Does the human embryo have a soul?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mercytruth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
greylorn said:
Micah,

I like that road even less than you. I abhor Genetically Modified foods and regard the Monsanto Corporation as fundamentally evil. But like it or not, we are on that road.

That’s a collectivist “we.” There are a lot of nations willing to drive it, even if we are not.

It’s like biological and chemical weapons, and other devices for mass annihilation. We can either refuse to develop them, and thus to learn about them, or be at the mercy of those who do.

There are plenty of nations capable of cloning human beings, and it would be stupid to believe that several have not already done so. Those most likely to have done so are pretty much our enemies; if not at the immediate moment, just wait a few years until we can no longer repay our Chinese creditor, and they sell our loans to the Russians.

To refuse knowledge is to be ruled by those unafraid of it.
Click to expand...
Regarding GM food for those who may not be aware of the dangers to one’s health:

responsibletechnology.org/health-risks

safeage.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69&Itemid=84

As far as WMD, it always amazes me that the five permament members of the National Security Council of the UN are the ones who develop and have these weapons.

Why is it, that the nations with the most power within the UN are the most irresponsible in developing these WMD and maintaining them?

God’s peace

micah
 
Yeah…lets remember that the USA developed the first WMD’s. They still have the largest stock of them.

What is the point of that.
 
mercytruth said:
Here is one such website:
paulpearsall.com/info/press/3.html

It’s OK to distrust comfortable beliefs as you say. There is nothing comfortable about some of the teachings of Jesus Christ. And yes, it often seems that we are confused inhabitants on this one planet in the great vastness of the universe. I know that the Creator loves you because He fashioned you and gave you a living soul. How you express the glory of your Creator that He has imparted to you, is part of the mystery of being alive.

God’s peace to you

micah
Click to expand...
Micah,
Thank you, more than words can say, for the link. I just spent a few hours crying my way through it, the first time I’ve gotten emotional over a technical article. The article references are credible. I’ve worked on one of Gary Schwartz’ research projects, and although I’ve never had occasion to meet him, several friends and a cherished ex-wife know him personally. He is a trustworthy and honest researcher.

With that information and a night’s sleep to let yesterday’s new data settle in, I may have solved the mystery of transferred personalities. No point in trying to elucidate here, as you will necessarily reject my conclusions, which must be clarified by an essay before trying an informal presentation.

It is a delight to communicate with a Catholic who takes his beliefs to the wall of veridicality. I must admit to some curiosity about what prompted you to find information in support of an alternative theory that I should have known about for three decades?

BTW, I’m perfectly comfortable with Christ’s teachings as reported in the first three N.T. books, and accept the behavioral standards he described. Subsequent material is more clearly the inventions of ordinary self-appointed mystics and teacher wanna-be types, and not particularly interesting.

Moreover, since I fancy that I’ve figured out why the universe was constructed, there is no mystery for me in being alive. In fact, I shall be happy to be done with it.
 
oval said:
So what is the popular answer to the question… how does the soul interact with the physical world?
Click to expand...
There are no “popular” answers to this question.

There cannot be any from religionists who believe that the “soul” is a spirit, because by definition that puts it beyond the reach of physics, which is the science that describes physical interactions.

On the other side, almost no one with a scientific bent would attempt to explain how something which is defined as being outside the physical universe could interact with something within it.

Of course I have developed a theory which explains the issue, but then, you requested a popular explanation. Can’t help you with that. If you really want to understand this kind of subject, you must step beyond the limits of popular agreement and get used to an attenuated set of “friends.”
 
mercytruth said:
Regarding GM food for those who may not be aware of the dangers to one’s health:

responsibletechnology.org/health-risks

safeage.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69&Itemid=84

As far as WMD, it always amazes me that the five permament members of the National Security Council of the UN are the ones who develop and have these weapons.

Why is it, that the nations with the most power within the UN are the most irresponsible in developing these WMD and maintaining them?

God’s peace

micah
Click to expand...
Micah,
Thanks for your GM references. Years ago I explained to my wife that GM foods are typically modified to be “Round-Up Ready,” meaning that they can absorb the toxin without being killed by it. Of course if a plant absorbs a toxin, so does he who eats the plant. (Kind of like why big fish have lots of mercury.) Then I made her study the warning label on a can of Round Up. Now an ex-wife, she is an anti-GM food activist.

You seem to have a wide knowledge bandwidth. Please pass more of it along.

The only part of your last paragraph that I would quibble with is the word irresponsible. Following the principles of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction), they have done a fairly responsible job of handling WMDs, which, like it or not, are with us forever and will not be getting any more benevolent.

There’ve been no atomic weapons deployed against human beings since 1945, and the only use of chemical agents (that I know of from following news services of dubious repute) was by Hussein in Iraq, a pinheaded dictator in a rogue nation. The irresponsible use of such weapons seems more likely to come from Akimini in Iran, another rogue nation ruled more by Islamic dogma than rationality. And this is only possible because the greatest of the five S.C. nations has lost its clout.
 
mercytruth said:
Here is one such website:
paulpearsall.com/info/press/3.html

It’s OK to distrust comfortable beliefs as you say. There is nothing comfortable about some of the teachings of Jesus Christ. And yes, it often seems that we are confused inhabitants on this one planet in the great vastness of the universe. I know that the Creator loves you because He fashioned you and gave you a living soul. How you express the glory of your Creator that He has imparted to you, is part of the mystery of being alive.

God’s peace to you

micah
Click to expand...
I have no idea how this link is connected to things but will say this. I got to case 7…its as far as I could go with the non-sense. The recipients by their wording were aware roughly of age and a few details in their reporting. So the recipients were asked to give feedback with respects to personality change, and were asked if they would agree…

The request is a suggestion…they were given data on the donor…they agreed, if they agreed they would be the types who were interested in not only contributing, but contributing in a positive way…Unconsciously the only way they can contribute in a positive way is if they meet the suspect findings with positive experienced associations to the donor…of which characteristics were told…this is what I call a fixed manipulative experiment to encourage I do not know what. People pay tax dollars for research? Sexual wondering about black parts having sex with the white wife…? the thing is riddled with sex and, music preference,food preference…all things which the recipient can psychologically repay the donor regard “and knew about.” this is not prof . So …heres the bottom line…research needs to show a safety net to these issues…if they set it up and mixed the donors up and the results lined up with the donors…ok…other then that I’m calling non-sense. I have no idea how this links with anything in the thread so this position has nothing to do with anything else but the nonsense in that above link report.
 
greylorn said:
There are no “popular” answers to this question.

There cannot be any from religionists who believe that the “soul” is a spirit, because by definition that puts it beyond the reach of physics, which is the science that describes physical interactions.

On the other side, almost no one with a scientific bent would attempt to explain how something which is defined as being outside the physical universe could interact with something within it.

Of course I have developed a theory which explains the issue, but then, you requested a popular explanation. Can’t help you with that. If you really want to understand this kind of subject, you must step beyond the limits of popular agreement and get used to an attenuated set of “friends.”
Click to expand...
Well it was off topic anyway and I was curious to find out how the question was approached, relative to my understandings.
 
greylorn said:
Micah,
Thanks for your GM references. Years ago I explained to my wife that GM foods are typically modified to be “Round-Up Ready,” meaning that they can absorb the toxin without being killed by it. Of course if a plant absorbs a toxin, so does he who eats the plant. (Kind of like why big fish have lots of mercury.) Then I made her study the warning label on a can of Round Up. Now an ex-wife, she is an anti-GM food activist.

You seem to have a wide knowledge bandwidth. Please pass more of it along.

The only part of your last paragraph that I would quibble with is the word irresponsible. Following the principles of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction), they have done a fairly responsible job of handling WMDs, which, like it or not, are with us forever and will not be getting any more benevolent.

There’ve been no atomic weapons deployed against human beings since 1945, and the only use of chemical agents (that I know of from following news services of dubious repute) was by Hussein in Iraq, a pinheaded dictator in a rogue nation. The irresponsible use of such weapons seems more likely to come from Akimini in Iran, another rogue nation ruled more by Islamic dogma than rationality. And this is only possible because the greatest of the five S.C. nations has lost its clout.
Click to expand...
It really would be off topic to pursue this subject, so I will defer.

God’s peace

micah
 
oval said:
Well it was off topic anyway and I was curious to find out how the question was approached, relative to my understandings.
Click to expand...
The website in question has to do with the donor-recipient phenomenon of the transfer of personality traits via heart transplants. Your objections to the science of these case studies may be valid. This website was given to someone who has an interest in the theories of human consciousness and it occurred to me to refer this phenomenon to him.

Why do I know about it? I have a interest in knowing how the human soul interacts with the human body, as do I have an interest in knowing how the human spirit interacts with both the human soul and the human body.

Why this particular interest? “The life (nephesh/soul) is (in) the blood”. . If departed souls have some sort of etheral body that looks like the human body in which it resided, then the converse might be true. The human body might reflect in some manner what the soul represented while abiding in the body.

Since the human heart is the central organ through which the blood (life-nephesh-soul) circulates, I thought this phenomenon of what a soul chooses in this life, what a soul has experienced in this life, what a soul dislikes in this life, what soul likes, or loves in this life might be imprinted on the central organs in which blood circulates, the most important of which is the human heart.

So, getting back to the question of whether an embryo has a soul, it is my speculation that the human life must have a heart that beats, and lungs that help circulate the blood, that is, the life-nephesh. The relationship between spirit/breath as it relates to soul to body
is another question entirely.

God’s peace

micah
 
mercytruth said:
The website in question has to do with the donor-recipient phenomenon of the transfer of personality traits via heart transplants. Your objections to the science of these case studies may be valid. This website was given to someone who has an interest in the theories of human consciousness and it occurred to me to refer this phenomenon to him.

Why do I know about it? I have a interest in knowing how the human soul interacts with the human body, as do I have an interest in knowing how the human spirit interacts with both the human soul and the human body.

Why this particular interest? “The life (nephesh/soul) is (in) the blood”. . If departed souls have some sort of etheral body that looks like the human body in which it resided, then the converse might be true. The human body might reflect in some manner what the soul represented while abiding in the body.

Since the human heart is the central organ through which the blood (life-nephesh-soul) circulates, I thought this phenomenon of what a soul chooses in this life, what a soul has experienced in this life, what a soul dislikes in this life, what soul likes, or loves in this life might be imprinted on the central organs in which blood circulates, the most important of which is the human heart.

So, getting back to the question of whether an embryo has a soul, it is my speculation that the human life must have a heart that beats, and lungs that help circulate the blood, that is, the life-nephesh. The relationship between spirit/breath as it relates to soul to body
is another question entirely.

God’s peace

micah
Click to expand...
Ok…I’m just reading this now. There are many supposed expert opinions infiltrating society presently. Highly suggestive atheistic movements toward the social. People work, have children and enjoy educational things. If I see something which is off in the area of behavior I waste no time in offering a view without mercy to the origin. That alone was my passionate interest

It seems your onto an interesting approach. I have trouble with the thought& sight of blood and can only admire the courage so in honor of the wondering, will continue rowing alongside the thought provoking exploration.

youtube.com/watch?v=N10YZ2Sk3Kg
 
oval said:
Ok…I’m just reading this now. There are many supposed expert opinions infiltrating society presently. Highly suggestive atheistic movements toward the social. People work, have children and enjoy educational things. If I see something which is off in the area of behavior I waste no time in offering a view without mercy to the origin.

It seems your onto an interesting approach. I have trouble with the sight of blood and can only admire the courage so in honor of the wondering, will continue to row alongside the thought provoking exploration.

youtube.com/watch?v=N10YZ2Sk3Kg
Click to expand...
If these case studies do represent something of the personality of the soul being imprinted in the memory of such organs as the human heart, then we have some very profound questions to ask of those who have received donor hearts and exhibit the personality of the donor.

Personally, I am opposed to organ transplants also.

God’s peace

micah
 
My first profound question would be…how are you able to discern a notice in change if not for an already firm and formed up per-disposition…? and where did the foundation for pre-disposition to recognize change come from if not, your very self…? IOW the very notice denys the inference in whats being suggested. I think that seems somewhat a fair query in the order of the suggestions objectives… ( in that particular segment of it…no huge remark intended and I gotta duck out again today
 
Yes, the human embryou has a soul. When? At the moment of conception - when life begins.
 
mercytruth said:
If these case studies do represent something of the personality of the soul being imprinted in the memory of such organs as the human heart, then we have some very profound questions to ask of those who have received donor hearts and exhibit the personality of the donor.

Personally, I am opposed to organ transplants also.

God’s peace

micah
Click to expand...
You clearly are someone who is very suspicious of science. Why are you against organ transplants?

If your life was about to end because of a deadly disease and a transplant could save you would you still be opposed to transplants.

Are you against life saving brain surgery as well?

X-Rays?

Chemotherapy?

Blood transfusions?
 
AdamPeter said:
You clearly are someone who is very suspicious of science. Why are you against organ transplants?

If your life was about to end because of a deadly disease and a transplant could save you would you still be opposed to transplants.

Are you against life saving brain surgery as well?

X-Rays?

Chemotherapy?

Blood transfusions?
Click to expand...
I do not judge anyone who has organ transplants. It is strictly my own belief that the human body is sacred and should not receive donor transplants from another person.

If someone is receiving the personality of the donor, then they are receiving something that is unique to that individual’s own soul. I would not want to be involved with something like that.

As far as the other medical procedures that you mentioned, I would cross that bridge when, and if I should get there. (I will say, and I thank the good Lord, that he has healed me of broken bones, and of pneumonia without medical intervention). I would never suggest what another human being should do with regard to medical procedures.

shalom

micah
 
mercytruth said:
I do not judge anyone who has organ transplants. It is strictly my own belief that the human body is sacred and should not receive donor transplants from another person.

If someone is receiving the personality of the donor, then they are receiving something that is unique to that individual’s own soul. I would not want to be involved with something like that.

As far as the other medical procedures that you mentioned, I would cross that bridge when, and if I should get there. (I will say, and I thank the good Lord, that he has healed me of broken bones, and of pneumonia without medical intervention). I would never suggest what another human being should do with regard to medical procedures.

shalom

micah
Click to expand...
This is where your opinion goes from being an actual valid opinion to being a potentially dangerous one.

This line of reasoning doesn’t have a place in science or in philosophy. It is purely based upon your own imaginings of what the human soul is and is not.

Talking about the “personality of the donor” being transferred and this kind of thing is absolutely unscientific and there is no philosophical basis for this either.

It is also dangerous in that it leads to the idea of science and medicine being bad things.

I have had brain surgery for epilepsy and had my entire right temporal lobe removed. This has greatly improved my life.

What “opinions” do you have on that type of thing?
 
AdamPeter said:
This is where your opinion goes from being an actual valid opinion to being a potentially dangerous one.

This line of reasoning doesn’t have a place in science or in philosophy. It is purely based upon your own imaginings of what the human soul is and is not.

Talking about the “personality of the donor” being transferred and this kind of thing is absolutely unscientific and there is no philosophical basis for this either.

It is also dangerous in that it leads to the idea of science and medicine being bad things.

I have had brain surgery for epilepsy and had my entire right temporal lobe removed. This has greatly improved my life.

What “opinions” do you have on that type of thing?
Click to expand...
I am glad that you are doing much better. I would never judge anyone for the type of medical procedures they have underwent. That would be uncalled for, and disrespectful to the integrity of the individual.

This is my personal opinion based on this website data, I am not asking anyone else to believe it, have you read it?

paulpearsall.com/info/press/3.html

God’s peace to you

micah
 
mercytruth said:
Regarding GM food for those who may not be aware of the dangers to one’s health:

responsibletechnology.org/health-risks

safeage.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69&Itemid=84

As far as WMD, it always amazes me that the five permament members of the National Security Council of the UN are the ones who develop and have these weapons.

Why is it, that the nations with the most power within the UN are the most irresponsible in developing these WMD and maintaining them?

God’s peace

micah
Click to expand...
Your last statement is amazing. Can you provide one example of being irresponsible regarding nuclear, biological or chemical weapons? Do you think any of these nations have strict safeguards regarding their most dangerous weapons?

Peace,
Ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top