Do you believe that we are spirits occupying physical vessels (bodies)? Or are we just organisms with a conscious that ceases to exist once we are gone? Does that question make sense? lol
Artwork by Rick Ortega




51 Comments

Leave a response

You must be to post a response.

  1. BelleMadre 2 years ago

    i think we embody pieces of the life spirit that is all around us on this planet. we are interconnected in this universe.
    that being said, i think we are also just biological creations who happen to have really cool brains and bodies… but i still like to think we are a bit of something more. something that is just part of every all thing…
    which means we arent that much more important than a waving blade of grass, but we sure do think we are … i think there for i am? so if i think, and am, i should probably be responsible or act in accordance too? does THat make sense? im drifting, and rambling.

    i think Yes? yes, is my answer :D

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      Valeria 2 years ago

      @BelleMadre I definitely believe that we are interconnected but I still don’t know how.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

  2. Spitfire3dC 2 years ago

    If there is anything intangible within our physicality that might be the key to your answer, it has to start with the fact that we seem to have a very sharp sense of hope.

    Others animals have a lesser degree of the same capacity, but most of it is tied to a more fundamental sense of hoping that food is forthcoming. We stepped it up a few notches to hope for immortality.

    So I know hope exists and I wonder if just that is enough to keep us functional and a contributing element to the overall described by bellemadre.

    Hope might be the purest spirituality from which all things flow.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

  3. griz 2 years ago

    I currently see spirit as the core driving energy and intent behind something.

    I say “behind” in recognition of what we call the physical reality being like a facade or small overlay on a paradigm far larger and more enduring.

    And I say “something” because a thought, a process, or a trend can have a spirit behind it as well.

    “Spirit” is very dichotomous. It’s either good or bad; dark or light; unto Life or unto death.

    Physical experience tends to be analogous; dealing with comparisons shades and degrees. This (our “flesh”) rails at the absolute dichotomy (either-or) of the spirit.

    We all have an innate spirit in us: born of “Life”, but ransomed to “death”.

    And a human “soul” is simply a lost spirit: fooled into thinking a ” kidnapping” by death is the best absolute and eternal identity we can hope for.

    When in reality we belong originally to Light and Life! In the moment this realization AND fellowship is restored, the soul becomes a born-again spirit: and rightful heir of the very Spirit of Life.

    Nothing “soulful” is left.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

  4. luftballooneyegouge 2 years ago

    I like to think of spirit, like how I’ve heard the explanation for smiling babies.
    It’s just gas.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

  5. Jear77 2 years ago

    Something that doesn’t likely exist
    We might like to think we’re more, that we’re special, that we have something more… but it’s a trick of our own psyche.
    If we are more than what we appear, why is it forbidden to not only try to contact the dead, but when we do, we’re (basically guaranteed by scientific precedent) unable to do so? Why would the realms be so divided?

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • griz 2 years ago

      @Jear77
      Actually it’s more a trick of death to convince us that the only thing we’re heir to, is death. That’s how it “wins” — even though it is allegedly living on limited time itself.

      The realms are divided by the very dichotomy between “flesh” (the dying) and “Spirit” (the living”). Necromancy is “forbidden” because those who fancy themselves “just flesh” are NEVER prepared for the “powers and principalities” encountered in such forays. And actually, neither are those who “fancy” themselves spiritual. Entrapment/enslavement by dark process is almost 100% guaranteed.

      Only those with “spiritual backing” can venture safely into “the valley of the shadow of death” and “fear no evil”.

      But having the backing of the very Spirit of Life, one sees little constructive or beneficial reason to go there. Even if one is somehow immune to all pathogens, they would probably not choose to venture into an active charnal pit just to prove they are immune to all pathogens there!

      (It’s remotely linked to the notion that those who are truly strong don’t need to pick fights just to prove they’re strong).

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz that still doesn’t explain why we can’t be shown to communicate (scientifically) with the dead, and any such experiments automatically fail. Just because we aren’t supposed to according to scripture (and to do so would likely be damaging spiritually) doesn’t mean science can’t come up with a way.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        It would amount to little more than the blind leading the blind. (Matt 15:14).

        You are putting your faith in “a messiah” (bridge between physical and spiritual) that by it’s very nature . . . cannot see the spiritual lest it manifest into something purely physical.

        That is why science patently cannot see, measure or otherwise “capture” love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.

        BTW, what dead person do you crave contact with; and for what gain?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz if you think about it, according to christian theology JESUS is a dead man… at least was at one point, then raised. So literally every prayer that a christian makes is to a formerly dead man. So why are you complaining about that? I saw an interesting atheist meme which stated “Jesus gave up a weekend for your sins.” if jesus arose from the dead to be alive again, this meme quite literally true!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        The flesh was dead, yet the spirit lived on — and somehow even managed to preserve the flesh. There was no rot or decay on the resurrected Jesus; as per prophecy.

        Flesh dies. That is its nature. Remember that Jesus would not let anyone worship or pray to he construct of flesh.

        You are earnestly fishing, but not catching much. If you cannot discern a difference between giving up a weekend and giving up your life you truly are lost.

        That atheists quip, is more “fool” than “clever”. And “wise” isn’t even on the map.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz The point is if he had simply died and stayed dead, that’d make him a martyr for his cause of a kingdom. Dying and coming back alive as if he never died, save for the scars of the execution a few days later AND being able to have infinite power afterwards is completely meaningless in the grand scheme of things.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        Rising again showed for all time that death is not the key power in all existence: Life is. That’s why relationship with Life (made possible only through this act of defeating death), renders one as participant with the key power in all existence, at the moment one truly believes in it and not just in that which is dying. (what you are doing, have always been doing).

        What you’ve branded as “completely meaningless”, is actually huge beyond full current comprehension. Even the small perks of it that “bleed through” into the physical life of believers, are huge!

        You never experienced . . . because you never stopped relying upon that which was dead and dying. Your wanting just another martyr is evidence of this.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz the problem with that viewpoint is that it discounts the fact that the concept had been a trope in mythology before this point. The Egyptian myths did much the same thing. And if you want to go back before recorded history, it’s likely to have shown up there as well!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        Actually it’s rather unique in that Jesus Christ was “of God coming down”. I know this because I’ve had a challenge out on Usenet for a few decades now asking for Christ-analogies from other belief-systems and mythologies and have spent considerable time studying them.
        Almost all of them are more of some glorified Human, “reaching up”. Or the few where there was a “coming down”, it was not an amicable one: being more of a split or “being at odds” within the Deity. (schizophrenia?)

        If you know of one that more closely echos the morphology and spiritual functionability/sufficiency of Christ, please share! Egyptology is a dead end. Too much strife, competition and counter-productivity between the various (and very numerous!) aspects of their “godhead”.

        Unless someone can show differently, I would assert that Jesus Christ was an entirely unique “messiah and savior”.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz once again, a common thing in tropes is the REVERSE trope. That’s all the bible’s literature is doing. Nothing new!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @jear77
        Theyre not being another one that does, restores the strength of the observation that this is something truly unique. :wink:

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz i read the words you wrote. It seems disjointed. Are you *sure* you checked the grammar of that? It made no sense!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        There not being another one [ Messiah figure] that uses this [ so-called reverse trope] supports the observation that The Narrative of Jesus Christ is something truly unique.

        Can you point out any other Messiah narrative that is not just an egotistical spin on “us exalted”?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz the point is from a literary standpoint, ideas are inverse, reversed, have one detail changed and people say voila – it’s new. I see nothing new that can’t be explained from the standpoint of an altered trope. Research on tvtropes.org (but beware, it’s a black hole you may never escape from)

        This is a quote from the “older than dirt page:”

        Note: Tropes originating in mythologies/religions that aren’t Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Anatolian, Vedic, or early Chinese are never indexed here, as we have no idea whether those stories even existed in 800 BC, or what form they had, centuries or milliennia before they were first written down. Even The Bible and Classical Mythology are only Older Than Feudalism.note Early folklorists often started with the assumption that folktales and myths were primordial; more research has shown that people can and do modify all sorts of tales for any purpose.

        With that as a background, it’s easy to see from the lens that it’s *literally* nothing new. And EVEN Solomon the wisest man in the bible stated this. There is literally *no* “ego” involved; the statement is simply an understanding on the literary roots of the bible! (BTW in the page itself, the bible, classic mythology, and older than feudalism are all link in the description, that don’t carry through to this format.)

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        You don’t see it because you are invested in not seeing it. Seeing it who would sabotage your quest to find a new religion better than your old religion
        The ” literary device” of it is explainable, so you write off the entire actuality of it being a total departure from all other Messiah figures.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz the point is everyone is invested in their beliefs systems (or lack thereof)… and so it makes the point moot. i.e. “the (proverbial) pot calling the kettle black”

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        There is a difference between the investment you are still anxiously waiting to pay off, and one that is already delivered so abundantly that even if it crashed tomorrow you would smile and say it was a good thing.

        (But now enter the prospect of an investment who’s payoffs may never cease!)

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz at day’s end if hereto before our existence had not been a thing and we were not concerned about our lack of existence before we came into being, why would it be such a terrible thing to be not (i.e. cease to exist) from the moment of our death forward?

        I know that’s a bit double talk, but let me see if I can clarify it for you.

        If we hadn’t existed up to the moment of our conception
        And there are plenty of us (i.e. mortals) who simply didn’t make it to the stage we call “life” either through deliberate means – i.e. abortion, or accidental means i.e. miscarriage
        And if before we were born, and those that never made it to the living were unconcerned about the state of their souls
        And when we should die, if we should cease to exist completely
        Why should we be concerned about the nonexistence that awaits?
        Wouldn’t it make every moment that much more special that we are existing, rather than meaningless, because we actually had an opportunity to exist, compared to the millions who never had that chance?
        And wouldn’t that make those who have such a viewpoint see every moment as something they can improve upon and not waste or squander needlessly?
        (I really need to work on using twitter speak. I know that is WAY longer than 140 characters)

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        Your entire argument is based on two supposition that not even the precious god of science can resolve!

        We have no way of knowing what we might have known before or after this existence of flesh. We can ponder and daydream imaginate and machinate to the pleasures of our feelings and urges In this moment.

        But nothing more.

        So to base a line of reasoning, a set of beliefs, or a life philosophy on these things based on our own limited understanding and addiction to our flesh, is foolish at best.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz and a set of suppositions based around an unproven soul and the need for the salvation of such, that would only be relevant after death is even more foolishness. So we’re at an impasse.

        And it begs the question, what happens if a person never makes it to life? Where does their soul go? Or do they even have one? Furthermore, if a soul is created the moment sperm hits egg, how does that work? Where does it come from? If another combination of sperm and egg were to come about, would it be a different soul? What about the souls of those who were created through violence – i.e rape? What about those created artificially – sperm donors, artificial insemination, or another mother carrying the child to term? Lots of verses talk about being of the earth. What about those who might be concieved in space or another planet? Do the same rules apply to them in terms of having a soul? We have no idea on the mechanisms of such a scenarios – neither biblically nor scientifically.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        You fly off into things that cannot be known either by flesh or in the spirit as is accessible to us right now: the “what-if’s”.

        The thing is, you were already on a good path of discovering there is no way “the physical” can achieve spiritual relationship with God and Life.
        And the Bible that you weekly held in your hands confirmed this over and over.

        The task now is to not let the anger and bitterness have you jump into another religion of worshipping human knowledge as it currently is.

        This all comes back to Christ. One can mouth the words of accepting him into your heart without actually letting go of human pride and hubris in the need to render all things in and of and by ourselves.
        This process is evident in almost everything that you are saying these days.

        The thing is, you’ve already essentially exhausted this trail and seen that it goes nowhere. Yes! I know you dressed it up in the Robes of God. But ultimately you never broke from relying on human endeavor and understanding to “”render God”” unto you.

        Spiritual relationship happens only by the spiritual process that Christ enabled. You seem to have had zero encounter with Christ’s Spirit. When I’ve asked you to share about this you’ve been baffled and run off on all kinds of tangents.

        Even now you are still wanting to look just in the physical: even though your frustrations are living proof that this does not and cannot work.

        The answer, if and when you are ready, will have to be a Spiritual answer; not one wrought of the flesh. You need to go back to square one with accepting Christ and recognizing that this is not a physical endeavor. You need to let God be God and stop trying to fill that role yourself.

        Let me know if and when you are ready for more.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz without solid answers to such questions that should have been thought of, let alone answered eons ago (i.e. when the bible authors were being inspired) my hands are tied. Spiritual answers don’t do a lick of good when one is in this life. And I’m not going to worry about them since the god that is proposed in the bible’s pages is so picky. At least physically there’s the senses of sight, sound, touch, smell, taste, sense of movement, where one’s limbs are and so on. Spiritually… there is only one dimension (or 2 if you count a good spirit and a bad one)

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        Spiritual answers don’t always give us the instant gratification are flesh craves. Just like the answers and adult gives a child don’t always satisfy them. But over the course of time as the child matures into adulthood they may find themselves giving very similar answers to the kids who ask them!

        The quest is as important as the destination. And the only one tying your hands, is you. You have sought entirely according to your flesh (feelings, sensations, urges, biases, and the”logic and reason” that these render). You now have absolute proof that this does not work. (Oh, and it’s not proof that any study or lab could have rendered for you! So there IS worth and value in things that the TV or the computer cannot tell you!)

        But will you take this work and use it for what it’s worth? Or will you charge off down another path of trying to find answers using the same process? Religious process. (Connect the dots, man!)

        Remind me again: are we not told the flesh will oppose the Spirit? Are we not told that those who seek God must seek Him in Spirit and in Truth? (That means not just the little truths that massage our ego!)

        The answers are there; and you’ve had them in your hands hundreds of times. But the religious processes of the flesh would not let you see them.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz I’m not going to involve myself in something that is one or two dimensional, when we live in a 3, or 4 dimensional world. Why you’d be interested in something so “flat” is beyond me. Also the time involved is something I don’t have.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        You still seem to be of the impression that God is just the dead words on paper: very two-dimensional.

        Religions excel in “magi-babble”. But God’s word is more like the coyote teaching I was exposed to in Native circles: it easily divides between the insincere or selfish seeker, in the Seeker who is truly motivated to find the spirit behind the words.

        It invites in the genuine seeker after Truth; while turning aside and befuddling all insincere seeking that still wants to preserve the more foolish aspects of ego and pride (ie. Seeking MY subjective truth or ME-as-truth over the absolute, objective Truth”

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz Something that is only understood if a person sincerely seeks understanding is utter nonsense. That means the would be seeker can find literally anything. That’s like saying one can only fully discern the meaning of the “Lord of the Rings” trilogy by seeking it out instead of reading it at face value. It’s like the sign below

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @jear77
        A novel is baby mush; the best of them being perhaps barely more than entertainment. One can expand knowledge from them, perhaps glean a smattering of wisdom (if that is what one seeks) but that is not the intent of a novel. It is there to entertain.

        Go back and examine the nonsense of your first sentence. Of course understanding is reserved for those who seek it!!
        And those who seek foolishness (the “anything” you speak of), will find it. The doors that you knock on our the doors that will be open to you! This isn’t rocket science Jear.

        It’s the very nature of freedom. You are free to seek and pursue whatever it is you want: whether the baby mush or the adult food that takes a bit of chewing.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz double talk, maybe. BUT nonsense, no. And even you need to admit that there is this thing called literary analysis. And there are people who do entire PHDs based on the fictional works of an author!
        And as I said before, it’s not something that I am going to pursue – it’s not of the type of benefit i seek, so no matter what, you’re wasting not only your time, but mine as well trying to persuade me otherwise.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        Literary analysis is for literature. Inspirational and spiritual texts are something much more. They were designed to inspire us to higher levels of living; and not just so we could Marvel at how clever we are in all the devices that we can use.

        And such discussions is these are rarely a waste of time.

        Some of the Old Testament books are written in very beautiful literary style. But it is a style that one would have to be fluent in ancient Hebrew to understand!

        Let’s return to the very real possibility that your anger is only because you could not use God’s word the way you wanted to craft the kind of Salvation you wanted according to the terms you stipulated.

        Does this really sound like the kind of process that would bear spiritual fruit?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz beautiful language means nothing to me as even i can create such if I put my mind to it!
        But since the right meanings, the “true,” meanings, the meanings that are the living words behind the flowery language if it takes a “right heart,” “a relationship with god” to understand that’s actually a point in its “cons” column. So much for the point that it is supposedly so simple a child can understand it!
        Furthermore, not only is the society that created the old testament no longer in existence, but neither does the mindset. We *might* be able to catch glimpses of the mindset by examining the writings of the Talmud… But I am not going to learn Hebrew for that purpose.
        And the new testament is not much better except for the fact we still have Greeks today.
        I really don’t see how a relationship with someone who is not here physically, can’t interact with us directly, OR even through electronic devices. The only way he does is through a book whose authorship is questionable at times, or other people. Sounds like group imagination to me!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        Science is, in a way, the “quest for truth”. But because it is entirely “of us” it is prone to (and at times even a magnification) of all of our follies, games and foibles. Yes, I understand that the “scientific process” is hoping to mitigate them. But its necessity means that at least SOME of our “hired thinkers” are recognizing that science IS just a function of an often (and repeatedly) imperfect process/race.

        You cannot craft it into your “new god” [or “godhood”??] Jear — for it will be a god of just you/us and all our imperfections that no matter how hard our flesh tries, cannot bring under control/submission. Imperfections that necessitate a “scientific process” to begin with.

        It is so simple that perhaps ONLY a child can understand it — someone who REALIZES and OWNS that they are imperfect; immature; in-process. That is why children learn much more easily than old dogs trying to learn new tricks (or un-learn the bastard ones religion has imprinted upon them?). You my friend, have a VERY hard time letting go of those lessons and processes that realistically, you are saying you hate! It’s a real conundrum, and personal fracture within you.

        With your comment on the Hebrews and the Greeks . . . you are STILL relying TOTALLY on “human vehicle” in your reasonings and understandings and quests. There is ZERO surprise that all you are left to try to craft a “lord”, a God, or “an anchor” of, is something that is entirely human. (At it’s worst, something that is “only you” — who are already ripening for the grave.).

        Again and again, science is an excellent tool. But it’s a lousy “almighty”.

        It’s actually VERY good your recognizing that spiritual fellowship with God CANNOT happen at human terms. It can only happen from a faith that is not “in” God (still too egotistical) . . . but “OF” God. (That can sound like just semantics if one is just looking for a quick-dismiss. But there’s actually a LOT of meat to it.)

        This ties into what I believe is the TRUE spirit of your post about “unequal relationships”. Just as the child learns of the adult world through fellowship with adults and by submitting themselves to that “unequal fellowship” . . . we learn about Life through fellowship with the very Spirit of Life; with this being for now, a very unequal fellowship that happens TOTALLY within the structure that God sets.
        And not the one the spoiled child insists that they should get to set! (They are not the ones who

        Children are excellent learners, bar none: once they realize that they are not the teachers, or the holder of the wisdom, or the ones calling the shots.
        If they fall into this very bad spirit, all their excellent capacity for learning is nullified.

        “Group imagination” could not have come up with God’s word or the Salvation message . . . because so much of it is so “counter-flesh” — not catering to or massaging the more foolish aspects of Human ego. It is the one “God-paradigm” . . . that flies reverse to ALL the rest.

        I’ve noted your trying to “diffuse” this reality with your “reverse-literary-device” offering. But there is far FAR more there than just a novel form of entertainment for you!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz who ever said that the bible was “light reading?” No one ever.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        Jesus said about what is put upon us to be in fellowship, “my yoke is easy, and my burden light”. Neither the words nor the study of the Bible is what saves. They just point to “what saves”. Jesus has already done ALL the “heavy lifting”. We just have to accept that He has.
        But you never did. You set forth, convinced that YOU were the one who would do the “heavy lifting” for yourself. And you “hurt” yourself trying to do it.

        Here’s a thought, and a bit of a puzzler question. If entry to God’s kingdom was like a gate, consider that there are only two questions you need to answer correctly to proceed. (And yes, like most “correct answers” they are going to have to be very specific. So consider well before answering!)

        1. Who is God?
        2. Who are you?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz Both answers, ultimately, are the same “no one” or “nothing”

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        So this is what disqualifies you from entry.

        You have no understanding of who God is or who you are.

        And there is no rat-bastard cruelty on God’s part, because understanding and answers are abundantly available. Your exclusion is VERY much your own choice.

        At least to those who don’t go to the Arctic looking for a cactus (ie, saying they have diligently sought something, but have sabotaged their own quest by going to where it cannot be found. God is not to be found in religion, in dead words written on paper, in literary devices)

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz Please drop this, I don’t want to discuss this any further today. Maybe another time. But not today.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz Also, at day’s end, the bible seems like magi-babble to me: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MagiBabble

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz I had some extra time and thought I’d expand / expound on my ideas somewhat.

        if you didn’t see what I did, I cycled back to the point of the question, of what a spirit is.

        The idea of the soul is one thing. A classical idea of the human is body (physical), mind (emotional), soul (spiritual). The problem at day’s end is that the concept of a “soul” cannot be examined *except* through the mind. And there’s very little in proof that can be shown… and the ultimate detraction to that proof is the fact that we all die.

        Things wrong with the body can be examined by a combination of medicine, an examination of diet, exercise, family history, environmental pollutants. We can say to the people who have something wrong with them “exercise more” or “change your diet” or both.

        Things wrong with the mind can be examined as either a physical problem (brain damage, imbalance of chemicals), a social problem, or a combination of both. A person who has physical problems with their brains can oftentimes get medication to help. People with social problems might benefit from group therapy, counseling, and even sometimes medication.

        The mind, if it’s a healthy one, asks about any idea it might come across “where’s the proof of this concept?” How does this “mesh” with reality of science, common experience, and common sense meet. Not “I feel this to be true.” Not “I see this in other people’s lives.” Not even “I found this concept to be useful and true because of retrospect.”

        The problem with the concept of the concept of the soul is it is totally immaterial. And this concept of the soul isn’t able to be neatly packaged into such ideas of “sick” and “healthy” because there’s multiple ideas on the subject, which not only confuse the subject, but give multiple choices.

        Even if there were diagnoses of sick and healthy souls, a “cookie cutter” solution as presented by the god of the bible shouldn’t be seen to be a panacea for the soul that you say that it is. If it were there would be no ability to fashion, fathom other beliefs. And i think it’s telling that there ARE a multitude of beliefs (which I’ll be getting back to this idea in a minute)

        Person is grieving – go to god. Person is dying – go to god. Person is wondering about god’s existence – go to god… when god is nowhere to be found. Person is confused – go to god. War just took the person’s son or daughter – go to god. Person just got raped / molested – go to god.

        Some people have different priorities, and need to be given the freedom to exercise those. According to the god of the bible, any who disobey him are so anathema to him he punishes those that cannot or will not obey, accept his son forever. And your thing of “the person sends themselves to hell” is not as cut and dry as you might think. I’ve said it before, if a person goes there on their own accord they’d find out quickly they don’t want to be there and simply refuse to stay. And the bible is 100% clear. A person, once in hell, can never be redeemed by any way. Such a black and white thing is not something that *ever* shows up in life. Even DEATH itself is shown to be a series of steps that if not reversed, eventually becomes permanent. And there are several points along the way that it can be stopped.

        Moreover having this “us vs. them” mindset is a useless dividing tactic. And the bible even says that families, nations will be divided over him. Such dividing over believe, I’ve seen, at day’s end is useless. If there was no religion, no concept of the soul those wars wouldn’t exist. How much more peace would there be/ have been if not for that?

        Getting back to the multiple choice idea(s): Some people say there’s a limited number of souls and they’re recycled somehow. Other say there’s one soul per person and whatever the fate of the soul is has been predetermined. Some say you need to end your life in violence to make things right for your soul. Still others say there’s a soul but each person must decide for themselves and that choice must be the god of the bible. Finally, there are those who don’t say there’s a soul at all. Telling a person who doesn’t think they have a soul that s/he has one is at one end foolishness because they will not believe you or selfish in that you want them a part of your community on the other extreme.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @Jear77
        Had a huge response: almost half the size of yours. The site Aiden and I don’t have any spare time right now to recreate it.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        @griz Who’s Aiden? I don’t recognize that screen name.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        @griz
        8, not Aiden. Limitations of my dictation app. I dictate a lot of these responses on the road when things are not busy

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

  6. Spitfire3dC 2 years ago

    Your question, in conjunction with another question on this site, led me to an interesting video today. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x59j0gq

    Your question and the subsequent answer seemed to appear at minute 37.

    Total time on this video was about 50 minutes and there is an objectivity, coupled with an inquiring mind to investigate your question.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

  7. immortal_pirate 2 years ago

    An eternal life force dwelling in a temporary vessel.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

  8. Yin 2 years ago

    I think that “spirit” is basically just an emotional and elaborate way to say “consciousness.” I believe people just like the idea of them being more than their brain and the chemicals that run their emotions. I think once the brain is done though, it is over, except maybe unless your consciousness manages to develop again? Maybe I’m wrong though. I’m open to that, but I just need some solid evidence for it. As for being connected with other people and life in general, maybe there is something that has to do with string theory or something similar?

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

  9. TruthDistillery 2 years ago

    The spirit is our internal link to the eternal. In our individual lives it is a shard of the infinite presence from which we came. It longs for one thing: to be itself. Whole, perfect and complete.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

©2019 Soul Sequel | All Rights Reserved

 
or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account