• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Questions about Souls

Amadeus said:
Do souls contain memories? If so, what about souls from people who die without memories (e.g. newborns). Is the soul of a mentally impaired person also mentally impaired?
Click to expand...

The topic of souls was originated in philosophy by the Greeks, as far as western heritage goes.

With the advent of Christianity in the Roman Empire and Europe, certain ancient Jewish doctrines were first immersed into western culture.

Genesis Chap 2 verse 7 states "a living soul" (CHIH NFSH).

But religion does not define "a living soul" elsewhere other than intuitively with the creation of Adam in Gen 2:7.

So anything else is simply philosophical speculation.

And you should never never mix philosophy, religion, and/or science.

These 3 are separate arts and crafts.
 
Northern Light said:
Your soul is the Divine spark that comes from God / the Divine / the Creator / the Source / whatever you want to call it. It does not belong to you, it's on loan. When you die, what you think of as "you" (the spirit) disappears (or lingers in some cases). The soul goes back to where it came from.

Soul could be said to be the present awareness that has been there since you were born, and will be there when you die -- it is completely unchanged by the natural growth and phases of the spirit, and its accompanying egos. Basically, the soul is pure awareness, and that's it. Everything else is just part of the current drama and doesn't survive death.

This info comes from many sources. Avoid new age descriptions of how this works, they aren't accurate at all. Judeochristian depictions of soul damnation or eternal paradise are also wrong. The soul is the soul, it has no judgments and it has no requirements. Think of it as a sort of... tape recorder, a pure witness that does not change or react to anything. It is pure presence.

Spirits can get trapped in limbo for various reasons (such as a violent or very attached death), but souls never do.
Click to expand...
You should make some effort to research all this mythology/fantasy and then quote your sources.

Unless you expect us to believe you are some god or angel.
 
Frank Apisa said:
I do not understand how someone (lots of someone's) can speak with such authority about something that IS NOT KNOWN.

We do not even know if there is such a thing as a soul...let alone what it is like.

Every assertion that posits a "soul"...or that describes one in any way...is nothing more than a blind guess.

Or so it seems to me.


Amadeus: Were you actually asking for blind guesses?
Click to expand...

The possibilities are dope, excessive alcohol, or mental derangement.
 
Amadeus said:
I guess it depends on the religion. Christianity does not embrace the concept of past lives that I'm aware of. The notion of reincarnation exists almost exclusively within the Brahman religions (Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.).
Click to expand...

Reincarnation is also part of the Jewish tradition.
 
Riveroaks said:
You should make some effort to research all this mythology/fantasy and then quote your sources.

Unless you expect us to believe you are some god or angel.
Click to expand...

You can discover this truth by doing the inner work, plain and simple. No gods or angels required, only what is happening right now.

I can't translate for you what has taken a life time of seeking, researching, discovering, and realizing. You want me to prove something that cannot be materially proven - a matter of the spirit. Eventually when you do enough searching, enough learning, enough realizing, it syncretizes into something that makes total sense. Every human being on this planet is capable of finding out. No middle man required.

If you're a true seeker, then you'll find sources which lead you to the truth; but if you demand proof in order to assert doubt then it's a pointless exercise, sorry to say. Calling what I said mythological or fantasy is an empty reflection, quite honestly. It neither adds nor detracts. It's why I'd much rather have this discussion with fellow seekers. It's not my job to show you what your own spirit can tell you or what is right for you.

I came here to share a point of view, one that does not require anyone's approval to be expounded.
 
Northern Light said:
You can discover this truth by doing the inner work, plain and simple. No gods or angels required, only what is happening right now.

I can't translate for you what has taken a life time of seeking, researching, discovering, and realizing. You want me to prove something that cannot be materially proven - a matter of the spirit. Eventually when you do enough searching, enough learning, enough realizing, it syncretizes into something that makes total sense. Every human being on this planet is capable of finding out. No middle man required.

If you're a true seeker, then you'll find sources which lead you to the truth; but if you demand proof in order to assert doubt then it's a pointless exercise, sorry to say. Calling what I said mythological or fantasy is an empty reflection, quite honestly. It neither adds nor detracts. It's why I'd much rather have this discussion with fellow seekers. It's not my job to show you what your own spirit can tell you or what is right for you.

I came here to share a point of view, one that does not require anyone's approval to be expounded.
Click to expand...

That's called philosophy.

It is a matter of speculation.
 
Absentglare said:
Philosophy is the love of wisdom, not a fondness for speculation.
Click to expand...

You obviously do not really understand philosophy nor the difference between it and it's counterparts -- science and religion.

You really should read Bertrand Russell's book "History Of Western Philosophy" before you say any more about it.

Right now your understanding of philosophy is high school level and definitely pre freshman college.
 
Your understanding of the value of civil discourse is even less evolved. Frankly. Why so snide?
 
Riveroaks said:
That's called philosophy.

It is a matter of speculation.
Click to expand...

I seek truth. I don't dabble in mental masturbation.

If you live in doubt, then own that. I don't.

If you think I'm merely speculating, then you're free to believe that. Like I said, it neither adds nor detracts. Have a nice day.
 
Northern Light said:
I seek truth. I don't dabble in mental masturbation.

If you live in doubt, then own that. I don't.

If you think I'm merely speculating, then you're free to believe that. Like I said, it neither adds nor detracts. Have a nice day.
Click to expand...

There is philosophical truth, which is derived from speculation and reasoned out normally to various opposing conclusions that cannot be proved.

There is religious truth, which is derived from reading doctrines and dogmas and gaining a personal assurance about it through faith.

There is scientific truth, which is derived from observations and induction to a perceived generalization which is then validated by deductive research.

Those are your 3 choices.

If God(s) or Angels have appeared to you then you can count yourself lucky and among the very few in history with Moses, Elijah, Peter, James, John, Paul, Constantine, and Muhammad each of whom claimed to be visited by God(s) and/or Angels.

So state your source. Which is it ???
 
Riveroaks said:
There is philosophical truth, which is derived from speculation and reasoned out normally to various opposing conclusions that cannot be proved.

There is religious truth, which is derived from reading doctrines and dogmas and gaining a personal assurance about it through faith.

There is scientific truth, which is derived from observations and induction to a perceived generalization which is then validated by deductive research.

Those are your 3 choices.

If God(s) or Angels have appeared to you then you can count yourself lucky and among the very few in history with Moses, Elijah, Peter, James, John, Paul, Constantine, and Muhammad each of whom claimed to be visited by God(s) and/or Angels.

So state your source. Which is it ???
Click to expand...

Who said anything about gods or angels? I certainly didn't. Those are your inferences.

I also see no reason to submit to the choices you present, for it's a false dilemma. I'm not responsible for your linear thinking nor do I have to gratify it by satisfying your conditions.

Take responsibility for your own frame of consciousness. :shrug:

As I already stated, it's not my responsibility to explain this to you. I came here to state my point of view in response to the OP's question, if you don't accept it then that's your business.
 
tosca1 said:
Here we go again with blind guesses.

:roll:
Click to expand...

Okay...

...but do you think the assertions "there is a GOD" or "there are no gods"...

...are anything other than BLIND GUESSES?
 
Riveroaks said:
Science is all blind hypothesis with some experimenting whenever possible.
Click to expand...

What is a "BLIND HYPOTHESIS?"
There are blind experiments......but, blind hypothesis? Can you cite where you got that? It's the first time I've heard of it.


Hypotheses usually stem from, or is inspired by, something that we observe, or already know of.

Here, I just looked it up:

hy·poth·e·sis


1. a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation



Hypothesis has to have a starting point!

As an example, the discovery of gravity was inspired by observing an apple falling from the tree.
Without the microscope, could we have known about cells and bacteria, or things not visible to the naked eye?

The microscope was inspired by magnifying lenses!

Leeuwenhoek's Introduction to the Microscope

Textile merchants widely used small lenses for cloth inspection and Leeuwenhoek acquired his own magnifying glass for trade purposes in 1653. This was his introduction with microscope.

With the passage of time, he got keenly interested in glass processing and lens grinding. He was also inspired by Robert Hooke's microscopic observations in his book Micrographia.

He built a simple microscope during 1671 and started observing different substances.

https://explorable.com/discovery-of-bacteria



And that led to all the amazing facts that we know now.



Do you still consider Gravity or bacteria, as only a theory at this point? Aren't they a reality now for us?

Therefore, it can't be said to be a "guess" anymore, let alone a "blind" guess! There's no longer any guessing about that!
 
Last edited:
tosca1 said:
I wouldn't say "all blind."

Hypotheses usually stem from, or is inspired by something that we observe.

The discovery of Gravity was inspired by observing an apple falling from the tree.
Do we still consider Gravity as a only a theory at this point? Isn't it a reality now for us? Therefore, it can't be said to be a "guess" anymore, let alone a "blind" guess at that!
Click to expand...

If you say, "there is a GOD"...you are merely asserting a blind guess about the REALITY of existence.
 
Frank Apisa said:
Okay...

...but do you think the assertions "there is a GOD" or "there are no gods"...

...are anything other than BLIND GUESSES?
Click to expand...


The theory that there is a God or a Creator is not a blind guess since there are numerous evidences that support that possibility (refer to the other thread, Is There A God).
May I bring up the statement from the National Academy of Sciences again (better get used to seeing this statement brought up everytime we talk about God's existence...... after all, science is the only source non-believers rely on).

many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth.

This belief, which sometimes is termed 'theistic evolution,' is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution.

Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines."

WMAP Site FAQs


That basically renders the no-God theory almost, if not utterly debunked. The theory that there is no God, is what you can call a, "blind guess."
It's based on blind faith.



And those who can't see that, are whom we can say to be wilfully, blind. And there isn't any guessing about that either. :lol:
 
Last edited:
tosca1 said:
The theory that there is a God or a Creator is not a blind guess since there are numerous evidences that support that possibility (refer to the other thread, Is There A God), and may I bring up the statement from the National Academy of Sciences again (better get used to seeing this statement brought up everytime we talk about the God's existence, after all, science is the only source non-believers rely on).

many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth. This belief, which sometimes is termed 'theistic evolution,' is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution. Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines."

WMAP Site FAQs

That basically renders the no-God theory almost, if not utterly debunked. The theory that there is no God, is what you can call a, "blind guess."
It's based on blind faith.
Click to expand...

Anyone asserting "a GOD exists"...is asserting a BLIND GUESS.

Anyone asserting "no gods exist"...is asserting a BLIND GUESS.

Ya gotta deal with that, Tosca.
 
Frank Apisa said:
If you say, "there is a GOD"...you are merely asserting a blind guess about the REALITY of existence.
Click to expand...

If I say, there is a God.....that would be because of my faith.


However, my faith happens to be not in disagreement with science.
Therefore, even though my belief is based on faith - and it's faith, alright - you however, can't say it's still blind faith. I've been informed.
So, I know too that.......

......science says there are evidences that support my belief.
 
Last edited:
Frank Apisa said:
Anyone asserting "a GOD exists"...is asserting a BLIND GUESS.

Anyone asserting "no gods exist"...is asserting a BLIND GUESS.

Ya gotta deal with that, Tosca.
Click to expand...

You're not saying anything new, Frank. That's not a rebuttal. You're merely stubbornly stating your belief - with nothing to back it up.

You're in denial. Just look at your two sentences!
I can't see you....but, are you stomping your feet as well? :lol:


So guess what. You're the one who has a problem. You're the one who'll have to learn how to deal with the facts!
Not me.



Oh my goodness....I just happened to look up and saw the title of the thread. For a while I thought I was at Philosophy. Let's get back on topic.
Sorry Amadeus.
 
Last edited:
tosca1 said:
If I say, there is a God.....that would be because of my faith.
Click to expand...

Wow...we finally agree on something. We agree that an assertion of "there is a GOD" IS a blind guess.


However, my faith happens to be not in disagreement with science.
Click to expand...

So...your insistence that your blind guess is correct...is not inconsistent with science.

Neither are the blind guesses that there are no gods.

So what?

(I have regularly asserted that one cannot get to either of those assertions through science...so you are not telling me anything I have not been asserting right along.)


Therefore, even though my belief is based on faith - and it's faith, alright - you however, can't say it's still blind faith. I've been informed.
So, I know too that.......

......science says there are evidences that support my belief.
Click to expand...

Nah...a blind guess is just a blind guess.

Nothing wrong with your blind guess that there is a GOD.

Nothing wrong with the people who blindly guess there are no gods.

Nothing wrong with the fact that neither of those blind guesses conflict with science.

But none of that makes the blind guesses any more than blind guesses.
 
Riveroaks said:
You obviously do not really understand philosophy nor the difference between it and it's counterparts -- science and religion.

You really should read Bertrand Russell's book "History Of Western Philosophy" before you say any more about it.

Right now your understanding of philosophy is high school level and definitely pre freshman college.
Click to expand...

The word "philosophy" is from the Greeks whose corollary literally means "love of wisdom" and that's no speculation.

Speculative Philosophy is a sub-field of philosophy.

You insult philosophy by equating it with speculation.
 
Absentglare said:
The word "philosophy" is from the Greeks whose corollary literally means "love of wisdom" and that's no speculation.

Speculative Philosophy is a sub-field of philosophy.

You insult philosophy by equating it with speculation.
Click to expand...

There is also Philosophical apologetics , which is basically making logical fallacies to promote a predetermined 'proof' via metaphysics.
 
Frank Apisa said:
Wow...we finally agree on something. We agree that an assertion of "there is a GOD" IS a blind guess.
Click to expand...

Not really. As explained.
In fact, I 'll rephrase what I said before: No blind guesses at all - with or without that particular statement from the NAS.


Furthermore.....

So many Christians believed that science will never be able to prove that God does not exist, but in fact will most likely prove that He does.....even if they hadn't seen that statement from the NAS. I believed that, too.

Many religious scientists who'd founded the disciplines of science were deeply religious, and some were inspired and vindicated by their discoveries.

I was surprised to see the NAS coming right out to state that publicly since I've partly bought into Dawkins' and his minions' propaganda that science and religion are opposed to each other. That turned out to be the biggest lie from Dawkins and the New Atheists!



I'm not saying there's anything wrong about "blind guesses." I'm saying you're using that term inappropriately when it comes to this religious faith.....

......a faith which btw, relies on this Book that had given so many prophecies that had come true. No BLIND GUESSES about those prophecies -
in fact, they're a statement of what's going to happen, and they did happen. Some are intimate information that only the Creator would know about His own creation.


And as we now see, science is affirming some information that were DECLARED in the Bible:

Starting from the very first three introductory words - that the universe has a beginning.



Therefore, this particular faith isn't dependent on any blind guesses at all.

What's been DECLARED have been, or are being confirmed.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom