PoetPhilosopher
Veteran Member
In theistic evolution, does human beings having souls mean other species have souls?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Theistic evolution and souls
- Thread starter PoetPhilosopher
- Start date
I believe humans have individual souls and animal species have group souls at the current level of evolution. A domesticated animal that experiences and reciprocates true love with a human can 'individualize' from their group souls and eventually advance to human.
Bonus info: Group souls explain why animals are more instinct driven from collective group traits. Humans more need to learn everything from childhood. I watched a robin build a nest on my porch drain pipe last week that I couldn't build. I watched while replying to religious post questions that a robin couldn't answer.
In the Biblical definition of a "soul" every living breathing creature is a soul. It isn't something you possess...its something you are.
Adam was not 'given' a soul when God created him, but he 'became' a soul when God started him breathing. (Genesis 2:7)
If Old King Cole was a merry old soul....what part of him was happy?
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
The answer to this depends on who you ask -- there are theistic evolutionists that have all sorts of different opinions on this. There are those who believe only humans have souls. There are those who believe all life forms have souls. And there are those who believe all things have souls, even rocks, trees, and rivers.
I’m undecided if nonhuman beings have souls.
But i’m not undecided about non living things like rocks not having souls
PoetPhilosopher
Veteran Member
Well here's the challenge, my friend...
Imagine that human beings evolved, and that they have souls. The big question is, at what point in the evolutionary process did either the divine breathe souls into them, or they evolved to have souls?
If I was God I would have done it when the being was sufficiently evolved for it to understand right from wrong to some degree.
I suppose it depends on which animals have the ability to distinguish right from wrong to a degree.
Or perhaps all living creatures have souls. But I struggle to imagine how God would judge whether or not a single celled organism has led a good life to grant it salvation.
In my understanding, all is Brahman.
Wouldn't this view be Vishishtadvaita - qualified nondualism?
When humans became human in the very distant past. This cannot be defined from our perspective, but I believe some time before a half a million years ago. As far as all life forms I believe they have an evolved spiritual nature. as does all of our physical existence.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
That depends on the person, as "theistic evolution" only states that there is/are deity/deities that created all.
The term soul is always challenging as to what someone identifies as that. For discussion sake, generally speaking we could imagine it to be what is still identified as uniquely "you", yet transcends and exists prior to that egoic self identification which is a matter of evolution or development. That is, it is the pure "essence" of who you are before and beyond your personality and all it's programmings.
As far as theistic evolution goes, while I believe that natural evolution is "God creating", I would not place the soul within that process, directly that is. I think it transcends, or exists alongside a material reality as its "interior" reality. I suppose you could imagine evolution to be like putting skin on the soul.
A way you could state that is this. We are not humans on a spiritual journey. Rather, we are spirit on a human journey.
Not only Created, but also involved in the physical existence through Revelation. The Deist view may believe in a Creator God, but not a God apparently involved with Creation.
Well there are a million Sanskrit word. That one sent me to Wikipedia:
Vishishtadvaita (IAST Viśiṣṭādvaita; Sanskrit: विशिष्टाद्वैत) is one of the most popular schools of the Vedanta school of Hindu philosophy. Vedanta literally means the end of the Vedas. VishishtAdvaita (literally "Advaita with uniqueness; qualifications") is a non-dualistic school of Vedanta philosophy. It is non-dualism of the qualified whole, in which Brahman alone exists, but is characterized by multiplicity. It can be described as qualified monism or qualified non-dualism or attributive monism. It is a school of Vedanta philosophy which believes in all diversity subsuming to an underlying unity.
With that last sentence in the definition, I think it is consistent with what I am saying.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I do believe we are using a different definition of "Creation" in this context. IMO, it means that a deity/deities created all, not necessarily whether they are interactive with Creation once created. Nor do I think "Revelation" has to be part of this by definition.
It may be variable within Deism, but many Deist believe in God a Creator of our physical existence.
It is part of case, because Deists do not believe in Revelation from God to humanity, which is part of the interaction between God and humanity as the basis of Theism.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
IMO, "many" is the catch-word here, especially since "theistic evolutionists' are all over the "map" on this-- and a lot of other things as well.
ADDED: Here:
Francis Collins describes theistic evolution as the position that "evolution is real, but that it was set in motion by God", and characterizes it as accepting "that evolution occurred as biologists describe it, but under the direction of God". Adherents of theistic evolution also have no trouble accepting other tenets of origin sciences with their religious beliefs. They include:
- the prevailing cosmological model, with the universe coming into being about 13.8 billion years ago through quantum fluctuations;
- the likelihood of a multiverse, in which our universe branched off from others, that explains our fine-tuned universe;
- early chemical elements originating through stellar nucleosynthesis;
- the solar nebular theory of the formation of the Solar System and planet Earth;
- billions of years of geological history bringing forth the formation of plate tectonics, Earth's oceans, and the atmosphere;
- the origins of life through chemical processes and formation of multicellular life;
- billions of years of biological evolution through natural mechanisms;
- humans are also the byproduct of these natural processes;
- human behavior, cognition, and consciousness are a result of these evolutionary mechanisms;
- morality, religion, intelligence, emotions, politics, and other cultural and psychological facets are the result of the same evolutionary processes;
- archaeology also provides large amounts of evidence for cultural evolution of early Homo sapiens, prior to the start of the Bronze Age and Iron Age;
- Despite no supernatural intervention in any of these phenomena, humans are unique. The concern for the Moral Law (the knowledge of right and wrong) and the continuous search for God among all human cultures defy evolutionary explanations and point to our spiritual nature. -- Theistic evolution - Wikipedia
I agree Theistic evolutionists are all over the map, so to speak, and my view as a Theistic evolutionist is simply that abiogenesis and evolution from the scientific perspective is fundamentally true. God Created our physical existence as science understands it with no contradictions..I am not a fan of the fin tuning theist argument, because it is too anthropomorphic, and requires too many non-science assumptions.
My post primarily deals with the Deist perspective commonly described as 'God set everything up,' ie Created, and than sat back and watched.