But how often must we make decisions based on incomplete information in our lives? Usually not such serious ones though. It’s not meant to be scientific, I just thought it was fun.
I’m fine with incomplete information, but they presented conflicting information, at least in my eyes.
By defining the “soul” as we understand it in common usage, the very concept of “soul death” is only comparable to actual death, so by stating that people do live without them, they’re effectively invalidating the idea of a soul as understood in the first place.
Let me be clear, I understand the point they are trying to make, and I understand that this very sticking point is the crux of the question. But I still feel they are invalidating their own question by acknowledging folks do wake up post-“soul death.”
But how often must we make decisions based on incomplete information in our lives? Usually not such serious ones though. It’s not meant to be scientific, I just thought it was fun.
I’m fine with incomplete information, but they presented conflicting information, at least in my eyes.
By defining the “soul” as we understand it in common usage, the very concept of “soul death” is only comparable to actual death, so by stating that people do live without them, they’re effectively invalidating the idea of a soul as understood in the first place.
Let me be clear, I understand the point they are trying to make, and I understand that this very sticking point is the crux of the question. But I still feel they are invalidating their own question by acknowledging folks do wake up post-“soul death.”
You are correct and I concede.