Clones, Christianity and Souls (1 Viewer)

[Lord Tammerlain]

In Christianity would a clone of an adult human have its own soul?


With the state of science as it is today, human created clones of adults is certainly possible. They have cloned other primates ( monkeys) in Shanghai, so with any real attempt clones of humans is certainly possible.

With that said, if your stem cells were taken and used to clones you, would your clone have its own soul? Would it have its own soul? Would it share yours?


This is not about whether or not souls exist please, just a discussion of what it means to have a soul in Christianity.


To start off.

Identical twins are basically clones, with the blastocyst splitting a few days after fertilization.

If life in Christianity begins at fertilization, the blastocyst should already have a soul, so when it splits to create an identical twin, is the soul split, or does one of the twins get a new soul despite not being a soul created at fertilization

 

[Metanoia]

I see all souls as the same thing at birth……empty receptacles….cloning can only be physical imo….

 

[maquiscat]

If life in Christianity begins at fertilization, the blastocyst should already have a soul,

First, at fertilization, it's a zygote. Blastocyst is the stage between zygote and embryo. Secondly when the soul is part of the body is not any kind of universally accepted point within Christianity. We are as all over the place, as we are on many other details.

But if you are claiming that the blastocyst stage is when the soul is implanted, then no worries on twins since the division usually occurs prior to the blastocyst stage.

As for a clone, the soul is not part and parcel of each cell. Otherwise we would be destroying part of our soul everytime someone had an organ removed or limb amputated. Not to mention that we are effectively a new body about every 7 years or so, due to all the cells dying and being replaced. So a clone would get it's own soul, whenever that happens to occur.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

First, at fertilization, it's a zygote. Blastocyst is the stage between zygote and embryo. Secondly when the soul is part of the body is not any kind of universally accepted point within Christianity. We are as all over the place, as we are on many other details.

But if you are claiming that the blastocyst stage is when the soul is implanted, then no worries on twins since the division usually occurs prior to the blastocyst stage.

As for a clone, the soul is not part and parcel of each cell. Otherwise we would be destroying part of our soul everytime someone had an organ removed or limb amputated. Not to mention that we are effectively a new body about every 7 years or so, due to all the cells dying and being replaced. So a clone would get it's own soul, whenever that happens to occur.

I am not claiming anything, just wanting a discussion on when souls are created.

Conception vs when the separate life form is created.

In the case of twins which one gets thev" original soul

 

[Daisy]

 

[DCCougar]

This is not about whether or not souls exist please, just a discussion of what it means to have a soul in Christianity.

But your question about clones and identical twins basically reveals the absurdity of the concept.

 

[Visbek]

In Christianity would a clone of an adult human have its own soul?

I think that depends on what century it is. And what denomination you're in, or personal beliefs.

A clone still needs to be fertilized, i.e. you still have to combine the sperm and an egg. If you believe that the soul magically attaches to a fertilized sperm and egg, presumably the answer is "yes."

We should note this is NOT, and never was, a universal belief among Christians. E.g. in the Middle Ages, the commonly held belief was that it wasn't a "person" in any sense until the quickening, which is when the baby's own movements can be felt (usually around 15-16 weeks). There are also a very large number of both denominations and individuals that do not believe "life begins at conception."

So, here's a better one for you.

Let's say that we develop a Quantum Duplicator, which can scan an entire human body, and create an exact duplicate. Would a 100% perfect human duplicate, created without any fertilization, have a soul?

 

[maquiscat]

But your question about clones and identical twins basically reveals the absurdity of the concept.

The absurdity of the concept is irrelevant when discussing a concept within it. It's much like discussing character vs character ideas, which are popular enough to spawn a web series called Death Battle.

 

[maquiscat]

I am not claiming anything, just wanting a discussion on when souls are created.

It was meant as more of a generalized "you". Sorry, I usually note when I do that.

As to created, created and merged with the physical form might end up being two separate events, especially if one follows a reincarnation track, although the concept is not limited to that.

Conception vs when the separate life form is created.

Again we may well be looking at two separate things here. Plants are life forms, but do they have souls? And even at limiting ourselves to beings, what are the qualifiers? Given their intelligence, octopi might well qualify.

In the case of twins which one gets thev" original soul

That question presumes that the soul merges with the physical form prior to separation. If the event occurs after separation then both are original. But here is a related question. What happens to the two souls if a chimera event occurs after the souls merges with each of a fraternal twin pair?

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

It was meant as more of a generalized "you". Sorry, I usually note when I do that.

As to created, created and merged with the physical form might end up being two separate events, especially if one follows a reincarnation track, although the concept is not limited to that.



Again we may well be looking at two separate things here. Plants are life forms, but do they have souls? And even at limiting ourselves to beings, what are the qualifiers? Given their intelligence, octopi might well qualify.



That question presumes that the soul merges with the physical form prior to separation. If the event occurs after separation then both are original. But here is a related question. What happens to the two souls if a chimera event occurs after the souls merges with each of a fraternal twin pair?

P

Those are the types of questions I was looking for and are great

The chimera one is a fantastic question.

 

[maquiscat]

A clone still needs to be fertilized, i.e. you still have to combine the sperm and an egg. If you believe that the soul magically attaches to a fertilized sperm and egg, presumably the answer is "yes."

Actually no it doesn't. In the normal course of events, the half set of DNA from the sperms merges with the half set from the egg. But with cloning, the half set is destroyed and a complete set is inserted, beginning the gestation process. One might be able to argue it's the same as fertilization, but I would say it isn't

So, here's a better one for you.

Let's say that we develop a Quantum Duplicator, which can scan an entire human body, and create an exact duplicate. Would a 100% perfect human duplicate, created without any fertilization, have a soul?

Now this is a question where the potential duplication of a soul comes into play. I'll have to delve into this more when I get home.

 

[Visbek]

Now this is a question where the potential duplication of a soul comes into play. I'll have to delve into this more when I get home.

That should be fun. But unless souls are made of subatomic particles, which no one has detected yet, they wouldn't be duplicated by a physical copying device....

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

If I am a soul, what happens when I am copied

 

[Daisy]

If I am a soul, what happens when I am copied

Soul is nothing more than the life that a person or an animal has...when you're dead you're a dead soul...

Meaning of Soul in Hebrew​

Nephesh means breath. God created human beings and animals and gifted them His life breath.

“Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being” (Genesis 2:7).

Nephesh also connects with the lifeblood, as captured in these two verses.

“But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it” (Genesis 9:4).

“For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar. It is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life” (Leviticus 17:11).

When breath leaves the body or lifeblood circulation stops, the soul dies. Most people follow Plato’s dualistic view of “an immortal, immaterial soul distinct from, but enclosed inside the material body.” But the Hebrew translation considers it a psycho-physical unity. Based on this, we can conclude that the Hebrew soul is mortal, and life is the most important.

Nephesh also teaches us that the afterlife is the non-life version of Sheol, where people exist as shadows isolated from the Lord.

“Before I go to the place of no return, to the land of gloom and utter darkness” (Job 10:21).

Our Soul Is Made of the Breath of Life​

Let’s get back to the beginning to fully understand the power of the Hebrew word for soul. The world and other creatures came into existence with the power of God’s word. But The Creator specifically breathed into man to give him life. We are unique beings, created in The Lord’s image and likeness.

The term nephesh tells us more about the value and weight of our covenant with God. His promises are important because He made our lives significant.

“Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people. He has broken my covenant” (Genesis 17:14).
https://walkingcrossroads.com/hebrew-word-for-soul-nephesh/

 

[maquiscat]

That should be fun. But unless souls are made of subatomic particles, which no one has detected yet, they wouldn't be duplicated by a physical copying device....

Well let's think about it a bit. And I am just spitballing here, not making an argument. Is energy made up of subatomic particles? Can we copy the magnetic field or the radioactive emissions of an item with that quantum copier? If we can copy energy, that makes it more likely that a soul can be copied. I am also making an assumption that all memories are copied.

Now I am wondering on the nature of the soul as well. By some multiverse theories (and I use that word very loosely), you only have one soul, but it is divided up among all the versions of yourself across the multiverse. Of course another assumes that each is a separate soul and go to different afterlives. But it does make me wonder that if a quantum copier could copy a soul, would it be similar to Shadow Clones from Naruto? Per that show, what happens to the Shadow Clone, is added to the memories of the original person when the Clone stops existing. So would the experiences of the two quantum clones merge back into a single soul? This is even more likely if you subscribe to the idea that whatever/where ever the afterlife is, that it is outside our concept of time/space. Thus both copies would get there at the same time. Oh the possible variations!

 

[Visbek]

Well let's think about it a bit. And I am just spitballing here, not making an argument. Is energy made up of subatomic particles?

It's a hypothetical scenario, not a research grant proposal.

The idea is that every physical element is duplicated.

Now I am wondering on the nature of the soul as well.

Do you think that souls are physical things?

If so, then what is their mass?

 

[maquiscat]

P

Those are the types of questions I was looking for and are great

The chimera one is a fantastic question.

One of the key factors would have to be when the soul merges with the physical form. Even with Daisy's C.S. Lewis quote, that doesn't indicate when such an implantation occurs. If one even does. For all we know small bits of our soul are conveyed by sperm and eggs, and fertilization causes a blending of both into a new unique one. Which in turn brings us back to the what happens with the identical twins.

 

[maquiscat]

It's a hypothetical scenario, not a research grant proposal.

The idea is that every physical element is duplicated.



Do you think that souls are physical things?

If so, then what is their mass?

That is why I asked the question about how energy is affected with the quantum copier. Doesn't energy have mass. How is it affected by say gravity? Are thoughts things that have mass? What about memory? We might be able to say that about memory if we are dealing with it as purely storage in the brain. But thoughts? Are they energy, mass or something else altogether?

 

[Visbek]

That is why I asked the question about how energy is affected with the quantum copier. Doesn't energy have mass.

Energy does not have mass. I didn't think I would need to be so specific, but....

• Do you think that souls are physical objects? (That includes energy, which is a physical thing even though it does not have mass)

• If so, then why can't we build a soul detector?

• If not, then how does it interact with the human brain without violating conservation laws of physics?

How is it affected by say gravity?

FYI, energy is affected by gravity, even though it has no mass. I may be slightly off here, but: Gravity is the warping of spacetime in a way that forces an object's path to center(s) of gravity. Thus, energy can be affected by the gravitational field caused by objects with mass.

However, if a soul is not a physical thing, then it is neither matter nor energy, and it makes no sense that it would be affected by gravity. This is, to put it mildly, a problem for anyone who posits a non-physical soul.

Are thoughts things that have mass?

If you are a physicalist: Yes.
If you are a theist: No.
If you are an idealist: What's "mass?"

By the way, this stuff has been thoroughly hashed out in Western philosophy. Here's a pretty good start, although the author leans towards some sort of vaguely dualist position.

The Mind–Body Problem

Philosophers from Descartes to Kripke have struggled with the glittering prize of modern and contemporary philosophy: the mind-body problem. The brain is phy...

mitpress.mit.edu

 

[maquiscat]

Energy does not have mass. I didn't think I would need to be so specific, but....

I respond to the whole post when I get home and have some time. But wanted to touch base and note that the post was supposed to be "Does energy have mass?" I'm not sure how that slipped by me. Apologies.

 

[maquiscat]

• Do you think that souls are physical objects? (That includes energy, which is a physical thing even though it does not have mass)

I don't hold an opinion one way or the other as to what a soul is comprised of. But then I don't have to know what air is comprised of to claim it exists, and be correct. That is not an argument that a soul exists. It merely points out that someone can know something exists without knowing all about it.

• If so, then why can't we build a soul detector?

Who says that we can't? Can't right now, sure. But that does not argue that souls do not exist. Radiation existed long before we ever had an idea that it did, and then it took a while after determining it did to figure out how to measure and classify the different types.

• If not, then how does it interact with the human brain without violating conservation laws of physics?

There is no guarantee that we have discovered all of the laws of physics or the universe. Further, things that work on the macro level don't necessarily work on the atomic or subatomic level. Quantum entanglement for example.

FYI, energy is affected by gravity, even though it has no mass. I may be slightly off here, but: Gravity is the warping of spacetime in a way that forces an object's path to center(s) of gravity. Thus, energy can be affected by the gravitational field caused by objects with mass.

However, if a soul is not a physical thing, then it is neither matter nor energy, and it makes no sense that it would be affected by gravity. This is, to put it mildly, a problem for anyone who posits a non-physical soul.

Is gravity energy? Can gravity of one mass affect the gravity of another mass? And that is all within the bounds of the 4 dimensions of timespace. There is a lot of theory that there are other dimensions in play and interaction. It may be that we would have to have a way to detect and and measure the 5th dimension before we can do and learn anything with souls.

If you are a physicalist: Yes.
If you are a theist: No.
If you are an idealist: What's "mass?"

By the way, this stuff has been thoroughly hashed out in Western philosophy. Here's a pretty good start, although the author leans towards some sort of vaguely dualist position.

The Mind–Body Problem

Philosophers from Descartes to Kripke have struggled with the glittering prize of modern and contemporary philosophy: the mind-body problem. The brain is phy...

mitpress.mit.edu

I'll have to look over this later as I have more time.

 

[Gordy327]

"Soul" is just a silly religious concept. There is nothing in anatomy/physiology or in cellular biology that demonstrates an actual "soul."

 

[Revelation]

"Soul" is just a silly religious concept. There is nothing in anatomy/physiology or in cellular biology that demonstrates an actual "soul."

Biology can't demonstrate or prove what it can't measure or see, that is true.

but what about things that are beyond our Physical world, how can you prove they don't exist? i feel they do, i believe in the Soul and the Spirit.

we all have a Soul; Gordy your ARE a living soul.

a doctor noted that at death when the spirit of a person leaves a body, there was a small weight difference.



In 1907, Dr. Duncan MacDougall conducted an unusual experiment to measure the weight of the human soul14. He placed terminally ill patients on a sensitive scale as they neared death, recording their weight before and after the moment of expiration. MacDougall reported that one patient lost 21.3 grams (three-quarters of an ounce) at the time of death, which he hypothesized could be the weight of the departing soul. https://www.perplexity.ai/search/a-doctor-noted-that-at-death-w-Y0uvWuswSXusXFTubMJkfw


.

 

[Exquisitor]

In Christianity would a clone of an adult human have its own soul?

With the state of science as it is today, human created clones of adults is certainly possible. They have cloned other primates ( monkeys) in Shanghai, so with any real attempt clones of humans is certainly possible.

With that said, if your stem cells were taken and used to clones you, would your clone have its own soul? Would it have its own soul? Would it share yours?

This is not about whether or not souls exist please, just a discussion of what it means to have a soul in Christianity.

To start off.

Identical twins are basically clones, with the blastocyst splitting a few days after fertilization.

If life in Christianity begins at fertilization, the blastocyst should already have a soul, so when it splits to create an identical twin, is the soul split, or does one of the twins get a new soul despite not being a soul created at fertilization

I wondered about my starts, it's not the same as growing from seed. Plus the stuff is this three leaf mutated shit.

The soul of a clone would miss much of the joy of conception.

I remember my conception.

My mother always gets uncomfortable when I say that.

Still, the joy of a human life may be the same thing.

Soul is like water, he just goes and takes some from the ocean.

A lot of the specific issue is if there is reincarnation, sure you may draw water, but how does that specific soul get in?