Souls With Bodies vs. Bodies With Souls

[Bubba_Switzler]

I mentioned at one point, and Science and Science Fiction have already considered these questions, too, that if that speculation is correct, that the soul is a product of a natural evolution, Bodies evolving and then “growing” souls, that eventually evolution would lead to a “singularity” of a “God Soul” that would essentially Become the God people believe in…

It may well be that the first true humans were those “God souls” and that there is no room for further evolution of the soul.

Are you’re looking for some kind of “proof theory” that God exists,

No, that is far from my concern here.

But that goes a bit beyond the bounds of philosophy, doesn’t it? Are ~we~ beating a dead horse? Or are you just going to keep wrapping your mind around the subject in avoidance of an answer you’re not going to get, without personal experience? That’s a bit solipsistic, to my mind. I believed in the experiences I read of Saints, and that Transubstantiation was a Reality, not just a ritual, and things like that, and I was also quite an Atheist for a time, only “believing” in Science for a time, too…

No offense intended. It just seems like no matter how someone tries to answer the question for you, you’re gonna find a way to dodge any answer you could gain from the conversation…

Perhaps you could point to what you regard as the best answer so far and we could discuss that specifically.

Mentioning the Atheism part actually brings up another point… When I Did go there, I did it trying to treat what Christ had to say as a Philosophy that I took Very Seriously, so even then, there was a lot more to it than simply indulging myself in “animal behaviors” so much as exploring the boundaries of “sins” I was “comfortable with” one might say… things that didn’t hurt anyone, other than my own physical body. I still smoke cigarettes and I’m in a coffee shop drinking coffee all day, for example, but what can I say, I’m human =P

I think you’re equating animal behaviors with self indulgence and sin which is an argument you made earlier. However, even animals build nests, hunt in packs, and protect their young so it’s not as simple as that.

And you also claim to have searched for a Christian account, that simply turns out to make the statement that souls exist after the body dies… What about Christ? Christ was Fully Human, and lived in Communion with The Father and The Holy Spirit. You might have more research to do on others, as well, but that’s not precisely my area… As a Pagan, you also have a lot more lee-way on what accounts you can decide are credible or not, strictly speaking…

Christ (and Christology) is such a huge mystery Himself that I don’t think it’s going to be very helpful. Still, Christ was ressurrected as we celebrate today.

 

[fisherman_carl]

I have searched in vain for a Christian account. All I have found so far are assertions that the soul is immortal. I have not researched the matter deeply but it’s my recollection that the idea of the immortal soul was more Helenistic than Hebraic. I have nothing against Helenism but it is interesting that the Hebrews were focused on resurrection.

So you never read anything i wrote on that or read Feser.? There is a strong philosophical case for the immaterial mind and for the immortality of the soul in Aquinas. And a good place to start is with Feser’s books like his introduction to philosophy of mind or his book on Aquinas.

As for a ‘Christian’ source for the bodily Resurrection it rests on argument from authority. That is Christian’s believe the words of Jesus and God have enough authority to be believed. If God tells you something then that should be enough.

If you read Aquinas or any of Feser’s articles I linked to you would know the soul is incomplete apart from the body. Even functions like thinking rely on the body. Since our minds are used to processing sensory information. So in order for us to be whole again we need our bodies.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

So you never read anything i wrote on that or read Feser.? There is a strong philosophical case for the immaterial mind and for the immortality of the soul in Aquinas. And a good place to start is with Feser’s books like his introduction to philosophy of mind or his book on Aquinas.

As for a ‘Christian’ source for the bodily Resurrection it rests on argument from authority. That is Christian’s believe the words of Jesus and God have enough authority to be believed. If God tells you something then that should be enough.

If you read Aquinas or any of Feser’s articles I linked to you would know the soul is incomplete apart from the body. Even functions like thinking rely on the body. Since our minds are used to processing sensory information. So in order for us to be whole again we need our bodies.

Perhaps I should have been more precise. I was sloppy copying a previous paragraph into a new post.

What I have searched for and not found is a Christian account of why we are body/soul composites instead of merely souls, why we have material existence at all.

Obviously this question is related to the immortality of the soul and the arguments for that position. As I recall Aquinas updated ancient Greek arguments. I am open to discussing those arguments here but even if we accept them as made, they beg the above question as I noted early in this thread. If we are fine and dandy as souls without bodies, why the need for resurrection or for our initial birth into a material world?

 

[fisherman_carl]

Perhaps I should have been more precise. I was sloppy copying a previous paragraph into a new post.

What I have searched for and not found is a Christian account of why we are body/soul composites instead of merely souls, why we have material existence at all.

Obviously this question is related to the immortality of the soul and the arguments for that position. As I recall Aquinas updated ancient Greek arguments. I am open to discussing those arguments here but even if we accept them as made, they beg the above question as I noted early in this thread. If we are fine and dandy as souls without bodies, why the need for resurrection or for our initial birth into a material world?

But we are not fine and dandy without our bodies according to Aquinas. And from a Christian perspective we must need our bodies if God wants to resurrect them.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

But we are not fine and dandy without our bodies according to Aquinas.

Perhaps you could point me to where Aquinas addresses this need for bodies. I don’t recall it.

And from a Christian perspective we must need our bodies if God wants to resurrect them.

Well, yes, but this doesn’t really answer the question. My question is why material bodies at all. Why a material universe? What is the deficiency of a purely spiritual existence which gives rise to this need for a ressurection? To say that we need the first bodies for the ressurection doesn’t really get to the core question.

 

[Lynxdk]

It may well be that the first true humans were those “God souls” and that there is no room for further evolution of the soul.

I think it’s pretty clear just from the condition of the world, that there’s a lot of room for improvement

Quoting you out of order, to stress another point =P

I think you’re equating animal behaviors with self indulgence and sin which is an argument you made earlier. However, even animals build nests, hunt in packs, and protect their young so it’s not as simple as that.

Except that Animals have no concept of Sin. They have no “shame” during procreative “rituals” let alone during the act, the way people… learn to have?

When a person beats their dog for pooping on the rug and/or rubs their noses in it, they might have some sense of shame thereafter, but did they have it, Before?

Try doing that with a Cat

Christ (and Christology) is such a huge mystery Himself that I don’t think it’s going to be very helpful. Still, Christ was resurrected as we celebrate today.

And it’s still anecdotal. Anecdotal and Subjective, from those who share of Spiritual experience, also.

Perhaps you could point to what you regard as the best answer so far and we could discuss that specifically.

I think it’s not a single point that can solve the issue. That would be like my trying to pick a certain moment, in the whole of my life, where I decided that “ok, Now I “believe” in God” when it’s much More than just one moment in time, but a cumulative experience that has Grown over time. Trusting here, testing there, trying to figure things out on my own, looking back at how things worked out when I often thought “this is it. I’m screwed…”

There’s Plenty of times where I thought, ok. I get it. It’s for real. Only to have something happen where I lost that for a bit. Never completely, really… I knew God was real when I was a baby, then I learned “differently” because so many of the people around me, didn’t act anything like Christ described we should. However, I Trusted that God would not let me be so foolish to do something Damnable (The Bible Told me so, rings the children’s song in my head) when I chose to “become an Atheist” because too many things did not make sense. I needed a bunch of Science and other stuff to sort my mind out.

Have I mentioned I’m a “Cradle Catholic?” Born, Baptized, Confirmed, Married, etc… All as a Catholic, and while I’m sitting here trying to describe my Atheism, the song on the speakers in the cafe is “Always Something There To Remind Me” by Naked Eyes, from the Burning Bridges album

I had to “leave the Church” in that sense, because I had too much Fear of learning something so “sinful” that I would go to hell for it… I digress…

We’re talking about something so complex that who knows what kind of maths it would take to describe… We don’t even have sufficient maths to describe just the relatively simple Universe we live in right now, let alone the potentially Infinite MultiVerse that such an “Ultimate” One Most High God could create and destroy at will.

Imagine for a moment, how easy it is just to imagine these kinds of things in our Own minds. We “create and destroy at will” in our own imagining. They don’t necessarily or directly affect the world Around us, but we can Use our imaginations to improve ourselves, (or not) explore ideas, put ourselves in someone else’s shoes to try and understand their perspective…

Are these animal behaviors? Is it by some necessity to our survival to be able to write Science Fiction? Create Art? Describe God?

The very first line of the Tao Te Ching it’s stated that “The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao” so I think we’re going to keep getting stuck on this issue.

However, taking everything into account at the same time… Ah. Now we’re talking Omni.

Let’s push that a little further. Carl Sagan, Eckhart Tolle, We are the Universe, Experiencing itself.

We are Souls. We Have Bodies.
Lots of references for that sort of statement.

John 10:34
Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’?

With God “nothing” is Impossible.
Nothing can exist without(outside of) God.
With God, Everything is Possible.

You could just ~ask God yourself~
We’re ~inside~ of God, right now.
Nothing exists outside of God.

There is no such thing as “nothing” even the space between the stars, and the space the stars and planets “rest” in, can be described as “quantum foam” …

Sorry for the random bits and pieces there at the end, but there’s So Much More to Learn, that we could go on about this, probably forever, and I need to get back to the shelter for check in.

Yes, I am a homeless crazy person. =)

It’s temporary. The Homeless part. Had a falling out with family. The don’t like it when I talk to myself, out loud

Have a good night =D

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

I think it’s pretty clear just from the condition of the world, that there’s a lot of room for improvement

Quoting you out of order, to stress another point =P

We can easily agree on that but I was not treating the improvement of such conditions as part of soul evolution. When I say that human souls are at the pinnacle, I mean by that simply that we are reasoning creatures in full image of God and capable of being saints.

But you do raise an interesting distinction, or perhaps raise the possiblity of not making a distinction that I assumed between the form of the soul and the content of it.

Except that Animals have no concept of Sin. They have no “shame” during procreative “rituals” let alone during the act, the way people… learn to have?

I would agree that they have no concept of soul. One could say they have no concept period. The question is this like saying that fish have no legs but mammels do?

I think it’s not a single point that can solve the issue. That would be like my trying to pick a certain moment, in the whole of my life, where I decided that “ok, Now I “believe” in God” when it’s much More than just one moment in time, but a cumulative experience that has Grown over time. Trusting here, testing there, trying to figure things out on my own, looking back at how things worked out when I often thought “this is it. I’m screwed…”

I agree. I started the thread with one aspect but others have cropped up since then and my core quesiton has shifted to: why do we have material bodies?

There’s Plenty of times where I thought, ok. I get it. It’s for real. Only to have something happen where I lost that for a bit. Never completely, really… I knew God was real when I was a baby, then I learned “differently” because so many of the people around me, didn’t act anything like Christ described we should. However, I Trusted that God would not let me be so foolish to do something Damnable (The Bible Told me so, rings the children’s song in my head) when I chose to “become an Atheist” because too many things did not make sense. I needed a bunch of Science and other stuff to sort my mind out.

Have I mentioned I’m a “Cradle Catholic?” Born, Baptized, Confirmed, Married, etc… All as a Catholic, and while I’m sitting here trying to describe my Atheism, the song on the speakers in the cafe is “Always Something There To Remind Me” by Naked Eyes, from the Burning Bridges album

I had to “leave the Church” in that sense, because I had too much Fear of learning something so “sinful” that I would go to hell for it… I digress…

I am sorry to hear that. Perhaps we should move this to PM because I have some similar concerns but arrived at a very different place.

 

[Lynxdk]

Perhaps you could point me to where Aquinas addresses this need for bodies. I don’t recall it.

Well, yes, but this doesn’t really answer the question. My question is why material bodies at all. Why a material universe? What is the deficiency of a purely spiritual existence which gives rise to this need for a resurrection? To say that we need the first bodies for the resurrection doesn’t really get to the core question.

How else would you teach young gods how to treat each other respectfully, and with decency, and goodness? How else would you safely figure out the “good eggs” from the “bad eggs” without risking letting loose a bunch of all powerful beings in an infinite Multiverse?

How would you have children, to learn and teach and grow, if you were an Omni Everything ultimate multi-dimensional, timeless, “person”?

Persons… Father, Son and Holy Spirit…

(building off my last post)

Keep in mind the Material Universe is made of largely “empty” space, at the quantum level, and there is an infinite amount of “it” which goes along with my saying, read the Bible, especially what Christ had to say.

I am sorry to hear that. Perhaps we should move this to PM because I have some similar concerns but arrived at a very different place.

Oh, I’m not an Atheist… I was just practicing at it. Nor do I fear “hell”
1 John 4:18
There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.

Plenty of Bible verses that support the idea that God Saves Everyone… but that’s a whole 'nother argument.

Now I’m out for the night. =)

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

While investigating Thomistic teleology I came across this:

There is, among contemporary Thomists, a controversy over the metaphysical status of human beings after death. Both sides agree that the human soul is the substantial form of the living human body, both sides agree that the human soul subsists after death, and both sides agree that the body is restored to the soul at the resurrection. But what happens to the human being himself between death and resurrection? Does a human being in some way continue to exist after death? Or does he cease to exist until the resurrection? Which answer do the premises that both sides agreed on support? And which answer did Aquinas himself support?

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2016/03/so-what-are-you-doing-after-your-funeral.html

 

[Lynxdk]

When considering the perspectives of folks who didn’t have the understandings or conceptions of Sciences that we do today, one might consider adding in some newer thought, such as our Souls could simply be returning to God, for judgment or whatever else Souls might do in Heaven, only to be popped forward in time to when the Earth is remade, so that life can continue “On Earth, as it is in Heaven.” If God transcends time and space, and any other dimension people discover in the meantime, that wouldn’t be particularly difficult…

The problem with premises, is they tend to presume that we know all there is to know…