I don't believe in Christianity primarily because of the brain

[Mister Agenda]

Yeah, good point.  Let's work on a definition before we can even talk about evidence in favor of such a thing.

Did you not read the article?

That was the primary take way from it, was a defination the article gives coinsides/works with the 2007 Theory of Biocentrism. The old term 'soul' is being described in the theory as it's primary biological life force. It is conscientiousness. 

That is your definition. This theory explains makes an attempt to account for Conscientiousness as a product of biology. which Robert Lanza, M.D., the currently Chief Scientific Officer at the Astellas Institute for Regenerative Medicine and Adjunct Professor at Wake Forest University School of Medicine.

For the purpose of this article drew parallels with His/our understanding of the word soul.

Both you and bobbie-value want to poo poo on this topic without doing any of the leg work.. Intellectual dishonesty anyone? How about a side of closed minded laziness?

Conscientiousness is being careful and thorough in your responsibilities. I think you meant 'consciousness'. If you define 'soul' as a synonym for 'consciousness', you have thrown out the part where it can exist apart from the brain. Additionally, there is no evidence for a 'life force' and biocentrism is a pet notion of Dr. Lanza's, not a scientific theory in the sense of: 'a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment.' 

Speaking of fallacies, if you think Lanza being an MD makes him credible, that would be an argument from inappropriate authority. He has no particular credentials that would allow him to have an expert opinion on the existence of souls. He draws on science that he isn't qualified to analyze (quantum physics) to reach conclusions that his field isn't qualified to address (the existence of life force or souls).

Do you think all a soul is, is consciousness; without reference to surviving the body after death? If not, it's rather intellectually dishonest of you to bring in Lanza's speculations as if they supported your belief in an immaterial soul that preserves your consciousness after death.

And what's intellectually lazy is grabbing any article that you think is on your side instead of troubling yourself to look for one that is peer reviewed, or even one that actually presents the evidence you're trying to say exists. On the other hand, you may have looked for one diligently, failed to find it, and presented this extremely weak substitute for actual evidence; in which case you're not lazy, just dishonest.