Think of this.

Reincarnation states that humans have all live previous lives and cannot stop existing.

However, the human population has boomed since antibiotics were invented in 1888 and when they came out in 1896.

This therefore claims that thetans (as known by scientologions) were being created and that goes against the idea of reincarnation saying that all humans had a previous life.

Summary: Reincarnation cannot exist because it states that everything living had a previous life but since the population grew due to anti biotics new "souls" were being made.

You're arguement does make some sense. however, i'm sure there are some reincarnation experts that could refute it somehow. I'm personally not very educated on the topic so I'm not sure.

How about the possibility that our souls are a part of Gods soul fragmented to experience himself from an outside perspective.

More humans = More fragments of the overall soul.

Old souls have had many previous lives and are the wiser, new souls have had none or very few, and are the more foolish.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reincarnation I'm pretty sure that every human doesn't have to have a soul. But even if they do there are a multitude of extinct species that can be used as souls for humans.

^ Ah yes, some religeons believe that our souls also host animals, but "liberation" can only be acheived as a human, because as an animal we experience the life of the animal, but as humans we create the life of ourselves.

I'd be on board with the extinct species thing if the numbers were there. For reincarnation to exist as classically explained, there would have to be a stagnant number of organisms on the earth at all times, if not a slowly decreasing total number of organisms to account for those who were achieving nirvana. It just doesn't make sense to me, as the total number of organisms on earth is surely growing exponentially. Human population growing would mean that the populations of lesser organisms would have to decrease overall, but yet with the growth of human population there are (for example) both growth of bacteria (which each and every human being hosts billions of at any given time) and growth of insect populations (the type we consider pests, roaches, flies, ants, any which reproduce rapidly as human waste is produced). Those two alone, based on undeniable human population growth, far far outnumber any conceivable decreases of population in organisms not mentioned. The total amount of organisms on earth grows exponentially, starting with the growth of humans and trickling down to lesser and lesser organisms.

Did you include insects, or the possiblity that their may be a cache of souls, and we just have more active souls at this moment? Your also not taking into account the possibility of life on other planets. Energy can't be created or destroyed, but it can be changed.

People are willing to overlook Christianitys inconstintency (spelling sucks) when it comes to gaping holes in thelogy, but when it comes to other beliefs such as reincarnation everyone gets all practical.

Who says that every soul must be reincarnated as soon as it's last host dies? Of all the people alive today, some could have just died, others could have died thousands of years ago, and just been in a state of limbo for a bit. Over the course of history there are way more people then there are alive right now...

that evidence doesn't refute anything, all it does is prove medicine works

You have to consider that all forms of life (inluding forms of life within forms of life, ie. bacteria) and many animals.Think about this, if a fly dies, then a human can be born. If a dog dies, the bacteria within the dog also die, in which case, how many humans and animals can be born?

People jack off all the time and their sperm die. People have sex, if all those sperm die and one fertilises the egg, there is about minus 1,000 lives there to be made up.

This proves that arguement wrong. REINCARNATION EXISTS BITCHES!!!

Life doesn't just exist on Earth...

^ Good point.

And as I said before, why can't new souls be created?

Google "Brahman", or Godhead. Learn something about what you try to disprove.

What if unintelligent souls - like bacteria and flies - are just like computer programs? Why would a soul live such a simple life? Human life is much better for experiencing this world.

Our bodies are capable of holding beings. We, in our bodies and our lives are able to be spiritually aware.

In either case, reincarnation rules.



[This message has been edited by Osiris89 (edited 08-15-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Osiris89:

What if unintelligent souls - like bacteria and flies - are just like computer programs? Why would a soul live such a simple life? Human life is much better for experiencing this world.

the mind and the soul are completely different

some would mock the human existence

quote:Originally posted by AnAsTaSiO:

People are willing to overlook Christianitys inconstintency (spelling sucks) when it comes to gaping holes in thelogy, but when it comes to other beliefs such as reincarnation everyone gets all practical.

That is because reincarnation makes sense; Christianity does not.

BTW, the Bible once contained numerous references to reincarnation, but the Emporer Justinian had almost all of them edited out--he missed the verse that states that John the Baptist was a reincarnation of an Old Testament prophet.

I think of reincarnation sometimes but haven't done a lot of research on it.

So maybe someone here can answer this...

Are all the souls that are to exist already formed...or are new souls also being created?



[I see Beany had the same point...but with no answer either...

midgetbasketball...If you're going to refute something then shouldn't you have all the evidence/information to support it???]

[This message has been edited by outcast (edited 08-15-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by AnAsTaSiO:

You're arguement does make some sense. however, i'm sure there are some reincarnation experts that could refute it somehow. I'm personally not very educated on the topic so I'm not sure.



You know there are always going to be people who refute anything! Though I personally think that it's all a bunch of B.S. though.

Recarnation actually makes sense to me then any other explanation for a possible afterlife.

Think more deeply and not literally.

Recarnation may sybolize the cycles of nature.

Grass gets eaten by deer, deer gets eaten by human hunter, human hunter dies and becomes nutrients for soil, grass feeds on the soil.

Remember where this believe came from. It orignated in India, which has a Hindu culture. In this culture, the caste system exists. If a person who was a king in a previous life but was a sinner who acumilated bad karma, then that person's next life will be an untouchable who would clean out sewers for a living. In short, it is a beleif used to validate the caste system.

In the Hindu religion, everything is an illusion. In the begining, there was only one God, but different aspects of that God formed, such as other gods and the world. In short we are an aspect of that god. Kinda like how a single cell is able to divide itself into a multi-cell. Double check on that, it has been awhile since my

Hindu studies.

Couldn't they say these "souls" were in animals? as the human population has expanded we have lowered the populations of other species.

The assumption the original poster made makes so many assumptions that the average Joe just can't prove. Although these are all totally reasonable assumptions, they may not be true and if they're not could explain reincarnation + population growth: Time goes from past to future, there is only one time line and that time line is ours (there are no "alternate histories" in parallel universes or whatever), the sequence of people's multiple lives must go from past to future, one body = one soul, the amount of souls is a fixed, limited number, etc etc.

There is no such thing as a soul.

quote:The central claim of Cartesian dualism is that the immaterial mind and the material body causally interact, a point which is featured prominently in non-European philosophies, such as in Tibetan Buddhism. Mental events cause physical events, and vice versa. This leads to the most substantial claim against Cartesian dualism. How can an immaterial mind cause anything in a material body, and vice versa? This is called the "problem of interactionism." Descartes himself struggled to come up with a feasible explanation for the problem - he suggested that animal spirits interacted in the pineal gland. This has since been widely dismissed.

For this reason and others, most professional philosophers and scientists have abandoned this view and proffer other accounts of the mental. For example, mind-body problem presents competing philosophical positions and cognitive science generally assumes that mind is constructed from matter; that it is, for example a Category of correspondences among pieces of matter

Stop trying to come up with explainations of what happens when you die, you rot, you cease to exist just like before you were concieved.

there's no reason that more souls can't just be created, the first souls were obviously created at some point, or formed however you believe they did, so who's to say that it isn't still happening? what belief system gives the idea that each and every human has past lives?

second of all, the way i think about it, a very simple sort of pre-soul can be created simply out of nature, in bacteria and such, and then by a soul's very nature, souls follow a progression throughout more and more complex animals, with more and more comprehension, until they become human beings and then, theoretically, reach nirvana

quote:Originally posted by Daz:

There is no such thing as a soul.

Stop trying to come up with explainations of what happens when you die, you rot, you cease to exist just like before you were concieved.

Well, actually no. It is your body which rots and just because it is decaying you can't claim that this proves that you have no soul.

See ? The two go perfectly well together. Perishable body + unperishable soul.

How does your soul interact with your body without violating the conservation of energy law?

I prefer to think that we don't exist, why do we have to be something. We think we are real because we see, touch, hear and taste. We could be no more than a glob of energy. I've had dreams that appeared real, but everything I saw, heard, touched, and tasted was all just electrical and chemical reactions and nothing more.

Actually in the beggining there was only one soul. The soul of the universe. How did all the souls currently came into existence? They were not created, but splintered from that soul and formed into another entity. This shard then splits up even further to create more beings. Thus it is an individual being, yet still part of the whole (Uninverse.) Seperate, yet connected.

[This message has been edited by Omikcron (edited 08-18-2005).]

man, that argument against reincarnation always bugs me

your talking about the soul leaving the body on death and being born again! if it does exist who the hell says it has to obey the laws of time???

you could be reincarnated into someone from 300 bc when you die, and then into someone from 2500 ad, for all we know....heck, your best friend could be a reincarnation of you

All this arguement is proving is how much we don't know. It cannot be proven whether or not we have souls, so it all comes down to a matter of faith or lack of.

What kind of backwards fuck still doesn't believe in reincarnation?

quote:Originally posted by AnAsTaSiO:

All this arguement is proving is how much we don't know.

Particularly wearealldamaged. Someone would do well by explaining some basics to him.

quote:Originally posted by Daz:

How does your soul interact with your body without violating the conservation of energy law?

How does your soul "interact with the body" ? And why would it vioate the laws of conservation of energy ?

quote:Originally posted by The_Rabbi:

What kind of backwards fuck still doesn't believe in reincarnation?

Yes. Not believing in something that has never been proven and has absolutely no evidence supporting it is "backwards".

Your logic is astounding.

Why do you assume that time is linear? That's the christian in you talking...

quote:Originally posted by AnAsTaSiO:

People are willing to overlook Christianitys inconstintency (spelling sucks) when it comes to gaping holes in thelogy, but when it comes to other beliefs such as reincarnation everyone gets all practical.

No, Christianity is stupid too.

I agree with you that most aspects of Christianity are stupid, but from my exprience, people always give them more bullshit room then any other religon.

quote:Originally posted by NewRage:

Who says that every soul must be reincarnated as soon as it's last host dies? Of all the people alive today, some could have just died, others could have died thousands of years ago, and just been in a state of limbo for a bit. Over the course of history there are way more people then there are alive right now...

Do you not understand that the total number of organisms on the earth has increased steadily if not exponentially over time? Your response makes no sense. Souls would be being rushed into newly born organisms as soon as they were available to keep up with the demand, and there still would not be enough. The only way reincarnation makes sense is if souls can become spontaneously generated, or if there are a considerable number of organisms whom are without souls at a given time.

Anybody ever saw Little Buddha? In the movie the soul of the Lama was split up into three traits. I don't remember the exact traits but they were like physcial, mental, and talent. So they found three kids that each showed the trait and together they made up the orginal soul.

Maybe our sould splits up like that and thats how new souls form. Maybe that's why we are more of a specialized society. The souls are "more pure" in terms of a trait. Like whoever gets my physcial athelic trait would have a strong soul that can run track, instead of being combined with a bunch of other traits.

Multiple planes of existence, both below and above our own. As souls mature they graduate to the next plane of existence. Each time a soul goes from one plane of existence to the next it takes longer and is much more difficult to reach the next level of existence. The recent boom in population have souls from the lower planes of existence that have recently graduated.

quote:How does your soul "interact with the body" ?

I don't have one. You are suggesting that the soul and the body don't interact with each other - what properties does your soul have and what properties does your body have then.

quote:And why would it vioate the laws of conservation of energy ?

How can something spiritual that occupies no space, has no mass and has no velocity act on something physical such as our body? Assuming that energy is conserved any interaction between that spiritual 'soul' and your body would require some kind of energy transfer - how can something with no mass possess energy? The interaction would have to result in the creation of energy therefore violating the conservation law.

quote:Originally posted by Rust:

Yes. Not believing in something that has never been proven and has absolutely no evidence supporting it is "backwards".

Your logic is astounding.

Indeed, but I'm afraid your rapier wit still doesn't erase the reality that reincarnation isn't fake.

I almost wish it wasn't real, but it is. Once you go around the life cycle a few more times, I'm sure you'll realize it, too.

^Dude, stfu and stop trolling.

Don't you people know the difference between an incarnation and reincarnation? Brand new souls are created all the time. They are called incarnations.

Once a physical incarnation dies it's soul starts the journey through the afterlife. There is no heaven or hell. There is only an afterlife where we all go to once our physical body dies. For some people this afterlife can be a hellish environment or it can be a blissful nirvana. It all depends on your soul's experiences through this temporal, physical world that which we have manifested ourselves as incarnations.

If you are successful in life (success is not to be confused with wealth and power but rather with spirituality and wisdom) then once you die you then have the opportunity or at least a better chance to return once more to this temporal, physical world as a reincarnation from the afterlife. So not only are souls and reincarnation real, so is karma.

There is no limit on how many times you can reincarnate. It all depends on how you lived your life when you were first an incarnation which would dictate your journey through the afterlife that then dictates when and into what you will reincarnate if you have earned the right to choose so.

There are even some elevated souls which choose not to return back to this temporal world since the afterlife is so rewarding that they find nothing physical can compare. However these souls always have the privelige to return if they choose to. The choice is only given to those souls who have accomplished their journey through the afterlife with a perfect balance of karma.

I hope this enlightens some of you disbelievers out there. We all have souls believe it or not. You will find out either the hard way or the easy way once you die. It all depends on your karma.

thetans?? scientology is fake, so i wouldn't trust them ,they beleive that some dude called xenu is trapped in a volcanoe and that we were forced to go into 3d cinemas to be brainwashed with christianity some time ago

quote:Don't you people know the difference between an incarnation and reincarnation? Brand new souls are created all the time. They are called incarnations.

Once a physical incarnation dies it's soul starts the journey through the afterlife. There is no heaven or hell. There is only an afterlife where we all go to once our physical body dies. For some people this afterlife can be a hellish environment or it can be a blissful nirvana. It all depends on your soul's experiences through this temporal, physical world that which we have manifested ourselves as incarnations.

If you are successful in life (success is not to be confused with wealth and power but rather with spirituality and wisdom) then once you die you then have the opportunity or at least a better chance to return once more to this temporal, physical world as a reincarnation from the afterlife. So not only are souls and reincarnation real, so is karma.

There is no limit on how many times you can reincarnate. It all depends on how you lived your life when you were first an incarnation which would dictate your journey through the afterlife that then dictates when and into what you will reincarnate if you have earned the right to choose so.

There are even some elevated souls which choose not to return back to this temporal world since the afterlife is so rewarding that they find nothing physical can compare. However these souls always have the privelige to return if they choose to. The choice is only given to those souls who have accomplished their journey through the afterlife with a perfect balance of karma.

I hope this enlightens some of you disbelievers out there. We all have souls believe it or not. You will find out either the hard way or the easy way once you die. It all depends on your karma.

Nice story, fictional but nice.

- proof?

You didn't even define what a 'soul' was, how it interacts with our physical body or how it is created.

You imply that it has sensations, yet we know that sensations are simply electrical impulses interperated by our brain.

You ask for proof which I cannot give. The only way you will find out for sure is when you die. And if you spent your entire life as a disbeliever you will be the one to suffer.

If you want the definition of a soul look it up in the dictionary. Some things science just cannot explain and most probably never will most of which is metaphysical. If you are too narrow minded to disbelieve the idea of a spirit or soul you should not criticize other peoples beliefs if they differentiate from your own restricted mind. This is a religious forum after all.

BTW I gathered all this information from spiritualy gifted people which I do not doubt since they are much wiser then both you and I. If a wise man sincerely gives you advice do not judge his intentions, for he is the one that has complete control over his destiny and perhaps you should follow in his foot steps.

quote:Originally posted by The_Rabbi:

Indeed, but I'm afraid your rapier wit still doesn't erase the reality that reincarnation isn't fake.

I almost wish it wasn't real, but it is. Once you go around the life cycle a few more times, I'm sure you'll realize it, too.

So in other words you can't prove any of the bullshit you've said and and as such it remains just that, unsubstantiated, baseless, flimsy, frivolous, unsupported and uncorroborated bullshit; thus making it not "backwards" to not believe in it, but the opposite, a completely logical and intelligent position? Thank you.

[This message has been edited by Rust (edited 08-20-2005).]

quote:You ask for proof which I cannot give.

If you openly admit you have no proof to back your arguement then why even state it in the first place, or at the very least state it as your opinion and not fact.

quote:The only way you will find out for sure is when you die

When i die i will return to the state i was in before birth, no consciousness, no memory.

quote:And if you spent your entire life as a disbeliever you will be the one to suffer.

Suffer? how? think about how irrational what you are saying is. Any form of suffering/pain/discomfort is simply impulses in your brain, after death your brain does not function and therefore after death there can be no suffering.

quote:If you want the definition of a soul look it up in the dictionary

soul-

"The animating and vital principle in humans, credited with the faculties of thought, action, and emotion and often conceived as an immaterial entity."

brain-

"The portion of the vertebrate central nervous system that is enclosed within the cranium, continuous with the spinal cord, and composed of gray matter and white matter. It is the primary center for the regulation and control of bodily activities, receiving and interpreting sensory impulses, and transmitting information to the muscles and body organs. It is also the seat of consciousness, thought, memory, and emotion"

Source: dictionary.com

Seems they both have the same attributes - ever thought that the soul is the exact same thing as the brain?

quote:Some things science just cannot explain and most probably never will most of which is metaphysical.

I never said it could. The problem is these things can not even explain or prove their own existence.

quote:If you are too narrow minded to disbelieve the idea of a spirit or soul you should not criticize other peoples beliefs if they differentiate from your own restricted mind.

In saying that you openly criticise my beliefs because they differ from yours. Hypocrisy.

Your arguments are flawed on so many levels that nobody that takes their beliefs seriously could agree with them.

My proof is faith which cannot be proven to anybody else but myself. I cannot proof it to you. That's like saying "please prove to me that I have faith". It is for you to prove it to yourself. Nobody else is going to bestow your own faith in religion and metaphysics by using science. It is up to you to believe or not.

You say that when you die you will return to the state you were in before birth, no consciousness, no memory. I suppose you can prove this using your scientific method right?

As for the suffering it wont be physical pain in the form of a sense you currently have that is perceived by your consciousness. As you quoted from dictionary.com the soul is "...often conceived as an immaterial entity." If the soul truely is an "immaterial entity" it cannot be associated with physical sense in the form of pain since it is not physcial to begin with just like before you were born or after your death.

You say that "...these things can not even explain or prove their own existence." Neither can they be refuted or denied due to lack of physical evidence which will never be revealed unless you are a spiritualy gifted person or until you complete your journey through the afterlife.

I never criticized your beliefs but rather defended my own. Your opening statement (which is only your opinion just like mine) says that my "story,...is fictional" Who are you to tell me what kind of faith I have?

And finaly if you want some credible testimony about the after life, your soul, karma, and destiny I suggest you read the Quran but please don't ask us for scientific proof of it's divination. One of the core beliefs in Islam is life after death and in fact more then half the Quran is about your journey through the afterlife.

quote:Originally posted by Rust:

So in other words you can't prove any of the bullshit you've said and and as such it remains just that, unsubstantiated, baseless, flimsy, frivolous, unsupported and uncorroborated bullshit; thus making it not "backwards" to not believe in it, but the opposite, a completely logical and intelligent position? Thank you.

Don't request proof all the time.

Use your own brain for once, and only then will you have the right to agree or not agree - perhaps even to flame, who knows.

quote:Originally posted by land195:

Anybody ever saw Little Buddha? In the movie the soul of the Lama was split up into three traits. I don't remember the exact traits but they were like physcial, mental, and talent. So they found three kids that each showed the trait and together they made up the orginal soul.

Maybe our sould splits up like that and thats how new souls form. Maybe that's why we are more of a specialized society. The souls are "more pure" in terms of a trait. Like whoever gets my physcial athelic trait would have a strong soul that can run track, instead of being combined with a bunch of other traits.

I remember having seen that movie but I don't remember that "splitting of souls" you are talking about.

If this is true (but I doubt it - I am more enclined to think they just tested those three children because each one of them showed signs of being the likely incarnation of that ancient lama), then their concept of "souls" must be vastly different from ours. Souls don't just split.



[This message has been edited by Uncus (edited 08-20-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Daz:

quote:You ask for proof which I cannot give.

If you openly admit you have no proof to back your arguement then why even state it in the first place, or at the very least state it as your opinion and not fact.

quote:The only way you will find out for sure is when you die

When i die i will return to the state i was in before birth, no consciousness, no memory.

Do you have proof for that ?

quote:Originally posted by NewRage:

Who says that every soul must be reincarnated as soon as it's last host dies? Of all the people alive today, some could have just died, others could have died thousands of years ago, and just been in a state of limbo for a bit. Over the course of history there are way more people then there are alive right now...

Logically, there should be many more souls waiting to be reincarnated. Earth's population is increasing steadily. I think this means that there must be many souls "waiting", doesn't it ?

Uncus you son of a bitch. You got me all happy I saw four other posts made and I thought there was a debate going.

quote:Originally posted by Daz:

Nice story, fictional but nice.

- proof?

You didn't even define what a 'soul' was, how it interacts with our physical body or how it is created.

You imply that it has sensations, yet we know that sensations are simply electrical impulses interperated by our brain.

Oh no. We don't "know" that. All we know is that ther ARE electrical impulses travelling through our nerve paths. We don't know these ARE our sensations - or rather, some of us know they are not.

In fact, what you are doing in saying this, is denying the existence of a spiritual life.

It's a sad fact that more and more people - since probably several centuries - have gone this way. The enlightenment in the seventeenth century may have been a necessary thing, but it had also the accompanying phenomenon of leading people away from an acceptance of the possibility of their having a spiritual life.



[This message has been edited by Uncus (edited 08-20-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Paradise Lost:

Uncus you son of a bitch. You got me all happy I saw four other posts made and I thought there was a debate going.

I don't get you ...?

quote:Originally posted by Uncus:

Don't request proof all the time.

Use your own brain for once, and only then will you have the right to agree or not agree - perhaps even to flame, who knows.



Sorry but if he is ridiculing people who do not believe in reincarnation, then it's entirely relevant, nay, entirely required for me to show how he has absolutely no eviendece of the absurd claims he is making and therefore how his ridicule of those who do not believe in those baseless absurdities is not well-founded.

P.S. How am I not using my brain?

quote:You say that when you die you will return to the state you were in before birth, no consciousness, no memory. I suppose you can prove this using your scientific method right?

No, common sense actually...before conception we were not alive, after death we are not alive...it would follow that the states are the same would it not?

quote:As for the suffering it wont be physical pain in the form of a sense you currently have that is perceived by your consciousness.

I know, so what will it be?

quote:As you quoted from dictionary.com the soul is "...often conceived as an immaterial entity." If the soul truely is an "immaterial entity" it cannot be associated with physical sense in the form of pain since it is not physcial to begin with just like before you were born or after your death.

Your just repeating what i said http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

quote:Neither can they be refuted or denied

You cannot refute something that has no evidence of existing. Refute or deny my belief that there is an immaterial substance floating around the moon that controls the tides...

quote:Who are you to tell me what kind of faith I have?

Someone that is trying to help you http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif)

quote:And finaly if you want some credible testimony about the after life, your soul, karma, and destiny I suggest you read the Quran but please don't ask us for scientific proof of it's divination. One of the core beliefs in Islam is life after death and in fact more then half the Quran is about your journey through the afterlife.

If i write a book saying that the afterlife doesn't exist does that mean that it really doesn't exist?

quote:Don't request proof all the time.

Heck, a valid argument would do.

quote:Do you have proof for that ?

No, a common sense answer actually...before conception we were not alive, after death we are not alive...it would follow that the states are the same would it not?

quote:Logically, there should be many more souls waiting to be reincarnated.

Logically, souls don't exist...so using logic to state anything about them is pointless - they cleary do not adhere to logic.

quote:Oh no. We don't "know" that. All we know is that ther ARE electrical impulses travelling through our nerve paths.

That coincide with our sensations...

quote:In fact, what you are doing in saying this, is denying the existence of a spiritual life.

You think?

quote:It's a sad fact that more and more people - since probably several centuries - have gone this way

Is it wrong to goto the truth?

All this talk of souls and "new souls" and "old souls" isn't really necessary, in my opinion. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

The way I interpret reincarnation is simply energy being reused, over and over again. When you die, your energy is thrown back into the pot to be reused. So this whole "soul" thing is making it more complicated than it needs to be. I believe that the idea of a soul is just another manifestation of the illusion of self.

Well I might be able to refute this.

Well reincarnation is that when you die you come back as something else. Also you can come back as an animal. Prehaps that certain species are going extinct so therefore more people are being reincarnated into humans again, rather than animlas these days simply because there are less animals.

Well that's it. Holes in it? Anyone?

Yea - you assume reincarnation actually happens.

quote:Originally posted by midgetbasketball:

Think of this.

Reincarnation states that humans have all live previous lives and cannot stop existing.

However, the human population has boomed since antibiotics were invented in 1888 and when they came out in 1896.

This therefore claims that thetans (as known by scientologions) were being created and that goes against the idea of reincarnation saying that all humans had a previous life.

Summary: Reincarnation cannot exist because it states that everything living had a previous life but since the population grew due to anti biotics new "souls" were being made.



Scientologions, as you call them, AFAIK don't believe new thetans are "made". Growth of population doesn't imply new souls are made, it implies more souls are incarnated.

quote:Originally posted by Omikcron:

Remember where this believe came from. It orignated in India, which has a Hindu culture. In this culture, the caste system exists. If a person who was a king in a previous life but was a sinner who acumilated bad karma, then that person's next life will be an untouchable who would clean out sewers for a living. In short, it is a beleif used to validate the caste system.

The caste system is not needed for validating the reincarnation belief. A king who sinned much in this life could very well be a king again in next life who has to expiate his sins. Reincarnation rests on the idea of karma which says that every action will have an effect. You can accumulate good karma, and you can accumulate bad karma.

It is true that in the Hindu belief in reincarnation AFAIK someone could reincarnate in a low animal if he has lead a bad life. Not all reincarnation systems however accept this.

So you see it hasn't really anything to do with the caste system.[/B][/QUOTE]

quote:Originally posted by Uncus:

I remember having seen that movie but I don't remember that "splitting of souls" you are talking about.

Remember throughout the whole movie there was 3 kids being tested the whole time? In the end, they said something that the Lama's soul was split between each of the three and combined, they all show traits of the Lama. I haven't seen the movie in a while, but I'm pretty sure it was like that

quote:Originally posted by Social Junker:

All this talk of souls and "new souls" and "old souls" isn't really necessary, in my opinion. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

The way I interpret reincarnation is simply energy being reused, over and over again. When you die, your energy is thrown back into the pot to be reused. So this whole "soul" thing is making it more complicated than it needs to be. I believe that the idea of a soul is just another manifestation of the illusion of self.

I don't know about "new" souls. It could be supposed however that "old" souls are those which reincarnated many times and have acquired much experience, whereas young souls would have reincarnated little and be relatively "innocent". This is how I understand it when "old" and "young" souls are being mentioned somewhere.

As for your "energy" being thrown back into the pot to be reused when you die, I think you are making a good point here. You could see the cleansing process the soul has to go through after death in this way. I think that not everything is lost however. You have definitely something of your own which you acquired in your past lifetime(s) and which you bring back with you. How else could reincarnation make sense ?

If you think that the soul is an illusion, then you can't really believe in reincarnation.

quote:Originally posted by Daz:

quote http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)o you have proof for that ?

No, a common sense answer actually...before conception we were not alive, after death we are not alive...it would follow that the states are the same would it not?

In asking if you have proof, I was being facetious, as you said to the other poster that if he has no proof he should state his argument as opinion and not as fact, whereas you were doing the exact same thing : you wrote "When i die i will return to the state i was in before birth, no consciousness, no memory" just like that.

But anyway, it doesn't follow that you are in the same state before life as you are after life. Of course, it would be a state of "after-life", but wouldn't it be very different to someone ready to be reborn, and someone who has recently died and who has to go through the whole process of cleansing his soul ?

quote:quote:Logically, there should be many more souls waiting to be reincarnated.

Logically, souls don't exist...so using logic to state anything about them is pointless - they cleary do not adhere to logic.

Absolutely not. When I say it is logical that there should be many more souls waiting to be reincarnated, then I am saying it in the context of the reincarnation belief and the fact that the population of earth is rising and therefore necessarily more souls have to incarnate. In this context, saying this was using logic.

It is not using logic however to just state that "logically, souls don't exist" because it isn't based on any rational argument.

quote:quote:Oh no. We don't "know" that. All we know is that ther ARE electrical impulses travelling through our nerve paths.

That coincide with our sensations...

You could say that, yes. As you could say that the red streetlight coincides with cars waiting, that a stab with a syringe in your arm coincides with pain, and the sight of the sun rising in the morning coincides with a feeling of awe, of peace, of splendor... while a red streetight IS not the waiting cars, the stab in your arm IS not the pain you feel, and the dawn IS not your sense of awe or peace or splendor or whatever...

quote:quote:In fact, what you are doing in saying this, is denying the existence of a spiritual life.

You think?

Yes. Don't you ?

quote:quote:It's a sad fact that more and more people - since probably several centuries - have gone this way

Is it wrong to goto the truth?

It might be wrong to focus on the existence and the laws of the material universe alone while rejecting the existence of everything which is not material.

Daz, you talk about using common sense but then bring such poor examples of explaining your belief of "...an immaterial substance floating around the moon that controls the tides..." You don't need faith to believe in something like gravity.

What you do need faith to believe in is the existance of souls and spirits. I quoted your reply from dictionary.com not only to repeat what you said but to dispell your idea in which you wrote "...ever thought that the soul is the exact same thing as the brain?" Since when is the brain an "immaterial entity"?

And also Daz, you say that "If I write a book saying that the afterlife doesn't exist does that mean that it really doesn't exist?" No it does not mean that the afterlife doesn't exist since using my common sense you are clearly not a spiritual person and obviously do not have the gift of clairvoyance to transcribe the divine word of God. Once again I cannot prove your words over the prophet's word but since you openly refute spirituality, souls, and the afterlife, using my common sense I can conclude you just came up with a poor example of argument to counter my claim of the Quran's passages which give some credible testimony of the afterlife.

You are not trying to help anybody Daz. Instead what you are trying to do is break our faith which you want replaced with science. Like I already said in a previous reply, some things science will never be able to prove. It is for you to either belive or not and you Daz, among others, choose to be a disbeliever. It's ok though because everyone will eventualy become a believer either the easy way or the hard way once we've reached our ultimate destination in the afterlife.

quote:But anyway, it doesn't follow that you are in the same state before life as you are after life.

Why not?

quote:but wouldn't it be very different to someone ready to be reborn, and someone who has recently died and who has to go through the whole process of cleansing his soul ?

I have no idea what you mean here...

quote:Absolutely not. When I say it is logical that there should be many more souls waiting to be reincarnated, then I am saying it in the context of the reincarnation belief and the fact that the population of earth is rising and therefore necessarily more souls have to incarnate. In this context, saying this was using logic.

It is not using logic however to just state that "logically, souls don't exist" because it isn't based on any rational argument.

Absolutely so...

1)Pain is an electrical impulse that our brain interperets.

2)After death our brain ceases to function.

3)The after-life involves either pain or bliss.

Therefore: there can be no afterlife.

Is that argument rational enough for you?

Not only that but there is still the problem of interaction between the soul and the body when we are alive...

quote:You could say that, yes. As you could say that the red streetlight coincides with cars waiting

Indeed it does - more importantly it is also the cause of the cars waiting. The red light causes the cars to stop. The electrical impulses coincide with sensations, or, the electrical impulses cause our sensations...

All of the examples you listed are cause/effect interactions, just like the cause/effect interaction between the electrical impulses in our brain and our sensations.

quote:It might be wrong to focus on the existence and the laws of the material universe alone while rejecting the existence of everything which is not material.

Why should i not reject the existence of everything which is not material when there is absolutely no evidence for the existence of any of it?

Infact - there are infinite possibilities for immaterial things such as the immaterial elephant that controls the tides by orbiting the moon...do you believe in this elephant? Because immaterial 'things' have as much evidence as each other it would be hypocritical(sp) to believe in one and not the other. Yet the possibilities are infinite so there must also be contradictions between immaterial objects - if there is a contradiction one should believe neither option 'till one can be discounted...

Sorry if that was hard to understand, i'll put it in argument form:

1)There are infinite possibilities for immaterial objects.

2)There is no evidence for any of the possibilities.

3)With infinite possibilities there will be contradictions.

4)With no evidence to decide which is the more likely option in the case of a contradiction we should believe neither option.

5)There will be infinite contradictions in the immaterial world.

Therefore: We should no believe in the immaterial world.

Tools, reincarnation counts every living thing as having a soul. Its like "FRUSTRATION" the board game, if you do good things, you get to be a decent animal, like a Human or some of the more cunning apes, but if you are bad you will be DOOMED to be something shitty like a daddy-longlegs and end up having your legs ripped off. once you reach enlightenment you win.

If tree's are counted as having a soul then there are more than enough souls for humans, but even excluding that we have made several species extinct so thats gotta count for something.

the trick of a good religion is to sound as credible as possible without needing any proof.

quote:Originally posted by Daz:



1)There are infinite possibilities for immaterial objects.

2)There is no evidence for any of the possibilities.

3)With infinite possibilities there will be contradictions.

4)With no evidence to decide which is the more likely option in the case of a contradiction we should believe neither option.

5)There will be infinite contradictions in the immaterial world.

Therefore: We should no believe in the immaterial world.



I'll address your argument one point at a time.

#1 First of all, living in a finite Universe suggests that only so much is possible until it becomes unreasonable or illogical, be it a material or immaterial possibilty. So therefor out of the infinite possibilities for immaterial objects the majority of them can be discredited using reason and logic alone. Most of the rest can be proven or not using science.

#2 Your point here is simply incorrect. There are many forms of energy or forces considered not to be material such as light, radiation, and gravity with plenty of evidence to support them using present day science. So there actualy is evidence to support the possibilty of immaterial objects. Who knows, perhaps one day if we properly funded the research we could even prove the existence of souls but for now we will have to rely on faith which is enough for me.

#3 Of course there will be contradictions, but the question is do they have any credible evidence to support them. Just because there are infinite possibilities does not make every possibilty valid such as that of a contradiction. So in reply to this argument I will say it is possible that there will be contradictions but they must be validated. So far you have not shown any validation of contradiction saying that the soul does not exist. You basicaly don't literaly know if the soul exists or not so you are using your opinion based on reason and logic which I can do too to formulate my own contradiction against yours.

#4 Like I mentioned above, there has to be evidence to support a contradiction otherwise it cannot be valid. Therefor your contradiction without any validation becomes the unlikely option to disbelieve.

#5 All those infinite contradictions in the immaterial world must have evidence to support themselves as I've already mentioned. If there truly were infinite contradictions in the immaterial world then all we know about energy and forces in physics would be messed up don't you think?

Also Daz, your write:

1)Pain is an electrical impulse that our brain interperets.

2)After death our brain ceases to function.

3)The after-life involves either pain or bliss.

Therefore: there can be no afterlife.

I agree on the first two points in a physical sense however the 3rd is invalid because the afterlife is not physical. I know I mentioned that the afterlife can be either a hellish environment or a blissful nirvana, but try not to associate it with physical sense. The hellish environment will be like a nightmare which doesn't literaly cause you to feel the sense of touch but I garauntee will be very scary for those with bad karma. Fear is an emotion and not a sense. You cannot sense fear however you can experience it in the same way as a soul can in the afterlife. The same is for the blissful nirvana. It won't literaly cause you to sense any physical feelings of comfort but will instead be more of an enlightening, peaceful experience.

And finaly I'd like to mention that our soul is what makes us animate just like it says in that definition from dictionary.com you quoted. Without our soul we would be inanimate, lifeless, and without emotion unable to experience anything.

I do think it is real, and i also think souls can be 'born' because if that isnt possible, a sould could never exist(make sence?)

And earth isnt the only place were there is so called 'existance'.

Ever seen the end of Men in Black? Where earth is zoomed out till its a marble and a alien pick it up and put it in a bag.

That made me think, and even a little scared.

I dont believe in any god though, nor am i an atheist. I do believe in something else than just us being alone.

quote:Originally posted by Uncus:



True but this was not the only explanation I offered for recarnation.

quote:Originally posted by -Mephisto-:

Tools, reincarnation counts every living thing as having a soul. Its like "FRUSTRATION" the board game, if you do good things, you get to be a decent animal, like a Human or some of the more cunning apes, but if you are bad you will be DOOMED to be something shitty like a daddy-longlegs and end up having your legs ripped off. once you reach enlightenment you win.

If tree's are counted as having a soul then there are more than enough souls for humans, but even excluding that we have made several species extinct so thats gotta count for something.

the trick of a good religion is to sound as credible as possible without needing any proof.

Oh, so you seem to think that you can just cook up a religion from some recipe, eh ?

Furthermore, I disagree with some of your minor points : cunning apes are not decent animals and daddy-longlegs are far from shitty ones. Only a very few among them end up having their legs ripped off, i.e. if they happen to have the bad luck of having a close-up meeting with a young human or some such. Most of them, I wager, have a pretty good life, using their legs to the fullest of their ability.

Trees, furthermore, I don't believe have actual souls. They have life in them for sure, but not the kind of life which says "I am", or even "I think, thus I am". No souls for trees, and certainly not souls fit for humans. They are part of the plant kingdom, which, as we all (more or less) know, is vegetative life.



[This message has been edited by Uncus (edited 11-09-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Omikcron:

-------------------------------------

quote:

Originally posted by Uncus:

----------------------------------------

True but this was not the only explanation I offered for recarnation.



What did I post again ? http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif)

I don't know if this was said yet, but with reincarnation, souls are not seprate. Everyone/thing is one infanite soul and each induvidual is juat a part of it.

quote:Originally posted by Social Junker:

All this talk of souls and "new souls" and "old souls" isn't really necessary, in my opinion. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

The way I interpret reincarnation is simply energy being reused, over and over again. When you die, your energy is thrown back into the pot to be reused. So this whole "soul" thing is making it more complicated than it needs to be. I believe that the idea of a soul is just another manifestation of the illusion of self.



+1. i believe that our 'soul' is nothing more than the energy it takes to sustain us. when we die, that energy has to go somewhere. mainly thanks to christian teachings, when someone mentions a 'soul' pepole immediatly think of a ghost like apparition with a conscienus (sp?). perhaps this is not the case, and is merely us humans trying to see ourselves in everything we see. (like why, when we're kids, shadows in the dark look like grotesque humanoid figures).

quote:Originally posted by Daz:

No, common sense actually...before conception we were not alive, after death we are not alive...it would follow that the states are the same would it not?



Then going off what you're saying, we came out of death and expreienced life. So why do you find it so difficult to believe that we could not do this again? we did it once before, why not again?

You have to admit that there could be a chance we could reincarnate.

The stated argument is simply foolish, since every series--whether it be lives or whatever--has to start somewhere.

Besides, reincarnation isn't fucking mandatory--it is merely one of several options.

No one here said reincarnation was mandatory.

quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:

The stated argument is simply foolish, since every series--whether it be lives or whatever--has to start somewhere.

So what ? After it started somewhere it can go on, can't it ?