I am interested in finding what many would call the crux of the argument. At what moment in time, does a human being gain its soul? Catholics and Southern branches of Christianity argue that it is formed at conception. Most scientists and philosophers argue it is weeks after conception, as in a couple of months. Many argue that a fetus does not have a soul at all. This is honestly the whole reason we have these debates. To understand if eliminating a fetus is eliminating a soul. In addition, I am left with a couple more questions. Philosophy and modern thinking has taught us that the soul is ones psyche. As restated by Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero. How can a fetus have a psyche? How can one prove that the same immaterial essence that controls the mind, also controls the one non existent in a fetus? If someone were to kill a fetus, and that fetus had a soul, how would we actually be doing any harm? The kingdom of heaven exists in all humans, and we interpret the "kingdom of heaven" to be our soul. After the third and fourth religious revivals, most Christians came under the belief that "heaven" and "hell" are not literal places. How can they be? After death, you are not left with a body, a carrier to hold your soul. The majority of protestant sects believe that upon ones death, the soul simply moves towards or away from god. So, even from a religious stand point, how is the elimination of a fetus causing harm? Not only do we have no apparent evidence that the fetus possesses a soul, but one that will take him/her to god? If we were to be taking a fetuses soul, wouldn't the life entity simply vanish? I'm hardly a theocratic scholar, but it seems that a soul that no longer exists harms not the sensation of the fetus, but benefits the carrier of said fetus. Doesn't the bible say that children are innocent, un-corrupted, and thriving with the holy spirit? This leads me to believe that fetus's are even more innocent to the world. Can it be reasonably assumed that a fetus would, if it were to have a soul, go to heaven upon death? If so, then why are we opposed to abortion? Answering these tough questions would really help me out, and I feel most of the people debating for abortion are secular. I am religious, but I claim no affiliation yet. Science, philosophy, and my own studies on religion have all lead me to the same conclusion. There are no harms, or even evidence, that the mentioned fetus being eliminated is harmful. Before you criticize me though, I ask you.............. Can you answer all these questions?
As there is absolutely no data to indicate there is such a thing as a soul.....there can be no indication of a "When" it begins. Might as well ask what time Bigfoot wakes up to eat.
That's a reasonable argument as well. Although a soul most certainly exists in some context. Which is undoubtebly subjective. The soul is simply the "start" or the master control of a human. Religion teaches that it is the holy spirit. Philosophers argue that its the psyche. Scientists argue its that which creates matter. The very start of an organism, which we have yet to understand. Whatever one's view on what a soul is, its existence is hardly contested.
From your description...I take it the "Soul" actually is another word for the "Brain". I suppose then that it can be argued that in humans the soul is in place somewhere around six months of gestation. In other animals it would vary depending on the species...probably more like 8 months for a dolphin.
The soul manifest itself at conception and aborted babies do not go to heaven. They wait for their moms with a pitchfork at the Gates of Hell.
Actually, and seriously, until 1868, the Catholic Church didn't consider that a fetus had a "soul"....until about 16 weeks or "quickening". Though abortion was considered a "sin"...it was not considered the "murder of a human being with a soul" until about 150 years ago. For CENTURIES before that....it was "different". And BTW, your anger and hatred really shows your true "Chrisian" nature.
Biologically, human life begins during the process of conception. The semantical reduction of the fetus to "Untermensch," the German word for sub-human...basically assuages any guilt associated with premeditated killing. In other words, it helps those involved with the abortion procedure to sleep at night. "I'm not really killing a person, it's not a person, it's a ....it's a thing, just some tissue and cells" Actually it is in fact...biologically, a human life in the developmental stage of it's existence, and abortion terminates said human life. We don't need to throw religion into the mix, or the concept of a soul or "brain" activity...biologically, a human life begins during the process of conception. 50% of the mother's DNA combines with 50% of the father's DNA to create a new human life. Abortion kills this human life. That's basic junior high biology. If a person is cool with killing a human life, by all means keep aborting to your heart's content, but at least be intellectually honest about what's actually occurring.
I've never said I was a Christian; the Catholic church also believes in baptism by declaration and exorcisms; and I really don't care what an anti-Semite thinks of my nature, Christian or otherwise.
Not exactly. Of the many theories on soul, all recognize the separation between soul and brain. - - - Updated - - - Hell is not a literal place. No body exists to go to hell. Modern christian theology leads us to believe heaven and hell are metaphors for one's remoteness to god.
I'm not an anti-Semite....what YOU are is anybody's guess. You sound like a snarky fundamentalist rightwing Christian...but then never actually say what you believe.
So, abortion kills human life? It would be different if that human were to have a developed soul, brain, or heart. Critical thinking leads me to believe a true human is one with these underlying qualities. Philosophically, a fetus is a conduit with the potential for human life. Aborting a fetus, at most, is aborting the potential for a human. Please explain to me why you think the fetus equates to the same level, as lets say, a 50 year old man? There is hardly legitimate argument against abortion, from a secular point of view. The Christian one is more than understandable though, yet lacking.
Some modern Christian theology may think that way, but certainly not all of them, and certainly not enough to even justify your declaration as fact that Hell is not a literal place.
Please, explain to me this. How can one without a body be subjected to physical torture? While I prepare my lengthy refutation, I would also appreciate what pieces of evidence lead you to believe hell is a place of physical torture. I have much evidence tat disagrees with this statement. Modern Christianity is much more interpreted to be along the lines of stoicism. The Triumvirate, in actuality, relies entirely on hell not being a real place to be true. So please, tell me your views on the matter........
Then it would seem we must revert to my initial comment...until one can examine or observe a thing, there is no way to establish anything about it. Basically, it does not exist in reality.
I can refer you to some books regarding the soul if you wish. One of my favorite theories on the soul is the Zenoic, or Stoic one. I will clarify what I meant by psyche though. Its a mentality, separate from the brain. The soul, is the start of the human. Its breath. We don't know how organisms are created to a certain point. That beginning, breath, is the soul. So, on the contrary, that one thing that first gave us life, is our soul.
Okay....then the answer is very simple, in fact you just gave it. The soul begins the moment something is born and draws it's first breath.
Well, this is more along the lines of what I was thinking. Breath is a metaphor for creation. In philosophical terms, the soul is the thing that controls the functions of the human, including the brain. Which in honesty, we do not know how organisms are started. I actually do believe the fetus has a soul, but is not human. Only a conduit for life. Potential, and nothing more. The soul is undeveloped, just like everything else. Aristotle's ensoulment theory actually predicts the soul comes into creation a month and a half after conception. I personally believe this is unsubstantiated. I suggest you read some stoic writings. They will more than clarify what I'm saying. Paraphrasing others has always been a weak quality I have.
Clearly the question is founded on an unwarranted assumption. Before I even think about answering this question, I need some reason to think it isn't...well, hopelessly retarded. What you mean, "we", Kemosabe? Are you seriously contending that the opinion of "most Christians" is properly taken as representative of God-given truth? On the contrary, there is plenty of anecdotal evidence that late-term fetuses respond to external stimuli - including that provided by other fetuses in the same womb. What's more, a fetus begins to hear at around 4 months after conception; and where there is hearing, there is surely a hearer - which in the case of humans means there's a soul. If we took your soul, wouldn't you simply vanish? I'm reminded of Vlad the Impaler, who supposedly argued to a certain monk that he should be considered for sainthood, having sent so many men, women and children to their deaths before sin could render them entirely unfit for Heaven. Don't kid yerself, pilgrim.
Then tell me yours. So far from your posts in this forum, I am fairly convinced you are just a better dressed version of Gorn_Private when it comes to secular humanism.
Actually, most scientists don't believe in souls at all. So from a purely scientific angle, there's no difference between killing a child in the womb and killing a full grown adult. It's just terminating a series of electro-chemical processes in a mass of organic matter.
And most Christians, at least the ones who have read the Bible, and some non-Christians who have read the Bible, would also know that it indicates that we are judged in accordance with our knowledge so that people who have no knowledge of Jesus would be judged by a much different standard than someone with an intimate knowledge of Jesus who elects to reject him, the latter going straight to the burning trash pit.
Regardless of what scientists believe, Christians most certainly do. As I said, I have no affiliation yet. Its hard for me as a man of religion to fully commit to either argument. I would like for someone to step forward though, and hopefully not give me the same jackassery that the other guy gave.
