mcarterbrown.com  

General Chat MCB's Coffee House: Pull up a seat, and grab your favorite caffeinated beverage. Non-paintball related chat within.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-11-2006, 02:15 PM   #21 (permalink)
Lord humungus the Mod
 
kidneythief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Spokane, WA
Send a message via AIM to kidneythief

No disrespect taken.

However to truely have a philisophical discussion you have to put yourself in both shoes. My belief in the validity of the existence of a soul is very simple, no. Now, I chose to answer the question is two possible ways. My second answers example simply illistrates one thing. From the veiw point of yes humans have souls...If a test tube baby is created the same way as a normal baby...which it is... Sperm implanted into an egg, then the egg implanted into a uterus, which grows and gives birth just the same. Now the current cloning process is basically the same as the Test tube process. If you were to say that the clone doesnt have a soul it would be the same as saying you and I dont have souls.

Not whimsical...

"Being religeous means that I have devoted a bit more time in thinking about this subject than one who doesn't believe in a soul in the first place, soe I attempt to give a meaningful as possible answer to a good question."

This comment has me a little concerned! Make no mistake, just becuase I dont believe in god and souls does not make me just another ignorant fool. I have pondered this subject just as much as you and the next guy!

-Jake
__________________


"I wish simply to be a decent person, yet I will always fear the retards" -Brian Hindt(geech)

MCB Moderator

Kidney Machine

Last edited by kidneythief; 10-11-2006 at 02:21 PM.
kidneythief is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2006, 02:21 PM   #22 (permalink)
Post Whore
 
shartley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Manchester, NH

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidneythief View Post
Make no mistake, just becuase I dont believe in god and souls does not make me just another ignorant fool. I have pondered this subject just as much as ewe and the next guy!

-Jake
Sorry, I just thought that little change was fitting for the conversation. Yeah, I do have a sense of humor…. even if small.

shartley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2006, 02:40 PM   #23 (permalink)
Red=mod, but not Schmitti
 
Fluff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: whitehall st. rm. 604

CCM Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by shartley View Post
As the question is framed, it comes down to if you believe we have a soul. And then it hinges on what your faith is concerning that.
As a Christian I believe that yes the clone would have a soul.

Now if you want to really get things flowing you don’t just ask if the clone would have a soul, but WHEN it would be given it.
LOL
Although I am not what one could call an active christian, I feel the question of if and when a clone would have a soul is best pondered by referring to leviticys 17:11(I think I wrote that right) which says as follows:
"For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul."
This says yes to me

If you do believe the Bible (I am not taking a position on this question) I think that this says a lot on the debate. I only reference the Bible for two reasons 1-Any discussion of souls is a discussion of faith and thus Biblical reference is appropriate and 2- I was raised Roman Catholic, so I am most familiar with the Bible, not having been exposed to the Quran, The TRorah, or most other Holy Books. So far as I recollect, the tao does not have much to say on the subject
__________________
http://askafreemason.org/

Great spirits always encounter violent opposition from mediocre minds-Albert Einstein

Support your local fields. The game you save may ne your own.

"No matter how cynical you become, it's never enough to keep up." ~ Lily Tomlin
Fluff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2006, 02:50 PM   #24 (permalink)
Red - Black
 
Talfuchre's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006

CCM Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lrrpie-CT View Post
Sticking to the Judeo-Christian world, my answer is yes. Do identical twins share a soul? In essence, if I understand it properly, the cloning is forcing an embryo to divide thus creating identical twins as might happen naturally. Whether I have the science right or not I have no idea as that's only what I've read about cloning.
LRRP - you are talking abotu Embryo Twinning. I have added a set of definitions to clear up any definition problems with the science.

I am learning a lot I didn't know as well.

I just though Cloning was Cloning.

TF
__________________
Pumpenstein - NSA National Champions

TF's MCB Trust.
Talfuchre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2006, 02:55 PM   #25 (permalink)
Red - Black
 
Talfuchre's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006

CCM Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fluff View Post
Although I am not what one could call an active christian, I feel the question of if and when a clone would have a soul is best pondered by referring to leviticys 17:11(I think I wrote that right) which says as follows:
"For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul."
This says yes to me

If you do believe the Bible (I am not taking a position on this question) I think that this says a lot on the debate. I only reference the Bible for two reasons 1-Any discussion of souls is a discussion of faith and thus Biblical reference is appropriate and 2- I was raised Roman Catholic, so I am most familiar with the Bible, not having been exposed to the Quran, The TRorah, or most other Holy Books. So far as I recollect, the tao does not have much to say on the subject
Fluff,

I really appreciate this quote. I can use this in my lecture - I am always asked how religions feel about certain things.

To add to the discussion:

If souls are immaterial - then it appears that science (being a tool using observation) would have very little to add to the discussion. It might be able to measure the souls effects - but like any other force, science has a difficult time explaining how they measure a force when they cannot 'see' it. David Hume has much to say on this topic.

For instance - science cannot observe the 'scientific method' - but it uses it daily. This is an 'immaterial' law perhaps that the scientist seems to take on measuring the effects of the method without being able to measure the cause.

TF
__________________
Pumpenstein - NSA National Champions

TF's MCB Trust.

Last edited by Talfuchre; 10-11-2006 at 02:59 PM.
Talfuchre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2006, 04:03 PM   #26 (permalink)
Post Whore
 
Christian Nelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Wisconsin

Kidney Thief, pleas don't be concerned about me thinking others thoughts on this matter are invalid.

Certain Christians have in the past, and continue to say that test tube babies and other such artificially joined sperm and egg unions deny that being a soul.

This is the reason, I contrasted my answer to yours for an example of what my answer could be to the situation, since you started with a premise that may not be shared by all who believe in "souls".

Your answer wasn't invalid, nor am I saying for sure that I know that I have devoted more time than you have on the subject, but I would probably warrant a guess that I probably have, since it has occupied most of my life for most of my memory. It is just that not everyone who is in the "soul" business ascribes to a premis you took as thought was unquestionable fact.

Now, I do a agree with your premise, that test tube babies have a soul, or more accurately for my belief, that they ARE a soul, but I wanted to clarify the situation a bit to make it clear how I came to my conclusion. Because without a reason, or explenation for my basis of belief, I basicly can say anything, and it just is, without hvaing a reason, just doesn't help others understand. I was trying to explain the reason for using the bible, and was trying to make a specific point, not bash your thoughts, just contrast a certain point of your premise with my explenation to give it more detail.

I hope I was a bit clearer then..

Fluff:

The whole life is the blood thing I am not sure that that is referring to the soul, because nowhere in the bible does it claim that animals have souls or again, more accurately ARE souls.

Only mankind are living souls. Animals have life, they have a body, so presumably they have a spirit and a body, but they are held separate in that God breathed HIS breath, or spirit into man, and that together, only they can be a living soul. human body + God's breath of life = living soul.

This is why I used Logos, consience or sentience to refer to it, it is different than simply life, or a spirit.

I hope I am not just muddying the water further.
Christian Nelson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2006, 04:24 PM   #27 (permalink)
Post Whore
 
Christian Nelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Wisconsin

As for the after life, being that I guess I fall into the belief that souls are material, since you aren't one until the body and spirit are joined, I will answer again with bible as my reference.

I believe that when Christ returns, the resurection spoken of will occur by a new body being given to the spirit we have, who's body has died. the body will be ours, just like the current one is, but it won't be corruptable, or decayable.

First small piece of evidence:

Job 19 : 25-27

25For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:26And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God: 27Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me.

Who says resurection, and redemption are new testament theory?

Here is a new testament one from Paul Kinda long but it refers to the soul and what the after life will be.

1 Cor 15:45-57
45And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. 46Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.47The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.48As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.49And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.50Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.51Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,52In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.53For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.54So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.55O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?56The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.57But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Notice, the first Adam was made a living soul. the second Adam refered to is Jesus, the first born of the resurection. It says elsewhere that when we see him, we will be like him.
Christian Nelson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2006, 04:40 PM   #28 (permalink)
Seasoned Member
 
mike31c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: San Francisco Bay Area, California

frankly, I really don't care if a clone has a soul... I am more concerned if the clone has rights...

Such as Brewtt has mentioned ---> Spare parts

say like I need new lungs because I smoke too much or a new heart because I ate one too many Big Macs yesterday/today/tomorrow...

According to some in the science (like those in S. Korea and China, who are spending a LOT of money on cloning tech), in a decade when I would probably be needing the new body parts, by then it would not take that much time to "grow" a clone from a test tube to make parts ready for the Doctors to transplant into me... Except if that clone has rights, what's to stop "IT" from claiming "IT" has rights (or have someone claim it has rights) like me because "IT" will, by all biological reasoning, "IT" will be me, minus the memories that I have.
mike31c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2006, 04:43 PM   #29 (permalink)
Post Whore
 
shartley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Manchester, NH

With technology advancing as fast as it is, I have no doubt that scientists will be able to take a good cell from a bad organ and just grow THAT without having to grow the entire human. They already do it with skin.
shartley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2006, 05:04 PM   #30 (permalink)
Active Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Toronto On, Canada
Send a message via MSN to Firestorm

Now a real question if a clone did not have soul would this mean that there would be no clones that can play the blues, well play the blues good?

Interesting read so far. If I have soul, I believe that a clone would have a soul. I prefer to looking at things from a scientific view, however there are things that science can not always explain.

Also, I do believe a clone should have rights!
__________________
UBIQUE
QUO FAS ET GLORIA DU****
Firestorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  mcarterbrown.com » General » General Chat

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO
© MCB Network LLC