It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Would It Have A Soul?

page: 3
12
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 06:29 PM
link   
As a further simplification to my earlier post - the entire universe is aware, however, a soul is when an individual can contain thier own consciousness, as if they were thier own universe, as opposed to being the animate thought form of other self-aware beings.

The process can be likened to the "big bang" - creation of something from nothing... We were somethings created from something, and we can achieve ensoulment and immortality of "self" when we can exist as something created from nothing.

In a scientific sense, the entire bubble of this universe is "immortal" and cycles perpetually, within that, is a multidimensional construct that is constantly in a state of flux, however, the "bubble" itself remains. When an individual is born of a creative intent, thier "frequency" that is a self-repeating cycle, becomes permanantley interlaced with the fabric of the universe, that is, everyone has thier own "sound", a unique frequency of thier soul. That being said, most of us are extentions to other beings, that is, we are interdependent upon the awareness of others - thus, in order to be ensouled, to prevent the return to the "collective memory" - to prevent yourself from being a memory or "past life" in one of your descendents, you must be able to exist as your own "bubble" within the universe, and as a result, you will gather expressions of "self" much like a snowball, being able to retain a core.

As explained before, a soul can dissolve, and even a spirit or astral being can dissolve unless it is able to gather energy from the "source" or the "vacuum of nothingness". Although, all is not lost, as the memories and thoughts will translate into surrounding individuals, and when they attain ensoulment, and if they give birth to new beings, memories of past beings will be incorporated within them, and after enough time, those beings will have memories of those whom had existed before them, and thus are able to acquire those expressions as a part of thier "self".

A further simplification - All our "selves" are the same self, from a multilinear perspective, however, since there is no separate individual who can claim to be all of us, we are relegated into separate bubbles of existence known as "souls".

Ultimatley, "God" is the one being that has no "self" and is thus all of us and none of us.
edit on 16-6-2011 by SystemResistor because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
reply to post by Signals
 


News flash!!!

The Greeks invented the soul, so no, it won't. But that's okay, because you don't have one either.

Plato and his pals were just trying to get a handle on the whole "external observer" conundrum, and next thing you know, the Mystery Religions launched the notion across the entire Mediterranean region, where the Hebrew merchants (trying desperately to hang out with all the potential business people who had their own versions of this new theological fad) recruited the closest thing they had to a "lesser god" (their Messiah) and launched what became Christianity - thereby cementing the concept of the Soul forever within the cultures that radiated out from that pivotal period of intense cultural concentration and exchange.

Sure, this is an extremely stripped down overview, but the fact is that the Soul didn't exist until the Greeks made it popular some handful of centuries before the Romans grabbed it from the Hebrews after they obliterated Israel and reconfigured it into a new and unifying state religion. In fact, the only reason you even know the term is because of the Vatican and its centuries of cultural influence from one end of the planet to the other. So blame the Romans - or give them credit - for the Soul. They stole it from the Greeks by way of the Hebrews who were just trying to find a way to do business with everyone who was getting their cues from the Greeks in that region.

Authentic history is pretty mundane when you really dig into it. Many mysteries end up not being so mysterious
edit on 6/16/2011 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)


The Book of Revelations speaks of The Book of Life and also speaks of those who's names will not be found in The Book of Life.

In The New Testament the writers teach that it is possible to lose one's soul (gaining the world and losing your soul which Y'shua spoke of).

The Old Testament does not use the word soul but does use the word spirit. The soul referred to in The New Testament is a reference to one's spirit, not the Platonic concept of the soul, but probably the reply here by one member that the Greeks introduced the word "soul" would have been the influence of the Greek word in translations of Scripture as it appears in the New Testament, but it is used there as an alternative word for spirit.

The Hebrew Torah comes from Moses. He passed down a history stretching back to Abraham. Abraham came from the region of ancient Babylon and both ancient Assyria and The nomadic Hebrews shared the same understandings of the origins of Creation; ancient Babylon followed the way of The Serpent of Eden while Abraham was led away by The Creator and taught in His Ways.Y'shua's Teachings have nothing to do with pagan Ancient Greece, they come from the Hebrew Tradition of The Torah and the prophesy of a Messiah.

No machine will have a soul or ever could have. The soul is bestowed by the Creator, it is the gift of life and Christian teaching reveals that our spirit has the potential to be clothed with a new body at the Creator's discression, according to that spirit's own desire to accept the Creator's Laws for the Kingdom of Eternity preached by Y'shua.

Of course I cannot prove anything I believe or accept from Christian Teaching because it is a Spirituality of Faith. However, neither can Plato prove his assumptions about the human soul. Neither can anyone who believes in physical reincarnation upon this earth. Neither can an atheist provide hard evidence for the denial of the existence of a Divine Intelligence. Infact, no spirituality has any hard evidence or proof of its Teachings. They are all based upon belief and faith. If we ridicule any one of them we ridicule them all.

I cannot prove my soul exists. I cannot prove it doesn't exist. I have only chosen to believe certain Teachers because I accepted their teaching.

edit on 16-6-2011 by Revolution9 because: spelling

edit on 16-6-2011 by Revolution9 because: spelling

edit on 16-6-2011 by Revolution9 because: punctuation



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 06:54 PM
link   
I believe we belong to God's creation and our spirit is what we really are. We can't add one single soul or spirit to the number of them that God created.

What we could be able to do someday, is a fully functional body, ready to receive a migrating soul from an already weaken body, like a conscient reincarnation.

There is people who believe some E.T. races already have this capacity. The Zeta Reticuli greys and the Apunians for example. Certainly hard to confirm or denie.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by bestintentions
yeah right..... would anybody choose to be born into a family that will be abusive, poor, live in an underprivileged country, where they look ugly, or any such sort ?


That's an easy one to answer.

At the level of Soul awareness there is no Duality, no good and bad.. because that is something we are experiencing when in life.. it's just part of this experience of being Here.

So Souls see all experience offerings as Valid and Worthy. This also hints at how magnificent Souls are that they would choose such lives for the experiences it provides them.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 07:20 PM
link   
i believe we will never develop a fully functioning AI. machines are programmed by us, so how would it develop something that we havent fully begun to even comprehend. i do believe though that they will one day be self aware but i dont see an AI functioning just for the sake of functioning. what i mean by that is you cannot program something to imitate what it never was in the first place



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by NorEaster
I'm sorry, but the double-slit experiment isn't something that can be reconstituted to serve as an explanation for every friggin' thing that someone doesn't understand.

Besides, the double-slit experiment debunks particle physics as being foundational. It doesn't actually debunk time and/or space, or prove that human conscioiusness is the lord and master of all creation, as most people who trot this disaster out seem to believe. It's the prime example of advanced technology backing particle physicists into a corner, and those poor bastards swinging for all their worth in an effort to stave off obsolescence.


What are You on about? The particle physicists are obsolete? Huh? Consciousness IS God - and the collapse of the wave-function supports that. (You may disagree, of course; cool with Me.) Of course, there's more to Consciousness than Humans, I agree - EVERYTHING is Consciousness on some level.

But the particle physicists are hardly obsolete because of "advanced technology" (what was that again that's obsoleting Them?).


You and I don't even see things similarly enough to disagree to a worthwhile lack of resolution. Let's just agree that there's no point in the two of us debating it. It'd be like a hamster arguing theophysics with the color red.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Signals
I was watching an episode of Through The Wormhole and an interesting question was raised.

Eventually, we will have the technology and computing power to synthesize, actually create a fully-functional Human brain.

Every connection, every spark, perfectly duplicated.

From the tissue, the cells, blood flow, etc.

When that day comes, will that mind have a Soul?




Do we not already naturally sexually reproduce and create fully functional human brains? is the human body not a supremely complex "machine" the brainn being something of a super computer which runs it? If a baby that is soon born is put in a room and is only fed and given water its entire life, will that baby have a soul, will that baby learn, or know a thing, be able to produce thoughts, or will it be more closely in living and actions to that of a dog? if the duplicated brain is the same as ours would it be difficult to teach it the way we teach ours, by using a system of memory? Is the basic idea of the soul or spirit a word that is used to describe the existence of emotions, what else is the spirit describing? conciousness in general?, i would say plain conciousness/awareness/being/ is quite similar to a computer turned on, ready to recieve information, input. its a very intense predicament being in the human condition, we have been created by a process which on some levels of scale and time is quite mechanical, and thus created a mechanical creature, but there is also much chaos. Why I thought it was important to mention emotions and conciousness with the spirit besides the fact that I think these are things the word spirit is describing, is why is it nessesary to have these things to be intelligent? or why would something intelligent need these things? would ultimate intelligence need spirit? I am not arguing anything anti human, ill have you know that I am blown away and humbled daily by the fact that a system of being can feel the warmth of the sun, smell flowers,and taste fruit and love, and swim in cool water, its amazing that we can do and experience what we can, the dirt on mars must surely be jealous of us. But just as single celled organisms had the potential to evolve and advance into all things we know bilogically exist today, what shall the rules, limits, desirees, and whys be to what we will create, and can they only be judged by ourselves and the infinite intelligence of the universe?



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Tayesin
 


to have choices is to experience duality.

it is a speculation to assume that: ‘ At the level of Soul awareness there is no Duality’

we are here and experience our choices moment by moment. all our actions set the future. in that sense we chose right here and now what our future will bring us. even the motion of rebirth and reincarnation is speculative.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by bestintentions
reply to post by Tayesin
 


to have choices is to experience duality.

it is a speculation to assume that: ‘ At the level of Soul awareness there is no Duality’

we are here and experience our choices moment by moment. all our actions set the future. in that sense we chose right here and now what our future will bring us. even the motion of rebirth and reincarnation is speculative.


Hi,

Thank you for your reply. I especially enjoyed this section..

"we are here and experience our choices moment by moment. all our actions set the future. in that sense we chose right here and now what our future will bring us."

Here is a simple mind's eye exercise to help gain a perspective on Life's choices, our Free Will....

Imagine a length of chicken wire fairly tightly rolled up, almost diagonally, so that there is one wire leading into it and one at the other end. When you look into one end of it, see all of those places where wires cross in the tube? We could say each of those is places where Choice has been included into the basic plan.. or Life Itinerary.

Each choice made leads in a different direction to what any other choice would.. as you said.. "all our actions set the future. Yet anything in the Future is still only Possibility and Probability until choices are made to bring them into 'reality'. One single different choice would alter the whole course.

Interestingly this also tells us that there is no set time for our death. We arrive their naturally and by the roads we take with the choices we make.. sort of making it up as we go.

If we accept that everything happens for a reason, whether we believe it or not, whether we understand it or not and whether we disagree with it or not, then we may also accept the concept of a Plan for Life. This itinerary, much like our vacation plans includes all the things we desired to have choices for.. .. eg:- spend one more day on the beach or go helicopter sight-seeing, equates with something like .. Turn left at the lights to head for work or call in sick and spend the day with your partner?

As I said before Duality is what we experience Here. It is part of the make-up or mechanics of this construction.. for want of a better word.

Speculating and Assuming are things done when we have no direct experience of a thing, so we cannot truly Know a thing. Yet if we have direct experience of what we talk about then it is not mere assumption or speculation... it is simply honest sharing.

In my case it is not sharing of new-age beliefs, or any tradtional ones either. It's only what I learned through my own experiences.. you don't have to accept it. I'd rather you didn't as I much prefer you find out for yourself.




edit on 17-6-2011 by Tayesin because: do they make keyboards for dyslexic typers?



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by NorEaster
I'm sorry, but the double-slit experiment isn't something that can be reconstituted to serve as an explanation for every friggin' thing that someone doesn't understand.

Besides, the double-slit experiment debunks particle physics as being foundational. It doesn't actually debunk time and/or space, or prove that human conscioiusness is the lord and master of all creation, as most people who trot this disaster out seem to believe. It's the prime example of advanced technology backing particle physicists into a corner, and those poor bastards swinging for all their worth in an effort to stave off obsolescence.


What are You on about? The particle physicists are obsolete? Huh? Consciousness IS God - and the collapse of the wave-function supports that. (You may disagree, of course; cool with Me.) Of course, there's more to Consciousness than Humans, I agree - EVERYTHING is Consciousness on some level.

But the particle physicists are hardly obsolete because of "advanced technology" (what was that again that's obsoleting Them?).


You and I don't even see things similarly enough to disagree to a worthwhile lack of resolution. Let's just agree that there's no point in the two of us debating it. It'd be like a hamster arguing theophysics with the color red.


Uh. Sure. Have a nice life, I guess.

And I was so hoping You would have the courtesy to explain how (and what) "advanced technology" was making particle physicists obsolete. But if You think debating People of opposing views is pointless... Meh. Makes Me wonder just how certain You are of Your "facts."



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Signals
I was watching an episode of Through The Wormhole and an interesting question was raised.

Eventually, we will have the technology and computing power to synthesize, actually create a fully-functional Human brain.

Every connection, every spark, perfectly duplicated.

From the tissue, the cells, blood flow, etc.

When that day comes, will that mind have a Soul?



Here's an even freakier thing to chew on:

Suppose you were able to replace a single neuron in your brain with an "artifical neuron." (say, a metal fiber that somehow conducted and transmitted eletricity and chemicals like a single real neuron).

Now, most people would say "you would still be you:" After all, your brain is still 99.999999999999999999% organic despite the artificial neuron, right?

Now add more neurons. 10, 100, 100, a million, a billion. Eventually you get a brain that is completely artifical, but it became that way over time.

Would "you still be you"? And if not, at what point did you lose your self and soul?



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:47 AM
link   
Have you ever hugged a teddy bear when during your childhood or sought comfort by snuggling up to your security blanket? How about polishing your prized cars meant for the museums. These are inanimate objects, obviously devoid of "souls" found in some humans. But these objects are the owners' affections. Does it mean it has not the capacity to return love, too? If "AI" does one day become self-aware, then yes it would have a soul, only when conscious, of course.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Revolution9

I cannot prove my soul exists. I cannot prove it doesn't exist. I have only chosen to believe certain Teachers because I accepted their teaching.


Do you care whether the things you believe are true?
-



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Revolution9
Neither can an atheist provide hard evidence for the denial of the existence of a Divine Intelligence


I'm certain there is much hard evidence to be presented against such concepts. The thing is, we don't believe anything that someone can't disprove; it's irrational. Can you disprove that invisible pixies live in my cabinets? We should believe things when we have good reason such as evidence. Otherwise, all unfalsifiable claims become equally as valid.
edit on 17-6-2011 by traditionaldrummer because: beans & rice



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Signals
I was watching an episode of Through The Wormhole and an interesting question was raised.

Eventually, we will have the technology and computing power to synthesize, actually create a fully-functional Human brain.

Every connection, every spark, perfectly duplicated.

From the tissue, the cells, blood flow, etc.

When that day comes, will that mind have a Soul?





Minds do not have souls.

If the computer is made perfect as-is a human, as-is a human mind, it still will not have a soul.

On the other hand, you could keep in mind that everything has a soul. The computer itself, the material it was constructed out of and it's atoms all come from another source or form. Any matter or form has a soul. It might not have a mind.

Mind, the body and the pathway (soul) to spirit are separate.
edit on 27-6-2011 by xenzaka because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster

Originally posted by Solsthime331
reply to post by NorEaster
 


WOAH WOAH WOAH slow down...The soul was created by ancient religons not historic ones, The druids, Pagans, and Forest Dwellers (also known as children of the forest (wiccans and such) in artheran lore) created an afterlife where your mind left your body and traveled....is this not a soul?


The human spirit is not the soul. Look it up. The soul exists (according to tradition) as served by, but devoid of, conscious human personality. The spirit, on the other hand, is the conscious personage of the corporeal human being. These are two very different things, and the ancients acknowledged spirits in everything (even bird droppings, it seems). The concept of the soul is that it pre-exists the human conscious personage, and is served (somehow) by the development of that personage before casting it aside and taking on the effort of developing a new and dissimilar conscious personage via the corporeal brain of a new human being.


edit on 6/16/2011 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)



spir·it/ˈspirit/


Verb: Convey rapidly and secretly: "stolen cows were spirited away".

Noun: The nonphysical part of a person that is the seat of emotions and character; the soul. From my Dictionary and exactly the same on Google and Wikipedia.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Whoever thinks a brain has a soul is fooling themselves. There is a reason the Egyptians discarded the brain yet venerated the Heart!

The brain is you and your experiences, coupled with all the other fabulous mis-firings and purposeful mis-firings (illicitly induced), but the brain is not our Soul and has no part of it after the physical dies!

I think a brain is a terrible thing to waste, especially on a machine that has no feelings (feelings are Soul talk).

Ever notice when your feelings are hurt, or you are sad, the emanation comes from the central portion of the chest. Ever notice all the confusion and realizations come from the head?



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by bestintentions
reply to post by OwenandNoelle
 




I think that’s a very interesting question. In some theories of reincarnation, it’s suggested that before our next life begins, we actually choose what family we want to be born into and that often we don’t actually enter into our ‘infant’ body until right before we’re born.


yeah right..... would anybody choose to be born into a family that will be abusive, poor, live in an underprivileged country, where they look ugly, or any such sort ?

edit on 16-6-2011 by bestintentions because: (no reason given)


...
Star and Flag for the most ignorant reply ever...
You read a metaphysics/philosophy forum and yet come up with something like that?
i mean like seriously..

did you even think about the theory or did you just start typing random words which happened to be coherent?

if you would think a couple of seconds about it and what it implies..

for instance..do you think your "higher self" / your soul really cares about outer appereance?
furthermore it would be all about "experience" -hence reincarnating in a difficult environment....

i bet there are people in "underpriviliged" areas which live a happier life then you do -

Id rather live in the djungle then in a city browsing a forum i do not understand...
edit on 28-6-2011 by Acetradamus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   
It is my belief that everything in the universe is to a certain extent aware, as all of 'creation' is an expression of the ultimate. However....

I have a scientific calculator. It already possesses the ability to calculate mathematical problems well beyond my ability. Does this mean it has a soul? Now assuming this AI robot possesses the ability to not only do this, but adapt, calculate, and 'think' about every situation i may ever face with a capacity far beyond my own. This still does not nescessarily mean it has a soul.

It will never laugh, feel fear, pain. You cannot programme happiness or contentment. Will it ever experience amazement of creation when it and another robot create a third robot, or see the beauty of the sun setting over the ocean. You may be able to programme it to recognise a joke and consquently laugh. But it will never get 'it'. For it does not and will not ever have a soul. It is a machine.

Only a hardcore 'we are merely meat machines' athiest can believe that robots can ever become truly aware. And they do not believe in souls anyway....



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Acetradamus
 


i can see why you scold and bash me the way you do. i could have been more explicit and explained myself better. yes, i did just start typing random words which happened to be coherent and i erroneously assumed i would be understood.

but have you read all the posts before you jumped ?

also i think that your post tops my ignorance and is of very bad manner. nevertheless i thank you – i have learned from you.

edit on 28-6-2011 by bestintentions because: typo



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join