Is my "soul" me in any meaningful way, and why should I be concerned?

[looking_for_answers_]

Animals can act, think, and feel emotions. That doesn't mean they have a soul as man does.

Every human being is created in the image and likeness of God. Christianity teaches that God gives the soul.


I've thought a bit about cloning, artificial intelligence, etc. Do such beings have a soul?

If God so desires, He could give a clone a soul, since it is a human being, just one produced by artificial means. Whether or not He would do so - I don't think anyone can say.

I think it very unlikely that He would give a soul to a machine created by man. We can right now program machines to approximate human beings to a degree - but that doesn't make those things human.

Frankly, I think we are dabbling into things we were not given to do. And in the process creating questions with answers we do not know.

Man has ever desired to possess knowledge and be like God, tempted by the one who first had that desire. That we would seek to be able to do such things is no surprise.

The implication here is that I do not necessarily need a soul to be as "I" am right now. Hypothetically, my soul could at this moment be off getting tortured or could be hanging out at the heavenly bowling alley, could be in it's kitchen cooking some delicious soul pizza, etc., but I would not be experiencing any of those things. I would still be sitting here chatting with people on this forum. Supposing one day in my lifetime we invent the ability for me to upload my consciousness to a computer, this could very well be the case; the soul that was connected to my body would be blissfully off in heaven (I certainly hope) while my consciousness would still be in the physical realm, probably still having philosophical discussions with people online.

If mechanical me does inherit my soul, would my physical body then be soulless? Would the soul be connected to two bodies simultaneously? Would a second soul also "splinter off"?
If mechanical me does not inherit my soul, then this raises extremely troublesome spiritual issues; I would then, in my mechanical body, equally conscious, rational, and emotional as in my old biological body (probably far, far more conscious, rational, and emotional, but that's aside from the point) - but without a soul, meaning I would be able to commit horrible atrocities without fear of the afterlife.

 

[~Anastasia~]

The implication here is that I do not necessarily need a soul to be as "I" am right now. Hypothetically, my soul could at this moment be off getting tortured or could be hanging out at the heavenly bowling alley, could be in it's kitchen cooking some delicious soul pizza, etc., but I would not be experiencing any of those things. I would still be sitting here chatting with people on this forum. Supposing one day in my lifetime we invent the ability for me to upload my consciousness to a computer, this could very well be the case; the soul that was connected to my body would be blissfully off in heaven (I certainly hope) while my consciousness would still be in the physical realm, probably still having philosophical discussions with people online.

If mechanical me does inherit my soul, would my physical body then be soulless? Would the soul be connected to two bodies simultaneously? Would a second soul also "splinter off"?
If mechanical me does not inherit my soul, then this raises extremely troublesome spiritual issues; I would then, in my mechanical body, equally conscious, rational, and emotional as in my old biological body (probably far, far more conscious, rational, and emotional, but that's aside from the point) - but without a soul, meaning I would be able to commit horrible atrocities without fear of the afterlife.

Well, some of those things can't happen. They may never be able to happen.

The definition of death from a Christian point of view (in normal circumstances) is the separation of soul and body.

We are created to be body + soul. That is how God intended it. Death is an unnatural state for us. When the body dies, the soul is separated from it. The body lies in the grave, rots, is destroyed, whatever, and has no consciousness, because consciousness and identity remain in the soul.

One of the reasons souls are not immediately judged upon death is the lack of the body. The body and soul together - the entire person - conspire together to commit most sins, or support one another in becoming like Christ. Both are involved. Both are the "me" of each human person. So both together inherit the state they will experience in the life of the age to come. This is why God does not judge until AFTER the resurrection of the body.

This doesn't all overlay your questions perfectly, I know. We know of no way to strip the soul from the body without it eventually causing the death of the body. I don't think it's possible to strip the soul and the identity/consciousness apart from each other.

We do understand that the physical brain has a role to play, and do not deny that. But simply if we accept the Christian understanding of "soul" ... some of these questions are answerable, and some are simply impossible scenarios. Some we may not know the answer to. And while I understand the attraction there can be to sort of play with these things in our minds, the danger is in following our conclusions and believing what might be false, just because it seems true to our deductive processes. These are rather delicate areas you probe into, though.

 

[looking_for_answers_]

Well, some of those things can't happen. They may never be able to happen.

The definition of death from a Christian point of view (in normal circumstances) is the separation of soul and body.

We are created to be body + soul. That is how God intended it. Death is an unnatural state for us. When the body dies, the soul is separated from it. The body lies in the grave, rots, is destroyed, whatever, and has no consciousness, because consciousness and identity remain in the soul.

One of the reasons souls are not immediately judged upon death is the lack of the body. The body and soul together - the entire person - conspire together to commit most sins, or support one another in becoming like Christ. Both are involved. Both are the "me" of each human person. So both together inherit the state they will experience in the life of the age to come. This is why God does not judge until AFTER the resurrection of the body.

This doesn't all overlay your questions perfectly, I know. We know of no way to strip the soul from the body without it eventually causing the death of the body. I don't think it's possible to strip the soul and the identity/consciousness apart from each other.

We do understand that the physical brain has a role to play, and do not deny that. But simply if we accept the Christian understanding of "soul" ... some of these questions are answerable, and some are simply impossible scenarios. Some we may not know the answer to. And while I understand the attraction there can be to sort of play with these things in our minds, the danger is in following our conclusions and believing what might be false, just because it seems true to our deductive processes. These are rather delicate areas you probe into, though.

May I ask what specifically you think is impossible here, and why? It is considered very possible by everyone I have read within the fields of AI/neurology/philosophy/etc. I can't think of any particular reason it's inherently impossible, though I am definitely open to hearing arguments.

This certainly does feel like a "tower of babel" area, even though I don't think anyone working on this stuff has that motive. In fact I would say that most are non-religious, or in cases like Anthony Lewandowksi, literally worship AI as a god. Yes, literally, google his name... quite a disturbing rabbit hole, that one...

I'm not "attracted" to any of this, just to clear things up. But I 100% believe that the world is going to be deeply shaken by AI within the next few decades, like it or not, and I things Christianity (most spiritual beliefs, really) are going to be deeply shaken by it all. I would like to understand these things better before they happen, to help my faith, and it concerns me greatly that the church will probably not be prepared to handle these things

 

[~Anastasia~]

May I ask what specifically you think is impossible here, and why? It is considered very possible by everyone I have read within the fields of AI/neurology/philosophy/etc. I can't think of any particular reason it's inherently impossible, though I am definitely open to hearing arguments.

This certainly does feel like a "tower of babel" area, even though I don't think anyone working on this stuff has that motive. In fact I would say that most are non-religious, or in cases like Anthony Lewandowksi, literally worship AI as a god. Yes, literally, google his name... quite a disturbing rabbit hole, that one...

I'm not "attracted" to any of this, just to clear things up. But I 100% believe that the world is going to be deeply shaken by AI within the next few decades, like it or not, and I things Christianity (most spiritual beliefs, really) are going to be deeply shaken by it all. I would like to understand these things better before they happen, to help my faith, and it concerns me greatly that the church will probably not be prepared to handle these things

I think it would be impossible for your soul to be off doing something while your consciousness is present in your body doing something else. The non-physical part of "you" ... cannot be carved up into autonomous bits. Again, that is the Christian understanding. Which often has a great deal more wisdom than it might appear on the surface.

I wouldn't expect folks who are not Christian to think it impossible, if they have a whole other paradigm of soul/consciousness. Though the last time I checked (admittedly some years ago) they weren't able to produce much of anything in the way of observable, replicatable data that defined soul or consciousness. It tended to just be mostly speculation, usually based on what was essentially a type of (non-Christian) religious paradigm.

 

[Devin P]

This is the core of my question thought - at some point, if you change enough things about me, I would no longer recognize the copy as "me". So if my identity and consciousness are based on physical things like memory, thinking capacity, emotion, personality, sensation, etc., and not my soul, then why would threatening or rewarding the soul be meaningful?

Well, there's no such thing as the soul, but I understand your question.

Assuming you just want this question answered, and don't care about a soul not being something mentioned in the bible - because your soul would be I it's very essence you. So the reward or punishment would be occurring to the most YOU version of yourself - without worldly insecurities and pollutants.

Now assuming you want your question answered and you do care what's in the bible - when you're given your new body, you'll be the you God intended you to be - the versionof yourself where you inherit His promises, and you're free of blemish and sin. The reward is reigning with Jesus, the punishment is that you cease to exist.

Why in either scenario should you care? Because, both scenarios involve you. As humans, we're simply hosts. The only difference, is what you're letting host you. Light, or darkness. Realize that you were created to host light - God, but through the enemies deception and our ignorance, we host darkness. We're made and intended for light though. You aren't the darkness you're thinking will be changed - why am I assuming it's darkness you're worried about changing? Because, if it was light, you'd not worry about it, and would hope towards that change. But realize that the things about yourself that will change, are for the better. You'll be casting off corruption, for that which is incorruptible.

 

[Smylie]

May I ask what specifically you think is impossible here, and why? It is considered very possible by everyone I have read within the fields of AI/neurology/philosophy/etc. I can't think of any particular reason it's inherently impossible, though I am definitely open to hearing arguments.

This certainly does feel like a "tower of babel" area, even though I don't think anyone working on this stuff has that motive. In fact I would say that most are non-religious, or in cases like Anthony Lewandowksi, literally worship AI as a god. Yes, literally, google his name... quite a disturbing rabbit hole, that one...

I'm not "attracted" to any of this, just to clear things up. But I 100% believe that the world is going to be deeply shaken by AI within the next few decades, like it or not, and I things Christianity (most spiritual beliefs, really) are going to be deeply shaken by it all. I would like to understand these things better before they happen, to help my faith, and it concerns me greatly that the church will probably not be prepared to handle these things

Keep in mind that the people involved in the field of AI profit directly off the success and progress of AI. They won't say that it's impossible, they'll hype it up and make it sound like the next best thing so if it ever does gain traction, they can say they we key constructors in the movement. It's the same thing as people talking about living on Mars, etc. Who supplies the rockets? Who makes money from selling the rockets to get to Mars? Maybe this is a little out of the picture from your original post, but it's just something to keep in mind when listening to people involved in fields that work in designing things for the future.

 

[Devin P]

Understood. I apologize if that came across as confrontational. Part of my frustration is reading about transhumanism over the last few years, watching as new milestones seem to be getting hit on a monthly basis, observing the... strange places that many secular thinkers in the field get to, and finding that there are practically no Christian writers or philosophers who have touched on the subject. Certainly not to the depths that people like Kurzweil or Bostrom do.

"I suppose it depends on what you consider to the the locus of your soul."

Indeed. If I consider that at some point, it will be possible to create a non-biological human that can act, think, and feel emotions just like I can, then I have to consider that my own actions, memories, thoughts, and emotions are not seated in the soul, but in something physical. So if my conscious identity is seated in the brain, then why should I care what happens to the "soul"?

The one and most important thing about that non biological being that would be missing - the breath of God. God breathed His breath into His creation, so it wouldn't be the same thing. They would be computer simulations going off of algorithms and predictive programming, you're a being that can host the spirit of God, there's no competition.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Hello everyone,

I've been thinking a lot about the philosophy of identity, mostly in sci-fi ish thought expiriments. But the more I think about it, the thornier it makes spiritual issues as well.

Let's imagine this. Suppose I'm a criminal in the star trek universe and when I'm getting beamed to the courthouse there's an error that results in an exact duplicate of me. Should both be put in jail for my crimes?

Now suppose there were some errors with one of the copies. He now has the same personality, but no memory of the crime committed. Should only the one with memory be punished?

Suppose other things get changed as well. In the teleporting process, the copy not only loses memory of the crime, but other things as well. He no longer remembers growing up on the colonies on Titan, but remembers being adopted and raised by vulcan diplomats working for the federation. Instead of having my brash personality, he is much more stoic and thoughtful.

At what point is the copy considered different enough from the original to no longer be considered culpable?

Thing is, this isn't so unrealistic. Given a few years, many all of the cells in your body are swapped out. People's personalities can change drastically, under the right circumstances, and we can absolutely lose memories.

So why should the promise of heaven or the threat of hell even be meaningful? Suppose the soul is some carbon copy of my brain state that gets "frozen" at death. If I get shot in the head such that the part of my brain with memories that make up me are destroyed and I live in a hospital for a few days before dying, then will my soul be tortured for my sins, while not even being able to remember that it did them?

What if I accept Christ, but then am in a severe accident that makes me forget doing so. Over the next few years, both my body and mind change significantly enough that I can no longer even be considered the same person. The "new me" does not even believe in God. Did my old soul go to heaven and get replaced by a new, damned soul at some point? Was my unlucky soul saved at one point and then, due to forces outside of it's control (the accident) had salvation yanked out from underneath it? Will the body, which ridicules the idea of belief in God (much less the Christian one) be attached to a saved soul?

I could go on with lines of questioning imagining the spirituality of, fifty+ years down the line, what if one were to upload their consciousness to a non-biological body, and their biological body were to then die. Would they now have a soul that were in heaven or hell, while also being physically alive and hypothetically immortal? But that may have to be a different thread for later.

Ultimately it's got me wondering why I should even think that anything in the supernatural realm, like the soul, could even be me in any meaningful way. I still "feel" like it is, but the more I think about it the less coherent it gets. Would love to hear your thoughts.

Thanks and God bless!

The soul is simply another word for you, yourself. There isn't such a thing as ectoplasm that gets added to the collection of your cells to make you a person; instead, the collection of cells itself, as an active entity, is your soul.

Human courts would have to wrestle with your sci fi scenarios in human ways.

God will judge us with His mercy and His love. But I do believe all redemption, once granted, is permanent.

 

[~Anastasia~]

By the way, I can understand your concerns. I see overtones of something akin to creation vs evolution and how that has damaged the faith of some. Likewise other discoveries could have that effect.

I understand wanting to have a wider understanding. Some of the theologians of the first millennium have written on these kinds of things, but terms can get confusing.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

Given a few years, many all of the cells in your body are swapped out.

Unless you're talking about skin, hair or blood, or a liver that was halfway removed, then I don't think you realize that the vast majority of your cells stay with you through nearly your entire life.

I'm not talking about my hair though. I'm talking about the phyiscal parts that make up my consciousness and self-identity.

Brain cells are never replaced. Not naturally, anyway.

By the way...nothing physical gives rise to your consciousness. It only interfaces with your consciousness. Otherwise, every functional brain could give rise to your consciousness. None of them, excepting one, can. You can't name a single absolutely unique thing about your brain or body, and you, therefore, cannot name that absolutely unique thing that gives rise to that absolutely unique thing that you know as your own personal consciousness. That's why your questions seem so devastating, from your view. It's easy to beat down a straw man. It's easy to discount what you don't even understand.

 

[looking_for_answers_]

Well, there's no such thing as the soul, but I understand your question.

Assuming you just want this question answered, and don't care about a soul not being something mentioned in the bible - because your soul would be I it's very essence you. So the reward or punishment would be occurring to the most YOU version of yourself - without worldly insecurities and pollutants.

Now assuming you want your question answered and you do care what's in the bible - when you're given your new body, you'll be the you God intended you to be - the versionof yourself where you inherit His promises, and you're free of blemish and sin. The reward is reigning with Jesus, the punishment is that you cease to exist.

Why in either scenario should you care? Because, both scenarios involve you. As humans, we're simply hosts. The only difference, is what you're letting host you. Light, or darkness. Realize that you were created to host light - God, but through the enemies deception and our ignorance, we host darkness. We're made and intended for light though. You aren't the darkness you're thinking will be changed - why am I assuming it's darkness you're worried about changing? Because, if it was light, you'd not worry about it, and would hope towards that change. But realize that the things about yourself that will change, are for the better. You'll be casting off corruption, for that which is incorruptible.

This makes sense to me. However, annihilationism is certainly not the opinion of many of the Christains I've met. In fact I can only really think of one friend I've known who has talked about it from a believing standpoint.

I wouldn't really say I'm "worried" about any change. In this instance it's really just more of an interesting thought. To be honest this was partially sparked by an episode of Black Mirror that dealt with the concept of uploading consciousnesses and the potential for eternal, unending torture as a technological possibility (that show is by far the darkest tv show I've ever seen btw). It got me to consider if in such a world, knowing that I was still in a biological body, I would even need to be worried about identifying with an uploaded copy of myself (aside from being horrified from an empathetic standpoint). Could such a technology be used as a threat? If I identify with simulated copies of myself, then yes.

Then I realized that that was exactly what I believed was happening, just with hell and souls instead of computers...

 

[looking_for_answers_]

Unless you're talking about skin, hair or blood, or a liver that was halfway removed, then I don't think you realize that the vast majority of your cells stay with you through nearly your entire life.



Brain cells are never replaced. Not naturally, anyway.

By the way...nothing physical gives rise to your consciousness. It only interfaces with your consciousness. Otherwise, every functional brain could give rise to your consciousness. None of them, excepting one, can. You can't name a single absolutely unique thing about your brain or body, and you, therefore, cannot name that absolutely unique thing that gives rise to that absolutely unique thing that you know as your own personal consciousness. That's why your questions seem so devastating, from your view. It's easy to beat down a straw man. It's easy to discount what you don't even understand.

I'm not yet sold on this. I believe that my pets are conscious, but I do not believe that they have souls. Therefore I do not believe that souls are necessary for consciousness.

"Otherwise, every functional brain could give rise to your consciousness."
Why shouldn't I believe this to be the case? Assuming consciousness appears at some level of functioning, why would some brains above that level be conscious and others not?

Also, I'm very hesitant to say that tech can never be conscious, since that's something that could be very hard to defend in a few decade's time. And if a machine can look just as conscious as a person without being conscious, then I am forced to conclude that consciousness has no purpose.

 

[looking_for_answers_]

The one and most important thing about that non biological being that would be missing - the breath of God. God breathed His breath into His creation, so it wouldn't be the same thing. They would be computer simulations going off of algorithms and predictive programming, you're a being that can host the spirit of God, there's no competition.

Indeed. But if 50 - 60 years from now I can create a non-biological that is identical to a human by all appearances, and may even falsely believe itself to be human, then what exactly does the breath of God do?

Similarly, what specific functional aspect of humans do you think is philosophically impossible to replicate, and why?

 

[looking_for_answers_]

Keep in mind that the people involved in the field of AI profit directly off the success and progress of AI. They won't say that it's impossible, they'll hype it up and make it sound like the next best thing so if it ever does gain traction, they can say they we key constructors in the movement. It's the same thing as people talking about living on Mars, etc. Who supplies the rockets? Who makes money from selling the rockets to get to Mars? Maybe this is a little out of the picture from your original post, but it's just something to keep in mind when listening to people involved in fields that work in designing things for the future.

True indeed, but those are reasons not to buy into hype about specific timeline predictions. There's no real reason to think we'll never get to mars, but I am certainly going to be skeptical about Musk sending people off in 2023.

 

[Ronald]

Hello everyone,

I've been thinking a lot about the philosophy of identity, mostly in sci-fi ish thought expiriments. But the more I think about it, the thornier it makes spiritual issues as well.

Let's imagine this. Suppose I'm a criminal in the star trek universe and when I'm getting beamed to the courthouse there's an error that results in an exact duplicate of me. Should both be put in jail for my crimes?

Now suppose there were some errors with one of the copies. He now has the same personality, but no memory of the crime committed. Should only the one with memory be punished?

Suppose other things get changed as well. In the teleporting process, the copy not only loses memory of the crime, but other things as well. He no longer remembers growing up on the colonies on Titan, but remembers being adopted and raised by vulcan diplomats working for the federation. Instead of having my brash personality, he is much more stoic and thoughtful.

At what point is the copy considered different enough from the original to no longer be considered culpable?

Thing is, this isn't so unrealistic. Given a few years, many all of the cells in your body are swapped out. People's personalities can change drastically, under the right circumstances, and we can absolutely lose memories.

So why should the promise of heaven or the threat of hell even be meaningful? Suppose the soul is some carbon copy of my brain state that gets "frozen" at death. If I get shot in the head such that the part of my brain with memories that make up me are destroyed and I live in a hospital for a few days before dying, then will my soul be tortured for my sins, while not even being able to remember that it did them?

What if I accept Christ, but then am in a severe accident that makes me forget doing so. Over the next few years, both my body and mind change significantly enough that I can no longer even be considered the same person. The "new me" does not even believe in God. Did my old soul go to heaven and get replaced by a new, damned soul at some point? Was my unlucky soul saved at one point and then, due to forces outside of it's control (the accident) had salvation yanked out from underneath it? Will the body, which ridicules the idea of belief in God (much less the Christian one) be attached to a saved soul?

I could go on with lines of questioning imagining the spirituality of, fifty+ years down the line, what if one were to upload their consciousness to a non-biological body, and their biological body were to then die. Would they now have a soul that were in heaven or hell, while also being physically alive and hypothetically immortal? But that may have to be a different thread for later.

Ultimately it's got me wondering why I should even think that anything in the supernatural realm, like the soul, could even be me in any meaningful way. I still "feel" like it is, but the more I think about it the less coherent it gets. Would love to hear your thoughts.

Thanks and God bless!

Your science fiction hypothetical story is just that. The soul is the mind, will, emotions and the personality ( which is a range of habits). Its the invisible you, not physical therefore could not be duplicated. Your mind uses your brain to function in this physical realm. But when your physical body dies, you still have consciousness. If you are saved, your spirit, which is a compartment of your soul, is cleansed, regenerated to life and filled with the Holy Spirit, will go directly to our Lord and Savior, if not, to judgment and destruction. The spirit part of you would be the perfect you, without sin.
You need to stop with these weird philosophical thoughts and just read the Bible only until you get on the right path.

 

[looking_for_answers_]

Your science fiction hypothetical story is just that.

As of today. Let's check back in fifty years and see where we stand after quantum computers are an everday thing. Actually, let's check back in five years after Zuckerburg has his mind-reading phone:
https://gizmodo.com/facebook-litera...3.1747412331.1505318059-1673279382.1504834612

The soul is the mind, will, emotions and the personality ( which is a range of habits). Its the invisible you, not physical therefore could not be duplicated. Your mind uses your brain to function in this physical realm. But when your physical body dies, you still have consciousness. If you are saved, your spirit, which is a compartment of your soul, is cleansed, regenerated to life and filled with the Holy Spirit, will go directly to our Lord and Savior, if not, to judgment and destruction. The spirit part of you would be the perfect you, without sin.

You need to stop with these weird philosophical thoughts and just read the Bible only until you get on the right path.

I'm hesitant to say "these thoughts and questions are off-limits!" If I wouldn't say such a thing to a Mormon or a Scientologist, then I wouldn't say it to myself. Refusing to examine your own beliefs is not a healthy thing. And if you really believe that your current beliefs are the truth, what is there to be afraid of? The Truth is certainly not in danger because of questions like these.

The world is changing at an exponentially fast rate. Silicon Valley elites are pouring stupid amounts of money into tech for stuff like this and making strides on a near weekly basis (like AlphaGo, a computer that, knowing only the rules of Go, played against itself for three days and became unbeatable even by the world's champions). Stuff like "You need to stop with these weird philosophical thoughts" frustrates me. Why the heck would it be better for the church to wait until after we already have these spiritually challenging technologies to think about the implications? Would it not be far, far better to be prepared???

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

I'm not yet sold on this. I believe that my pets are conscious, but I do not believe that they have souls. Therefore I do not believe that souls are necessary for consciousness.

That is the definition of a soul, as far as I'm concerned. It is the thing which makes experience of any kind through any thing possible. Whatever else it may be is incidental. Without it, a brain is just a computer. Therefore, to say that they are conscious but do not have souls is inherently self-contradictory.

"Otherwise, every functional brain could give rise to your consciousness."
Why shouldn't I believe this to be the case? Assuming consciousness appears at some level of functioning, why would some brains above that level be conscious and others not?

It's funny how close you come to reading what I say without actually doing it. I'm not talking about some brains above a certain level being conscious and others not. I'm talking about seven billion human brains in this world being roughly equal in power to establishing their own manner of consciousness, yet none of them are yours, but one. They are all equally capable of providing the infrastructure for your human experience, but they apparently lack the one thing that makes it possible. That one thing is absolutely unique, in a way that no physical thing can be. You're totally lost on that concept. It's one thing to be capable of consciousness, but it's another thing to be capable of your consciousness. Until you understand the second kind, you'll never understand the first.

Also, I'm very hesitant to say that tech can never be conscious, since that's something that could be very hard to defend in a few decade's time.

You're hesitant to say it, because you have a religious faith in technology, and because you have no idea what power lies behind the nature of your own human experience. Without real understanding, all science fiction sounds plausible.

And if a machine can look just as conscious as a person without being conscious, then I am forced to conclude that consciousness has no purpose.

Your own consciousness will always have a purpose to you. If you accept the idea that the charade is just as good as the real thing, that the farce and genuine article are of equal value, then I have a 24-carat zircon to sell you.

You can marry a robotic wife, who acts and looks like the real thing, but she can't go to Hell and you won't go to Heaven.

 

[Devin P]

Indeed. But if 50 - 60 years from now I can create a non-biological that is identical to a human by all appearances, and may even falsely believe itself to be human, then what exactly does the breath of God do?

Similarly, what specific functional aspect of humans do you think is philosophically impossible to replicate, and why?

The breath of God makes you God's creation. He makes you after His own image, and then gives you His breath. This makes you able to host His spirit. A machine, no matter how much he thinks he's a human, will never be able to host God's spirit, but that is our sole purpose - to serve God.

The computer could worship God, but it's impossible to have His Spirit within it, and it's impossible to be saved, because it's not of God. There are however spirits looking to inhabit a body, the spirits of the fallen that could possibly inhabit the body.

 

[Devin P]

This makes sense to me. However, annihilationism is certainly not the opinion of many of the Christains I've met. In fact I can only really think of one friend I've known who has talked about it from a believing standpoint.

I wouldn't really say I'm "worried" about any change. In this instance it's really just more of an interesting thought. To be honest this was partially sparked by an episode of Black Mirror that dealt with the concept of uploading consciousnesses and the potential for eternal, unending torture as a technological possibility (that show is by far the darkest tv show I've ever seen btw). It got me to consider if in such a world, knowing that I was still in a biological body, I would even need to be worried about identifying with an uploaded copy of myself (aside from being horrified from an empathetic standpoint). Could such a technology be used as a threat? If I identify with simulated copies of myself, then yes.

Then I realized that that was exactly what I believed was happening, just with hell and souls instead of computers...

Yeah I know most don't believe in this, but the modern beliefs regarding eternal hell, is a Roman Catholic idea taken from paganism, and has nothing to do with scripture. There's only two hebraic terms that are used regarding our view of hell, and one that simply refers to the judgement of God.

Tarterus - which is a holding place for disobedient angels
Sheol - which is the grave. It's where all go when they die. Here, there is no consciousness, because all are sleeping.

Then, there's the judgement of God that all are tried by - even His elect. This is how we're given new bodies, we must go through this fire. This is what was referred to by Jesus saying our works will be tried by fire, and what was left was our reward. Its talked about in more detail in more places, but I digress.

Hell comes from the daughter of Loki, Hel. She was considered the ruler of the realm of the dead. Hades, which is a word in a translation of the bible as well, but too comes from paganism. The only terms in the OT original Hebrew, are Tarterus and Sheol. When the fire is concerned, it only ever talked about His wrath, the idea of hell is of pagan origin and one of Catholic influence considering historically they brought paganism into Christianity in attempt to make pagans convert to Christianity. This is how we get Christmas and Easter. The pagan roots to them is connected to sol invictus, the feast of saturnalia, and yule/yuletide.

I'm one who celebrates the 7 feasts written about in the bible that foretell of Jesus. He's fulfilled the first 4, but the last three He'll fulfill once He returns. All throughout the bible, God shows His disdain for worshipping Him after the ways of the pagans, which is all the modem church does today, so the fact that what I'm sharing with you isn't normal, is a good thing.

 

[Radagast]

the soul is some carbon copy of my brain state that gets "frozen" at death.

Your questions are all old questions. But you're assuming a materialist view of mind. This is not the Christian view.