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.

[Clownboat]

I still cannot avoid the obvious fact that no scientist has ever tried to prove that electrical charges create thoughts without any input from spirits.

You mean, like this?:
What are thoughts made of? They’re really just electro-chemical reactions
https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask- ... s-made-of/

I assume you have amended your thinking.

Marke: Do MIT engineers suggest that the desires to mass murder innocent people are just bad chemical or electrical impulses? Are mass murderers innocent of mass murder because their chemical mixes made them do it?

I don't know MIT engineers thoughts on mass murder, sorry.
You did correct your thinking though right? You quoted my post after all.

[Clownboat]

Marke: Maybe you should first explain how you define the word "defining."

Please stop sullying this debate forum.

sul·ly
/ˈsəlē/
verbliterary
damage the purity or integrity of; defile.

[marke]

Marke: Humans cannot think on earth without a physical brain but that does not mean the chemical and electrical reactions in the human brain do the thinking for them.

I agree.
Now, will you address my post? You quoted it after all.

Marke: I thought I answered your post. Tell me again what you want me to answer.

[marke]

I still cannot avoid the obvious fact that no scientist has ever tried to prove that electrical charges create thoughts without any input from spirits.

You mean, like this?:
What are thoughts made of? They’re really just electro-chemical reactions
https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask- ... s-made-of/

I assume you have amended your thinking.

Marke: Do MIT engineers suggest that the desires to mass murder innocent people are just bad chemical or electrical impulses? Are mass murderers innocent of mass murder because their chemical mixes made them do it?

I don't know MIT engineers thoughts on mass murder, sorry.
You did correct your thinking though right? You quoted my post after all.

Marke: If engineers claim natural elements create thoughts in humans do they think good thoughts can be made to replace bad inclinations such as desires to murder by simply altering chemicals in the bodies of offenders?

[Clownboat]

Marke: I thought I answered your post. Tell me again what you want me to answer.

Certainly!

You said: "I did not say someone said chemicals can think."

I pointed out that that no one had made the claim that chemicals can think and noted that you brought it up anyway.
I then provided you with the definition for the strawman argument you were making.
I then supplied the post where it was made known that our thoughts and reasoning can be affected by affecting the brain itself.
"Swamp the brain with chemicals or inflict a sound blow to the head and see what happens to thought and reasoning."
I then pointed out how this shows that our affecting our brains affects our reasoning and no soul concept is needed to explain this.
I then explained how you failed to address this valid observation and instead created a strawman about chemicals not being able to think, which was something no one had argued for.
I then requested that you amend your thinking on this in place of offering logical fallacies (the strawman that was identified).

You quoted this post of mine, but failed to address anything in it (Chemicals, blows to the head and how souls are not needed to explain this). You instead offered up a logical fallacy, specifically a straw man.
It would be polite if you would stop quoting posts that you have no intent to address. I get notified when my post is quoted and it turns out to be a waste of time. You will never get me to amend my thinking if you continue to fail in pointing out where my reasoning fails, if/when it does.

I assume you now agree that a soul is not a needed explanation for anything.

[Clownboat]

I still cannot avoid the obvious fact that no scientist has ever tried to prove that electrical charges create thoughts without any input from spirits.

You mean, like this?:
What are thoughts made of? They’re really just electro-chemical reactions
https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask- ... s-made-of/

I assume you have amended your thinking.

Marke: Do MIT engineers suggest that the desires to mass murder innocent people are just bad chemical or electrical impulses? Are mass murderers innocent of mass murder because their chemical mixes made them do it?

I don't know MIT engineers thoughts on mass murder, sorry.
You did correct your thinking though right? You quoted my post after all.

Marke: If engineers claim natural elements create thoughts in humans do they think good thoughts can be made to replace bad inclinations such as desires to murder by simply altering chemicals in the bodies of offenders?

I don't know.
Have you corrected your thinking about thoughts now that your words were shown to be in error? Do you accept that thoughts are electro-chemical reactions and retract your irrelevant claim about what no scientist has tried to prove?

[marke]

You mean, like this?:
What are thoughts made of? They’re really just electro-chemical reactions
https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask- ... s-made-of/

I assume you have amended your thinking.

Marke: Do MIT engineers suggest that the desires to mass murder innocent people are just bad chemical or electrical impulses? Are mass murderers innocent of mass murder because their chemical mixes made them do it?

I don't know MIT engineers thoughts on mass murder, sorry.
You did correct your thinking though right? You quoted my post after all.

Marke: If engineers claim natural elements create thoughts in humans do they think good thoughts can be made to replace bad inclinations such as desires to murder by simply altering chemicals in the bodies of offenders?

I don't know.
Have you corrected your thinking about thoughts now that your words were shown to be in error? Do you accept that thoughts are electro-chemical reactions and retract your irrelevant claim about what no scientist has tried to prove?

Marke: I am not persuaded that we should believe that ignorant chemical reactions and not souls do the thinking for humans.

[brunumb]

I am not persuaded that we should believe that ignorant chemical reactions and not souls do the thinking for humans.

We know what chemical reactions are and what they can do. We observe and study them everywhere. Souls? Nothing but hearsay and stories. As elusive as unicorns.

[marke]

I am not persuaded that we should believe that ignorant chemical reactions and not souls do the thinking for humans.

We know what chemical reactions are and what they can do. We observe and study them everywhere. Souls? Nothing but hearsay and stories. As elusive as unicorns.

Marke: Researchers can study chemicals all they like but they will never be able to communicate with them except in their imaginations because chemicals don't have the ability to think and talk.

[armchairscholar]

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.

Throughout church history, the understanding of the soul has evolved in interesting ways. Early church fathers like Augustine were heavily influenced by Greek philosophy (especially Plato), which viewed the soul as the essential, immortal part of a person. Fast forward to today, and we see more holistic views emerging where body and soul aren't so sharply separated.
What's fascinating is how universal this intuition seems to be. Almost every culture throughout human history has developed some concept of a self that transcends physical existence. I'm intrigued by why humans across time and geography share this deep intuition that we are more than just our bodies.

Can we "prove" souls exist? Well, that depends on what we mean by proof! In my counseling practice, I've sat with countless people who've had profound spiritual experiences that convinced them of soul reality. These spiritual experiences aren't measurable in a lab, but they're deeply meaningful and transformative for those who have them.

In Scripture, we see the Holy Spirit described as bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God (Romans 8:16). This inner witness isn't something we can put under a microscope, but for believers, it's as real as anything we experience.

Different faith traditions approach the afterlife differently - Christianity emphasizes bodily resurrection rather than reincarnation. The hope of eternal life through Christ isn't just about souls floating around in heaven, but about whole persons being restored in what Scripture calls "new heavens and new earth."

I believe that faithand reason can work together here. While we can't scientifically verify spiritual realities in the same way we measure physical phenomena, that doesn't make them any less real. Some things are known through different kinds of knowing.