"spirits"... human, the Holy Spirit, ghosts and demons: is there such thing as a spirit?

[alreadyGone]

 

In a (current) thread around the topic of blasphemy I was reminded of a question I've asked for some time now..

What precisely is a "spirit" ?

 

It seems that belief in some human spirit is nearly universal among Christians and non-Christians alike.

Seems even total atheists usually believe in and assume the existence of a human "spirit".

And of course, acceptance of the Christian God's punishment for non-belief is condemnation of a presumed eternal human spirit to eternal torment.

 

Is there any objective, rational basis for belief in any spirit, of any kind whatsoever?

As a human with "free will" (blame the Baptists for that one, not me) what if I just elect to have no spirit?

 

If there is indeed a human spirit, are we born into this life with such a spirit, already fully formed?

Most Christian belief seems to center on the belief that you as a human do "have" a spirit, and that it exists prior to your birth into this temporal world.

If this is true, where did this human spirit you now possess reside prior to your birth?

 

What is the connection between a "human spirit" and a "soul"?

Are they the same thing?

 

 

 

[TABA]

44 minutes ago, alreadyGone said:

Seems even total atheists usually believe in and assume the existence of a human "spirit".

Yes, but not in the same way that Christians do.  “Spirit” and “Soul” mean different things to different people.  I will sometimes refer to something as being good for my soul, or moving my spirit, but I’m referring there to the essence of who I am, my emotional being, which is inseparable from my physical self - my brain -  and which presumably ends at my death.  It develops gradually before and after birth and I suppose throughout life.   I wish there were words that captured this concept without implying anything that existed before conception or after death.  
 

44 minutes ago, alreadyGone said:

 

Is there any objective, rational basis for belief in any spirit, of any kind whatsoever?

Not for anything that exists independently of the brain, or that existed before or after our physical lives. 
 

44 minutes ago, alreadyGone said:

If there is indeed a human spirit, are we born into this life with such a spirit, already fully formed?

Most Christian belief seems to center on the belief that you as a human do "have" a spirit, and that it exists prior to your birth into this temporal world.

If this is true, where did this human spirit you now possess reside prior to your birth?

Christians have different theories about when the human soul comes into existence.  Some believe it exists from the moment of conception, somehow attached to a fertilized egg.  Others believe that God implants the soul at some later point in the womb.  If this were true, then aborting the fetus would guarantee its passage to heaven before it could be born and eventually “reject salvation” as the likes of you and me have done.  I’m sure there are also those who believe the soul is created at birth: in Christianity there’s enough ambiguity about key doctrines that almost anything goes.  

[alreadyGone]

Twice I've asked ministers "what is a soul? How do we know there is such a thing?"

 

I received only dissimulation in response, with a clearly contemptuous implication of "well duh! There is a human soul. Everyone else (other than yourself) knows this, and we all agree!

(Everyone other than you of course)

So....".

 

Which I could only understand as:

We're right, and we know this because so many of us feel the same way about it.

 

 

 

[Brothermario]

Hello, what you probably call a “newbie” here.

 

A very important person a very long time ago made this statement:

 

“God is Spirit”.

 

So why is it then that when a skeptic asks for “proof” of God existence, that skeptic will only accept physical proof using the scientific method? That when a skeptic asks for “which” God you believe in, that skeptic will only accept an intellectual name and not the one God behind all the names for God? And when does a skeptic ever accept spiritual experiences of God as anything more than synapses in the brain?

 

A skeptic above made it a point to say, something like, any “spirit” he would consider would have to be physical in nature and die with the body.

 

So, it seems, to answer a skeptic’s questions to the pleasure of that skeptic, one would have to be like that skeptic.

 

I know a person who thought the existence of God was so important to know for sure that he left behind his family, friends, cat, career, girlfriends, etc. and spent five years in a monastery in his twenties. He wasn’t disappointed. He found out for himself that the stories about God revealing himself to individual people who sought him were true. He gave everything to receive back everything.

 

Now ...

 

How can this person give to others the understanding he has that “God is Spirit”, when it cost him so much to receive it himself?

 

But what he discovered that he could share with others is that the meaning to our lives is to become “fully alive—to stay fit, to get educated, and to give of ourselves, for when we die, we will become like God according to how we become like God before we die. This is what it means to have a “soul”, which all living creatures who think and love have. To have a soul is to be like God. We think because God thinks. We love because God loves.

 

Of course, the skeptic thinks that our body, the “seat” for our soul, is who we are.

 

The person I know knows differently.

[Brothermario]

2 minutes ago, Brothermario said:

Hello, what you probably call a “newbie” here.

 

A very important person a very long time ago made this statement:

 

“God is Spirit”.

 

So why is it then that when a skeptic asks for “proof” of God’s existence, that skeptic will only accept physical proof using the scientific method? That when a skeptic asks for “which” God you believe in, that skeptic will only accept an intellectual name and not the one God behind all the names for God? And when does a skeptic ever accept spiritual experiences of God as anything more than synapses in the brain?

 

A skeptic above made it a point to say, something like, any “spirit” he would consider would have to be physical in nature and die with the body.

 

So, it seems, to answer a skeptic’s questions to the pleasure of that skeptic, one would have to be like that skeptic.

 

I know a person who thought the existence of God was so important to know for sure that he left behind his family, friends, cat, career, girlfriends, etc. and spent five years in a monastery in his twenties. He wasn’t disappointed. He found out for himself that the stories about God revealing himself to individual people who sought him were true. He gave everything to receive back everything.

 

Now ...

 

How can this person give to others the understanding he has that “God is Spirit”, when it cost him so much to receive it himself?

 

But what he discovered that he could share with others is that the meaning to our lives is to become “fully alive—to stay fit, to get educated, and to give of ourselves, for when we die, we will become like God according to how we become like God before we die. This is what it means to have a “soul”, which all living creatures who think and love have. To have a soul is to be like God. We think because God thinks. We love because God loves.

 

Of course, the skeptic thinks that our body, the “seat” for our soul, is who we are.

 

The person I know knows differently.

 

[midniterider]

5 hours ago, alreadyGone said:

 

In a (current) thread around the topic of blasphemy I was reminded of a question I've asked for some time now..

What precisely is a "spirit" ?

 

It seems that belief in some human spirit is nearly universal among Christians and non-Christians alike.

Seems even total atheists usually believe in and assume the existence of a human "spirit".

And of course, acceptance of the Christian God's punishment for non-belief is condemnation of a presumed eternal human spirit to eternal torment.

 

Is there any objective, rational basis for belief in any spirit, of any kind whatsoever?

As a human with "free will" (blame the Baptists for that one, not me) what if I just elect to have no spirit?

 

If there is indeed a human spirit, are we born into this life with such a spirit, already fully formed?

Most Christian belief seems to center on the belief that you as a human do "have" a spirit, and that it exists prior to your birth into this temporal world.

If this is true, where did this human spirit you now possess reside prior to your birth?

 

What is the connection between a "human spirit" and a "soul"?

Are they the same thing?

 

 

 

 

From a rational standpoint I suppose every human being is simply a bag of meat. I see no rational importance for bags of meat. Why must bags of meat survive to produce more bags of meat?

 

Along with that silliness "I" tend to think that there is a center of being called 'myself', but Zen says this is just an illusion. That there is no center of being called "I" to be associated with this bag of meat or the rest of the universe. Without a soul/spirit, this brain is just a microprocessor controlling the functioning of a generally useless meat bag. 

 

------

 

Is there any objective, rational basis for belief in any spirit, of any kind whatsoever? 

 

Is it rational to want to feel good? I think so. Believing in a spirit makes me feel good, so that's my rationality. Is there any physical evidence of something that is by definition non-physical? No. 

 

Some people have a deeply held belief that nothing can exist unless it is made up of matter. 

Others dont. Some people aren't sure. 

 

--------

 

Most Christian belief seems to center on the belief that you as a human do "have" a spirit, and that it exists prior to your birth into this temporal world.

If this is true, where did this human spirit you now possess reside prior to your birth?

 

I'm not sure. Where did all matter reside prior to the Big Bang? 

 

Good questions. Good food for thought.

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

4 hours ago, Brothermario said:

So why is it then that when a skeptic asks for “proof” of God existence, that skeptic will only accept physical proof using the scientific method? That when a skeptic asks for “which” God you believe in, that skeptic will only accept an intellectual name and not the one God behind all the names for God? And when does a skeptic ever accept spiritual experiences of God as anything more than synapses in the brain?

Even the most skeptical among us will, however begrudgingly, acknowledge the existence of fear, love, sorrow, happiness, leprechauns, anger, compassion, and other such non-physical manifestations.

[alreadyGone]

Professor,

There are leprechauns and there are leprechauns.

Can't quite trust all of them.

It isn't all one thing.

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

2 minutes ago, alreadyGone said:

Professor,

There are leprechauns and there are leprechauns.

Can't quite trust all of them.

It isn't all one thing.

 

I don't trust any of those poxy Irish pixie pricks. 

[alreadyGone]

3 hours ago, midniterider said:

 

From a rational standpoint I suppose every human being is simply a bag of meat. ...

I can only speak for myself, but...

[florduh]

Most people believe in a "soul" but nobody agrees on what it is. Somewhat fewer people believe in demons, angels, fairies, bigfoot, alien abduction and Xenu.

 

The point is that people make up all kinds of shit and expect everyone else to believe their shit. There's no reason to.

[◊ Weezer ◊]

It is strange how that universal spirit that God injects into every human can turn out to be so different in different people.  And how my dog's spirit is so different from mine.  We talked about that the other day, and decided it was beyond our comprehension.    MERRY CHRISTMAS!

[Astreja]

10 hours ago, Brothermario said:

...So why is it then that when a skeptic asks for “proof” of God existence, that skeptic will only accept physical proof using the scientific method?

 

Because that's the language my mind speaks.  To me, "spirit" is a meaningless term that is indistinguishable from fantasy, and I have better things to do with my life than chase after phantasms.

[Brothermario]

Thanks for your responses. Don’t be offended, but I could have written them for you, given my many experiences with skeptics who are first and foremost imprisoned in their heads and locked up by their prideful personality.

 

Our mind is not best served by only allowing it pragmatic mathematical and analytical limitations. No. Our life is far more meaningful than that. And our mind is infinitely more capable of achieving greater things than that.

 

Why is it that the idea of a scientist creating a single thought is utterly absurd, to everyone? However, the idea of a single thought being a greater reality than all the mindless matter in the physical universe combined is rather logical, to many?

 

Have you ever pondered that a mother holding her dying child is one of the greatest realities?

 

Allow me to give to you an example of what our mind is capable of when we consider scientific accomplishments, and scientific failures, with an open mind, philosophically trained.

 

Here is, possibly, the rarest metaphysical principle (such as, no two contradictory statements in the same sentence can both be true), a principle that evades scientists at every turn, causing them to only giggle at their limited achievements:

 

“No combination of lesser things can create a greater thing unless something even greater than the greater thing is added to the lesser things.”

 

Google it and you won’t get anywhere else but back to me.

[florduh]

Mysterious Ways covers a multitude of bullshit.

[midniterider]

1 hour ago, Brothermario said:

Thanks for your responses. Don’t be offended, but I could have written them for you, given my many experiences with skeptics who are first and foremost imprisoned in their heads and locked up by their prideful personality.

.

Some people are in intellectual prisons. Some are in religious prisons. Some are proud of science and logic. Some are proud to be servants of Jesus.

 

Our mind is not best served by only allowing it pragmatic mathematical and analytical limitations. No. Our life is far more meaningful than that. And our mind is infinitely more capable of achieving greater things than that.

.

I'm not sure how each individual mind is best served. I prefer not to limit myself to a material reality nor a biblical reality though.

 

 

[Brothermario]

“mysterious ways”, “Jesus”, “biblical realities”

 

The religious bigotry is strong with these ones.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

36 minutes ago, Brothermario said:

The religious bigotry is strong with these ones.

I wonder why that would be... on an EX-christian website.

[Brothermario]

I didn’t say I was surprised.

 

To be truly intellectually gifted is to train ourselves to always focus on the topic at hand, and to scold ourselves when we refuse to allow anything to change our thinking even a little bit.

 

 I cannot truthfully say that either of these things are present in the “thinkers” here, so far.

 

To make a very many claims against religion, all of religion, when in reality religions throughout history have saved humanity from itself in real and profound ways, is not a small thing, but a very great personal claim of authority.

 

Here’s a question: Where does this authority come from?

 

Sincerely, EX-wannabe

[florduh]

1 hour ago, Brothermario said:

I didn’t say I was surprised.

 

To be truly intellectually gifted is to train ourselves to always focus on the topic at hand, and to scold ourselves when we refuse to allow anything to change our thinking even a little bit.

 

 I cannot truthfully say that either of these things are present in the “thinkers” here, so far.

 

To make a very many claims against religion, all of religion, when in reality religions throughout history have saved humanity from itself in real and profound ways, is not a small thing, but a very great personal claim of authority.

 

Here’s a question: Where does this authority come from?

 

Sincerely, EX-wannabe

I don't claim any authority, it's people such as yourself who do that. All I ask for is some evidence to back some rather extraordinary assertions made by believers claiming special knowledge. You assert that religions have saved humanity and I need to see some evidence for that; from my vantage point I see religions responsible for wars, crusades and witch hunts that have killed millions and and to this day cause people to oppress those who disagree with their particular beliefs.

[Astreja]

4 hours ago, Brothermario said:

To be truly intellectually gifted is to train ourselves to always focus on the topic at hand, and to scold ourselves when we refuse to allow anything to change our thinking even a little bit.

 

That's a rather strange interpretation of "intellectually gifted." Sometimes focus is exactly the wrong thing to do, because it blocks spontaneous insight.

 

As for "refusing to allow anything to change out thinking," that's just plain silly.  Perhaps at a conscious level someone could attempt to hold on to a specific perspective, but our thinking is constantly in flux at both a conscious and unconscious level.  

 

All you seem to have brought to the table is an unverifiable spiritual experience resulting from a monastery stay.  Big effin' deal.

[midniterider]

5 hours ago, Brothermario said:

 

 

Here’s a question: Where does this authority come from?

 

 

 

Your mom?

[Brothermario]

So, human beings, who are always at war, as we seem to be on this rather insignificant .net, are mostly at war because of religion? Is that your great insight? And killers are mostly religious people? Why don’t you take a walk tonight at around 3:00am, and see who it is you will fear—religious people carrying a Bible or a Quran, or godless punks carrying a knife or a gun.  Reality isn’t very real to the bigot, only his bigotry. I get it. Someone close to you shoved a Bible up your ass, and now you feel “free” with it dislodged. But it’s asinine to blame the Bible and not the dumbass family members who didn’t know where to put it.

 

And when have I claimed to have had only a “spiritual experience”?

 

I thought I claimed to have discovered that the stories about God revealing himself were true. Read these stories again, and you will see that many of them were quite the opposite of an inner experience. There was this one story about a Resurrection that was particularly visible, and kinda changed the spread and character of Western Civilization.

 

And I guess you missed the part where you will have to begin your own story at the place you have been told to begin, not just sit there going nowhere and becoming no one in your imaginary brilliant mind.

 

 It is a big f...ing deal because the life we have been given and share with others is a big f...ing deal.

 

And you didn’t think I was expecting much from any of you, or really care what you think, do you? The greatest delusion of a skeptic is that people close to God are seeking them out to become close to God. Such an achievement takes far more than a conversation.

 

Anyway ... you can go back to playing Rocket League.

[Astreja]

12 minutes ago, Brothermario said:

I thought I claimed to have discovered that the stories about God revealing himself were true. Read these stories again, and you will see that many of them were quite the opposite of an inner experience. There was this one story about a Resurrection that was particularly visible, and kinda changed the spread and character of Western Civilization.

 

And your so-called discovery is indistinguishable from fiction or delusion.  If you don't have any testable evidence for this alleged god, you're just another wanker claiming to have some amazing Truth but unable to back up your claim in the real world.  Your fable is of no value to us.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

4 hours ago, Brothermario said:

Someone close to you shoved a Bible up your ass, and now you feel “free” with it dislodged. But it’s asinine to blame the Bible and not the dumbass family members who didn’t know where to put it.

This may be true for some of us; but none of us became ex-christians as a result of something so shallow.  We each came to the intellectually honest position of doubt as a result of thoroughly investigating the scripture, theology, and history of the church and the bible.  Maybe if you spent more time in the Testimonials forum and less time spouting off your pseudo-intellectual, while simultaneously arrogant, claptrap, you'd have grasped that by now.

 

4 hours ago, Brothermario said:

And you didn’t think I was expecting much from any of you, or really care what you think, do you? The greatest delusion of a skeptic is that people close to God are seeking them out to become close to God. Such an achievement takes far more than a conversation.

You're free to leave, then.