Nope, because a soul has conscious and can move freely from the components of evolution. The cells that evolve to a monkey may of had a soul until the fork splits and follows the homosapien.
You lost me again. Sounds like you're saying something like only species in the direct lineage of homo sapiens had souls, or maybe individual animals of species in the direct lineage of homo sapiens somehow carried a single soul to the first homo sapien or something along those lines. Regardless, aren't you trying to accomplish something that is unnecessarily complicated here? You think the soul is not a physical thing. Why does it have to have anything to do with evolution, which is basically just a description of physical change in life forms over time?
Because I keep telling you that God is the soul. Our soul is God. So the conscious of God has fined tuned evolution, meaning he was part of the entire evolutionary process. As in, the random "mutations" weren't random at all. And then the moment the species was ready, God gave us consciousness. You are saying that God started the Big Bang, then after all the mutations were made without his control, then added a soul. This is what I disagree with. I think he was involved since day one from the first cell to the final product. I also love how you use "magic" as a dig. Are you aware that primitive man though Lightning was magic? The sun? Even flying? Science proved it wasn't magic at all. Your rant about it being "magic" is explaining you are no different than primitive man.
Neither of us have any idea what you mean by this, and it doesn't attempt to answer the question of what's the benefit for a Christian to insist souls were connected to the evolutionary process, when they don't have to be and it's logically much simpler if they weren't. this doesn't conflict with anything I've said about what Christians tend to believe. I said no such thing. In fact I said in my experience Christians tend to believe God has been meddling in and controlling the evolutionary process all along. you missed the point of the magic thing, which was people who make metaphysical claims generally don't have any kind of firm grasp of what they are claiming. when you say souls are real you are psychologically referring to something that is extremely vague and undefined to you (obviously from your conflicting statements about souls).
Bro, we are talking about the "Christian view". Sorry, but your naturalism does not apply. And the soul (part of God) was given to us and used throughout the entire process. You can keep trying to come back and say how "logical" your idea is; its not what I believe. End of story... Again, we are discussing what the theist views, not what you think is right. Well I must have misunderstood you then. My bad There are no conflicting definition of "souls". I say that souls are part of God. Show me were that contradicts the Bible? Look up "The Trinity" and get back to me. God is in three parts. God the father, the son and the holy spirit (our soul).
Given to us makes sense. "Used throughout the entire process" seems odd and unnecessary. The entire process prior to the emergence of homo sapiens could have simply been God manipulating DNA in animals and controlling their physical environment. That's why saying animals don't have souls, then talking about a soul as part of evolution prior to the existence of humans seems contradictory.
Sounds like you are about to make an argument for Buddhism : ) A person is obviously connected to their offspring in many ways. As to being an *actual* part of them - physically no. "Spiritually" for Christians, I wouldn't know how to interpret the Bible to say anything other than souls are an individual thing. They certainly seem to have individual fates.
I take your words literally, Mags. I think you mean connected, not literally physically a part of me. Or you might mean metaphysically a part of me, which for the sake of argument I wouldn't dispute.
No they do not contemporaneously share body cells. You mean something other than what you are asking.
Different question. Yes, an offspring's parents can (potentially) be determined by its DNA - because it is a copy of some combination of its parents DNA.
So physically, a part of the father is passed down to the offspring? The question isn't different at all.
Well, you see Mags, when a man and a woman love each other very much, the man puts his penis... ... Do you understand all that? barfo
