Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
You Have an Immortal Soul! (Logical Proof)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 ноя 2022
- Often today, society takes for grated that "the soul" is an old-fashioned idea without a scientific or philosophical basis. Fr. Gregory Pine explains the long-standing, non-religious step-by-step proof for the existence of the soul, dating all the way back to Aristotle.
Also Check out Fr. Pines new Podcast on Catholic Classic with Ascension 📚: ascensionpress...
📗 Fr. Pine's Brand New Book (get it and you're cool): amzn.to/3ylrUOJ
📚 Read Catholic Classics with Fr. Pine! ascensionpress...
🌞 Godsplaining Podcast: / godsplainingpodcast
💻 LINKS
Add Matt on Parler!: parler.com/mat...
Try Hallow for FREE!: hallow.com/matt
Website: pintswithaquin...
Merch: teespring.com/stores/matt-fradd
📱 SOCIALS
Facebook: / mattfradd
Twitter: / mattfradd
Instagram: / mattfradd
Gab: gab.com/mattfradd
Fr. Gregory Pine has all the facial features of GigaChad
next he should upload his videos in black and white
Eh, he's no mike schmitz
He is a "Father." GigaDad if you will
I am a seminarian, studying to be a priest, and love watching these because they give my theological formation a properly philosophical outlook. Never lose philosophy!
Just remember the bible is the claim. Not the proof. Btw, if the god described in the bible is true, he committed genocide and is not worth the worship. Just a penny for your thoughts: how did the all knowing god not know where adam and eve where hiding in the garden? The whole book is full of inconsistencies. Read it back to back. Good luck
@@woutermortier2771 you should try to give the best interpretation to the Bible you can. It is wrong to give it the worst outlook possible. It is better to try to at least give it a charitable interpretation before jumping to conclusions and also maybe try to understand how we view those verses. There is more than one way to read the Bible
@@woutermortier2771 you have to look at it figuratively, in a historical context and so much more, not just surface level. You don’t read a poem at surface level. You look for deeper meaning
@@timothy1168 Would you do that with all religious texts?
@@nanashi7779 You mean trying to understand what said doctrine actually says rather than ones first perception of what it may be saying? Yes. Do that with all doctrines/claims/arguments. To proceed otherwise is fallacious from the outset.
I am not Catholic, but man I LOVE this guy!
I love him moooooore than uuuuu
You'll have to remedy that. 😉
Same
become catholic
I’m not Catholic either, but like him I am an ordained priest. Even though there is a slight religious divide between us, I think he’s wise, compassionate, and devoted (not to mention charming as all merry); everything a proper priest of any faith should be (In at least my opinion). So.. I love him too!
... I'm not smart enough to follow this line of thought I think.
But I love that you try to explain such things! Thank you!
You're not the only one!
I like CS Lewis' quote in _Miracles_ of Professor Haldane a lot better than this (If brain merely a matter of atoms in motion rather than will and intellect, then no reason to believe brain made of atoms). Much simpler and to the point and thus more persuasive. The very concept that our material brains can grasp an actual real truth is proof of an immaterial ability/personality. Otherwise, knowledge is no more significant than a cue ball hitting an 8 ball.
I presume you are smart enough. He is just making a huge word salad to convince himself and others. An argument like his is only that. Do not mistake it for proof.
Don't worry if you are catholic. Be very worried if you're not. LOL!
@@woutermortier2771 You do realize that words like "I", "he", "himself", "proof", etc. don't even make sense without the human soul, without independent human personality, will, and intellect. A person who denies the human soul is a walking-talking contradiction.
This is what I sound like when I’m explaining mathematics after downing several espressos.
🤣
The Dominicans have always been kind to my family and of all the orders I think they are the most merciful.
just finished a 10 page paper on basically this, love Aristotle and Aquinas!
Fr. Gregory showed us how he prepared for his examinations in front of the mirror the day before 😀
To recap
Living things are clearly different than non_living things, thus they have an animating principle-a soul.
Lower living things can grasp and learn from their senses but cannot abstract from their senses. A dog can learn that three right turns will put him back where he came from but can't then grasp what a triangle is. Or if as Chesterton put it, horses will never learn to paint. When an animal dies, their soul disappears because it is a sensible soul, tried to the body, it ends with the body.
The human intellect this is different. It holds abstract concepts like" triangle" and "1+1=2". This part of the soul is immortal.
I do not think that Father Pine has any idea how funny he is. No matter what you believe or do not believe, just watching and listening makes you smile.
This episode was a little wild and wooly 😂
Please, please pray for my salvation brothers and sisters. I am afraid of going to Hell and I know I am on the road to perdition. For 6 years I did not even leave my house and have lived as a Catholic in Name only not carrying my cross. Please help me get to Heaven. Our Lady of Fatima said that it will take sacrifices and prayers of others to help people in my situation get to Heaven. Please as we are on one body and we are our brothers keeper, please consider it a great act of charity if you help me get to Heaven. Please keep me in your daily Rosaries forever if you can and please offer up your daily sacrifices, sufferings and penances with the intention of helping me make reparation for my sins. If you could do this and continue to do this, I would be eternally grateful!
Confession is a great place of mercy and Love of the father!
@@johndouglas4826 John I understand that but I have committed thousands and thousands of mortal sins and can count on one hand the good works I've done on my life. Our Lady of Fatima and Jesus both said it take many prayers and sacrifices to save poor sinners and I had no one praying for me my entire life, not even my family. Reparation must be made for all those sins and that is why I ma asking for help. If you could in a sense adopt me as your spiritual brother and offer up your daily illnesses, prayers and sufferings on my behalf to help me in this regard I would be eternally grateful brother!
@@caseymckee6856 We can have confidence in Christ if you have confessed your sins, Hope in Christ. You may face purgatory but that means you'll be saved! I can't pray for your soul while you're alive, I'll pray now but, I'm not in the Catholic Church yet though I hope by the grace of God to have that courage. Take the eucharist as much as you can. Pray as much as you can. Jesus loves you! Walk in his mercy
No matter our theological persuasion, we all start at the same place: a conviction that the entire human race lies in sin and is lost without some act on God’s part. Man cannot remake himself into a condition that would make him acceptable to God.
But doctrines diverge at the point of how the grace of God works to save a sinner. There are all shades of differences, but basically two opposing positions. The one belief that is most popular is that the grace of God works in our hearts to bring us to repentance of sin and faith in his son, Jesus, transforming us into obedient children, thereby making us acceptable to God. This we can call Imparted Righteousness. That is, God by his grace imparts to our experience his righteousness so that we are changed into sons and daughters of God. This is the Roman Catholic position as well as what most Protestants believe in practice. It is also the position of most Plain people, Mennonites and Amish. Since this view is based on God transforming the individual, no one can ever say for sure that he has been sufficiently changed so as to be in a saved state. The sinner must be constantly engaged in repentance and confession, trying to maintain a proper humility and fear, keeping his sins confessed, making sure he doesn’t die with any unconfessed sins, and not daring to presume that he has arrived at that place of unqualified acceptance. The person under this system cannot know that he is saved. He lives all his life in doubt and confusion. Such a one is often the most religious and devout among us, and they make great neighbors, for they labor for their own salvation. Sad to say, this belief is a vain hope. It is purely human in its basic precepts, and it is dead wrong.
The contrasting view, held by very few, was the belief of the early church and of the reformation fathers. In contrast to Imparted Righteousness, we call this position Imputed Righteousness. That is, God sees us as too sinful to be transformed into anything that could remotely be acceptable. We are without hope in our sin, but God sent his Son Jesus to take our place as a son of Adam. Jesus received our sin upon himself as if he were the sinner. God “imputed” our sin to the perfect God/Man Jesus. He died as if he were the sinner and was raised from the dead because he was indeed righteous. God now imputes the righteousness of Jesus to all who will believe upon him. This is called “the gift of righteousness.” (Romans 5:17).
Here is the contrast between the two positions: Imparted righteousness changes the individual so as to make him righteous. Imputed righteousness just changes the man’s legal standing with God. Imparted righteousness is the man’s own experience. Imputed righteousness is God’s experience of righteousness placed to the account of the sinner as if it were his. Read 2 Corinthians 5:21: “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.”
Anyone who claims to be sinless is a liar (1 John 1:8-10) and you need listen to him no further unless you just want a laugh. That is not the same as claiming to overcome sin, as did the Apostle Paul. All believers have the power to sin not, and it is normal for a believer to sin not-but the power to sin not is not the same as being sinless. To claim sinlessness is to claim to NOT BE ABLE to sin. A Christian is able to SIN NOT on a moment by moment basis, but he will always be ABLE to sin until he gets rid of this fleshly body.
Any preacher worthy of the name should boldly profess to be enjoying the complete gift of God’s righteousness, and he should also testify that God is delivering him from the acts of sin on a daily, moment-by-moment basis.
God made Jesus to be something he wasn’t-sin―so that he can make us something we are not-righteous. Just as Jesus received our sin in an act of faith, we receive his righteousness in an act of faith. My sin took Jesus where he did not deserve to go-death and hell-so his righteousness can take me where I do not deserve to go-eternal life and heaven.
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, *unless ye have believed in vain.* For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; (1 Corinthians 15:1-4)
“For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:” (Ephesians 3:1-2)
And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. (Romans 11:6)
The Bible says that grace is grace and works are works. As a Christian, we work by praying, reading the Bible, soul-winning. But, when it comes to salvation, there is absolutely nothing we can do in order to save ourselves. It’s only the blood of Jesus Christ that can save us.
Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. (Romans 4:4-5)
Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. (Galatians 2:16)
I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain. (Galatians 2:21)
If you think that your works after salvation count towards your salvation, then why would Jesus even need to die? Jesus would have died for nothing.
"Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ, that you may be married to another; to Him who was raised from the dead, that we should bear fruit to God." (Romans 7:4)
The Bible says that those who are working to be justify under the law are under the curse. They have to continue to work to keep their salvation.
Galatians 3:10-12: “For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.”
If Christians choose to work for justification, then God reckons it’s not of grace. God reckons it as debt. If they choose not to work and believe on him that justify the ungodly, their faith is automatically counted for righteousness.
Romans 4:4-5: “Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.“
Colossians 2:11 “In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:”
As an unbeliever, the soul is attached to the body. So both body and soul are condemned. But when salvation happens, God cuts off something from saved believers. Their souls are cut off from their bodies that continue to sin.
Even though, a believer's spirit/soul is born again and saved. They are still accountable for what they have done in his or her body
2 Corinthians 5:10 “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.”
The participants in the judgment seat of Christ are members of the New Testament church. These are people who have trusted Christ as Savior from the Day of Pentecost, until the coming of Christ for His church before the tribulation.
Jesus is the only foundation for our salvation and the judgment seat of Christ is a judgment of believers works after salvation. (1 Corinthians 3:10-15) Not everyone will receive the same reward. At the judgment seat of Christ, there will be those who suffer loss. The judgment will be by fire. Fire is used in Scripture as a symbol of judgment.
In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will: That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory. (Ephesians 1:11-14)
For the gospel of salvation, please refer to (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) for our current dispensation of grace (Ephesians 3:1-2)
@@caseymckee6856 Did you go to Confession yet?
You don't have to account for yourself to me, especially in public. Just checking in.
Thanks for explanation.
I wish I had the intellect to understand.
God bless
Religion counts on you not understanding or questioning.
I love you videos Father, I have included you in one of my daily rosaries for catholic creators.
I love this. However, I would argue that where we talk about the anima ceasing to exist in an animal due to its constituent parts ceasing to exist Plato has a better explanation in his Forms. Because if anima is that which gives life to dead matter, then how can we say that when the matter is gone the anima ceases to exist UNLESS the anima is INHERENT IN the matter? If it is IN the matter, then it would follow we could identify the PARTS of a soul. But we cannot. Souls are simple, not atomistic and are thus not empirically verifiable phenomena IN matter. If an animal is said to hold to a set of soul'ish features, then we should expect to see these features IN the matter that the soul is animated. If the functions of the matter that the soul animates is per accidens then how we can say that these features are not inherent to a transcendental nature of anima that animates the matter per se? We can't. Aristotle does a GREAT job of categorizing taxonomy. However, Plato's theories are far more thorough, albeit less technical. This would suggest that NOTHING ceases to exist, only the instantiation of things IN matter, or at least in the embodiment of a lower level of reality, as in Isaiah 66:1 states, the floor of reality.
Robert, but doesn't the instantiations of both humans and animals things in matter cease to exist at death and yet we say that man soul is immortal while the other isn't? As far as I know St. Thomas said that when the animal soul is separated from the body it perishes. Can you explain please? Honestly asking this question.
Good video, thanks and God bless you!
It is not self evident to me that the actions of the intellect (thinking and choosing) are not restrained by a corporal organ, namely the brain. Can someone explain this in more detail?
"For the living know that they shall die; but the dead know not anything."
Eccl.9:5
Is there a way to explain this to me as if I were a literal 5 year old?
Once the jargon is stripped away, the central argument is basically that because ancient people couldn't conceive that a physical object (such as the brain) could be capable of deliberation, thought, introspection, etc., the mind can't be physical. The invention of mechanical thinking machines (i.e. computers) and the explanatory and predictive success of neuroscience and cognitive science show that this is completely false
Ok father you use words that make my head heart….how I regret missing that philosophy class😂 thank you for making me think!😇
The secular science crowd has already quietly revised the notion that all life on earth evolved from a gaggle of single cell organisms, in some primordial soup… which means even they know that we were created by an intelligence far greater than our own, and I know that God doesn’t owe me an explanation as to why… so if it turns out that were all just microbes on a cosmic Petri dish, I will be no less thankful to Almighty God for giving me life.
Aristotle had no understanding of what the brain was; he thought it was an organ for cooling the blood. He was a genius, but because of the time he lived, he had no idea that it contains over 100 billion neurons, each with up to 3,000 connections to other neurons. He had no understanding of how a physical system could organize sensory information, make decisions, form memories, introspect, and move the body. We don't rely on Aristotle to know about the surface of the moon (he thought it was perfectly smooth), or the Earth's position in the solar system, or the rate at which objects fall. Why should we ignore neuroscience? Why should we accept that living things are the result of certain arrangements of matter, but chicken out when it comes to accepting the brain (and mind) as physical and mechanical?
so our souls are immortal because we are capable of abstract thinking and are able to generalize (water bottle example)? can somebody elaborate on this because it doesn't sound very convincing. Also, how can a soul, once the body is dead, think and perceive without a brain (neurons), eyes, ears, etc?
Two things, firstly, the soul is not a separate substance but is substantially united with the body, forming a single composite being. However, the soul possesses faculties, such as the intellect and will, that are not tied to material conditions. These faculties enable the soul to engage in operations (such as abstract thought and self-reflection) that transcend the limitations of matter.
Secondly, the immaterial nature of the soul's intellectual operations provides a rational basis for asserting its immortality. Since what is immaterial is also incorruptible, as corruption involves the separation of form from matter. Since the intellectual operations of the soul are immaterial, the soul itself is incorruptible and therefore immortal.
Now regarding your question of how the soul can think and perceive without a body, I should clarify that the soul's natural state is to be united with the body. In this life, the intellect relies on the senses and imagination, which are rooted in the body to provide it with data for abstraction and conceptualization. However, the separated soul in its immateriality has the capacity for intellectual operations without the mediation of bodily organs. This is because the intellect and will are faculties of the soul, and so are not intrinsically dependent on matter for their operations, although they are naturally oriented towards it.
This was a fun video! I’m not all that familiar with Aristotelian concepts, but it seems that this is proof that, given a soul that is fundamentally different from animals, this soul is also immortal. I’m probably wrong, and I think it would help me to see the syllogistic form of this argument.
Syllogistically you could say, per Ed Feser, I can have an exact and unambiguous knowledge of a triangle, matter is inexact (constant flux) and ambiguous (Heisenberg uncertainty), so therefore my knowledge of a triangle is immaterial. Since I have knowledge of immaterial reality, there is something about me that is purely immaterial. Usually if you just establish that there is an immaterial reality, the listener will quickly understand. For example:The laws of logic do not change, but matter does, therefore the laws of logic are immaterial.
@@KestyJoe which part of the syllogism do you reject?
@@KestyJoe Not all thoughts are exact. So it doesn’t boil down to just thoughts.
@KestyJoe Another way to put it, the laws of logic do not change, matter changes, therefore the laws of logic are immaterial.
Thanks. I believe, but I don’t find the argument presented convincing.
I think neuroscientists would refute that abstract cognition is not a corporeal operation. You are making a scientific claim without the proper evidence.
(And for what it’s worth - I am a practicing Catholic - I just think we should be careful with our claims and have some intellectual humility.)
Unsung hero of 20th-century Catholic apologetics Frank Sheed also goes over an argument like this in his most excellent book "Theology for Beginners."
But what proof do we have that the operations such as willing, loving, thinking, transcend the corporeal? How do we know that they are not just another face of matter (because all of these mental phenomenon have a parallel in the brain, from what we can observe). Besides that, why don't the subjective processes of plants and animals also transcend the corporeal? Why just the human ones? Even animals have will, love, and thinking, to various degrees, though usually in a much less developed way than humans. Please respond, i would like to understand this.
Just to add a bit of clarification to Fr. Pine's presentation: the "other argument" that he introduces at 12:40 isn't really a separate argument for the soul's immortality; rather, it serves to justify the premise that the intellectual soul, in understanding, has a "per se" operation in the first place, a claim that was simply posited, but not defended, in his initial presentation of St. Thomas' argument for the soul's immortality. That the soul has a distinctively immaterial operation is implied by our experience of intellectual cognition as abstractive and universal, conditions which (according to Aquinas' metaphysics) require that understanding not be an activity seated in an organ.
Forgot how hyperloquacious and excited Fr. Pine gets when he's in his element. Might behoove us to watch at 0.5x speed and take notes. 🤯
Also, this needs to go into an essentials of theology playlist or something. I believe many modern people could profit from this summary yet dense articulation of the basics.
All he's doing is promoting lies.
@@djparsons7363 🔃 (this is the closest thing to an Uno reverse card I could find)
@@john-paulgies4313 You need to give it to him, his theology is totally backwards.
@@djparsons7363 Unless you have forwards theology to share, all you're doing is emoting uselessly.
@@john-paulgies4313 We don't HAVE a soul, we ARE a soul. The original-language terms (Heb., neʹphesh [נֶפֶשׁ]; Gr., psy·kheʹ [ψυχή]) as used in the Scriptures show “soul” to be a person, an animal, or the life that a person or an animal enjoys.
The Roman Catholic translation, The New American Bible, in its “Glossary of Biblical Theology Terms” (pp. 27, 28), says: “In the New Testament, to ‘SAVE ONES' SOUL’ (Mk 8:35) DOES NOT MEAN TO SAVE SOME "SPIRITUAL" PART OF MAN, as opposed to his ‘body’ (in the Platonic sense) BUT THE WHOLE PERSON with emphasis on the fact that the person is living, desiring, loving and willing, etc., in addition to being concrete and physical.”-Edition published by P. J. Kenedy & Sons, New York, 1970.
This priest doesn't agree with his own church which, surprisingly, agrees with the Bible.
Your awesome Father✝️🙏❤️🙏✝️
The soul has been articulated in detail within the first scripture of existence, The Bhagavad Gita circa 1700BC.
Brahman Priests in India for thousands of years have invoked departed souls into themselves (incarnate) so the families of the departed can ask that soul questions and feed them... Rebirth is a universal spiritual law which is beyond all religious dogmas. When the soul takes birth, it's no longer possible for it to incarnate into a priests because a new chapter for that soul has begun.
Being sincere this is not a good explanation. THe father keeps losing himself while talking, also he puts distracting curiosities, it is hard to keep up with him when he is barely keeping up with himself. If there is oportunity to record this again it would be a gracious gift because we're trully interested in this topic.
Very honest. The belief has nothing to do with the Bible, and everything to do with Aristotle. As he says at the beginning, it starts with a pagan belief and becomes part of Christianity. Wild! I agree.
I look forward to a follow up video that provides evidence for the assertion that the intellect is, indeed, distinct from the brain. This entire argument hangs on an assertion for which there is no conclusive evidence. Show me a single example of the intellect existing without the brain and I'll fall to my knees and become a Catholic!
@frgreg Please can you explain why that which perceives the immaterial abstractions eg. the mind perceiving the quality of “triangleness” with a group of various triangles has to itself be immaterial?
Form of triangle + matter = individual triangle. When the mind knows the form of a triangle, it doesn’t become a triangle. Therefore, the mind isn’t material
Catechism 10:29 talks about all creation, so I’d say dogs will be part of the afterlife, but as they aren’t fallen in the same sense that we are, you should not try to convert or baptize them. No, nor communion nor other sacraments. That’s the part I worry the animal lovers will forget.
I like CS Lewis' quote in _Miracles_ of Professor Haldane a lot better than this (If brain merely a matter of atoms in motion rather than will and intellect, then no reason to believe brain made of atoms). Much simpler and to the point and thus more persuasive.
Wait, wait. I'm a bit confused. It sounded like when you got to the part where you decided the intellect has powers that transcend the corporeal organ, you kind of just assumed that instead of presenting a reason as to why the brain can't just be responsible for intellect. So...why can't the brain just be responsible for intellect?
The brain is biology. As I reflect on my life of love, virtue, relationships & etc, there is no way it can be explained with biology.
Yeah I caught the same thing. He kind of just STATED that the intellect transcends the brain, even though deficits in the brain can hamper the intellect.
Seems like we jumped over the most important part of the whole argument lol.
He does circle back around later and discuss abstraction as something more or less demonstrates the “higher ness” of the intellect.
To recap
Living things are clearly different than non_living things, thus they have an animating principle-a soul.
Lower living things can grasp and learn from their senses but cannot abstract from their senses. A dog can learn that three right turns will put him back where he came from but can't then grasp what a triangle is. Or if as Chesterton put it, horses will never learn to paint. When an animal dies, their soul disappears because it is a sensible soul, tried to the body, it ends with the body.
The human intellect this is different. It holds abstract concepts like" triangle" and "1+1=2". This part of the soul is immortal.
@@Urbanity_Kludge that's not an answer to the question of how that demonstrates that the ability to understand concepts = non physical soul.
Just because you don't understand how the brain works doesn't mean anything.
Example, a digital image is only zeroes and ones, does that mean a computer/phone also has an immortal soul?
Mama plant and daddy plant... now I know why you had the giggles before you started 😂... Amen
And in all fairness Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas did not know anything about the brain. Now you have father Gregory who also doesn't know much about the brain but still knows far more than they did trying to reconcile the 2. Aunt and hes having one heck of A time doing so because he doesn't seem to know much about biology. And that's OK because he gave a really solid theological andphilosophical argument even if it's not rooted in physical sciences.
I would just tell people to look elsewhere because there's a lot more solid evidence in other places than this video was able to provide. And please do not look at near death experiences because those are like hearsay and not very reliable
I like this guy.
What’s an example of intellectual activity that doesn’t look at all like it comes from a merely sensible soul?
Excellent!
Great explanation Fr. Gregory.
If animals go to heaven most of it is going to be taken up by all the cows, pigs, and chickens we’ve eaten.
I apologise, but I cannot understand how we can demonstrate rationally that the soul just uses the brain to allow us to be rational; some people may say that our rational functions stem only from our brain and neurons. How can we rationally demonstrate this is not the case?
Thank you so much!
There are several ways to rationally demonstrate the case, here is one.
The capacity for abstract thought distinguishes the human intellect from mere material processes. The intellect can apprehend universal concepts that are not tied to particular material conditions. For example, the concept of "justice" is not reducible to any specific neural configuration but is a universal idea that the intellect grasps. Material processes (including neural activities) are confined to particular instances and cannot account for the intellect's capacity for abstraction.
1. Is Fr. Pine a modern day St. Aquinas or a crazy person?
2. Not sure how to do it but could someone get this video to Jordan Peterson for a reaction to A - the message and B - the body language.
Pls not peterson. Him reacting to this will not multiply but square the word salad. This argument of the father is just that. A whole lot of words, not one proof in sight.
I did not expect this to be an argument that only works when starting from a religious standpoint that already presupposes a soul.
Super late reply but honestly man ya I believe in an afterlife and God and everything but I don't think he quite realized that his argument was no bueno for someone who is a nonbeliever. Something I was thinking the other day though, while I understand does not prove a soul but maybe a higher power, is that you would think life would be born into a universe teaming with life, to me at least that would be the only way for life to just make sense popping out of nowhere. Because that implies that in that universe life is easy to create. In this universe however it seems that there is no life and we were just dropped in the middle of it to guess our way out.. or something.
i believe all living things have a soul, humans are the ones who put unimportance towards certain things like plants, small animals.
Thanks much for this video.
This is a beautiful argument for theism
On the question do all dogs go to heaven, I believe the expression you were looking for is, I don't have a dog in this fight. 🤣
"sports" wasn't the word I heard when I learned of the adidas acronym
How did you come to the conclusion that the soul has an operation that transcends the body?
Yeah, I wish he would have developed that point. Perhaps he alludes to it with the powers of the intellect: it can transcend material instances to abstractions. Furthermore, it follows that if willing to act from deliberation is possible, it must be indeterminate, and, if indeterminate, must be immaterial, since all material reality seems to be determinate. Otherwise deliberation is a sheer illusion. But why would such an illusion even exist?
🙏 thank you
I really enjoyed this video thank you. 👍New subscriber. I got a lot out of it. Very interesting subject matter. I have to ask though, please excuse me but, has anyone ever told you that you could do a really great Mathew McConahey impression? 🤷🏻♀️
Ohhh there’s a Tool album called Aenima now I understand what the meaning of the word is. That makes sense Tool is a very soul searching Heavy Metal band. Not a Christian band but, yeah I can definitely say their music has a lot of lyrics about the soul and finding yourself. A lot of lyrics about learning how to control your mind and emotions.
Thanks for the interesting content. 😊 Blessings to you
normally I skip Mr Pine, but this is really good...
Interesting argument. What are we to make of the souls of those who appear to lack what we nominally understand to be intellect? Does it logically follow that someone with impaired IQ transition into in animal soul? If you see this and respond thanks in advance Father.
Do we say that a person who is blind is a different or inferior creature/person? We recognize that they lack a component of human nature, but only actually, not potentially. Just because someone can't exercise all or some of their cognitive faculties doesn't mean they are substantially different.
@@john-paulgies4313 are you making this response on the basis that the blind human has the potential to realize their faculty of sight?
@@jacobmartinezsilva4222 As opposed to a tree, for example, in which the faculty of sight is not present by nature.
Not as opposed to a human with, say, a damaged occipital lobe or shredded optic nerve, since such a privation is a defect. Even though actualization of such potential is out of our reach in these cases in this time and place, it remains a proper accident of human nature to have eyes that see... and likewise a mind to know.
So what do you think?, is the soul created with the "Organ" and thus allowing for traducianism and Original Sin?
Intellect transcends the brain?
Sorry but this appears to me as an attempt from medieval philosophy to account for will/condition using a non-scientific framework.
Christianity is a product of the marriage of Judaism and Hellenism, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that Greek philosophical thought heavily influenced Catholic theology.
The brain serves as the material basis for the operation of the intellect, but the intellect itself transcends the material conditions of the brain.
Youre quoting aristotle? A 2500.year old philosophy? He was great in setting the foundadtion for modern science but isnt informed enough to understand what conciousness or a soul is.
What is the soul made of? It can't be matter because we would detect it. We're down to quarks and gluons. There's only one other choice: energy. But then it will behave like energy and disperse from its source at light speed in every direction until it's absorbed by and indistinguishable from the background radiation of the universe. How do you reward or punish totally dispersed and diffused energy?
You say "when we talk about human beings there is an operation [of the intellect and will] that transcends the corporeal organ. ... Which is to say, thinking and choosing or knowing and loving." But you offer no explanation as to how or why the intellect transcends the corporeal organ. Despite admiting problems with the brain impede the intellect, you dismiss--without explanation--that the brain (or any other organ) "delimits or specifies or circumscribes" the intellect. From where do you draw this conclusion?
He's so great lol.
“Man comes into the world incomplete, needing to attain his fulfillment through the operations proper to his intellectual nature. He is oriented towards these operations and moved towards the completion of these operations by the initial, imperfect acts that constitute the rudimentary dynamism of his faculties.” (“To the Image of the Trinity” by D. Juvenal Merriell pg. 239) “By implanting His image in man's nature, God has given man a capacity for attaining eternal beatitude at His right hand, a dignity that far exceeds man's honor as master of the earth. Thomas shows that human dignity, bestowed on man with the image of God, is not primarily a matter of man's right to respect and service, but rather of God's right to man's obedience and work. If man honors and realizes his God-given dignity, he will eventually possess the fruits of his labor, the reward of an eternal life in which through knowledge and love, he will directly enjoy the infinite Source of all that is true and good.” (“To the Image of the Trinity” pg. 244) The corollary of this is that should anyone fail to develop the image of God which God gives us the grace and ability to develop we will live forever as a being who continues to desire this happiness and yet cannot achieve any longer because the limit has been reached. That is Hell.
Father seems to have rested well.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:00 *🧠 Understanding the Soul's Immortality*
- The discussion begins with an exploration of the concept of the soul and its immortality.
- Aristotle's definition of the soul is introduced, focusing on how it distinguishes living things from non-living ones.
- The progression from basic life functions in plants to intellectual capacities in humans is outlined.
03:04 *🌱 Types of Souls: Plants, Animals, and Humans*
- Aristotle's categorization of souls into vegetative, sensory, and rational types is explained.
- Each type of soul is described in terms of its specific capabilities and how it contributes to the realization of different life forms.
- The soul is depicted as the principle that enables organisms to act and evolve towards their inherent nature.
06:23 *🌟 The Nature of the Soul: Immaterial and Vital*
- The soul is defined as the organizing principle that directs the development and operation of living beings.
- It's clarified that the soul is not a ghostly entity but rather an immaterial form that informs and guides the material body.
- The relationship between the soul and the realization of a being's nature or potential is discussed.
09:32 *⚖️ Differentiation of Souls: Mortal and Immortal*
- The argument for the immortality of the human soul is presented.
- Distinctions are drawn between vegetative and sensory souls, which are tied to the body's existence, and the rational soul, which transcends corporeal limitations.
- The immaterial nature of the intellect and its capacity for abstraction are highlighted as evidence of the soul's immortality.
What the heck is immortal soul? immortal life? immortality? What the heck is soul? All souls don't die or some souls are immortal? what the immortal souls are doing and where?
I loaded the transcript of this video to chat GPT and decided to argue with it. The whole dogs don't go to heaven didn't sit well with me. (this is just for fun so relax everyone) Your argument that the soul is eternal is based on Intellectual Volition vs Sensory Volition which an animal, like a dog would only have. There have been plenty of accounts where a dog defends their owner, sometimes to the death. The dog make the choice of loyalty rather than it own safety. An argument may be made that some animals, like a dog for instance, may show traits of intellectual volition that may grant them grace from God. Just saying...I am holding out to my by baby boy once again.
here is the response for from Chat GPT. "In the scenario you've described, where a dog decides to stay by your side and defend you against a pack of wolves even though both you and the dog are in grave danger, it's important to recognize that the dog's behavior appears to involve more than just sensory volition. While sensory instincts and perceptions may play a role in the dog's decision, there are elements of loyalty, courage, and possibly an emotional bond at play.
Here's how this situation can be analyzed:
Dog's Behavior:
Sensory Instincts: It's likely that the dog's initial response to the presence of wolves is driven by sensory instincts, such as the perception of a threat and the fight-or-flight response. These instincts are sensory in nature and are related to immediate survival.
Loyalty and Bond: However, the dog's decision to stay by your side and defend you, even when escape is possible, suggests a deeper emotional and possibly intellectual aspect to its behavior. Dogs can form strong emotional bonds with their human companions and may act out of loyalty, protective instincts, or a sense of duty.
Courage and Sacrifice: The dog's willingness to defend you in a dangerous situation, even at the risk of its own life, demonstrates a level of courage and self-sacrifice. These qualities go beyond basic sensory responses and may involve a sense of duty or commitment.
While the initial response to a threat may involve sensory volition, the dog's ongoing decision to protect you in the face of danger appears to encompass emotional and possibly intellectual factors, such as loyalty, courage, and a bond with you. This behavior goes beyond the instinctual and sensory and reflects a more complex decision-making process."
I think you can do a thought experiment that uses the negative condition to demonstrate that there is a transcendent self. There are two possibilities, a transcendent self (mind, spirit, souk) or a material body that must account for every part of human existence. If materialism is true then that means that all of our ideas, intentions, feelings, reason, moral judgements, and even our “ability” to do science and math are a product of unguided material processes. If materialism is true then we have a huge contradiction. The same materiality that produces a belief in God is the same materiality that produces atheism. But even worse, a materialist has to argue that they have an objective claim to the truth of materialism which is a transcendent claim. Materialism eats itself. Materialism is absurd in the full academic sense of the word.
I find it human arrogance to say "All dogs don't go to Heaven" if the soul is what animates and gives us intelligence and the ability to reason and love, there are animals who not as intelligent as humans do show higher intelligence than just instinctual function and love for each other and for other species. I feel that as a human I feel no distinction from any other animal except that our scope of intelligence has given us more technology. Other than that our functioning isn't much more than instinctual. We have learned to function as a society out of fear and reason to adapt to our environment. Animals in most cases have done the same each species having different needs.
Immortal soul - one of the biggest heresy in history
Dang, I really like to listen to you talk Father Gregory pine 😁 You make me feel dumber and smarter at the same time. And I learn lots of fun new words too. Impress people with 😏You are very smart, thanks for making us out here a little smarter 😉💗
Father Gregory did you take something or have too much coffee? Wow really speedy words yikes! Struggled to keep up - went right over my head (maybe I'm not too bright) but thank you for trying to explain.
There's a lot of words and not a lot of information. Let me save your time. He's saying that Souls are not physical and are transferrable. There is no logical evidence despite the misleading title.
To be eternal, you would need to exist in a non physical universe.
I find this reasoning to be pre-suppositional and thus circular. Perhaps logical in the confines of the presupposition, but I don’t find these arguments persuasively proving anything.
Father, i don't know if I can express this properly. A couple of weeks back my gf pressed me to answer my reasons to believe in Christianity. Well, I tried my best. But in her mind, in a "historical, cientific manner", It's reduced to a "I believe what those palestinian are saying they saw and experienced". I'm content with that notion in aggregate with personal experience and straight fittingness but I'll also like to be able to give a more cohesive answer. Any suggestions?
@@RadTradX I mean in a historical way. Reliability of Scripture, of the testimony of those who wrote it, etc, etc
@@zavalajoseraul Well, I’d say a lot of reasons. Thomas Aquinas’s Five Ways, which are based on the Four Causes of Aristotle. The Fine Tuning and Moral Argument, maybe. Christianity is morally perfect, and makes sense of the way the world is today. It has no contradictions, especially the Church, the Church hasn’t been destroyed in 2,000 years and has never contradicted or erred, and has a certain way of keeping the Deposit of Faith for Christianity in tact. Also, the Argument from Miracles. The evidence for the Resurrection. The evidence for Our Lady of Fatima. The evidence for Our Lady of Zeitoun. The evidence for Our Lady of Guadalupe. The Prophecies of Tyre and Israel’s Reformation are interesting. God is really what humans want deep down, and Christianity changes you as a person, gives you reason not to fear, and Hope after death, and hope that life isn’t meaningless, a reason for life. And also I’d say it has a good answer for the problem of suffering, is philosophically sound, and has a Savior unlike any other religion, that is the Way, not a set way of living, even though we should Confirm to the Way, the Way is Christ, not the Law. And how Jesus was prophesied beforehand, and how the Bible is very historical.
@@zavalajoseraul Just some options I honestly don’t know, pray to God, and be prudent and strong
Some big motivations for belief can be established by philosophy. It takes a while to understand all the reasons for this being so, but the basic idea is this: Christianity completes what Aristotle and Plato started. If you have an email or some means of messaging I can send you some material thats supplementary to the type of philosophy and theology Fr. Gregory is talking about here, but in regards to motivations for belief in Christ and the Church.
We have good arguements for God existence
-Aquinas 5 ways
-Fine tuning arguement(This is probabilistic one, but it its still useful)
-Evolution( you can argue that it makes more sense under theism, because of sentient life and theleology
-Moral arguement(If moral realism is true)
-The evidence for the resurrection.
-Qualia and the inmateriality of the mind(Materialism has problems to explain the mind)
.
Now, if theism is true. We find that the testimony of the apostales its not only believable but it makes alot of sense under theism. We have the perfect love and justice of God trough jesus
Fun video. Some thoughts below.
This ranking of souls is arbitrary. We could say plant souls are the highest souls because they are the best at photosynthesis.
I like Russellian monism over dualism because it better addresses the hard problem of consciousness. Also, it seems there is likely a 1:1 correspondence between physical brain states and conscious states.
Also going from immaterial to immortal seems like a big leap. Maybe you will cover that later.
Just heard a moment and he's chanting "proof, prove" without realizing what 'proof' is!
In a nutshell, 'proof' is anything that you are willing to accept as 'proof' (validation of your biases and food for beliefs)!
There is no 'objective' proof of anything.
Knowledge is experience! You can only know what is Immortality is by Being Immortal!
Okay, back to vid...
So, now he's trying to offer me a definition of a Soul, nothing original, no original experience or thought, but reflecting some ancient pop star's opinion.
Alright, not wasting any more time, if you are interested in Truth about Soul, and are in the 'right place';
Souls is (yes, collectively we are One) Consciousness.
Yes, We are Consciousness! We = all-inclusive of every unique Perspective, ever! And every point in the Universe is a unique Perspective/Soul.
Mind/Self is what Consciousness/Souls are conscious of.
One... BIG BANG of 'Divine' Self revelation!
Our collective Universal experiences occur all in One single moment!
"The Laws of Nature are not rules controlling the metamorphosis of what is, into what will be (ie; Karma). They are descriptions of patterns that exist, all at once... " - Genius; the Life and Science of Richard Feynman
Again, that would be a "Big Bang!!", indeed, that wouldn't be a fallacious theory (as it is not subject to the illusory duality of 'time/motion').
"God cannot know himself but by me!" - Meister Eckhart
"The eye by which I see God is the same as the eye by which God sees me. My eye and God's eye are one and the same." - Meister Eckhart
Oh, and Aristotle? You are always welcome for tea! ;)
Yup.
Ai has intellect equal or greater to humans that is definitively tied to materiel dependencies. Also ai is not alive.
Intellect is not merely the ability to process information or solve problems; it is a faculty of the soul that has the capacity for abstract thought, self-reflection, and the apprehension of immaterial realities such as universals and spiritual truths. AI (being a machine) lacks a soul and therefore does not possess an intellect. Its operations no matter how advanced are the result of algorithms and computational processes, not the activities of a spiritual soul. AI is entirely material and algorithmic, and is confined to the data it has been trained on and the parameters set by its programming. Thus, it cannot transcend its material dependencies to apprehend universal truths.
Well U know the body ages & dies but inside we are ageless, are we not? So then therefore we are not our body. What we are is what we love & what we think. So if we love our pets, they are a part of us and as such they can also be with us in heaven.
God is infinite love & wisdom and this is where everything comes from, on earth & in heaven. Everything corresponds to a different aspect of God's love & wisdom.
I know this is not enough but I hope it helps
Wow
Paul said that God the Father is "The one ALONE having immortalitiy" That is he CANNOT die! Yet Jesus DID "Die and was buried and rose again on the third day" ( as the scriptures frequently say!). Yet for his faithful course he was GIFTED immortality at his resurrection! He stated "As the Father has life in himself ( immortality) HE HAS GIFTED ( Greek 'edoken' to 'give' to 'grant') that the SON SHALL HAVE LIFE IN HIMSELF". (John 5:26) Paul also shows that we DONt have an 'immortal sou'' but "This mortal will PUT ON immortaliy" 1 Cor 15|: 53,54.
Adi Dassler is the guy who started Adidas, I believe.
"Does this unit have a soul?"
The problem is almost no one fully realizes that the Bible is 100% God's word! People were created in God's own image and the Bible tells us exactly that God is an eternal spirit and people were created in God's own image. In other words the spirit within the physical body is eternal just like God. The Bible also tells us that the physical body is just a temporary container for the this eternal spirit inside the physical body.
This further suggests that both Heaven and Hell are the only two eternal spiritual realms which the spirit will move on into after the physical body expires here on earth.
Remember, that since the human spirit / soul was created in God's own image the spirit can never ever be destroyed under any circumstance. This means that those who end up in Hell will endure the fires and wrath of Hell for eternity since the soul/spirit can never be destroyed (die).
Since Jesus was God in the flesh and blood (see the book of John), when Jesus Himself said very few will make it through the narrow gate this would also indicate that almost no one will make it into Heaven.
The answer to making a person making through the gates of Heaven is within Jesus's very own words as the Bible specifically tells us that Jesus was given the role as moderator between the "Father" and those here on earth....
Remember, the Bible MUST be tested as eternity into Heaven is not easy as one may believe. The Bible was written for the living thus everything within the Bible pertains to those living and this also includes what Jesus told His followers > "the way to the Father is through me....."
Those who are able to get the Father to reveal Himself are those who will also have their foot in the gates of Heaven after their physical body expires here on earth.
Of course, there is a second option and that is to "REPENT." However, one will not know whether they have made it into Heaven until after they have died and by this time it will be too late if one is sentenced to Hell on their day of judgment.....
Decide for yourself....
My therapist: Gremlin Pine isn’t real. Gremlin Pine can’t hurt you.
Gremlin Pine: 2:48
Is this Pines with Aquinas ?
Why don t you invite fr Charles murr ?
Wow! That was a lot😳🤪
This is one topic that has always bothered me as Catholic. Is the soul immortal. Do we have a soul or are we a soul. Gen 2:7 seems to imply that we are a soul not that we were given one.
I wish any Catholic channel would tackle this subject from the BIBLE, not Aristotle or any other philosopher. The evidence against the immortal soul makes a lot of sense too in my opinion.
But anyways I keep searching for truth.
Does the human soul live forever? God said, "Behold the man is become one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of live, and eat, and live forever:" Gen. 3:22-24 Humans never ate from the tree of live!
How? If anything it proves the composite nature of human beings, who are both body and soul. Genesis 2:7, "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul," the man is a "living soul." This shows the ontological distinction between the body and the soul. The soul in this context is not a separate entity "given" to the body but is the animating principle that makes the body a "living" being. The Gospel of Matthew (10:28) provides a clear affirmation of the soul's immortality: "And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." This passage explicitly states that while the body can be killed, the soul cannot, thus affirming its immortality. The Apostle Paul in his letters also speaks to the nature of the soul and its eternal destiny. For example, in 2 Corinthians 5:1, he writes, "For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens." Here, the "earthly house" refers to the body, and the "building of God" refers to our eternal existence, which is not confined to the material realm.
Proof for the existence of the immortal soul is not presented in this video.
How can we not say that animals have intellect too?
Almost all animals do, some are just smarter than others.
You made a strong philosophical and theological argument but I wouldn't exactly call that proof or evidence. This is what Frederick nichie meant when he said that a lot of people make a logical argument based on the truth as they say but unfortunately It makes many leaps and bounds of faith... At the core of their argument. And yes I know that Frederick niechi's name was spelt wrong unfortunately voice to text does not do a very good job at spelling.
For the record Aristotle made many claims about different things that made sense in his day logically speaking but once we were able to study the physical evidence in a more robust way we found out that his philosophy or I should say his theory behind these things was wrong. For example Aristotle believed that if you threw a pen through the air it did not get sucked down-to-earth by gravity because it created a propulsion behind it with the air and that turned out to obviously be False
Si l'âme est IMMORTELLE pourquoi Jesus a dit qu'il fallait craidre celui qui peut DÉTRUIRE l'âme et le corps dans la géhenne. MAT 10:28.
Is it Aristotle then that we get this idea that plants create their own souls, etc? This is where it seems I disagree with this logic. To my thinking, It's anthropocentric. God created plant souls and called them good. And he sustains all souls eternally at His Will. Heaven won't be some plantless space like a weird sci-fi dystopia. God loves plants. Are their souls different than humans? Likely. But different how? To answer that we have to try to take God's view, not our base human view. God didn't expect an oak tree to do trigonometry. God offers the gift universally and Christ saves the whole universe.
Bla bla bla we have ability for abstract reasoning and higher cognitive skills than other living beings. So what? How is that explanation for immortal soul? If you use cognitive abilities as proof, then you can say that we can create soul. AI can process larger ammounts of information than humans and are better in many aspects than humans. First of all Aristotle was born in ancient Greece where paganistic Greece myth of 12 Olympians was main religion. He bellieved that everything was created from earth, water, air and fire. That is old belief and today we know much more about universe then in time of Aristotle.
OK, so you're starting with a system made up by Aristotle to identify and categorize souls. You then theorise further based on these assumptions, which leads you to your conclusion that souls are immortal.
I don't see how speculations based on an unproven hypothesis by Aristotle add up to a proof?
Neither philosophy, maths nor science work this way. Also, I don't think that any of this would fly in a biology class.
Furthermore, did you know that there is software for self-driving cars that can recognize people on the road? That is, it can recognize new people based on learned examples of people. And that's just to name one example from what AI can do.
I had hoped for something more substantial and am rather disappointed as well as completely baffled by all this.
But let's try to resolve this issue objectively: Here's a test: what will AI never be able to do, because it doesn't have a soul and how do you propose to test an AI for having or not having this capability.