I read something I found peculiar

[fr0d0]

Yet if I used the word 'soul' I'm sure you'd have a good idea what I meant in many contexts.

I'm assuming you meant spiritual soul. The supernatural sense.

Is the soul supernatural? If it's so widely described and observed, this surely takes it out of the realm of 'super' and demotes it to ordinary doesn't it? There's nothing 'weird' about it. It's 'ordinary'. Look at the definition/s I quoted and tell me where you get supernatural from that.

& don't all other uses of the word 'soul' relate in some way to the religious definition? To me they do. "The animating and vital principle in humans".

It isn't something you'd seek to prove, just like 'God'

If it's the spiritual, supernatuaral sense then yes it is something to try and prove. It is a claim and is unproven. Evidence is required.

Why does it have to be something to prove, and how would you suggest anyone went about doing that?

Descriptions may well vary greatly across civilizations, but the fact that it's (the soul is) there in all of them is a strong indicator that something is tangibly present.

The fact that a lot of people have delusional beliefs about this "soul" does not equal it's existence. Evidence is required.

So the vast majority understanding it doesn't mean it is something? Maybe they mis-described it then. Maybe they're all wrong and you're right.

God is a formulated answer related to this condition and explains and satisfies this side of our nature

It explains the unknown and denies some answers that science presents. God is a huge claim that requires evidence. God is an answer I will never accept without evidence.

It doesn't explain the unknown, it explains that side of our nature. Like I said, it also leaves room for science to completely answer the 'how' questions.

It answers the 'why' questions perfectly

Anyone can answer any question with anything. Goddidit can answer every question just like santadidit can but it does not mean it's correct. God is a baseless assertion, nothing more. Yes it can answer questions but there is no evidence to suggest that it's the correct answer. No sources are pointing towards the god conclusion.
I can say the flying teapot answers the why questions perfectly, it doesn't make it so though. There's no evidence to support that assertion, just like god.

The God solution answers the questions perfectly. I know of no other workable solutions. Do you? You choose to dismiss this solution and will naturally substitute other rationalisation for it. That would be like me consulting a cereal packet for answers on science. Not too helpful in reality, but it might make me happy.

---

---

Okay fr0d0 here is my "unorthodox" interpretation of the passage in question as taught to me by those stupid fundamentalists. when god states "let us create man in our image" he is referring to his truine self, namely the father, son, and holy spirit. I noticed that alot of people that have posted here have used the words spirit and soul interchangeably as if they were one and the same thing but I was taught that as god is of a truine nature so are we. In pentecostalism we say that man is made up of a physical body, a soul "eternal part of a living being, commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; distinct from the physical part, and spirit "spirit, like soul, forms a natural part of a being: such people may identify spirit with mind, or with consciousness, or with the brain". Those qoutations are taken from wikipedia but they pretty much describe what I am trying to say. fr0d0 this part is for you and it is from Catholic reference.net I thought I would define the word trinity and when I looked it up I was shocked to see that it was defined the same way I have stated at one time to be my previous beliefs as god being three distinct persons only being one in plan and purpose.

TRINITY, THE HOLY

A term used since A.D. 200 to denote the central doctrine of the Christian religion. God, who is one and unique in his infinite substance or nature, is three really distinct persons, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The one and only God is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Yet God the Father is not God the Son, by generates the Son eternally, as the Son is eternally begotten. The Holy Spirit is neither the Father nor the Son, but a distinct person having the divine nature from the Father and the Son by eternal procession. The three divine persons are co-equal, co-eternal, and consubstantial and deserve co-equal glory and adoration.

If you don't believe me look it up clown on CatholicReference.net

---

Did you make a point or answer a question Chatty

I've declared that belief (from catholicreference) myself on here at least a couple of times. I also studied Pentecostalism as a member of the AOG.

So what is God's image here, as I can't see your answer.