Dear God, Eve what have you done?

[Drich]

Yes, pretending I didn't bring up the things I did is a much easier thing to do than refuting them. Your failure to do so has been noted.

From what I saw you said nothing of substance, just empty conjecture. Now if you want me to revisit something specifically just highlight it.

Right, so if you can't detect it, how did you confirm that it's there at all?

As mentioned in the artical found in psychology today, the soul is not a physical object, but a word that describes self awareness.

Yeah, what you actually linked to was an article filled with vague ramblings, the only thing close to a scientific reference being an offhand remark about the double slit experiment, which basically just asserts "quantum mechanics is weird, therefore a soul, maybe." It doesn't state what you say it does, so let's dial back on what "science has identified," hmm? This is either dishonesty, or wishful thinking on your part.

What you seem to be looking for is scientific proof that a soul exists as you currently understand the existance of a soul. which by all reason and measure of logic is a fools errand.
(But it does support my assertion a few posts back that people like you first come up with a concept and then look for proof to support it rather than honestly gather information and form a conclusion to where ever it leads.)
In the above mentioned artical the soul is identified as a catch all term for self awareness, it even goes as far as seperating itself from the 'spiritual' defination.. But it seems you did not read the whole artical. I guess I am not the only one guilty of that.

Right, so how did you determine there was a point that the soul was bred into mankind.

When the bible identified Adam "as being a living soul." and through the oral tradition of the Jews that says the soul of man is given by the father, and the body or blood of man is given by the mother.

Because before the introduction of the Soul into the population of Man, 'Man' was nothing more than a platoon of up right monkeys. The bible does not describe the behaviorial patterns of any animals except in passing.

Okay, so first of all, demonstrably wrong: mankind had religions, agriculture, and full human-ness six thousand years ago. And again, "it doesn't say it didn't happen," is not evidence that it did happen.

is it your contention that religion=souls?
I did not say man was a blank slate, I said man was little more than a troop of monkeys. meaning they were without a soul, not without minds of their own.

Yeah, the bible I just read says Cain went to live in "the land of Nod." There's no reference to a city, and "land," can just be.... you know, land.

Where he built the city of Enoch... Do you know the difference between a city and a house? do you know the difference between a house and a villiage, a village and a town, and town and a city? aside from the size and shape of the buildings POPULATION is what seperates these communities.

And pointing out a problem with the bible's logic does not mean your workaround is true: it just means there's a problem with the bible's logic.

So it is you estimation that in 6000 years of telling and retelling this story no one has caught this error aside from you and your peers?

Or was it that pervious generations simply understood the situation more completely?

What you just committed is an argument from ignorance, but funnily enough, I've argued with christians who are happy to admit that the human species was begat through incest to begin with, because Adam and Eve had "perfect genes," so... let's not pretend you've found the only truth, here.

They are only responsiable for what they understand.

Is that the reason you believe it?

I believe because I stood before Christ, and went though judgement, and for a brief moment felt the love and completeness that welcomed all who believe. I want to experience that love and completeness for eternity.

..and if I can using science then what?

You haven't so far. If you do, that'll lead to follow on investigations on my part, certainly.

that wasn't the question now was it?