The Increasing Human Population vs Soul Population Debate

Discussion in 'FAQ' started by Kelly, Dec 16, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Kelly

    Kelly Administrator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2000
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    London, UK
    Alternatively
     
  2. Kelly

    Kelly Administrator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2000
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    London, UK
    More Member Opinions

    To my mind, this contradiction will only exist, if we assume that all souls were created at the same moment somewhere in the past. But does this have to be the case? I don't know. What if the process of creating souls isn't finished yet? Given this, there would be "brand new" souls joining us on our journey to perfection on this planet.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
     
  3. Kelly

    Kelly Administrator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2000
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    London, UK
    Here's my new hypothetical analogy:


    There were 100 people living in Jonesville in 1800. During the next 100 years, 100 people died and 200 people were born there. However, in 1900, there were 400 people living in Jonesville.


    What is your conclusion? That birth is mathematically impossible? No, I think you would immediately consider the possibility that some people moved there from somewhere else. Or, in other, words, it would be obvious to you that not everyone living in Jonesville in 1900 must necessarily be a descendant of someone who lived there in 1800.


    Applying this to reincarnation, why on earth would you assume that every body in our world today has a soul that must have been incarnated in a body here one century ago?


    Here's a shortened excerpt from one of my previous responses to this question:


    The issue:


    There are more people living on the earth now than everyone who has died before, therefore reincarnation is mathematically impossible.


    Supposing, for the sake of argument, that the premise is actually true, in order for the conclusion to necessarily follow, a number of other unstated premises would also have to be true, including the following:

    • 1. Every body has a soul;
    • 2. Every body has only one soul;
    • 3. Every soul has a body;
    • 4. Every soul has only one body;
    • 5. Souls cannot reside anywhere except in bodies on the known physical earth;
    • 6. There are no incarnated bodies on any other planet of the universe or in any dimension other than ours.
    • 7. No new souls can ever be created.
    Regarding 5: A basic tenet of reincarnation is that souls can and do exist apart from physical bodies, therefore the number of physical bodies at any given time would be irrelevant to the number of souls at any given time.


    Simply stated, the conclusion does not logically follow from the premise; The issue is a red herring.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 11, 2014
  4. Deborah

    Deborah Executive Director Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 1997
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    258
    Location:
    CA - USA
    Dr. Ian Stevenson looked at the estimated total amount of people who have lived here on earth - ranging from 69 billion to 96 billion.


    He figured that each soul/person on the earth which was currently 5 billion when he made this calculation - would have had 15 to 20 past lives. :thumbsup:


    {Information obtained from the book The Case for Reincarnation - by Joe Fisher}
     
  5. ChrisR

    ChrisR Administrator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    59
    Location:
    England, UK
    Updated FAQ
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page