Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

What is a person?

So, a person is merely a being that is able to perceive or feel? A person is a being that has an awareness?

That is my perspective on it, however the word "feeling" is more attributed to emotion or spirit rather than only pain and pleasure. Self awarenes is more a philosophical term but a valid indicator of a person. Defining self aware is another matter.

What is a soul? From the word Nephesh meaning to have breath, wherein God breathed into dirt and man became a living soul.

Another indicator is to what we attribute the proper nouns "He" or "she" as opposed to "it".
 
That is my perspective on it, however the word "feeling" is more attributed to emotion or spirit rather than only pain and pleasure. Self awarenes is more a philosophical term but a valid indicator of a person. Defining self aware is another matter.

What is a soul? From the word Nephesh meaning to have breath, wherein God breathed into dirt and man became a living soul.

Another indicator is to what we attribute the proper nouns "He" or "she" as opposed to "it".

Merely running with your definition, however, a robot with artificial intelligence would in fact be a person.

I did not mention "self" awareness, but awareness only, running with your usage of the word "sentient," which means, according to Oxford English Dictionaries online, "able to perceive or feel things," which could be called an awareness. But, can I safely infer that you are not requiring an awareness of self in your definition of person?

I do not see how a discussion of what the soul is matters here, or what pronouns ("he," "she," and "it" are pronouns) we apply to persons.

Nevertheless, according to your definition of person, the term identifies a sentient being, which would be a being that is able to perceive or feel things. This definition does not require an awareness of self.
 
Merely running with your definition, however, a robot with artificial intelligence would in fact be a person.

I did not mention "self" awareness, but awareness only, running with your usage of the word "sentient," which means, according to Oxford English Dictionaries online, "able to perceive or feel things," which could be called an awareness. But, can I safely infer that you are not requiring an awareness of self in your definition of person?

I do not see how a discussion of what the soul is matters here, or what pronouns ("he," "she," and "it" are pronouns) we apply to persons.

Nevertheless, according to your definition of person, the term identifies a sentient being, which would be a being that is able to perceive or feel things. This definition does not require an awareness of self.

In my view a sentient person has perception and emotional feelings. Just because someone was completely paralyzed does not mean there is not a person in the body. I don't see how a robot qualifies.

The soul is very relevant since the soul can be absent from a body yet is still a person. Hence Jesus says it is the Spirit that gives life and the soul is a vessel of Spirit defined in terms of Light and dark. Consequently the Word of God is the Light and Life of man. If a person is dead as in nonexistent he would cease to be a person.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As the title to this thread may suggest, I am inquiring about the definition of person.

What is a person?

This is very easy. According to Dr. Seuss A person's a person, no matter how small. This was famously illustrated in his ground breaking book, Horton Hears a Who!

I tend to agree. a person, as in a human being, is in fact a person no matter how small, and that process starts when a sperm from the male fertilizes an egg from a female. From that point on the cells divide and grow with an average total life expectancy of about 84 years by today's measures. ....and there you have it. A person.

This is usually taught in most 8th grade biology classes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is very easy. According to Dr. Seuss A person's a person, no matter how small. This was famously illustrated in his ground breaking book, Horton Hears a Who!

I tend to agree. a person, as in a human being, is in fact a person no matter how small, and that process starts when a sperm from the male fertilizes an egg from a female. From that point on the cells divide and grow with an average total life expectancy of about 84 years by today's measures. ....and there you have it. A person.

This is usually taught in most 8th grade biology classes.

So in your definition the term "person" refers solely to human beings? How does this incorporate into your understanding of God's personhood?
 
Brench Stevens. You have said a robot would qualify as a person according to my perspective. I said it most defintely would not. Please clarify why you are right and I am wrong.
 
So in your definition the term "person" refers solely to human beings? How does this incorporate into your understanding of God's personhood?

No! see your not listening. I said..."I tend to agree. a person, as in a human being,...............Now your wanting to speak of the personhood of God, or as in the spiritual person? Where is our spirit? is that it?

We can talk about that I guess, but clarify which it is. I am answering your question in the physical sense of "What is a Person?"
 
No! see your not listening. I said..."I tend to agree. a person, as in a human being,...............Now your wanting to speak of the personhood of God, or as in the spiritual person? Where is our spirit? is that it?

We can talk about that I guess, but clarify which it is. I am answering your question in the physical sense of "What is a Person?"

Sorry to drag you here Danus, but my dog is a person in my estimation.
 
Sorry to drag you here Danus, but my dog is a person in my estimation.

Danus, I am not talking about human beings specifically or God's personhood specifically. I am asking what a person is. What is a person? What constitutes as a person? What requirements must be met for something to qualify as a person?

childeye, I did not realize that you denied my conclusion that your terms indicate personhood for an artificially intelligent robot. It was not apparent in your response. Why do you deny such?
 
Danus, I am not talking about human beings specifically or God's personhood specifically. I am asking what a person is. What is a person? What constitutes as a person? What requirements must be met for something to qualify as a person?

childeye, I did not realize that you denied my conclusion that your terms indicate personhood for an artificially intelligent robot. It was not apparent in your response. Why do you deny such?

Because I think the best indicator of a person is that they have feelings as in emotions. Robots do not have this.
 
Danus, I am not talking about human beings specifically or God's personhood specifically. I am asking what a person is. What is a person? What constitutes as a person? What requirements must be met for something to qualify as a person?

Well, that's like asking what is the color blue.

I can tell you what constitutes a person, as in a human being, since that is the common understanding of a person, a physical human being.

There are plenty of shared attributes of a human person with other species and things, just as there are plenty of shades of blue, but to what value would it be? unless your wanting to minimize mankind.

We live in a time where that is a popular thing to do in order to justify and further define man made morality, such as the killing of persons yet born or the rights of Dogs and cats as equals to man.
 
=Danus;615189]Well, that's like asking what is the color blue.
Nice analogy.
We live in a time where that is a popular thing to do in order to justify and further define man made morality, such as the killing of persons yet born or the rights of Dogs and cats as equals to man.
Actually, Danus I take issue with your declining to count animals as persons, although I agree they are not equal to men in station. God is above us in station and yet he likens us to sheep that have all gone astray, and we are all accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Still He recognizes us as persons.

Isaiah 66:2-3

New International Version (NIV)


2 Has not my hand made all these things,
and so they came into being?”
declares the LORD. “These are the ones I look on with favor:
those who are humble and contrite in spirit,
and who tremble at my word.
3 But whoever sacrifices a bull
is like one who kills a person,
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I take issue with your declining to count animals as persons, although I agree they are not equal to men in station. God is above us in station and yet he likens us to sheep that have all gone astray, and we are all accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Still He recognizes us as persons.

Isaiah 66:2-3

New International Version (NIV)


2 Has not my hand made all these things,
and so they came into being?â€
declares the LORD. “These are the ones I look on with favor:
those who are humble and contrite in spirit,
and who tremble at my word.
3 But whoever sacrifices a bull
is like one who kills a person,


Let's tackle this scripture first. What 66:3 is referring to are ineffective sacrifices for the sake of simply sacrificing as am empty ritual. Let's add a little more for context.

and whoever offers a lamb
is like one who breaks a dog’s neck;
whoever makes a grain offering
is like one who presents pig’s blood,
and whoever burns memorial incense
is like one who worships an idol.
They have chosen their own ways,
and they delight in their abominations;
4 so I also will choose harsh treatment for them
and will bring on them what they dread.
For when I called, no one answered,
when I spoke, no one listened.
They did evil in my sight
and chose what displeases me.â€

God is not speaking out against the killing of a bull, but for the meaningless in the sacrifice one might make in that act alone. So he is not playing a Sarah McLachlan song and asking people to give money for the rescue of bulls from sacrifice here.

Clearly the bible makes a distinction between man and the rest of the animal kingdom. Man is set apart and elevated. Animalkind are not equal to mankind, so if we are going to tie the title of "Person" to mankind, then we would be minimizing that to include animals as well.

This is not to say that animals should not be treated with an amount of reverence and respect. They are God's creatures, but we have dominion over them. We eat them, we wear their skins, we make useful products from them and God clearly sanctions this within the pale of respect not only for his creations, but also the proper care and concern for the resource animals are.

So, no. Animals are not "persons" and I'd caution anyone in thinking they are, or defining them in the same way we define mankind.
 
=Danus;615233]Let's tackle this scripture first. What 66:3 is referring to are ineffective sacrifices for the sake of simply sacrificing as am empty ritual. Let's add a little more for context.

and whoever offers a lamb
is like one who breaks a dog’s neck;
whoever makes a grain offering
is like one who presents pig’s blood,
and whoever burns memorial incense
is like one who worships an idol.
They have chosen their own ways,
and they delight in their abominations;
4 so I also will choose harsh treatment for them
and will bring on them what they dread.
For when I called, no one answered,
when I spoke, no one listened.
They did evil in my sight
and chose what displeases me.”

God is not speaking out against the killing of a bull, but for the meaningless in the sacrifice one might make in that act alone.
Yes let's tackle this scripture, I agree it is about meaningless sacrifice. I agree with your context that God is talking about a worthless sacrifice and even one that does not have the power to change a man's heart such as the Christ is able to do. That is even why God says it is like he is killing a person. And there is no getting around it, the scripture says "person" and some translations say "man". Nevertheless it is about comparing the worth of a bull with a person. Only because the person sacrificing disregards the life, and therefore the person being sacrificed. That's why the blood of the offering is not to be burned with the flesh, nor eaten. Because the blood is given by God as an atonement. Read the above verse 2. It says that by God's hands all was made. That life belonged to God.
Clearly the bible makes a distinction between man and the rest of the animal kingdom. Man is set apart and elevated. Animalkind are not equal to mankind, so if we are going to tie the title of "Person" to mankind, then we would be minimizing that to include animals as well.
Of course we are a higher station of species, but what if I told you that to count a lower life as expendable for your mistakes was Satanic in nature; who not only had no regard for us because he was higher than us, but consequently by the same spirit of vanity longed to even be higher than he was.
This is not to say that animals should not be treated with an amount of reverence and respect. They are God's creatures, but we have dominion over them. We eat them, we wear their skins, we make useful products from them and God clearly sanctions this within the pale of respect not only for his creations, but also the proper care and concern for the resource animals are.
This is a good attitude to take. I'm just saying what the love in me says. That my dog is a person and I treat her as such. She has feelings and she returns love too.

So, no. Animals are not "persons" and I'd caution anyone in thinking they are, or defining them in the same way we define mankind.
Don't be silly, respectfully, you end up sounding pretentious. God forgive my cynicism. God likened men to animals all the time. We are counted as sheep for the slaughter. Hard to forget that one. We are all living sacrifices when we walk in Love but the life belonged to God.
I not saying animals are all worth the same as a man. In fact I'm saying man is worth more. I'm saying that love doesn't have such limitations. The whole creation moans in travail awaiting the revealing of the sons of Light.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Danus, in no way did I mean to imply that you disregard the blood of Christ by what I said in above post. I know that you don't and it is most precious to you.
 
What qualifies a person to be a person? I suppose you might want to define what a person is.

Here is a non-religious definition, dicationary.com:

per·son   [pur-suhn] Show IPA
noun
1.
a human being, whether man, woman, or child: The table seats four persons.
2.
a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing.
3.
Sociology . an individual human being, especially with reference to his or her social relationships and behavioral patterns as conditioned by the culture.
4.
Philosophy . a self-conscious or rational being.
5.
the actual self or individual personality of a human being: You ought not to generalize, but to consider the person you are dealing with.

I would say a person is one who was created in the image of God. Animals were not created in the image of God. People have characteristics that God contains in perfection. We have a will, we know right from wrong. This works well when describing the three Persons of the Trinity, though the Christian would say the Trinity is in unity.

Genesis 1:26
New King James Version (NKJV)
26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;...

- Davies
 
What qualifies a person to be a person? I suppose you might want to define what a person is.

Here is a non-religious definition, dicationary.com:

per·son   [pur-suhn] Show IPA
noun
1.
a human being, whether man, woman, or child: The table seats four persons.
2.
a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing.
3.
Sociology . an individual human being, especially with reference to his or her social relationships and behavioral patterns as conditioned by the culture.
4.
Philosophy . a self-conscious or rational being.
5.
the actual self or individual personality of a human being: You ought not to generalize, but to consider the person you are dealing with.

I would say a person is one who was created in the image of God. Animals were not created in the image of God. People have characteristics that God contains in perfection. We have a will, we know right from wrong. This works well when describing the three Persons of the Trinity, though the Christian would say the Trinity is in unity.

Genesis 1:26
New King James Version (NKJV)
26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;...

- Davies
The term person does not mean a man anymore than a person means God. Let us make man in our image does not automatically conclude a man could not be made in God's image and consequently cease to be a man. Scripture doesn't say let's make an image of ourselves and call it man. It's as if the last animal they made they decided to make in their image. Christ is a man yet he is sent in the person of God.

The word personality is a good indicator of a person. Animals have wills and personalities too. They learn to go outside to pee even as we learn to go in the toilet. They know when they've done wrong also. Elephants mourn, show loyalty, love and affection.

We think men know right from wrong, yet Jesus said to his followers that some of them would be killed by men thinking they were serving God. It is not possible therefore to conclude all men know right from wrong. God used an ass to rebuke a man. He says the ox knows his master but Israel does not know. Oh the pride of men.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top