Souls in the unborn.

[Halbhh]

I appreciate the opportunity to explore this subject with you. I disagree with you on several points, but admit to having a far from complete understanding!


I didn't say physical, I believe our spiritual body parallels our physical body.

But human reproduction doesn't just produce physical likeness to your ancestry does it?
My father's family were all musical. My brother very strongly inherited that gift, whereas me and my sister have little noticeable music talent. I did however get my father's practical talents in engineering etc.
I also inherited ginger hair until it turned white in my early 50s.
Basically, nobody argues that both physical and non physical characteristics are inherited from our parents.

Science has even discovered the methodology of DNA division and reassembly that creates the offspring with part of each parent, but it only proved what everybody already knew.

However Christians watch the exact same thing happening with mental characteristics and musical gifts inherited from our parents, and then proceed to deny its reality!

I'm not challenging that verse one bit. Clearly the human flesh rots in the ground as I keep pointing out. But neither your nor my flesh came directly from the ground did we. Adam was made from the mud, but we came from our mother's wombs, which I can assure you were not filled with mud!

Obviously, we ultimately came from the mud as offspring of Adam, but in no way was that directly so.
If that fact is true regarding our physical flesh, then we must allow the same logic for the human spirit and human soul! ie. The soul/spirit entered us from God but routed via Adam.
Thus as Ecclesiastes states, the dust/human body returns to the earth, and our spirit returns to God.

Ah, part of how we may have trouble is language at times.

Just how a word is being used and what meaning is intended.

We are "dust", aka 'mud' -- water and Earth -- in our physical body means that very literally and exactly and completely our physical bodies are made of the atoms/molecules very literally and only from Earth. We are Earth, physically, in that we are the physical atoms that come from the Earth in our temporary flesh body. So, to say we are made of 'mud' was intended simply to say we are physically, literally the 'dust' of the Earth, on the body side, and wonderfully so.

Wonderfully. As I wrote above: a "brilliant organization of elements". Praise the Lord.

When I say "mud" I did not mean disorganized mere mud like in the back yard, but perhaps should only say "dust" to help avoid confusing communication? Would that be more clear? Also, to avoid confusion, would it help to point out that we totally agree that mere physically inherited traits are a given, and all recognize that inheritance, and it's not at all in dispute here in this thread anywhere (so far as I know)?

But the question that came up to me is whether you meant to say anywhere that our souls are physically inherited through atoms/molecules, through dust?

And what about our individual spirits? Physically inherited????

I'm trying to understand if you meant that, and how it would even work.

If so, does that mean one or both grow then like plants, in that theory?

Just asking to try to understand the theory.

-----------
Also, separately (not about just this one question, but several), please see post #99.

 

[Francis Drake]

Ah, part of how we may have trouble is language at times.

Just how a word is being used and what meaning is intended.

We are "dust", aka 'mud' -- water and Earth -- in our physical body means that very literally and exactly and completely our physical bodies are made of the atoms/molecules very literally and only from Earth. We are Earth, physically, in that we are the physical atoms that come from the Earth in our temporary flesh body. So, to say we are made of 'mud' was intended simply to say we are physically, literally the 'dust' of the Earth, on the body side, and wonderfully so.

Wonderfully. As I wrote above: a "brilliant organization of elements". Praise the Lord.

When I say "mud" I did not mean disorganized mere mud like in the back yard, but perhaps should only say "dust" to help avoid confusing communication? Would that be more clear? Also, to avoid confusion, would it help to point out that we totally agree that mere physically inherited traits are a given, and all recognize that inheritance, and it's not at all in dispute here in this thread anywhere (so far as I know)?

Mud, dust etc.
Obviously very organised mud, but becoming very disorganised soon after death.

But the question that came up to me is whether you meant to say anywhere that our souls are physically inherited through atoms/molecules, through dust?

Nope, again and again I've emphasised that our souls/spirits are NOT part of the physical body. The whole of my last post surely made that clear?

And what about our individual spirits? Physically inherited????

Yes, as I've constantly restated.

I'm trying to understand if you meant that, and how it would even work.

I believe that our spirit man parallels our physical body, ie, arms legs etc. Anyone who has a NDE or other out of body experience knows this. ie. He sees himself as a normal body.
Here's Paul.-
2Cor12v2 I know a man in Christ, fourteen years ago—whether in the body, I do not know, or out of the body, I do not know;
If Paul didn't know whether he was taken to heaven in his spirit alone, or it was a bodily experience, then his human spirit must look like his body.
God knows—such a man, having been caught up to the third heaven. 3And I know such a man—whether in the body or out of the body, I do not know; God knows— 4that he was caught up into Paradise, and he heard inexpressible words, not being permitted to man to speak.
My wife was taken up to heaven in her spirit as a child, she would say the same.

Thus when our parent's physical DNA split to make each new child, somehow, their spirit DNA also divided and reunited to make a new spiritual child.

If so, does that mean one or both grow then like plants, in that theory?

Dunno, lol.
Although I suspect so.

Just asking to try to understand the theory.

You're welcome.
But you've never answered my points as to how the non physical characteristics get passed down, if there is no non physical (ie. soul/spirit) inheritance going on.

 

[Francis Drake]

Yes, I was concerned once or twice if I discuss when the individual spirit God gives us is put into the physical body, that someone could mistake that as somehow endorsing abortion (!!??). Of course, as you can surmise with a hint or something, if I think the individual spirit is put in a physical body, then....of course I think the rule "do not kill" has not merely a pleasant peaceful aspect, but is really from God, because it truly matters in a way that is profound -- God never give us trivial rules that do not matter.

Please help me though -- did it even make you wonder for a minute if I endorse abortion if I am discussing when the spirit enters the body? I don't want to accidentally seem to endorse what I'm opposed to, and don't even want a small risk of that, of course.

Whether you like it or not, you invite that accusation.
In fact, the idea of God adding a spirit sometime after conception is just the sort of theology that abortionists would love to hear from Christians, as it heartily justifies abortion.

What is under discussion (indirectly at the moment) is what about the 1/2 of all conceptions that are naturally aborted by the mother's body, by nature, naturally -- thus by God's design?

Absolutely not. That some foetuses are naturally aborted is just a result of the fall.

It may seem esoteric, but it matters because of fraught situations like this:
What if a woman is raped, and does not know whether she is pregnant (this cannot be determined for a few weeks I think), and then she takes a morning after pill to prevent the rapist from possibly impregnating her?

Again, just a result of the fall.

Is "conception" itself merely our very modern, new, scientific understanding since the 1970s only? -- where we have high power microscopes videos that have in recent decades caused us to newly learn that the sperm actually penetrates the egg well before the fertilized egg gets implanted?

No. Long before science proved anything, people understood enough to know the hit or miss nature of conception.

Or is instead "conception" something that we don't determine, but instead God determines?

Again no. In the normal life, conception depends on many random and none random things.

And then is the true conception actually after a viable fertilized egg (only some fertilized eggs are actually physically viable, by nature, God's design) is successfully implanted and begins to draw nourishment? Or when?

Why ask this as obviously conception requires a viable egg and viable sperm. Just as survival of that conception to full term also requires a good healthy womb.

It's a new, modern way to define 'conception' that we came up with in recent decades, only, I think, to understand it's a sperm-fertilized egg before the woman is pregnant (before implantation in the uterous).

I don't think its new at all.
Farmers would know thousands of years ago that a minute lamb in its mother's womb was still a lamb.
Until the propaganda of abortionists, mothers knew there was life inside them, long before it showed a bulge.
Some mothers even knew they had conceived the moment after intercourse. ie, they witness new life.

It's seems it is speculation to say when the spirit is put in the dust body, since we are not told in scripture.

So why keep insisting that the spirit gets added at any time, rather than just accepting that it comes with the body from the beginning?

I keep asking, but you haven't answered how our non physical traits are passed on, if there is no direct spirit/soul inheritance from our parents.

 

[Halbhh]

Except that we both think abortion is wrong generally, we seem a lot of trouble communicating.
We use words very differently. You shouldn't think you've understood things I've said above, and you can blame me for that if you like, but I do think the Tower of Babel is still affecting mankind.

Have a good evening. God bless.

 

[Francis Drake]

Except that we both think abortion is wrong generally, we seem a lot of trouble communicating.
We use words very differently. You shouldn't think you've understood things I've said above, and you can blame me for that if you like, but I do think the Tower of Babel is still affecting mankind.

Have a good evening. God bless.

am bkhod.
kiydbj khkh khbuhd touhvnn qljhoh qwerty.

There, that should be crystal clear.