God and the Soul

17 posts / 0 new
Last post
Peter Wilding's picture
God and the Soul

Without the concept of a soul which lives on after death the God concept would lose most of its adherents.

Attachments

Yes

Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

LostLocke's picture
A good chuck, especially

A good chuck, especially Western Christianity and the more "progressive" versions of Judaism and Islam, but there are still some "old world" versions of Judaism and other non-Western religions that believe in a god/gods that accept that death is final and permanent.

Peter Wilding's picture
Agreed, LostLocke. It follows

Agreed, LostLocke. It follows then that the concept of the soul is not necessary for a belief in God. There are clearly other factors involved too. However I do feel that for many people the absence of a belief in the soul would lead to the irrelevance of a god or God. If there is no soul no judgment and no pleasure or pain to follow this life then many - not all, clearly - people would abandon the idea of God, or think of it as totally pointless.

What do you think?

xenoview's picture
First you have to prove there

First you have to prove there is a god or gods. Once that is done, you might be able to prove a soul exist.

Peter Wilding's picture
Neither can be proved of

Neither can be proved of course. I think if one could show the soul to be dubious then this might allow some religious folk to question both the soul and the relevance of a God under such circumstances

Sheldon's picture
"Neither can be proved of

"Neither can be proved of course. I think if one could show the soul to be dubious then this might allow some religious folk to question both the soul and the relevance of a God under such circumstances"

Claims are not remotely validated by being unfalsifiable, objectively speaking they are unsafe and an agnostic position has to be maintained. What I find surprising is how many people think agnosticism is some sort of halfway house to believing a claim. Unfalsifiable claims are easy to create, imagine there is an invisible duck in front of you, undetectable in any empirical way. Now you have to be agnostic about the claim, but would anyone believe it because it couldn't be disproved? Why then do apologists so often use argument that a deity's existence can't be disproved?

The rational position is to disbelieve any claim for which evidence commensurate to the claim can't be demonstrated. You don't need to 'know' it is false for this position to be the most rational, unless you want to believe in invisible ducks, or think picking and choosing which unfalsifiable claims you believe and which you reject is an objective rational way to think.

Peter Wilding's picture
I don't think an 'agnostic'

I don't think an 'agnostic' position has any value so far as God is concerned. Clearly God is logically impossible and hence an atheist position is clearly the order of the day.

Sheldon's picture
"I don't think an 'agnostic'

"I don't think an 'agnostic' position has any value so far as God is concerned. Clearly God is logically impossible and hence an atheist position is clearly the order of the day."

That would depend on how God is defined of course. An unfalsifiable deity would logically negate the possibility of knowing anything about it's existence or nature. Then again so would an invisible cat you couldn't empirically detect, and I wouldn't believe that existed without evidence either. Agnosticism and atheism are not mutually exclusive, since epistemology and knowing are not the same as belief or non-belief.

Peter Wilding's picture
God is logically impossible

God is logically impossible however defined. An 'unfalsifiable deity'? What would that look like?

MCDennis's picture
prove either that gods or

prove either that gods or souls exist. that would be a great start

Peter Wilding's picture
Impossible of course.

Impossible of course. Disprove them - in other words prove that they don't exist - also rather tricky though the evidence is rather stacked in favour of a disproof. I believe that getting people to think about such things could bring about an 'rational epiphany', and allow believers to step out of their petrified belief-system

Cognostic's picture
I have not met an adherent

I have not met an adherent capable of defining either concept. Given that adherents, nor even your own bible, can sufficiently define either of the concepts, how are they key to a reason for belief?
Ignorance is a better measure of belief than any magical concept.

Peter Wilding's picture
I'm an atheist. My aim here

I'm an atheist. My aim here is to try to figure how to get people to actually think. One of the blocks that believers appear to have seems to be a belief in - and the accompanying great fear for the welfare of - their 'immortal soul; 'something' that God and/or His Devil ceaselessly tug upon.

Randomhero1982's picture
I've always felt it's due in

I've always felt it's due in large part to a conscious or sub-conscious fear of death...

Pitar's picture
After reading a trending

After reading a trending interview on this site it would appear that atheism is still in the throes of defining. Some dismiss the concept of a god but claim belief in mysticism. I find that the epitome of all that is oxymoronic to atheism but, again, people are built fallibly so you'll have that.

On the subject of soul, the god-construct is the source for that notion. Remove it through atheism and soul goes with it. Mysticism, another word for metaphysics and it's imagined god-construct, portends to abort the god but holds onto the soul aspect as the vehicle for mysticism. How people assemble their psyches to satisfy their desire for instant answers and placate their fears amazes me. No one can dismiss it all under one name (atheism) and find the finality in its honesty. It isn't a hard concept but it is a hard truth. The latter has too much sting in it for most claiming to be atheists so they cling to vestiges of theism like the veritable candle in the wind hoping the light never goes out completely. Very sad. The indoctrination of the god-construct has rendered man into a poor tender of his own kind. He truly is pathetic. Only time will find him searching for reality and set his course straight.

Peter Wilding's picture
There are some atheists - I'm

There are some atheists - I'm not one incidentally - that believe in a soul but not God. The soul for many people appears to be a sticking point - they are terrified that God may tug on this in some way.

As an atheist who believes in neither God nor soul I feel that many theists wouldn't give two hoots about whether or not there was a God if they felt that they had no immortal soul. In other words: The immortal soul idea keeps them locked in petrified belief.

Peter Wilding's picture
I'm an atheist. My aim here

I don't think an 'agnostic' position has any value so far as God is concerned. Clearly God is logically impossible and hence an atheist position is clearly the order of the day

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.