[cincinnati65]

I know this is open-ended, but I'm curious to see what others think about the subject.

[Ramius]

How could a clone be non-human? Of course it is.

[Ramius]

It isn't a duplicate of a person. It is another person, made from the same plan, but a separate new individual.

[Bob]

Not being particularly religeous, I'm not sure that I see the conflict that you seem to.

In my view, identical twins (the naturally-occurring cloning of one child from its sibling) each have their own unique souls. I don't see why a person's body having been artificially cloned would preclude him from having a soul anymore than being a twin would.

[rogue yam]

A clone is, if perfectly rendered, an identical twin with a different birthday. Nothing more. Everyone who has ever met identical twins knows that they are two different people with each possessing just what God intends for us all to possess.

The problems with cloning, so far as I can discern them are:

1). Playing God instead of worshiping Him. This problem is insurmountable and renders moot the others.

2). Imperfect clones who then suffer from their imperfections.

3). Clones subsequently being afforded fewer rights than all men are endowed by their creator (i.e. God).

I say it's a clear no-go.

[Salvation]

Raelians, Catholics and the Clone Age

Toward the end of this article the writer addresses the body and soul issue. Sources mentioned also.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Welcome to the fruit loop convention. Yee-hah!

[T. P. Pole]

I'll bet the same question was asked when they first were doing test tube babies, and that doesn't seem to concern folks anymore.

[Dr Warmoose]

From a theological standpoint, the soul is produced when the seed of man is joined with the woman, and a child is formed. This is the mechanism for passing on the sin nature of Adam, and why Jesus Christ had to be born of a virgin and not be of the seed of Adam.

To break that chain, then one allegedly is breaking the "sins of the father" mechanism, and similarly is breaking the chain of inherited salvation. (see Romans 5)

It would seem wrong for God to honor man's attempts to subvert YHWH by creating their own savior (one who does not inherit the sin nature) by installing a haploid soul, does it?

If you want to get real wild about speculation regarding clones, I submit that the Nephilim of Genesis 6 were clones. They have the common trait of clones (giganticism) and an empty shell does provide the idillic host for demon posession, since there is no fear of the Paraclete invading the soul and cleaning house, so to speak. The "bene elohiym" of 6:4, can be translated "sons of gods" (notice little 'g' gods). If the antediluvian scientists played "God" and practiced their own eugenics through cloning, then the product would indeed be their "sons", and in theological terms, their "men of great name", would mean that they were subjected to the authority and dominion of their god-like creators. (do a study on the topic of "naming")

What a great way to eliminate this population of clones than through a thoroughal global deluge? And to prevent man from quickly restarting their cloning efforts in Babel, to confuse them. (BTW, Nebechadnezzar did indeed rebuild the "Tower that reached unto heaven", so say the historians and honest archaeologists)

So now we are cloning again... allegedly.
And what did Solomon say ? "There is nothing new under the sun"
And what did Jesus Christ say? "As in the days of Noah..."

[God is good]

A clone is like a twin. So two bodies means two souls. You can't have the same soul in two bodies.