The "soul"
Options
Comments
-
The best physical representation of the creator would be the periodic table of elements.
-
Strange you say that animals have "souls", because their souls would need to pass some where if ours do. But all believers I have ever met and know do not believe animals have souls.
I don't see how gods image or likeness is proof for a soul though, or the "breath of life", the bible itself isn't fact. -
The Soul is like a memory Card while our Bodies is like the Gaming station.
Even when the Gaming Station Breaks down and is no longer able to turn on...
You can the information on your memory card, put it into a new gaming stations and still be able to
Retrieve the information you carefully built upon. Thats the Soul to body Relationship.
When we die and our Bodies are left behind our Soul will have a chance for a new body.
All that we built in our characters and personality will be ready for more developement.
Only thing is Humans don't remember. Most don't alot of times Kids can remember then forget as life goes on. -
Check this story out, personally I think it's made-up...
http://www.reversespins.com/proofofreincarnation.html -
DoUwant2go2Heaven?
11:05AM Posts: 3,427
The soul is the breath of ? that makes our clay bodies alive. Amen.
? has halitosis then. -
Dro can't take the ether.
-
FIAT... U ARE KNOWN FOR POST SINGLE SCRIPTURES TO FALSELY PROVE YOUR POINTS WHEN EVERYBODY KNOW THATS YOU HAVE TO READ WHAT WAS SAID BEFORE AND AFTERWARDS... SMARTEN UPfiat_money wrote: »
The Christian bible doesn't say "scientists and experts" yo.texasboi409 wrote: »The funny thing is if Gods word wasn't true why was it predicted in the Bible thousands of years ago that man would believe what false prophets(scientists and so called experts) were speaking but the same people would go against Gods word. This thread only proves ? right
You're putting words in the bible's pages out chea.
What the Christian bible says about the process of false "prophecy":Jeremiah 14:14
Then the LORD said to me, “The prophets are prophesying lies in my name. I have not sent them or appointed them or spoken to them. They are prophesying to you false visions, divinations, idolatries and the delusions of their own minds.Jeremiah 23:16
This is what the LORD Almighty says: “Do not listen to what the prophets are prophesying to you; they fill you with false hopes. They speak visions from their own minds, not from the mouth of the LORD.
^^In the Christian bible "prophets" are those that speak for "? ". So a "false prophet" would be someone who falsely claims they speak for "? ". Makes sense, because the Hebrew term for "prophet"--which is "navi"--also translates into "spokesperson".
This definition of "prophet" is supported by Deuteronomy 18:18:Deuteronomy 18:18
I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their fellow Israelites, and I will put my words in his mouth. He will tell them everything I command him.
Even that ? Ezekial--who was an OG designated "prophet" in the Christian bible--explained what a "false prophet" was:Ezekial 13
The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel who are now prophesying. Say to those who prophesy out of their own imagination: ‘Hear the word of the Lord! 3 This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Woe to the foolish[a] prophets who follow their own spirit and have seen nothing! 4 Your prophets, Israel, are like jackals among ruins. 5 You have not gone up to the breaches in the wall to repair it for the people of Israel so that it will stand firm in the battle on the day of the Lord. 6 Their visions are false and their divinations a lie. Even though the Lord has not sent them, they say, “The Lord declares,” and expect him to fulfill their words. 7 Have you not seen false visions and uttered lying divinations when you say, “The Lord declares,” though I have not spoken?
SMH @ You spreading false words about the Christian bible.
I have a better chance understanding hieroglyphics than understanding what you just said... -
Soul believers, since it's not the brain or mind that is our "soul" but the soul that does all, what happened to ones soul who is in a vegetative state? They have no true awareness. Brain damage disconnects them from knowing reality, unable to respond. Is their soul damaged as well? Did their soul leave them?
-
Anybody know anything about dmt?
-
-
question.... 4 all yall in here.... have u ever asked a scientist (who yall follow like this)
what they believe in.... cuz most of yall assume the dont belive when im pretty sure alot do... -
Lol only young ? worry about ? like that..
The older you get, the more you realize the soul aint ? but who youve been trying to grow into your whole life.. -
The Heart Sutra expresses the same idea by stating the emptiness of the five skandhas, i.e. the emptiness of the body, sensations, perceptions, mental formations, and consciousness. The five skandhas are commonly translated into English as the five aggregates. According to the Buddha, these aggregates are what constitutes a person. As adumbrated above, it is possible to deconstruct the five skandhas in the same manner as objects. However, this method of deconstruction assumes a third person perspective. It analyses phenomena perceived as external to the observer. When we talk about the essence of a person, the situation is slightly different, because we talk indirectly about ourselves. It may therefore be more intuitive to look at things from a first person perspective. The first person perspective allows us to make statements about the internal state of the observer thereby producing self-reference. What is observed is the observer. Perhaps this will lead to new insights into the essence of mind and body.
First, let's look at experience. What exactly is experience? - Obviously, we experience objects and phenomena through the senses. This is one form of experience. We also experience feelings, moods, thoughts, and emotions. The former can be called sensory experiences and the latter mental experiences. Upon contemplating the distinction we may find that there is no clear boundary between sensory and mental experience. As soon as we perceive a physical object, for example an apple, the corresponding mental experiences are immediately triggered. First, we think "apple". This is identification. Following this thought, a number of things we associate with apples may come to mind, for example "sweet, edible, green, red, healthy, delicious, juicy," and so on. These associations may be followed by the build-up of a desire to touch or to taste the apple. Once the desire is strong enough, our thoughts may be occupied with consuming the apple and we start weighing the merits and demerits of consuming the apple now or later. All these mental experiences are caused by, yet independent of the original object. If the apple is withdrawn, the memory of it may be able to sustain the chain of thoughts for a short time, yet it will eventually cease. -
We can infer that mental experience requires sensory experience, or respectively memory of sensory experience. Sensory experience in turn requires the body. If we carried through a thought experiment and examined whether each of the skandhas is able to exist without the other four, we would find that this is not possible. The latter four aggregates all depend on the body. Without the brain and the nervous system there is no consciousness, no sensation, no perception, and no mental formations. On the other hand, we cannot imagine the body to function without the mind. The body and the mind depend on each other, the five skandhas depend on each other. We must conclude that none of the skandhas is fundamental. Body, sensations, perceptions, mental formations, and consciousness are interrelated. Experiences emerge from the interaction of all five skandhas. Just as objects, experiences are conditioned by the interplay of multiple phenomena. Experience has no inherent existence either.Our brain is advanced enough to reflect on its experiences. By means of self-reference we can direct mental activity onto itself. For example, we can think about thought. From this arises a division between subject, percept, and object. The percept is the mental impression, the subject is the owner of it, the thinker, and the object is that which causes the mental impression. This threefold division seems so natural to us that it is reflected in the grammar of most human languages. We perceive the separation of subject, percept, and object as real, because mind attributes an owner to experience and thought. This owner is the "self", the subject, the centre of consciousness, the supposed psychological entity. Surprisingly, this entity remains completely undetectable. Body, feeling, perception, and mental formations are not the self. Consciousness is not the self either, otherwise it would follow that the self temporarily ceases to exist during unconscious states, for example during deep sleep.
We might ask how "self" can be independent of a surrounding world. Is it possible for the self to exist in a mental vacuum, a world devoid of sense impressions, thought, and mental images? Would the self not literally run out of fuel if it lacked thoughts and contents to identify itself with or to set itself apart from? It seems there is no basis an independent entity. It seems more that the self is an emergent phenomenon arising from the application of complex interpretative schemes to perception. In particular, it arises from the conceptual division between subject, object, and percept. Through introspection it is possible to realise that the "self" is not fundamental. It is created by the mind through identification and discernment. The "self" is itself a mental formation - a product of mind. It is therefore empty of inherent existence.
http://thebigview.com/buddhism/emptiness.html -
Holy gotdayum ? ? ?
-
Your a lame if you read all that
-
Jaded, can i get a summary?
-
-
Good Drop JR.
Link? -
JR basically gave an expanded version of what i was trying to say. Try to contest that
-
black ppl got soul
-
The_Maryvale_Joker wrote: »Your a lame if you read all that
You're even more of a lame if you either
a. can't read all of that
and/or
b. are too lazy to read all of that
and it's "you're", not "your" -
-
PublicEnemigo1 wrote: »Good Drop JR.
Link?
the link is in the post. But the website is www.thebigview.com if you don't want to click the link.
-
bump..
