> The problem I see here is that according to what I have heard, for the
>embryo to go on to be a human being, it has to implant in the wall of the
>uterus. Otherwise, it just gets washed out with the next menstrual
>flow-something that happens quite often. Do those embryos have fully formed
They only don't implant if there is something biologically wrong with them
and first trimester spontaneous abortions are quite high due to biological
Here we are talking about two different points of infusion, the point of
conception as a possible entry point for the infusion of a soul or when the
embryo is a human being as the entry point of infusion.
How to determine if it is human and should have a soul. If we work
backwards: does a newborn have a soul?; does a premature but viable baby
have a soul?; does a fetus with a heartbeat have a soul?; does a fetus with
a nervous system have a soul?; does the embryo have a soul?; how about a
morula or a blastula or an egg immediately post fertilization? Everyone
will make their own breakpoint somewhere in this scheme and it seems too
fuzzy for me.
My gut feeling says point of conception for infusion. That's a very clean
time for the infusion. Those embryos that don't make it, their souls go to
the Father, no different than any other soul that dies very young.
Conception also makes sense because of nature and nurture, both impact
development from the moment of conception. Thus the soul as well as the
biological part of us is exposed simultaneously to everything that makes us
the unique individuals that we are.
Another point of distinction. Is the soul the same as the Holy Spirit? Do
nonbelievers have the Holy Spirit in them and just don't listen to Him and
are their souls fully formed?
>According to this web site, the spinal cord and nervous system does not
>start to form until day 1o. The major organs, including ( I guess )the
>( the presumed seat of the soul) form by somewhere around day 70.
>Are there any experts on fetal development out there?If we are going to
>guess about the date of the infusion of the soul, let us have an educated
Why is the nervous system the presumed seat of the soul? Do animals have
souls? If so, how then are we spiritually different from them? What about
earthworms and slugs, they have nervous systems too. I like to think of the
soul as a very fine gauze that overlays us but is not part of our biology.
We can't see it, others can't see it but when it is not there we are
biologically human but not fully human as in "made in God's image".
>From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]On
>Behalf Of Adrian Teo
>Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2002 6:14 PM
>To: RDehaan237@aol.com; firstname.lastname@example.org;
>Subject: RE: Infusion of the soul as a process
>Just a suggestion: How about the traditional view, that the huamn
>soul is fully formed upon conception and therefore, the conceptus is
>a fully human person?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: RDehaan237@aol.com [mailto:RDehaan237@aol.com]
> Sent: Sat 7/20/2002 4:54 PM
> To: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org;
> Subject: Infusion of the soul as a process
> In a message dated 7/20/02 11:39:01 AM,
> << Even with this answer, however, it is OK to speculate,
>realizing that this
> is metaphysics, not science. One speculation is that the
>infusion of a soul
> is a PROCESS, and takes place over the many months of gestation, and,
> perhaps, is not complete until sometime in childhood. I don't like this
> speculation; it implies that there are such things as either
> or "incomplete souls." >>
> How about an "immature soul"? That makes the soul a
>developing dimension of
> human beings, reaching full maturity perhaps sometime in
> or at the age of accountability, as some of us old timers called it.
> Just speculating.
Join the worldís largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 23 2002 - 00:12:44 EDT