Please prove that souls exist and that they are either resurrected or reincarnated

[Compassionist]

Most religions claim that souls exist. Some religions claim that souls are immortal and are reincarnated after the death of the body while other religions claim that souls are immortal and are resurrected after the death of the body. Can anyone please prove that souls exist and are either resurrected or reincarnated? Thank you.

[marke]

[Replying to Compassionist in post #1]

I believe that when you die , God takes control of your soul and deals with it at his discretion.
Also if a person doesn't believe they have a soul , then they can definitely look forward to a 'dead', end.
I rather look forward towards a living (and loving) new beginning.

However without a soul , I feel that a person is nothing more than an organic robot.

Thank you for sharing your beliefs. Can you please prove that souls exist and are resurrected?

Humans could not think and reason if not for their souls. How else would their random thoughts be arranged by ignorant and accidental chemical or electrical charges?

[Clownboat]

Thank you for sharing your beliefs. Can you please prove that souls exist and are resurrected?

Humans could not think and reason if not for their souls.

Now we must also thank you for sharing a belief you hold. Any chance that you have any actual arguments for the existence of souls?

How else would their random thoughts be arranged by ignorant and accidental chemical or electrical charges?

A functioning mind explains this. Remove such a thing and what you ask about above is then also removed. Do you have a better explanation that is not an argument from incredulity?

An argument from incredulity is a logical fallacy that assumes something is false because it's difficult to believe, imagine, or understand. It's also known as an appeal to common sense, personal belief, personal conviction, or the divine fallacy.

[marke]

Thank you for sharing your beliefs. Can you please prove that souls exist and are resurrected?

Humans could not think and reason if not for their souls.

Now we must also thank you for sharing a belief you hold. Any chance that you have any actual arguments for the existence of souls?

How else would their random thoughts be arranged by ignorant and accidental chemical or electrical charges?

A functioning mind explains this. Remove such a thing and what you ask about above is then also removed. Do you have a better explanation that is not an argument from incredulity?

An argument from incredulity is a logical fallacy that assumes something is false because it's difficult to believe, imagine, or understand. It's also known as an appeal to common sense, personal belief, personal conviction, or the divine fallacy.

Let's approach this logically and scientifically. What forms thoughts in the human mind? Electrical impulses? Do electrical impulses have the ability to arrange thoughts and reason with others? Are thoughts formed by chemicals in the body? No, thoughts are formed by souls which leave the body at death and leave the body no longer able to think or function.

[Clownboat]

Let's approach this logically and scientifically.

thoughts are formed by souls which leave the body at death and leave the body no longer able to think or function.

Well, so much for approaching this logically and/or scientifically!

What forms thoughts in the human mind? Electrical impulses? Do electrical impulses have the ability to arrange thoughts and reason with others?

Just for the sake of trying to foster debate, let's say 'I don't know' to each one of your questions and see where that leads us. Logically and scientifically of course.

[marke]

Let's approach this logically and scientifically.

thoughts are formed by souls which leave the body at death and leave the body no longer able to think or function.

Well, so much for approaching this logically and/or scientifically!

What forms thoughts in the human mind? Electrical impulses? Do electrical impulses have the ability to arrange thoughts and reason with others?

Just for the sake of trying to foster debate, let's say 'I don't know' to each one of your questions and see where that leads us. Logically and scientifically of course.

Those who deny the spiritual aspect of humans will be left without an explanation for the source of thoughts and logic.

[Clownboat]

Let's approach this logically and scientifically.

thoughts are formed by souls which leave the body at death and leave the body no longer able to think or function.

Well, so much for approaching this logically and/or scientifically!

What forms thoughts in the human mind? Electrical impulses? Do electrical impulses have the ability to arrange thoughts and reason with others?

Just for the sake of trying to foster debate, let's say 'I don't know' to each one of your questions and see where that leads us. Logically and scientifically of course.

Those who deny the spiritual aspect of humans will be left without an explanation for the source of thoughts and logic.

Demonstrably wrong, again...
One could deny the spiritual and then credit a functioning mind for thoughts (neurons firing in the brain which is what we already know is happening) which then form logic.

If we are being honest with each other, with this explanation, the spiritual isn't needed. However, if the cause was spiritual, we still have neurons firing which wouldn't be needed and that is a bit unnecessary and therefore odd.

[marke]

Let's approach this logically and scientifically.

thoughts are formed by souls which leave the body at death and leave the body no longer able to think or function.

Well, so much for approaching this logically and/or scientifically!

What forms thoughts in the human mind? Electrical impulses? Do electrical impulses have the ability to arrange thoughts and reason with others?

Just for the sake of trying to foster debate, let's say 'I don't know' to each one of your questions and see where that leads us. Logically and scientifically of course.

Those who deny the spiritual aspect of humans will be left without an explanation for the source of thoughts and logic.

Demonstrably wrong, again...
One could deny the spiritual and then credit a functioning mind for thoughts (neurons firing in the brain which is what we already know is happening) which then form logic.

If we are being honest with each other, with this explanation, the spiritual isn't needed. However, if the cause was spiritual, we still have neurons firing which wouldn't be needed and that is a bit unnecessary and therefore odd.

How do neurons know what to say in arguments requiring reason? Do neurons have intelligence of their own? If neurons can think on their own what then gives them that ability, random uncharted electrical charges?

[Clownboat]

Those who deny the spiritual aspect of humans will be left without an explanation for the source of thoughts and logic.

Demonstrably wrong, again...
One could deny the spiritual and then credit a functioning mind for thoughts (neurons firing in the brain which is what we already know is happening) which then form logic.

If we are being honest with each other, with this explanation, the spiritual isn't needed. However, if the cause was spiritual, we still have neurons firing which wouldn't be needed and that is a bit unnecessary and therefore odd.

How do neurons know what to say in arguments requiring reason? Do neurons have intelligence of their own? If neurons can think on their own what then gives them that ability, random uncharted electrical charges?

Is this you admitting that you were wrong as I demonstrated? Have you amended your thinking?
I would like to know before you move us on to another topic as I fear you offer distractions in order for you to maintain your preconceived beliefs even though they have been shown to be misplaced.

[marke]

Those who deny the spiritual aspect of humans will be left without an explanation for the source of thoughts and logic.

Demonstrably wrong, again...
One could deny the spiritual and then credit a functioning mind for thoughts (neurons firing in the brain which is what we already know is happening) which then form logic.

If we are being honest with each other, with this explanation, the spiritual isn't needed. However, if the cause was spiritual, we still have neurons firing which wouldn't be needed and that is a bit unnecessary and therefore odd.

How do neurons know what to say in arguments requiring reason? Do neurons have intelligence of their own? If neurons can think on their own what then gives them that ability, random uncharted electrical charges?

Is this you admitting that you were wrong as I demonstrated? Have you amended your thinking?
I would like to know before you move us on to another topic as I fear you offer distractions in order for you to maintain your preconceived beliefs even though they have been shown to be misplaced.

You do not explain how humans form thoughts and engage in logical discussions without the benefit of a human soul. Are thoughts formed by the wind? Is logic the product of random electrical charges?

[Clownboat]

Those who deny the spiritual aspect of humans will be left without an explanation for the source of thoughts and logic.

Demonstrably wrong, again...
One could deny the spiritual and then credit a functioning mind for thoughts (neurons firing in the brain which is what we already know is happening) which then form logic.

If we are being honest with each other, with this explanation, the spiritual isn't needed. However, if the cause was spiritual, we still have neurons firing which wouldn't be needed and that is a bit unnecessary and therefore odd.

How do neurons know what to say in arguments requiring reason? Do neurons have intelligence of their own? If neurons can think on their own what then gives them that ability, random uncharted electrical charges?

Is this you admitting that you were wrong as I demonstrated? Have you amended your thinking?
I would like to know before you move us on to another topic as I fear you offer distractions in order for you to maintain your preconceived beliefs even though they have been shown to be misplaced.

You do not explain how humans form thoughts and engage in logical discussions without the benefit of a human soul. Are thoughts formed by the wind? Is logic the product of random electrical charges?

Once again you fail to amend your thinking.
You said: "Those who deny the spiritual aspect of humans will be left without an explanation for the source of thoughts and logic."
You were shown to be incorrect. Have you corrected your thinking or found a way to challenge how I showed your words to be wrong?

Furthermore, even if we were to pretend that we don't know how thoughts work, that would not mean that there is a soul. Do you understand this?