This question arose in the context of arguments about extraterrestrial intelligent species. Some Christians, especially among Young Earth Creationists, believe that we can rule out the possibility of ETs on the basis of Scripture. Anyway, my intention here is not to prove or disprove that, but rather on some ideas which have appeared within the discussion. This article by Gary Bates makes many arguments for that conclusion, and I'm wondering about one specific part of the argument, namely the assumption throughout that ETs must have immortal souls, just as we do (I know some schools of thought dispute this; those are outside the scope of the question). They bring up an idea from Michael Heiser that "Just like ‘bunny rabbits’ on the earth, they do not need salvation—even though they will die, they are going to neither heaven nor hell." The respond thus: > And Heiser’s ETs in spaceships require a level of intelligence not found in rabbits. This acutely highlights the injustice of their suffering the effects of the Curse, including death and ultimately extinction when the heavens are ‘rolled up like a scroll’ (Revelation 6:14). It also seems bizarre to assign no moral responsibility for the actions of highly intelligent beings. But this response is somewhat oblique - Heiser's argument isn't that they aren't morally accountable (at least not as presented by Bates), but rather that they don't go to heaven or hell. Bates seems to be a tacit assumption here that an immortal soul is a prerequisite either for intelligence or for moral responsibility. It isn't clear which, but in either case, I'd like to understand the philosophical underpinnings here a little better. **Have some Christian philosophers made the case that moral accountability and/or rational intelligence require an immortal soul?** If so, what reasoning is used to argue for that conclusion?

Why do the souls in purgatory suffer since there is no presence of the flesh? Catholics and the Saints pray for the souls in purgatory for the relief of their sufferings and the forgiveness of their sins.

The Immortality of the Soul is "the doctrine that the human soul will survive death, continuing in the possession of an endless conscious existence." (source) . What is the biblical basis for the immortality of the soul?

This question relates somewhat to the one posted here: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/107637/are-indulgences-previously-granted-by-popes-still-in-effect-unless-specified-oth The following (which is part of a preparatory prayer for the *Stations of the Cross* devotion) is extracted from pg. 301 of [*Mary, Help of Christians*](https://ia801604.us.archive.org/20/items/MaryHelpOfChristians/MaryHelpOfChristians_text.pdf) I have long been under the impression that an Indulgence can be gained either for oneself or for the souls in Purgatory (but not both). After reading the above, I am not so sure. QUESTION: May an indulgence simultaneously be obtained **both** for oneself and for the souls in Purgatory (if it is not specified that it is applicable only to one or the other---such as, the indulgence associated with visiting a cemetery on All Souls Day.)? Thank you.

The question is: According to The Anglican Church, does God have a soul? Understandably, the answer will have to incorporate the Anglican definition of 'soul' and, if yes, whether it differs from the 'human soul'. I apologize for the phrasing of the 'title'. The original was being wrongly resisted as a duplicate by the bot. Related: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103593/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103592/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103581/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103595/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103596/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103598/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103600/47250

Open theism posits that God possesses comprehensive knowledge of every possible future but is unaware of which particular future will be actualized due to human free will. Wouldn't this result in the same thing as Molinism? If God has exhaustive knowledge of every potential future, He knows precisely how each individual would act in any given situation. Thus, God would be aware of whether a person will ultimately be good or bad from the moment of their birth. Isn't this analogous to Molinism's concept of "middle knowledge"? One could argue that God's awareness of possibilities is so vast that He comprehends every conceivable outcome for an individual, not just every choice they might make. For instance, there exists a potential world where I become a terrorist, and another where I become a priest. God understands all these possibilities in perfect detail but is unaware of which one will unfold because it depends on my exercise of free will. However, wouldn't this contradict the Christian concept of the soul? This perspective seems to suggest that there is no inherent soul, and that a person's character is entirely contingent on circumstances. For example, if I had been born to strict Muslim parents, I might have become an extremist Muslim. If I'm not misunderstanding open theism, it appears to imply that a person's characteristics are solely determined by the random chance of their upbringing.

How will God judge those who never heard the gospel, this is because Jesus said knowledge of the gospel will be used as testimony to all nations. >This good news of the kingdom [the gospel] will be preached throughout the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end [of the age] will come. (Mathew 24:14)

I've heard particular denominations claim that although hell is definitely a real place and hell itself will burn forever, people who are condemned to hell don't actually exist forever in hell but instead are eventually destroyed, wiped out of existence. They claim that the soul being naturally immortal is a pagan idea, and that only those given eternal life will live forever. As far as I know most mainline denominations affirm that if you are not saved then you will indeed exist forever in Hell. My question is, what is the biblical basis to support the doctrine that people who are condemned to hell will actually continue to exist in hell for eternity (as opposed to being annihilated)? Alternatively, what is the biblical support for the soul itself being naturally immortal?

Quoting from [this site](https://carm.org/annihilationism/what-is-soul-sleep/) : > Soul sleep is the teaching that when a person dies that his soul "sleeps" until the time of the future resurrection. In this condition, the person is not aware or conscious. What are the biblical arguments against soul sleep?

Let's say that someone with DID (dissociative identity disorder) has 2 alters: an atheist and a faithful Christian. Where would that person go? To Heaven? To Hell? To some third place? This question is pretty important as it is estimated that 1.5% of the global population (or 121 million people) suffer from DID, many of whom are faithful Christians.

I'm struggling with this question for a while: It seems like dogs do know what dogs are. Is it possible for a dog to only recognize individuals and not grasp the universal concept of dog? I thought this ability to recognize universals was the ability that God gave to Adam (to name things) and thus that separated him from the animals. How did the Christian scholastic theologians (such as St. Thomas Aquinas) separate the animal and spiritual capacities of human beings?

### The three transcendentals and *imago dei* Medieval scholastic theology inherited the notions of [transcendentals](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendentals) from Greek metaphysics. CCC 41, interpreting [Wis 13:5](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Wisdom%2013%3A5&version=NRSVCE) , teaches that our soul has the ability to perceive God through the 3 transcendentals Truth, Goodness and Beauty in created things **by resemblance**, because our soul has *imago dei* stamped on it: > All creatures bear a certain resemblance to God, most especially man, created in the image and likeness of God. The manifold perfections of creatures - their truth, their goodness, their beauty all reflect the infinite perfection of God. Consequently we can name God by taking his creatures" perfections as our starting point, "for from the greatness and beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of their Creator". A [*Reasons to Believe* article](https://reasons.org/explore/blogs/reflections/the-3-transcendentals-truth-goodness-beauty) quoted Stephen R. Turley saying that the 3 transcendentals to provide **divine meaning to 3 capacities**: > Truth, goodness, and beauty are cosmic values that communicate divine meaning to the **intellectual**, **moral**, and **aesthetic** capacities of the human soul, which brings a balance in the soul, which, in turn, harmonizes the human person with divine meaning and purpose of the cosmos, which was considered the prerequisite to human flourishing. The same article quoted Christian philosopher Peter Kreeft who connects the 3 transcendentals to **created things**: > When God created, he imbued the cosmos with truth, goodness, and beauty. Philosopher Peter Kreeft says: “Everything that exists is in some way true, good, and beautiful.” and continues to associate the 3 transcendentals to **3 verbs** "know", "desire", and "love": > And humans via the imago Dei (image of God) are able **to *know* the truth, *desire* the good, and *love* the beautiful**. The fall of humankind into sin disordered man’s natural capacities but through the redemption found in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ humans are brought back into a right relationship with God and with these revealed values. ### My question It seems that the last 2 pairings are not technically consistent. Shouldn't it be: 1. ***Know* Truth** by our **reason** (because by **intellectual** activity in our mind we grasp & form concepts and we reason discursively) 2. ***Love* Goodness** by our **will** (because inspired by divine Love we *ACTIVELY resolve* to love others, usually with great effort unless aided by virtues, in the sphere of Christian **morality**, i.e. love = "willing the good of the other") 3. ***Desire* Beauty** by our **passion** (because our **aesthetic** sensibilities is *PASSIVELY drawn* to all things beautiful or by *being led* to them by simply perceiving or immersing ourselves in them with little effort) I am seeking a Catholic answer linking Catholic psychology to Catholic doctrine of God. I hope that CCC, an encyclical, St. Thomas Aquinas, or a post Vatican II theologian says something about it. ### P.S. It seems there are other meanings at play here, such as "love" as attraction ("love" is such a complex multivalent word!) or "good" to mean how we desire created goods (such as wealth, honor, food, sex, etc.) we aim to possess to be happy. I'm simply using that article as a motivating resource to ask this question. It's important for the answer to this question to get those multiple meanings of the words in order, refined within the discipline of Catholic psychology, so we can focus on the right terminologies for the 3 faculties of our soul (covered heavily in St. Thomas's *Summa*) and how they connect to the 3 transcendentals in Catholic theology.

Belief in an immortal soul seems quite common in Christianity although some denominations do not seem to believe in this. What specific scriptures, and scriptural arguments, are used by those that do not believe in humans having an immortal soul separate from the body? **Update:** this is not a duplicate of this other question because this one is specifically asking for support for the opposite viewpoint. Additionally the other question has only answers which support the idea that humans **do** have a soul. If this **has** to be scoped to a particular denomination, I choose Jehovah's Witnesses.

If you look at historical records, the concept of a soul has existed long before it was ever "revealed" by any ancient prophet, with tribes and ancient civilizations already coming up with an ethereal substance that connects them together as a species, probably to feel important with respect to animals or to create a connection with their pre-existing deities. In fact, the Jews formally recorded the idea of the soul in their religious texts based on traditional beliefs which had not come from divine inspiration. So, if souls as described in the Bible and prophetic texts are a human invention derived from reason and other social beliefs, then how could this possibly coincide with what is actually true? The "system" for our connection with God and the supernatural world could literally be anything outside our wildest imaginations, and it just so happens that it's exactly the same as how humans had originally believed it to be? Do souls really exist? But then, if souls don't exist, can heaven or hell even exist either? In fact, those have also existed as concepts since ancient times, and it's clear how their creation by a society could positively benefit it (e.g. an elder telling kids they will suffer eternally if they disobey, lie, steal, etc. and this evolving into widespread belief)... Without these principles, everything about Christianity falls apart, so where does the reasoning go wrong? Sorry if this seems a bit anti-religious, but they're genuine doubts of mine.

We know from many sources of evidence that life started more than 4 billion years ago, and over the aeons evolution produced a huge range of different creatures. We also know that modern humans originated at least 200,000 years ago, and that for at least 50,000 years humans have had the same cognitive powers as current ones. The theory of evolution also tells us that there never was a "first couple". Instead, the genes that make us human spread through a population of almost-humans, and the change from almost-human to fully-human happened over a period of tens of thousands of years, with no clear speciation point. Among Christians, many accept evolution and the age of the earth as facts. However, most of them also agree that, somewhere along the line, we acquired a soul - which they argue is the final piece that makes us fully human. For example, Catholics believe that "after a long and gradual process of biological evolution, which produced hominins who were highly advanced mentally, there was a sudden transition, in which God raised some of them to the “spiritual” level, i.e. to the level of rationality and freedom" . I can see 2 possibilities here: either God implanted a soul in just one couple ("Adam and Eve"), or He gave souls to all humans alive at the time. Either way I see problems. If all people got souls, how do you explain the original sin, for which Jesus had to die on the cross? Did all those people commit the same sin? In that case, why was God complaining? He obviously built the same mistake into all people. If God built the same mistake into all people, He should not complain about it, and accept His mistake. Which leads me to the other alternative: if only one couple got a soul (or the soulless ones died out), and we are all descended from that one couple, how do you square that with DNA evidence? Our DNA shows no evidence at all of the human species ever having been restricted to just 1 couple. How do Christians reconcile the existence of the soul with the fact of evolution, and specifically the DNA evidence? **EDIT** I just realised there's a third alternative: God gave a soul to Adam & Eve only, and all the "soulless" ones survived as well. That explains who Adam's children had offspring with. However, it also means that the vast majority of people today are direct descendants of the soulless ones, and hence cannot have a soul. That is contrary to all Christian teaching.

The question is: According to Baptists, does God have a soul? Understandably, the answer will have to incorporate the Baptist definition of 'soul' and, if yes, whether it differs from the 'human soul'. I apologize for the phrasing of the 'title'. The original was being wrongly resisted as a duplicate by the bot. Related: What does Lutheranism say about God's soul? , A question for Roman Catholicism about the soul of God? , According to Eastern Orthodoxy does God have a soul? , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103595/47250, https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103598/47250, https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103599/47250, https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103600/47250

The question is: According to Presbyterians, does God have a soul? Understandably, the answer will have to incorporate the Presbyterian definition of 'soul' and, if yes, whether it differs from the 'human soul'. I apologize for the phrasing of the 'title'. The original was being wrongly resisted as a duplicate by the bot. Related: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103596/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103595/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103581/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103592/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103593/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103599/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103600/47250

The question is: According to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, does God have a soul? Understandably, the answer will have to incorporate the LDS definition of 'soul' and, if yes, whether it differs from the 'human soul'. Related: - Do Anglicans think God has a soul? - Does God have a soul according to Presbyterians? - Do Baptists say God has a soul? - What is the Methodist position on God's soul? - According to Eastern Orthodoxy does God have a soul? - A question for Roman Catholicism about the soul of God? - What does Lutheranism say about God's soul? - Do Pentecostals teach that God has a soul?

The question is: According to Eastern Orthodoxy, does God have a soul? Understandably, the answer will have to incorporate the EO definition of 'soul' and, if yes, whether it differs from the 'human soul'. Related: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103593/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103592/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103595/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103596/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103598/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103599/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103600/47250

The question is: According to Roman Catholicism, does God have a soul? Understandably, the answer will have to incorporate the RC definition of 'soul' and, if yes, whether it differs from the 'human soul'. I apologize for the phrasing of the 'title'. The original was being wrongly resisted as a duplicate by the bot. Related: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103581/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103593/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103595/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103596/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103598/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103599/47250 , https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103600/47250