How do we prove we have a permanent soul?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ben_Sinner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Ben_Sinner

Guest
How do we prove we have a permanent soul?

A claim made against such a soul is that we are constantly changing. Our appearance, our attitude, changes day to day. ‘Soul’ is no more than a bundle of sensations, emotions, sentiments, all relating to the physical experiences,

If our soul was permanent, our appearance and attitude would never change. It was permanently be the same.

Ho do we prove we have a permanent soul?
 
We have a soul - we are a soul and a body. An embodied soul.

Such will remain us and our soul from now til forever.

Persons though change all the time - we do not remain “fixed static beings”.

Indeed we can become more and more holy…

We - yes including our soul - can become better 🙂 More conformed to Christ.
 
If it changes though,how can it be permanent?
We do not use the term “permanent” here.

A person can change all the time…become more loving…learn new things…acquire new virtues…

At no time does the soul cease to be if that is what your getting at.
 
I don’t think that anything is permanent.
It suggests unchanging in time.
In this world everything changes.
Permanent does not mean eternal.
Can you provide a reference?
 
Seems a question has been asked about something that hasent been properly defined first.
What is meant by soul? What is soul as compared to some other entity? What are its characteristics?
Simply stating that man has a soul and a body says nothing about their relationship to one another or how one might effect the characteristics of the other. Does the body change the soul? Can ones soul effect ones body? We have to define before we can determine how one may or may not be eternal. Perhaps the soul is like a body of water displaced by the rock tossed into it. I think we can agree a change has occured to the water yet the water remains as always…water. Of course this is a physical event applied to a very abstract concept but one has to start from where one can.
There are plenty of definitions out there which attempt to define soul…perhaps you can start with one that you which to base you question about.
 
And also, would the fact that in every seven years, every cell in our body is changed, have any argument that we don’t have an eternal soul?
 
I would assume that our soul is not Phyical being ,
but a Spiritual thing which may never have Phyical changers such as our body,
That’s my uneducated opinion ,
 
How do we prove we have a permanent soul?

A claim made against such a soul is that we are constantly changing. Our appearance, our attitude, changes day to day. ‘Soul’ is no more than a bundle of sensations, emotions, sentiments, all relating to the physical experiences,

If our soul was permanent, our appearance and attitude would never change. It was permanently be the same.

Ho do we prove we have a permanent soul?
What you mean by “prove”?

Why do you think permanent = unchanging?

Also, I don’t believe permanent is the correct descriptor of our souls’ immortality.
 
No one can prove there is a soul. We accept on faith that there is a soul, just as we have a deep, abiding faith that there is a God. Weather the soul is permanent-changable-or not, well, you will just have to wait and see. Be sure to “come back” and let us know, OK? Peace.
 
I know what Ben is getting at and it is something that I have asked a couple of times and would also like an answer. The idea that all of our emotions can be physically described or related to the brain is disturbing to me. Where is there room for the the soul and what possible affect does it have on the body? I get what he is saying because I have encountered it. This is what I know and I’m not sure this will help.

The powers of the soul involve intentionally (experience, unity over time, and subjectivity), will, and the ability to exsist after death. The physical changes on ones body would have no impact on the permanency of the soul. Also if the soul is truly immaterial, than neuroscience will never find the soul and it will certainly look like we would be spongy robots from their stand point. However, logically I can’t see why God would ever allow us access to the soul through any physical means. The idea of us being capable of tampering with what would be our most important trait in our existence seems insane and would be a true over sight for a supreme creator. The soul by all means, belongs to God and God alone.

So the question is, is there proof of the soul and how do you defend it against allegations that decree that our emotions and minds are nothing but physical events in the brain subject to change. Personally I’m not sure, but I’d love to have a rebuttal to this level of reductionism. The best explanations I have heard, have been hylemorphism and or the concept that the soul employees the brain and body to exist in this world.

Hylemorphism does account and acknowledge emergent properties prevalent in our world and physics due to the potentially of matter and the power of form in the matter (thanks Richca for the help on the topic of hylemorphism!). In a very figurative sense the brain is the finger print of the soul. It is the form that matters and the soul is the form and animating principle of the body effectively. Further more from a science stand point, quantum physics and the permanency of the soul is possible but that’s a subject for a different time, but to sum it up we leave a quantum thumb print in our universe. This is very simplistic and there is much more to this.

Secondly, the view that the brain is employed by the soul is another view that also might work, but very hard to prove. The analogy the brain is to the soul as the tv is to the tv show is the best way to look at it. If tested, science could only ever measure the brain activity associated with the actions of the soul, which would look like exactly what we see now in neuroscience, the difference would be that the first cause is the soul, not strictly genetics, environment, and conditioning. The mind is physical as is the brain but the soul dwells in the mind. Once that dies, the soul leaves. I believe it was grannymh that posted that on this forum. Her view was actually the view I grew up with and still believe. The bodies emotions are relayed to you, tell you what’s good and what’s bad and than you decide to act on them. Love is physically experienced and can be found in the brain, but it’s that experience that makes it special. Love it self could be a power of the soul and the soul uses the brain to express it. Much like hylemorphism, if you damage that part of the brain you can’t express it anymore, ei you can’t move a limb if you no longer have it.

Over all this is all debatable, which makes it stressful. The idea of having no soul is hard to think about, and when the alternative view turns every thing that we know and feel to be right and good into an evil illusion, which makes this all that more stressful. The above two views can be taken to be the same. I’d like to point out that the Cartesian view makes the mind a separate substance of which I don’t support, there are similarities but only that the soul can continue on separately, not the mind. For all we know it actually might be the mind and the finite time of its existence that truly restricts our soul and gives us the microscope view of knowledge we have. I hope this helps Ben. I’d also like to get some personal feed back from some of the forum elders and believers to help shine a more positive light on neuroscience, so please feel free to personal message me.

God bless
Aaron
 
No.

The soul is spirit.
Biblically speaking the two apparently aren’t quite the same. According to the bible one can be dead in spirit but retain a soul. Also the soul can be destroyed see isaiah 10:18 and Mathew 10:28 for instance. Hardly rendering it unchanging or eternal. The soul is that which is the animating force which God has “breathed” into the body apparenty. And what God has made animate he can render inanimate again.
 
I found your post very interesting. It seems to me that you have spent enough time to think about the subject matter. Here are some of my thoughts.
I know what Ben is getting at and it is something that I have asked a couple of times and would also like an answer. The idea that all of our emotions can be physically described or related to the brain is disturbing to me. Where is there room for the the soul and what possible affect does it have on the body? I get what he is saying because I have encountered it. This is what I know and I’m not sure this will help.
It is not only the emotion that is subject of neurobiological process. The scientists can affect our decision and read our minds in advance. Please read the this wiki article for more explanation. We know well that our identity and self is also subject of threat due to any brain damage. This is well know among people with Alzheimer. This is a self portrait of an artist from himself.
The powers of the soul involve intentionally (experience, unity over time, and subjectivity), will, and the ability to exsist after death. The physical changes on ones body would have no impact on the permanency of the soul.
The bold part is the result of neurobiological process.
Also if the soul is truly immaterial, than neuroscience will never find the soul and it will certainly look like we would be spongy robots from their stand point. However, logically I can’t see why God would ever allow us access to the soul through any physical means. The idea of us being capable of tampering with what would be our most important trait in our existence seems insane and would be a true over sight for a supreme creator. The soul by all means, belongs to God and God alone.
To me it is illogical if soul can affect the body, animate it, and be undetectable.
So the question is, is there proof of the soul and how do you defend it against allegations that decree that our emotions and minds are nothing but physical events in the brain subject to change. Personally I’m not sure, but I’d love to have a rebuttal to this level of reductionism. The best explanations I have heard, have been hylemorphism and or the concept that the soul employees the brain and body to exist in this world.
What is the use of hylemorphism (soul) if it could not even explain why people with brain damage lose their identity?
Hylemorphism does account and acknowledge emergent properties prevalent in our world and physics due to the potentially of matter and the power of form in the matter (thanks Richca for the help on the topic of hylemorphism!). In a very figurative sense the brain is the finger print of the soul. It is the form that matters and the soul is the form and animating principle of the body effectively. Further more from a science stand point, quantum physics and the permanency of the soul is possible but that’s a subject for a different time, but to sum it up we leave a quantum thumb print in our universe. This is very simplistic and there is much more to this.
Well, if identity is an emergent phenomena due to neurobilogical process then why not rest?
Secondly, the view that the brain is employed by the soul is another view that also might work, but very hard to prove. The analogy the brain is to the soul as the tv is to the tv show is the best way to look at it. If tested, science could only ever measure the brain activity associated with the actions of the soul, which would look like exactly what we see now in neuroscience, the difference would be that the first cause is the soul, not strictly genetics, environment, and conditioning. The mind is physical as is the brain but the soul dwells in the mind. Once that dies, the soul leaves. I believe it was grannymh that posted that on this forum. Her view was actually the view I grew up with and still believe. The bodies emotions are relayed to you, tell you what’s good and what’s bad and than you decide to act on them. Love is physically experienced and can be found in the brain, but it’s that experience that makes it special. Love it self could be a power of the soul and the soul uses the brain to express it. Much like hylemorphism, if you damage that part of the brain you can’t express it anymore, ei you can’t move a limb if you no longer have it.
I cannot follow you here.
Over all this is all debatable, which makes it stressful. The idea of having no soul is hard to think about, and when the alternative view turns every thing that we know and feel to be right and good into an evil illusion, which makes this all that more stressful. The above two views can be taken to be the same. I’d like to point out that the Cartesian view makes the mind a separate substance of which I don’t support, there are similarities but only that the soul can continue on separately, not the mind. For all we know it actually might be the mind and the finite time of its existence that truly restricts our soul and gives us the microscope view of knowledge we have. I hope this helps Ben. I’d also like to get some personal feed back from some of the forum elders and believers to help shine a more positive light on neuroscience, so please feel free to personal message me.
Why death is stressful for you? It is permanent peace. To me an everlasting life witout meaning is much more stressful.
 
The above post was a miss send I meant to send you a pm sst. I will say this I’m not here to debate, and I don’t see what you added with your comments to my post. Infact they seem to misunderstand what I meant in all of your comments. So I feel you are looking to debate or argue. I sent you a pm on this, so if anyone else has a question pm, help on this subject is nice. I will not be posting anymore on this thread.
 
How do we prove we have a permanent soul?

A claim made against such a soul is that we are constantly changing. Our appearance, our attitude, changes day to day. ‘Soul’ is no more than a bundle of sensations, emotions, sentiments, all relating to the physical experiences,

If our soul was permanent, our appearance and attitude would never change. It was permanently be the same.

Ho do we prove we have a permanent soul?
First, do we have a soul. Yes, logically all living beings must have a soul defined as their animating and integrating principle. Living beings are composed of cells, use energy, respond and adapt to their environment, grow and reproduce. These activities require an integrating and animating principle – soul.

Second, are souls permanent. The permanency of the soul is a matter of faith. We believe the animal soul is not immortal but dies with the animal’s body. We believe man’s soul made in the image of God is immortal.
 
How do we prove we have a permanent soul?

A claim made against such a soul is that we are constantly changing. Our appearance, our attitude, changes day to day. ‘Soul’ is no more than a bundle of sensations, emotions, sentiments, all relating to the physical experiences,

If our soul was permanent, our appearance and attitude would never change. It was permanently be the same.

Ho do we prove we have a permanent soul?
I think of the soul as being pure spirit, living spirit that brings the living physical body to life with thoughts, speech, and actions. The soul is therefore in a constant state of flux and can be easily stained through sin. Using perhaps a crude analogy, the body is like the computer hardware and the soul is like the computer software… artificial intelligence as it were. The parallels between computers and humans are striking to me and lead me to believe that the living soul is ever so plausible. Heck, most of us can probably be saved on an old-fashioned floppy disk!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top