"Actually, at this point it would be considered a hypothesis."
You stated earlier it the soul was "considered a hypothesis".
"Never said I didn't like it. I may argue against your reasoning and point out where it is flawed, however. Now, without using Scripture, give us a repeatable test for the soul. You claimed you had one."
To argue for the sake of argument is vanity, now what you seem to have the need for is to point out the 'flawed' as another one of the E's favorite word 'ignorant'.
Yes I claim I have a test for 'soul' and I also claim where I got that test from. I also pointed out that it would be a waste of my time and yours to quote Scripture.
You do not believe Scripture, and that is your choice, so I freely choose not to give you 'joy' for this day in allowing you to mock, and ridicule Scripture.
You see knowing what I would put forth would cause only one reaction out of you, requires me not to provoke you to think thoughts that you would not otherwise think.
Please, to think that you could demand that one who seeks guidance and understanding from Scripture, could be ordered to ignore Scripture. My words are not the test, which apparently you are aware of which is why you demand I ignore Scripture.
Because it cannot be a theory until it is tested.
You do not believe Scripture...
Beep. Circle takes the square. I do not believe in some peoples' interpretations of Scripture, however. I also do not consider Scripture to be a filter through which to perceive reality. The Almighty gave me a brain; I don't turn it off simply because of a few tens of thousands of words in some text.