O
oval
Guest
Its not my fault your only interest is in showing the embryo has no soul…a thread scheme trying to promote abortion and was fully torpedoed …peace
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
M
mercytruth
Guest
Really Oval? I sincerely do not know whether an embryo has a soul or not…only speculating with notions that can not be proven. Is it so wrong not to engrave the mysteries of God in stone, but rather to ponder them?Its not my fault your only interest is in showing the embryo has no soul…a thread scheme trying to promote abortion and was fully torpedoed …peace
His peace
micah
O
oval
Guest
I was checking out some of your other start up threads just now in order to try and understand the unusual Catholic viewpoint. I noticed another thread trying to justify experiments with embryos as long as they are not alive or something…the reason I was looking for answers is that your commentary with respects to BVM and not understanding as you remarked seemed strange, together with other comments about the idea in the sanctity of life and how things are worded seem like quick research gone unclear…therefore I have reason to believe I’m not conversing with an honest representation and am not interested in discussing any further, unless other damaging anti life issues come about…thanks and peace from G-d , (hyphen just in caseReally Oval? I sincerely do not know whether an embryo has a soul or not…only speculating with notions that can not be proven. Is it so wrong not to engrave the mysteries of God in stone, but rather to ponder them?
His peace
micah
M
mercytruth
Guest
Assume what you want, I never called a human embryo sub-human, rather it is possible that a human embryo is not completely human endowed with a human soul from God.I would have to agree with Oval. Your arguments have all been typically anti-life justifications for classifying certain embryos as sub-human.
Nothing that contradicts Catholic Church teaching here regarding the unsurety of when God confers a soul upon the human life within the womb.
The only reference to sub-human I made is when science takes upon itself to create something in the labs of science in which human DNA has been modified/combined with the DNA of animals.
I would never justify the experimentation of human DNA embryos for any purpose, which I have stated over and over again. Just because I can not insist that the human embryo is endowed with a soul, you assume I am pro-abortion. The truth is more important than ideology regardless of the desired goal: the end of abortion.
My approach is more expansive than the Catholic Church. Upholding the sanctity of all creation by upholding the sovereignty of our Creator is preferrable to allowing all sorts of genetic modification of His creation.
Whereas, the Catholic church seems to narrow her focus by upholding the sanctity of human life almost to the exclusion of the rest of God’s created life forms. In so doing, it seems as if she is disregarding the sanctity of God’s creation and God as sovereign over His creation…
Then if such DNA modification should happen to a human embryo, she would come into the debate by saying such an embryo should be assumed as being endowed with a human soul. This appears to me as backwards thinking, thinking that is reactive, rather than proactive. Thinking that seemingly disavows the sanctity of all of God’s created life forms, and the sovereignty of God as Creator of all life.
God’s peace
micah
God’s peace
O
oval
Guest
Led toward another theme and forced into summary for focus, the following observations.
Additionally… the theme in conception and endowment in Christianity self explains in the faith more appropriately, more fittingly, more naturally then any other system known to man.
2)Zero wonder, appreciation or acknowledgement is returned and an idea about organ transplanting & personalities come forward including a suggestion of repugnance to this remedy which entirely collapse’s, when entries attempt to sort out the reasons and significance’s in the alleged disposition.
A study is brought forward that isn’t worth the paper its written on… The item is dismantled on integrity and the overview is ignored yet, re-surface’s as a suggested credible article later on.
Continuing…
The only underlying common ground in all these changing reflections I see… is to get the soul out of conception at all costs.
Quick note because I gotta duck out again, on today’s new idea
With today’s revelation, all life should be included in the sanctity of life, an individual who is respectful, caring & charitable toward others is in keeping with the sanctity of life directive and is “non-destructive” in nature. Is without a need born out of fear to conquer critters, insects…the ones made by God who share this location with us…
There is a very very important quote by Matt… in Tonyreys exceptional design thread concerning the very topic we are discussing. Let me know how you like it, and I will look forward to the next idea in these wonderings.
- A claim that the Church cannot prove and does not specifically outline when the soul is endowed
- Both above have been fully explained and ignored without any interest in questions, comment or feedback in suitability or issue.
Additionally… the theme in conception and endowment in Christianity self explains in the faith more appropriately, more fittingly, more naturally then any other system known to man.
2)Zero wonder, appreciation or acknowledgement is returned and an idea about organ transplanting & personalities come forward including a suggestion of repugnance to this remedy which entirely collapse’s, when entries attempt to sort out the reasons and significance’s in the alleged disposition.
A study is brought forward that isn’t worth the paper its written on… The item is dismantled on integrity and the overview is ignored yet, re-surface’s as a suggested credible article later on.
- The thread went on another different path explaining that no, conception is not the time the embryo is endowed with soul, fellow member insisting with borrowed idea’s from other themes that breath, blood and heart idea’s were when the soul is endowed into the embryo. The effort was addressed and all market tone in emphasis forgotten.
- The thread is now introducing sanctity of life idea’s, complaining that the Church does not include sanctity of life for all animal existence and is therefore suggested to be once again out of step with the guidance concerning the sanctity of life, being incomplete.
- Last night however it was a different compelling curiosity which was explained, nothing to do with animals, the foundation of interest was passionately suggested to be based in wonder…look here below fellow member at last nights disposition…
Continuing…
The only underlying common ground in all these changing reflections I see… is to get the soul out of conception at all costs.
Quick note because I gotta duck out again, on today’s new idea
With today’s revelation, all life should be included in the sanctity of life, an individual who is respectful, caring & charitable toward others is in keeping with the sanctity of life directive and is “non-destructive” in nature. Is without a need born out of fear to conquer critters, insects…the ones made by God who share this location with us…
There is a very very important quote by Matt… in Tonyreys exceptional design thread concerning the very topic we are discussing. Let me know how you like it, and I will look forward to the next idea in these wonderings.
M
mercytruth
Guest
At this juncture a repeat of a past post is needed:
**These claims are reflective of the traditional teaching recently restated, for example, in the Instruction from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Donum Vitae, that the “human being is to be respected and treated as a person from the moment of conception and therefore from that same moment his rights as a person must be recognized” (I, 1).
The Instruction is careful to note that the Church has not taken a philosophical position on the time of ensoulment. However, “From the moment of conception, the life of every human being is to be respected in an absolute way—” (Donum Vitae, Introduction).
While the hierarchy of the Catholic Church has left open the resolution of the actual time of ensoulment, it has in fact insisted that the prudent response would be to recognize that as a practical matter ensoulment is coincident with fertilization. This position, combined with the traditional respect-for-life position of the Church, is what propels its opposition to embryonic stem-cell research.**
americancatholic.org/newsletters/CU/ac0102.asp
All other comments from myself relating to time of ensoulment are strickly notions, conjectures, hypotheticals and nothing which I ever attempted to prove or maintain as the truth for anyone to accept.
If the subject of personality transfer occurring in heart transpant recipients came up, it is because of my desire to understand the relationship of the human soul, known as the ‘psyche’ in Greek, and as the ‘nephesh’ in Hebrew as it relates in some manner with the blood of the human being. As the scriptures state, “The life (nephesh/soul) is (in) the blood.”
For that reason, I associated a possible connection, since the human heart is the principle organ for circulating the blood throughout the human body. Thus, the possible transfer of personality traits to some recipients who have received heart translpants. Whether the traits of personality of the soul are somehow imprinted in the nerve cells of the human heart, or not, it was a point of interest, not a proof of anything except as a side issue to the possible understanding of the time of ensoulment.
As far as the sanctity of all created life forms is concerned, my concerns are strictly within the confines of genetic engineering of the DNA of plants, animals and humans. This is an issue which has direct ramifications with the whole discussion of the human embryo and the manipulation of the DNA of human embryos.
though I do not subscribe to the emotional aspect of Spirit Daily, there is a posting regarding the dangers of DNA engineering which I do subscribe to and of which I have posted other sites as to the documented evidence of the dangers.
spiritdaily.com/1990geneticfood.htm
I respect your conviction that ensoulment begins at conception, if I can not concur with you then let it go without being so uncharitable.
God’s peace
micah
**These claims are reflective of the traditional teaching recently restated, for example, in the Instruction from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Donum Vitae, that the “human being is to be respected and treated as a person from the moment of conception and therefore from that same moment his rights as a person must be recognized” (I, 1).
The Instruction is careful to note that the Church has not taken a philosophical position on the time of ensoulment. However, “From the moment of conception, the life of every human being is to be respected in an absolute way—” (Donum Vitae, Introduction).
While the hierarchy of the Catholic Church has left open the resolution of the actual time of ensoulment, it has in fact insisted that the prudent response would be to recognize that as a practical matter ensoulment is coincident with fertilization. This position, combined with the traditional respect-for-life position of the Church, is what propels its opposition to embryonic stem-cell research.**
americancatholic.org/newsletters/CU/ac0102.asp
All other comments from myself relating to time of ensoulment are strickly notions, conjectures, hypotheticals and nothing which I ever attempted to prove or maintain as the truth for anyone to accept.
If the subject of personality transfer occurring in heart transpant recipients came up, it is because of my desire to understand the relationship of the human soul, known as the ‘psyche’ in Greek, and as the ‘nephesh’ in Hebrew as it relates in some manner with the blood of the human being. As the scriptures state, “The life (nephesh/soul) is (in) the blood.”
For that reason, I associated a possible connection, since the human heart is the principle organ for circulating the blood throughout the human body. Thus, the possible transfer of personality traits to some recipients who have received heart translpants. Whether the traits of personality of the soul are somehow imprinted in the nerve cells of the human heart, or not, it was a point of interest, not a proof of anything except as a side issue to the possible understanding of the time of ensoulment.
As far as the sanctity of all created life forms is concerned, my concerns are strictly within the confines of genetic engineering of the DNA of plants, animals and humans. This is an issue which has direct ramifications with the whole discussion of the human embryo and the manipulation of the DNA of human embryos.
though I do not subscribe to the emotional aspect of Spirit Daily, there is a posting regarding the dangers of DNA engineering which I do subscribe to and of which I have posted other sites as to the documented evidence of the dangers.
spiritdaily.com/1990geneticfood.htm
I respect your conviction that ensoulment begins at conception, if I can not concur with you then let it go without being so uncharitable.
God’s peace
micah
M
mercytruth
Guest
Oval, as far as the other thread. I think Genetic piano, IDvolution has some merit. Where I am out of the picture is thinking that science should have free rein in conquering disease. What if they are to conquer physical death? Should they be allowed?
At what point to we allow science the authority to determine how life begins, and the DNA manipulated life forms that they create in their labs are they truly life? At what point do we allow science to determine the moment of life, and the moment of death?
My concern is that we are elevating man and making him into god through the gospel of science, and not through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. We are in effect, replacing God with science, because science can do it, and science knows better than God.
God’s peace
micah
At what point to we allow science the authority to determine how life begins, and the DNA manipulated life forms that they create in their labs are they truly life? At what point do we allow science to determine the moment of life, and the moment of death?
My concern is that we are elevating man and making him into god through the gospel of science, and not through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. We are in effect, replacing God with science, because science can do it, and science knows better than God.
God’s peace
micah
M
mercytruth
Guest
It matters not what you think of me, God knows I am a poor excuse for a Catholic. This I do know, if we had one man of God like Brother Andre of Mount Royal living among us, his faith would accomplish more for America than all the scientists and physicians of America who have no faith in God.I think you sound more and more like you are just against science and suspicious of anything different. At the same time you make arguments that are ordinarily touted by abortion advocates.
Here is what Pope John Paul II said in his homily given at the beatification of Brother Andre Bessette on May 23, 1982:
"From what source can be traced his outstanding presence and his reputation among millions of people? Daily, the sick, the poor, the afflicted, the handicapped and all those wounded by the events of life came to see him in the parlor of Notre Dame College and later at the Oratory. There, in his presence, they were received warmly and found comfort and faith in God, confidence in the intercession of Saint Joseph, and the path to prayer and the sacraments. Very often, with all these blessings, they also found relief for their physical and moral pain. Today, are not the poor still in need of the same warmth, the same love, and education to prayer and a sense of hope?"
Introduction to Brother Andre the Wonder Man of Mount Royal, Henri-Paul Bergeron, CSC ISBN 2-920067-06-0.
In this book you will not read about the marvels of science, you will read about the marvels of God working through just one of God’s chosen humble servants.
God’s peace
micah
O
oval
Guest
Well a month or so ago I read a report out of Australia where the Medical representatives have decided to launch a general warning to MD’s not to prescribe antibiotic’s unless very necessary because bugs are now progressing in a way they fear is unsafe. Check out the numbers in extinction over the past thousands of years and these idea’s of science taking over absolute control in these area’s will be a memory for the history book…Disease an always concern.Oval, as far as the other thread. I think Genetic piano, IDvolution has some merit. Where I am out of the picture is thinking that science should have free rein in conquering disease. What if they are to conquer physical death? Should they be allowed?
At what point to we allow science the authority to determine how life begins, and the DNA manipulated life forms that they create in their labs are they truly life? At what point do we allow science to determine the moment of life, and the moment of death?
My concern is that we are elevating man and making him into god through the gospel of science, and not through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. We are in effect, replacing God with science, because science can do it, and science knows better than God.
God’s peace
micah
Whats the point in worrying what is allowed with respects to longevity when the solar keeper is estimated to be about 4,567,000,000 years old and is believed to have a total lifespan of 10,000,0000,0000 years. Who knows what man will or will not grow into…and if you fully believe in God then he does not do things without a reason, so who knows what the reason is for this observable known truth. Maybe something is designed in time to become semi spirit, I don’t know…and I don’t like to limit or worry about these things. Its just common sense.
This idea of science overpowering everything is overwhelming your mind …allowing this without expert training to review everything and defend common sense can only cause all kinds of unnecessary negative ideas. The internet is a buffet of end of day scenario’s.
If your being sincere you just gotta relax, a surprise asteroid in 36 hours. ok so what can anybody do about it. I looked at the link and the manipulating of food and so on, very interesting and for myself I eat very healthy and sit the the same chair that says I did my best… that’s all there is to it, and that’s what its all about. Very severe interference to the natural in life returns a consequence to the perpetrator. If I had a huge concern I would write or call experts, join science forums and look around , ask the professors for opinions and get sorted out with the data from these sites and their end of days momentum.
Other then that just opinion but I wouldn’t particularly pick out chem-biology for your hobby interest because there is a tendency to express a protector role on behalf of all that is, looking for a villain. If your looking for a villain to dis-arm a villain can be found . So if your science inclined maybe more on the wonder side of it and physic’s would be more enjoyable and you could try tackling all the problems for the wonder and creative fun of it…that way appreciation is at the door instead of all these dismay orientated things.
M
mercytruth
Guest
Brother Andre, now St.Andre, in his liftetime was able to do more good for the human race than any of these scientists who think they can heal human diseases without the power of Jesus Christ. They are a rival unto God, in thinking they can manipulate the DNA of God’s created life forms to overcome disease. Sin is the root cause of disease, and Jesus Christ is the healer, not scientists who think they can play God with God’s creation by creating new life forms and manipulating the human DNA to their liking.Well a month or so ago I read a report out of Australia where the Medical representatives have decided to launch a general warning to MD’s not to prescribe antibiotic’s unless very necessary because bugs are now progressing in a way they fear is unsafe. Check out the numbers in extinction over the past thousands of years and these idea’s of science taking over absolute control in these area’s will be a memory for the history book…Disease an always concern.
Whats the point in worrying what is allowed with respects to longevity when the solar keeper is estimated to be about 4,567,000,000 years old and is believed to have a total lifespan of 10,000,0000,0000 years. Who knows what man will or will not grow into…and if you fully believe in God then he does not do things without a reason, so who knows what the reason is for this observable known truth. Maybe something is designed in time to become semi spirit, I don’t know…and I don’t like to limit or worry about these things. Its just common sense.
This idea of science overpowering everything is overwhelming your mind …allowing this without expert training to review everything and defend common sense can only cause all kinds of unnecessary negative ideas. The internet is a buffet of end of day scenario’s.
If your being sincere you just gotta relax, a surprise asteroid in 36 hours. ok so what can anybody do about it. I looked at the link and the manipulating of food and so on, very interesting and for myself I eat very healthy and sit the the same chair that says I did my best… that’s all there is to it, and that’s what its all about. Very severe interference to the natural in life returns a consequence to the perpetrator. If I had a huge concern I would write or call experts, join science forums and look around , ask the professors for opinions and get sorted out with the data from these sites and their end of days momentum.
Other then that just opinion but I wouldn’t particularly pick out chem-biology for your hobby interest because there is a tendency to express a protector role on behalf of all that is, looking for a villain. If your looking for a villain to dis-arm a villain can be found . So if your science inclined maybe more on the wonder side of it and physic’s would be more enjoyable and you could try tackling all the problems for the wonder and creative fun of it…that way appreciation is at the door instead of all these dismay orientated things.
Why did I start this thread? There was a Jewish man who tried to explain the unborn status of the human being with that of the human being who is actually born as in accordance with his understanding of his Jewish faith.
Catholics raked him over the coals for expressing his faith. Calling him a baby killer and the like. It then occurred to me to look into this whole question of ensoulment and when it begins. I am still not sure when ensoulment begins, and maybe in my lifetime I will never know. I do know we need to have more tolerance for those who do not necessarily concur that ensoulment begins at conception.
People who do not believe as you, are not abortionists. Abortionists are those who perform abortions and those who choose to have an abortion. Please make that distinction, and do not link everyone into your sphere of evil because they do not agree with you as to the time of ensoulment.
If everyone who is so concerned about abortion would take one Down Syndrome child or adult into their home, or one developmentally disabled child or adult into their home we could eliminate a lot of group homes in this country. Then such concern would have actually have meaning.
GM foods have been shown to be medically dangerous. If an unwanted baby is rescued from abortion, but suffers from the effects of GM food, have we continued our concern for the sanctity of human life? Or do we say, Oh well, there is nothing I can do about it, the free market will take care of it.
It is a time for all of us not to become so smug in our perceived righteousness. We are nothing without Jesus Christ, and for those who do not know him, we should be praying for them.
.
The people that Jesus Christ became most angry with were the religious hypocrites of his day, may God save us from religious hypocrisy.
God be merciful to us sinners,
St Andre pray for us
micah
O
oval
Guest
mercytruth;9739861]Brother Andre, now St.Andre, in his liftetime was able to do more good for the human race than any of these scientists who think they can heal human diseases without the power of Jesus Christ. They are a rival unto God, in thinking they can manipulate the DNA of God’s created life forms to overcome disease. Sin is the root cause of disease, and Jesus Christ is the healer, not scientists who think they can play God with God’s creation by creating new life forms and manipulating the human DNA to their liking.
Oval…
I don’t think the broad sweeping smear against science is justifiable. Plain and simple to be interested or love something…a need is born to know all about that something.
There are extremities in everything man gets involved with including religion…We teach to cross the street when the light is green… it’s understood and if the teen or adult wants to play I’m the boss of the world consequence’s come about.
Sin is not the root cause of disease, life is.
Even though a human is a sinner, the claim that sin is the root of all disease is leading,therefore wrong and cannot do anything but create a pointed finger on top, of an already accepted value in humility…
…therefore the outlook has compromised the true nature in humility and is therefore immoral, by an obstruction to virtue in cause of pride.
Mercytruth…
Why did I start this thread? There was a Jewish man who tried to explain the unborn status of the human being with that of the human being who is actually born as in accordance with his understanding of his Jewish faith.
Catholics raked him over the coals for expressing his faith. Calling him a baby killer and the like. It then occurred to me to look into this whole question of ensoulment and when it begins. I am still not sure when ensoulment begins, and maybe in my lifetime I will never know. I do know we need to have more tolerance for those who do not necessarily concur that ensoulment begins at conception.
Oval…
Well he must of been interested in modifying the faith that he belonged to and a rebel in this regard because there has been no consensus among historical Jewish sources about when ensoulment happens.
It is regarded as “one of the “secrets of God” that will be revealed only when the Messiah comes.”
Therefore if the Catholic’s were defending the the Jewish belief system the question would be whether an allegiance in effort was ever established and if not… why not ?
Mercytruth…
People who do not believe as you, are not abortionists. Abortionists are those who perform abortions and those who choose to have an abortion. Please make that distinction, and do not link everyone into your sphere of evil because they do not agree with you as to the time of ensoulment.
If everyone who is so concerned about abortion would take one Down Syndrome child or adult into their home, or one developmentally disabled child or adult into their home we could eliminate a lot of group homes in this country. Then such concern would have actually have meaning.
Oval…
Agreed these charitable idea’s have great meaning and I’m impressed you feel expressions in charity alone would qualify a meritorious, complete and sufficient ontological justification for people who were “so concerned about abortion” Problem solved it has nothing to do with the properties of your argument but the outside self understood value and thus judgement, in the people who are pro-life which has nothing to do with the decided ethical view.
Mercytruth…
GM foods have been shown to be medically dangerous. If an unwanted baby is rescued from abortion, but suffers from the effects of GM food, have we continued our concern for the sanctity of human life? Or do we say, Oh well, there is nothing I can do about it, the free market will take care of it.
Oval…
Communication, transportation,technology are all explorations in hopeful advance and flourish objectives. They will always come about with whats called the learning curve, whats called a price to pay for dividends in mind. It is as normal as drinking coke and getting cavities until whoever or whatever wakes up and considers diet pop. Man is in the midst of going from coke to diet coke every moment of every day…
Mercytruth…
It is a time for all of us not to become so smug in our perceived righteousness. We are nothing without Jesus Christ, and for those who do not know him, we should be praying for them
Oval…
I know what your talking about and have never let this bother me too much…( a healthy ego is a good thing and what your referring to is the absence of a healthy ego)
.
Mercytruth…
The people that Jesus Christ became most angry with were the religious hypocrites of his day, may God save us from religious hypocrisy.
Oval…
What I try to do with disappointment which always opens the door to natural law and therefore emotion possibly equipped with rage and anger out of an attack on my hopefully geared mission toward order…is say hey…I did not create that human being to this disarranged state of injustice, therefore it is not all together my problem as though society has no policing structure…so basically God, this is your issue, not mine and I’m giving it to you in the inspirational of…giving it to God.
I enjoy reading the older Catholic writings and acceptance was one of the important messages from Fatima. …" Most importantly accept and bear the sufferings which God sends" a directive not forced but graciously asked by Mary for and in the endless honor she would have for the Maker. Jesus as well did not let anger dominate his message in any way. An example of perfection in the difficult to achieve virtue prudence.
( Ive got a few things to do and won’t be back until the weekend or so…
Oval…
I don’t think the broad sweeping smear against science is justifiable. Plain and simple to be interested or love something…a need is born to know all about that something.
There are extremities in everything man gets involved with including religion…We teach to cross the street when the light is green… it’s understood and if the teen or adult wants to play I’m the boss of the world consequence’s come about.
Sin is not the root cause of disease, life is.
Even though a human is a sinner, the claim that sin is the root of all disease is leading,therefore wrong and cannot do anything but create a pointed finger on top, of an already accepted value in humility…
…therefore the outlook has compromised the true nature in humility and is therefore immoral, by an obstruction to virtue in cause of pride.
Mercytruth…
Why did I start this thread? There was a Jewish man who tried to explain the unborn status of the human being with that of the human being who is actually born as in accordance with his understanding of his Jewish faith.
Catholics raked him over the coals for expressing his faith. Calling him a baby killer and the like. It then occurred to me to look into this whole question of ensoulment and when it begins. I am still not sure when ensoulment begins, and maybe in my lifetime I will never know. I do know we need to have more tolerance for those who do not necessarily concur that ensoulment begins at conception.
Oval…
Well he must of been interested in modifying the faith that he belonged to and a rebel in this regard because there has been no consensus among historical Jewish sources about when ensoulment happens.
It is regarded as “one of the “secrets of God” that will be revealed only when the Messiah comes.”
Therefore if the Catholic’s were defending the the Jewish belief system the question would be whether an allegiance in effort was ever established and if not… why not ?
Mercytruth…
People who do not believe as you, are not abortionists. Abortionists are those who perform abortions and those who choose to have an abortion. Please make that distinction, and do not link everyone into your sphere of evil because they do not agree with you as to the time of ensoulment.
If everyone who is so concerned about abortion would take one Down Syndrome child or adult into their home, or one developmentally disabled child or adult into their home we could eliminate a lot of group homes in this country. Then such concern would have actually have meaning.
Oval…
Agreed these charitable idea’s have great meaning and I’m impressed you feel expressions in charity alone would qualify a meritorious, complete and sufficient ontological justification for people who were “so concerned about abortion” Problem solved it has nothing to do with the properties of your argument but the outside self understood value and thus judgement, in the people who are pro-life which has nothing to do with the decided ethical view.
Mercytruth…
GM foods have been shown to be medically dangerous. If an unwanted baby is rescued from abortion, but suffers from the effects of GM food, have we continued our concern for the sanctity of human life? Or do we say, Oh well, there is nothing I can do about it, the free market will take care of it.
Oval…
Communication, transportation,technology are all explorations in hopeful advance and flourish objectives. They will always come about with whats called the learning curve, whats called a price to pay for dividends in mind. It is as normal as drinking coke and getting cavities until whoever or whatever wakes up and considers diet pop. Man is in the midst of going from coke to diet coke every moment of every day…
Mercytruth…
It is a time for all of us not to become so smug in our perceived righteousness. We are nothing without Jesus Christ, and for those who do not know him, we should be praying for them
Oval…
I know what your talking about and have never let this bother me too much…( a healthy ego is a good thing and what your referring to is the absence of a healthy ego)
.
Mercytruth…
The people that Jesus Christ became most angry with were the religious hypocrites of his day, may God save us from religious hypocrisy.
Oval…
What I try to do with disappointment which always opens the door to natural law and therefore emotion possibly equipped with rage and anger out of an attack on my hopefully geared mission toward order…is say hey…I did not create that human being to this disarranged state of injustice, therefore it is not all together my problem as though society has no policing structure…so basically God, this is your issue, not mine and I’m giving it to you in the inspirational of…giving it to God.
I enjoy reading the older Catholic writings and acceptance was one of the important messages from Fatima. …" Most importantly accept and bear the sufferings which God sends" a directive not forced but graciously asked by Mary for and in the endless honor she would have for the Maker. Jesus as well did not let anger dominate his message in any way. An example of perfection in the difficult to achieve virtue prudence.
( Ive got a few things to do and won’t be back until the weekend or so…
O
oval
Guest
mercytruth;9739861]Brother Andre, now St.Andre, in his liftetime was able to do more good for the human race than any of these scientists who think they can heal human diseases without the power of Jesus Christ. They are a rival unto God, in thinking they can manipulate the DNA of God’s created life forms to overcome disease. Sin is the root cause of disease, and Jesus Christ is the healer, not scientists who think they can play God with God’s creation by creating new life forms and manipulating the human DNA to their liking.
Oval…
I don’t think the broad sweeping smear against science is justifiable. Plain and simple to be interested or love something…a need is born to know all about that something.
There are extremities in everything man gets involved with including religion…We teach to cross the street when the light is green… it’s understood and if the teen or adult wants to play I’m the boss of the world consequence’s come about.
Sin is not the root cause of disease, life is.
Even though a human is a sinner, the claim that sin is the root of all disease is leading,therefore wrong and cannot do anything but create a pointed finger on top, of an already accepted value in humility…
…therefore the outlook has compromised the true nature in humility and is therefore immoral, by an obstruction to virtue in cause of pride.
Mercytruth…
Why did I start this thread? There was a Jewish man who tried to explain the unborn status of the human being with that of the human being who is actually born as in accordance with his understanding of his Jewish faith.
Catholics raked him over the coals for expressing his faith. Calling him a baby killer and the like. It then occurred to me to look into this whole question of ensoulment and when it begins. I am still not sure when ensoulment begins, and maybe in my lifetime I will never know. I do know we need to have more tolerance for those who do not necessarily concur that ensoulment begins at conception.
Oval…
Well he must of been interested in modifying the faith that he belonged to and a rebel in this regard because there has been no consensus among historical Jewish sources about when ensoulment happens.
It is regarded as “one of the secrets of God” that will be revealed only when the “Messiah comes.”
Therefore if the Catholic’s were defending the the Jewish belief system the question would be whether an allegiance in effort was ever established and if not… why not ?
Mercytruth…
People who do not believe as you, are not abortionists. Abortionists are those who perform abortions and those who choose to have an abortion. Please make that distinction, and do not link everyone into your sphere of evil because they do not agree with you as to the time of ensoulment.
If everyone who is so concerned about abortion would take one Down Syndrome child or adult into their home, or one developmentally disabled child or adult into their home we could eliminate a lot of group homes in this country. Then such concern would have actually have meaning.
Oval…
Agreed these charitable idea’s have great meaning and its curious you feel expressions in charity alone would qualify a meritorious, complete and sufficient ontological justification for people who were “so concerned about abortion” Problem solved it has nothing to do with the properties of your argument but the outside self understood value and thus judgement, in the people who are pro-life which has nothing to do with the decided ethical view.
Mercytruth…
GM foods have been shown to be medically dangerous. If an unwanted baby is rescued from abortion, but suffers from the effects of GM food, have we continued our concern for the sanctity of human life? Or do we say, Oh well, there is nothing I can do about it, the free market will take care of it.
Oval…
Communication, transportation,technology are all explorations in hopeful advance and flourish objectives. They will always come about with whats called the learning curve, whats called a price to pay for dividends in mind. It is as normal as drinking coke and getting cavities until whoever or whatever wakes up and considers diet pop. Man is in the midst of going from coke to diet coke every moment of every day…
Mercytruth…
It is a time for all of us not to become so smug in our perceived righteousness. We are nothing without Jesus Christ, and for those who do not know him, we should be praying for them
Oval…
I know what your talking about and have never let this bother me too much…( a healthy ego is a good thing and what your referring to is the absence of a healthy ego)
.
Mercytruth…
The people that Jesus Christ became most angry with were the religious hypocrites of his day, may God save us from religious hypocrisy.
Oval…
What I try to do with disappointment which always opens the door to natural law and therefore emotion possibly equipped with rage and anger out of an attack on my hopefully geared mission toward order…is say hey…I did not create that human being to this disarranged state of injustice, therefore it is not all together my problem as though society has no policing structure…so basically God, this is your issue, not mine and I’m giving it to you in the inspirational of…giving it to God.
I enjoy reading the older Catholic writings and acceptance was one of the important messages from Fatima. …" Most importantly accept and bear the sufferings which God sends" a directive not forced but graciously asked by Mary for and in the endless honor she would have for the Maker. Jesus as well did not let anger dominate his message in any way. A perfect example to be sure in the difficult to achieve virtue, prudence.
( Ive got a few things to do and won’t be back until the weekend or so…(work…
Oval…
I don’t think the broad sweeping smear against science is justifiable. Plain and simple to be interested or love something…a need is born to know all about that something.
There are extremities in everything man gets involved with including religion…We teach to cross the street when the light is green… it’s understood and if the teen or adult wants to play I’m the boss of the world consequence’s come about.
Sin is not the root cause of disease, life is.
Even though a human is a sinner, the claim that sin is the root of all disease is leading,therefore wrong and cannot do anything but create a pointed finger on top, of an already accepted value in humility…
…therefore the outlook has compromised the true nature in humility and is therefore immoral, by an obstruction to virtue in cause of pride.
Mercytruth…
Why did I start this thread? There was a Jewish man who tried to explain the unborn status of the human being with that of the human being who is actually born as in accordance with his understanding of his Jewish faith.
Catholics raked him over the coals for expressing his faith. Calling him a baby killer and the like. It then occurred to me to look into this whole question of ensoulment and when it begins. I am still not sure when ensoulment begins, and maybe in my lifetime I will never know. I do know we need to have more tolerance for those who do not necessarily concur that ensoulment begins at conception.
Oval…
Well he must of been interested in modifying the faith that he belonged to and a rebel in this regard because there has been no consensus among historical Jewish sources about when ensoulment happens.
It is regarded as “one of the secrets of God” that will be revealed only when the “Messiah comes.”
Therefore if the Catholic’s were defending the the Jewish belief system the question would be whether an allegiance in effort was ever established and if not… why not ?
Mercytruth…
People who do not believe as you, are not abortionists. Abortionists are those who perform abortions and those who choose to have an abortion. Please make that distinction, and do not link everyone into your sphere of evil because they do not agree with you as to the time of ensoulment.
If everyone who is so concerned about abortion would take one Down Syndrome child or adult into their home, or one developmentally disabled child or adult into their home we could eliminate a lot of group homes in this country. Then such concern would have actually have meaning.
Oval…
Agreed these charitable idea’s have great meaning and its curious you feel expressions in charity alone would qualify a meritorious, complete and sufficient ontological justification for people who were “so concerned about abortion” Problem solved it has nothing to do with the properties of your argument but the outside self understood value and thus judgement, in the people who are pro-life which has nothing to do with the decided ethical view.
Mercytruth…
GM foods have been shown to be medically dangerous. If an unwanted baby is rescued from abortion, but suffers from the effects of GM food, have we continued our concern for the sanctity of human life? Or do we say, Oh well, there is nothing I can do about it, the free market will take care of it.
Oval…
Communication, transportation,technology are all explorations in hopeful advance and flourish objectives. They will always come about with whats called the learning curve, whats called a price to pay for dividends in mind. It is as normal as drinking coke and getting cavities until whoever or whatever wakes up and considers diet pop. Man is in the midst of going from coke to diet coke every moment of every day…
Mercytruth…
It is a time for all of us not to become so smug in our perceived righteousness. We are nothing without Jesus Christ, and for those who do not know him, we should be praying for them
Oval…
I know what your talking about and have never let this bother me too much…( a healthy ego is a good thing and what your referring to is the absence of a healthy ego)
.
Mercytruth…
The people that Jesus Christ became most angry with were the religious hypocrites of his day, may God save us from religious hypocrisy.
Oval…
What I try to do with disappointment which always opens the door to natural law and therefore emotion possibly equipped with rage and anger out of an attack on my hopefully geared mission toward order…is say hey…I did not create that human being to this disarranged state of injustice, therefore it is not all together my problem as though society has no policing structure…so basically God, this is your issue, not mine and I’m giving it to you in the inspirational of…giving it to God.
I enjoy reading the older Catholic writings and acceptance was one of the important messages from Fatima. …" Most importantly accept and bear the sufferings which God sends" a directive not forced but graciously asked by Mary for and in the endless honor she would have for the Maker. Jesus as well did not let anger dominate his message in any way. A perfect example to be sure in the difficult to achieve virtue, prudence.
( Ive got a few things to do and won’t be back until the weekend or so…(work…
O
oval
Guest
I have to make this post because I changed my mind after checking a few things and believe mercytruth is correct with science being a problem. Man made the bomb, dropped it , keeps it, everyone wants one and to make matters worse now there is a better potencial bomb and the project is well under way…so unfortunately a few bad apples in science or…in the wrong hands simply will NOT work out. In fact it seems anything and everything which can be used for destructive purpose is simply taken over by military initiative…so science has failed to be a good thing for man. Thats all there is to it. So in this regard member mercytruth is correct and I am clearly wrong…things are out of control, way out of control…even if these below idea’s are off, or some are staged there are many where experts come in and say…oh thats a practice nuclear such and such…well you know what…forget it, I’m one tax payer who’s had it…COMPLETELY. I formally regret every single tax dollar toward all science, my bros is a research world leading scientist and I knowhow hard these people work…but you know what…? its just not worth it, no way…man has without question become a full embarrassment to creation. I think member mecytruth was on the money with science in other area’s…with these idea’s below there is NO question…pen and paper for science only, or I begrudge every cent of my earned income. It is forced, without my consent PERIOD…no more dinkering…I don’t care what it is.
youtube.com/watch?v=xo-T_KvLNdQ&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=LsgrRmHW8ro
youtube.com/watch?v=Hu5DxpyTq7A
the fact is that some are accepted by experts as experiments so we don’t know what the heck is going on…as well…the HARRP is a full intent to develop a greater destructive tool, no doubt…there are 5 in the world …if combined at this ealy development stage would have unimaginable destructive power…I HAVE HAD IT WITH SCIENCE
youtube.com/watch?v=xo-T_KvLNdQ&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=LsgrRmHW8ro
youtube.com/watch?v=Hu5DxpyTq7A
the fact is that some are accepted by experts as experiments so we don’t know what the heck is going on…as well…the HARRP is a full intent to develop a greater destructive tool, no doubt…there are 5 in the world …if combined at this ealy development stage would have unimaginable destructive power…I HAVE HAD IT WITH SCIENCE
A
Agatha813
Guest
I’m not really well read on this matter, but I honestly don’t see why not. It is a forming human being, so why can’t it already come equipped with a soul?
T
Timawa
Guest
The soul is the principle of life. It is what makes a being that certain being. it is the formal cause of a living being, just as much as the shape of a chair is the formal cause of that particular woodcraft.
But, the difference is that the form of the woodcraft is external, while the form of a living being is internal; alter the woodcraft enough and it might no longer be a chair, but even if you take out the eyes, cut off the limbs or make a living being sick, or even if the living thing has yet to develop its natural features (pre-natal stages) it would still be, and already is, that particular living thing until it dies.
With that said, the scientific community is virtually unanimous in stating that life in fact begins at fertilization which happens before the embryonic stage. And so we can make the following statements:
If and only if the thing has a soul, then the thing is a living thing.
Human embryo is a living thing.
Therefore,
Human embryo has a soul.
I apologize for my poorly written post; I’m kinda sleepy… actually, I am really and terribly sleepy. zzzZzz…
Deo Gratias!
But, the difference is that the form of the woodcraft is external, while the form of a living being is internal; alter the woodcraft enough and it might no longer be a chair, but even if you take out the eyes, cut off the limbs or make a living being sick, or even if the living thing has yet to develop its natural features (pre-natal stages) it would still be, and already is, that particular living thing until it dies.
With that said, the scientific community is virtually unanimous in stating that life in fact begins at fertilization which happens before the embryonic stage. And so we can make the following statements:
If and only if the thing has a soul, then the thing is a living thing.
Human embryo is a living thing.
Therefore,
Human embryo has a soul.
I apologize for my poorly written post; I’m kinda sleepy… actually, I am really and terribly sleepy. zzzZzz…
Deo Gratias!
T
Timawa
Guest
Just to add credibility to my statement (that an embyo is already a living thing), here’s what the Philippine Medical Association, our country’s medical association (duh), has got to say:
here’s the link of the document: scribd.com/doc/66242620/Word-PMA-Position-Paper-RH-Bill-RE-SENATE-BILL-8-13-11-Approved
Right after fertilization, there is no way one could alter the natural and normal outcome other than a human being until natural death. The fertilized egg, now a human being, unstoppably grows by itself and, there is no other path it takes but to evolve into a full mature human being. There is no human embryologist in the world who would deny that life begins at fertilization. Some secular debaters may insist but not a single human embryologist will ever say that human life is, at some early stage,only a “potential” human life. Textbooks in Human Embryology are replete with discussions on the beginning of life. The zygote (fertilized egg) is that cell that results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo). Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm … unites with a female gamete or oocyte … to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.
Some will maintain that the beginning of life does not start before the formation of the embryo (pre-embryonic stage) but this is not supported by the scientific discussionsby human embryologists. Dr. Kischer, emeritus professor of Anatomy at the Universityof Arizona, writes,** “…the first thing learned in human embryology [is] that the life of the new individual human being begins at fertilization (conception)”.** He continues, "we should respect a microscopic human embryo because at that time it is an integrated whole organism, just as the human is at every moment in time until death. Every human embryo deserves as much respect as you or I because it is formed as a new individual human life within the continuum of life …" To deny this, Kischer says, is “a trivialization and corruption of the science of human embryology.” Thus, any scheme, procedure or medication that destroys the fertilized egg or the embryo is called abortion. Even the official U.S. Public Health Service Policy states: "All the measures which impair the viability of the zygote anytime between the instant of fertilization and the completion of labor constitute, in the strict sense, procedures for inducing abortion
Some many years ago, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology has changed the meaning of “conception” and according to its new meaning “conception”,no longer meant "fertilization.” Surprisingly “conception” was redefined as the implantation of a blastocyst on the uterine wall, typically occurring 1-2 weeks after fertilization. In his presidential address in 1984, however, Dr. Richard Sosnowski of ACOG refuted this change and thus he said-
“I do not deem it excellent to play semantic gymnastics in a profession … It is equally troublesome to me that, with no scientific evidence to validate the change, the definition of conception as the successful spermatic penetration of an ovum was redefined as the implantation of a fertilized ovum. It appearsto me that the only reason for this was the dilemma produced by the possibility that the intrauterine contraceptive device might function as an abortifacient”. [5]
The embryo is not something that is being passively built by the process of development, with some unspecified, external “builder” controlling the assembly of embryonic components. Rather,the embryo is manufacturing itself. The organized pattern of development doesn’t produce the embryo; it is produced by the embryo as a consequence of the zygote’s internal, self-organizing power. Indeed, this “totipotency,”or the power of the zygote both to generate all the cells of the body and simultaneously to organize those cells into coherent, interacting bodily structures, is the defining feature of the embryo.
Thus, the PMA …supports the scientific data that a new cell, the zygote, comes into existence at the “moment” of sperm-egg fusion, an event that occurs in less than a second. At the point of fusion, sperm and egg are physically united—i.e., they cease to exist as gametes, and they forma new entity that is materially distinct from either sperm or egg. The behavior of this new cell also differs radically from that of either sperm or egg: the developmental pathway entered into by the zygote is distinct from both gametes. Thus, sperm-egg fusion is indeed a scientifically well defined “instant” in which the zygote (a new cell with unique genetic composition, molecular composition, and behavior) is formed.
The material composition of the cell does not change from the instant prior tosyngamy (14 days after fertilization) to the instant after it takes place. There is no substantive change in the behavior of the cell at syngamy; all the preparations for cell division (DNA replication, assembly of the mitotic spindle, chromatin condensation) are already underway as the pronuclei move together. Indeed, nuclear membrane breakdown is not a unique, “zygote-forming” event, but rather it is cell—and it continues doing exactly what it was doing (i.e., preparing to undergo cell division) both before and after the pronuclei come into physical proximity. The developmental program observed during the first cell cycle (including the breakdown of nuclear membranes at syngamy) is clearly initiated by the fusion of the sperm and egg, and it progresses seamlessly from that instant forward.
here’s the link of the document: scribd.com/doc/66242620/Word-PMA-Position-Paper-RH-Bill-RE-SENATE-BILL-8-13-11-Approved
L
levinas12
Guest
This question is complicated by the history of the word “soul”.
In ancient Greek philosophy, “soul” meant “form” of a living entity.
And “form” meant “ability”.
The “form” is shareable by an indefinite number of particulars. In fact, the “form” is identical in these particulars. .
With the onset of Christianity, the meaning of human “soul” shifted, in certain venues, from the ancient Greek notion of a shareable “form” to “person” (as in, the salvation of “souls”).
“Person” is not shareable.
Each person is a singularity (there is no genus/species for a person qua person). This is expressed by saying each person is a “who” not a “what”.
The distinction between the ancient Greek “soul” and the new Christian notion of “person” must be kept in mind.
The “person” is a deeper reality than “soul”. The human “person” is what makes a human “soul” possible.
Both human “nature” or “soul” and the “person” are present at the moment of conception. But “person” is the reason why the human embryo is inviolable.
In ancient Greek philosophy, “soul” meant “form” of a living entity.
And “form” meant “ability”.
The “form” is shareable by an indefinite number of particulars. In fact, the “form” is identical in these particulars. .
With the onset of Christianity, the meaning of human “soul” shifted, in certain venues, from the ancient Greek notion of a shareable “form” to “person” (as in, the salvation of “souls”).
“Person” is not shareable.
Each person is a singularity (there is no genus/species for a person qua person). This is expressed by saying each person is a “who” not a “what”.
The distinction between the ancient Greek “soul” and the new Christian notion of “person” must be kept in mind.
The “person” is a deeper reality than “soul”. The human “person” is what makes a human “soul” possible.
Both human “nature” or “soul” and the “person” are present at the moment of conception. But “person” is the reason why the human embryo is inviolable.
L
levinas12
Guest
(continued)
Some argue that the ancient Greek “soul” as a formal cause, as an “ability”, is not present at conception because an “ability” requires an “organ”. If the “organ” is not there, then the ability is not there.
But what about the ancient Greek “soul” as a final cause, as the principle that “pushes” the being towards completion? Such a final cause has to be there at the moment of conception to provide a direction for the ensuing activities.
I would argue further that the “person” is really the final cause. In fact, in a human being, the person is the “who” behind all the living activities - but this “who” is not a thing or impersonal energy (like an impersonal Bergsonian elan vital) - this “who” is a “someone” and not a “something”.
Because “person” is a “who” and not a “what”, a “person” is not disclosable through methodologies associated the hard sciences, e.g., physics, chemistry, biology, etc. Although quantum mechanics may be a curious exception to this rule.
But even if hard sciences have nothing to say about persons, this does not mean persons don’t exist. Without “persons”, there are no hard sciences. And a whole bunch of other more meaningful activities.
Some argue that the ancient Greek “soul” as a formal cause, as an “ability”, is not present at conception because an “ability” requires an “organ”. If the “organ” is not there, then the ability is not there.
But what about the ancient Greek “soul” as a final cause, as the principle that “pushes” the being towards completion? Such a final cause has to be there at the moment of conception to provide a direction for the ensuing activities.
I would argue further that the “person” is really the final cause. In fact, in a human being, the person is the “who” behind all the living activities - but this “who” is not a thing or impersonal energy (like an impersonal Bergsonian elan vital) - this “who” is a “someone” and not a “something”.
Because “person” is a “who” and not a “what”, a “person” is not disclosable through methodologies associated the hard sciences, e.g., physics, chemistry, biology, etc. Although quantum mechanics may be a curious exception to this rule.
But even if hard sciences have nothing to say about persons, this does not mean persons don’t exist. Without “persons”, there are no hard sciences. And a whole bunch of other more meaningful activities.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.