Eternal hell or annihillation make no sense

[muhammad_isa]

You make it sound as though we have a goal of ending up in your hell..

Who's "we" ?

Who do you think G-d is talking about in the Bible & Qur'an?
My understanding is, that the verses are referring to the cursed satan,
and those that follow him(willfully).

You know, the sneering and rejoicing in other's misfortunes, and causing them.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Who's "we" ?

I'll ask it this way; who do you think is "hellbent to get to hell"?

 

[Ajax]

Do you believe in an eternal torment in Hell?

No, I don't.
There is no soul as meant by religions. It's an invisible, intangible and proven to be useless term.
Christians in the 3rd century AD "borrowed" it from Plato writings and Muslims from Christians.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

No, I don't.

This is common ground for us; I don't either.

There is no soul as meant by religions.

Which religion? Because there are a *lot* of views for what the "soul" or "spirit" of an individual is, depending on the religion or faith. Some religions even believe in *many* different aspects of an individuals soul that makes up the whole; some elements pass on, some die, some persist. For example the memory of the dead is seen as an aspect of their soul that lives on after their death, for so long as memory persists.

 

[Ajax]

Which religion? Because there are a *lot* of views for what the "soul" or "spirit" of an individual is, depending on the religion or faith. Some religions even believe in *many* different aspects of an individuals soul that makes up the whole; some elements pass on, some die, some persist. For example the memory of the dead is seen as an aspect of their soul that lives on after their death, for so long as memory persists.

For a start the three Abrahamic ones, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. However immortality of souls aren't strictly a religious belief. They are also a philosophical belief. For example, the Ancient Greek Epicureans considered the soul to be immortal.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

For a start the three Abrahamic ones, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

So that's three views... And really, that's being generous as Christianity and Islam are mostly derivative of one another and quite similar, with the view of the soul (several aspects) in Judaism is quite different, from what I've gathered.

Now, what makes you say that there "is no soul"? Do you understand what is meant and being said by such a belief statement?

 

[Ajax]

So that's three views... And really, that's being generous as Christianity and Islam are mostly derivative of one another and quite similar, with the view of the soul (several aspects) in Judaism is quite different, from what I've gathered.

Now, what makes you say that there "is no soul"? Do you understand what is meant and being said by such a belief statement?

I think so, unless you define it differently. It's an invisible, immaterial, immortal entity which enters the body upon conception, and according to many is responsible among others for the human personality, intellect, will, emotions, even for the body's animation as some claim.
It has been proven that all these soul's attributes are in fact brain's functions, so the there is no need for such entity, especially when it can not be empirically found or tested.

 

[muhammad_isa]

It has been proven that all these soul's attributes are in fact brain's functions..

I think I've explained to you before, you can BELIEVE that, and interpret said evidence in such a manner ... but not prove it.

How would you be able to prove such a thing? You can't !
If it COULD be proved, then all medical personnel who take their religion seriously, should
be in the "nuthouse"

 

[Ajax]

I think I've explained to you before, you can BELIEVE that, and interpret said evidence in such a manner ... but not prove it.

How would you be able to prove such a thing? You can't !
If it COULD be proved, then all medical personnel who take their religion seriously, should
be in the "nuthouse"

4.2 Our Brains Control Our Thoughts, Feelings, and Behaviour – Introduction to Psychology – 1st Canadian Edition
No, they will not end in a nuthouse, because most normal people (even theists) these days do not believe that a soul is necessary. Its only the fundamentalists who are stuck with this thought.

 

[muhammad_isa]

4.2 Our Brains Control Our Thoughts, Feelings, and Behaviour – Introduction to Psychology – 1st Canadian Edition

..and that is proof of what?
Psychology is renowned for having many competing theories.

You need to show a physical, scientific proof .. which is impossible.

No, they will not end in a nuthouse, because most normal people (even theists) these days do not believe that a soul is necessary. Its only the fundamentalists who are stuck with this thought.

Pure assumption.
The hospitals in the UK are full of Muslim doctors, who have a very good understanding of science & biology.
..and there are places of prayer in the hospitals, obviously, for the sick and bereaved etc.
These doctors often take their religion seriously, and use the prayer rooms, and they believe in the immortal soul.

Some of them would be brain surgeons.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

I think so, unless you define it differently.

I do, yes. Elaborated upon here. Some elements are quite finite, some are more persisting, none really considered "eternal" as everything has an end. I would also disagree with your claim that even theists don't believe a soul to be necessary; not only is this demonstrably false, but many theists believe similarly that our soul is what makes us uniquely us.

It has been proven that all these soul's attributes are in fact brain's functions, so the there is no need for such entity, especially when it can not be empirically found or tested.

All that proves is the physicality of what happens. For example we can watch neurons firing and hormones being released, but that chemical and physical process is a poor and soulless (no pun intended) description of what "Love" is. That you don't find a need for belief in a soul doesn't mean that others do not, and far far less so that it's been "proven" to be all the soul is. And even for those beliefs who include these brain functions as just that, and as elements of the human soul, I don't see a sound argument against such a view that's more than semantical.

 

[Ajax]

I do, yes. Elaborated upon here. Some elements are quite finite, some are more persisting, none really considered "eternal" as everything has an end. I would also disagree with your claim that even theists don't believe a soul to be necessary; not only is this demonstrably false, but many theists believe similarly that our soul is what makes us uniquely us.



All that proves is the physicality of what happens. For example we can watch neurons firing and hormones being released, but that chemical and physical process is a poor and soulless (no pun intended) description of what "Love" is. That you don't find a need for belief in a soul doesn't mean that others do not, and far far less so that it's been "proven" to be all the soul is. And even for those beliefs who include these brain functions as just that, and as elements of the human soul, I don't see a sound argument against such a view that's more than semantical.

My friend, I have no intention to argue with you about this. Everyone thinks differently. It's not me only that I don't find the need for a useless soul, but almost all the neuroscientists. If you have any evidence of your theory that a soul exists, I will be glad to look at it.

 

[Ajax]

..and that is proof of what?
Psychology is renowned for having many competing theories.

You need to show a physical, scientific proof .. which is impossible.


Pure assumption.
The hospitals in the UK are full of Muslim doctors, who have a very good understanding of science & biology.
..and there are places of prayer in the hospitals, obviously, for the sick and bereaved etc.
These doctors often take their religion seriously, and use the prayer rooms, and they believe in the immortal soul.

Some of them would be brain surgeons.

Ok, I will be waiting for your clear evidence that soul exists as well, but please don't present evidence from religious or philosophical texts written thousands of years ago. That's not evidence.

 

[muhammad_isa]

It's not me only that I don't find the need for a useless soul, but almost all the neuroscientists..

well .. the disbelieving ones, in any case.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Ok, I will be waiting for your clear evidence that soul exists as well..

Just as it's impossible to prove they DON'T exist, it is impossible to prove they DO exist.

Why is it, that some people always want to make it about "proof" ?
Not all topics are like that. Psychology being a case in point.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

My friend, I have no intention to argue with you about this. Everyone thinks differently. It's not me only that I don't find the need for a useless soul, but almost all the neuroscientists. If you have any evidence of your theory that a soul exists, I will be glad to look at it.

I don't really think that it's a matter of neuroscientists having no use for a soul, more that it's just not an element that would apply within neuroscience. We're not so much arguing here as just discussing the soul and what it is or may be. I think this is an important discussion to have on a ground of understanding, especially with the claim that (some) theists don't have use for belief in souls when that's a pretty difficult stance to take in tandem with belief in spirituality and divinity.

 

[Spice]

I think so, unless you define it differently. It's an invisible, immaterial, immortal entity which enters the body upon conception, and according to many is responsible among others for the human personality, intellect, will, emotions, even for the body's animation as some claim.
It has been proven that all these soul's attributes are in fact brain's functions, so the there is no need for such entity, especially when it can not be empirically found or tested.

I disagree with your definition of "soul" but I can't prove that it exists.

I think humans are made up of 4 aspects, the 4th and the one only found in humans, is this "soul."

1) Rock/minerals are made of the matter of the earth, as are plants, animals, and humans.

2) Add to that energy/life, as plants, animals, and humans.

3) Add socialization/personality found in animals and humans.

4) And finally, what does humans possess that these other three do not -- soul. That "something" that allows us to evolve individually from within.

Yes, rock can be shaped by weather or friction; plants can be altered through weather, friction/force, cross-pollination; animals evolve through weather/climate, force/necessity, cross-breeding, manipulatation/training; and finally, humans evolve by climate, necessity, breeding, training, and what others do not have, aforethought choice.

That aforethought choice is not matter or energy as the other 3 aspects, but something unique, to the best of our knowledge, to modern humankind (within a group of the latest humanoids). That unprovable internal something is "soul", in my view.

 

[Ajax]

Just as it's impossible to prove they DON'T exist, it is impossible to prove they DO exist.

Why is it, that some people always want to make it about "proof" ?
Not all topics are like that. Psychology being a case in point.

To cut the long story short, I do not have the prove anything.
Science has shown without any doubt that all attributes of soul like human personality, intellect, will, emotions, memories, behavior, consciousness etc., can dramatically change or completely disappear if the brain is damaged and there is no need for a soul. In the case of consciousness, you loose it even when you are asleep. As I pointed out earlier, if the "soul" keeps memories as it is claimed by many (because the theists' opinion of it's attributes vary), you should be able to remember what you experienced in your mother's womb and the first years of your life. You can not, because your brain was not fully developed.

Therefore if you believe that invisible, immaterial, undetectable, elusive and abstract entities exist, YOU are the one who has to prove their existence.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Science has shown without any doubt that all attributes of soul like human personality, intellect, will, emotions, memories, behavior, consciousness etc., can dramatically change or completely disappear if the brain is damaged..

Right .. but that does not prove that the brain is the ONLY 'mechanism' at bay..

What you are in effect arguing, is that a computer does not NEED software to operate, as one can prove that without the hardware, the program does not run.

..if you believe that invisible, immaterial, undetectable, elusive and abstract entities exist, YOU are the one who has to prove their existence.

I'm not the one .. I don't have to prove anything to anybody .. that's the thing about life .. we are all responsible for our own lives. You have the same resources open to you, as I have.

 

[Ajax]

Right .. but that does not prove that the brain is the ONLY 'mechanism' at bay..

What you are in effect arguing, is that a computer does not NEED software to operate, as one can prove that without the hardware, the program does not run.

So show us with evidence which is the software...because the brain has built-in OS package..

I'm not the one .. I don't have to prove anything to anybody .. that's the thing about life .. we are all responsible for our own lives. You have the same resources open to you, as I have.

Stop talking about the imaginary soul then.