Re: [asa] Event or process

From: Don Winterstein <dfwinterstein@msn.com>
Date: Wed May 09 2007 - 07:39:10 EDT

What is needed is a new perspective, as new as Gottfried Liebnitz (17th century+), who believed the fundamental atoms of existence ("monads," I believe he called them) were capable of perception and hence could be said to have rudimentary souls. Such souls by combining in special ways with other souls form ueber-souls (sometimes recognized by "emergent properties"), of which the human soul is the traditionally acknowledged acme.

(Or is the true acme the Church, which I claim God perceives as a soul on a yet higher plane?)

Whether any soul is ever "saved" or not is up to God, so there's nothing unseemly about postulating that God may ultimately extinguish most quark-souls (for example) or most of the souls of once-living beings.

While this idea seems weird by current standards, IMO it makes many concepts--e.g., human perception and consciousness, animal emotion and intelligence, and the ability of a spirit-God to influence matter--less incomprehensible and fits well with ideas about soul-evolution and soul-emergence. In short, the human soul has emerged continuously by evolution from lesser souls that preceded it. A lesser soul is still a soul.

An apparent consequence of this idea is that such a soul would seem incapable of existence apart from the body that gave rise to it. Its reality would be akin to that of the aether once thought essential for electromagnetic wave propagation. (This view, incidentally, is compatible with biblical teachings: God saves people, not souls. It is incompatible with visions of ghosts.) Personal experience makes me a bit uncomfortable with that consequence (i.e., lack of independent existence), but otherwise the idea has great albeit nonscientific explanatory power.

Don

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Carol or John Burgeson<mailto:burgytwo@juno.com>
  To: bullerscience@gmail.com<mailto:bullerscience@gmail.com>
  Cc: asa@calvin.edu<mailto:asa@calvin.edu>
  Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 3:04 PM
  Subject: Re: [asa] Event or process

  David Butler observed:

>>I do not at all see how a soul could be created by "a continuous function over a span of time." How could a human/man have a half of a soul? What would happen to a human/man that had a partially evolved soul when he died? If human is a "black area" and man is a "white area," I really do see any room for a "gray area." >

  I assume you left off a "not" in the last sentence.

  If an "event," then we must accept the fact that the parents had no soul and their offspring had one. Or -- the event was a wholly new creation of body & soul.

  ie. a "Progressive Creation."

  I am not at a point where I can reject a process answer.

  (4th post today so I'll go back in my hole)

  Burgy

  "The first key to wisdom is frequent questioning. For it is by doubting that we come in enquiry and by enquiry we arrive at the truth." -- Abelard

  www.burgy.50megs.com/scott.htm<http://www.burgy.50megs.com/scott.htm> (Review of Eugenie Scott's EVOLUTION AND CREATIONISM

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed May 9 07:36:03 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed May 09 2007 - 07:36:03 EDT