ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis) (08/24/85)
>>Resurrection implies continuity of something. The continuity >>is contained in the "we" that is resurected, since the "we" was there >>before, and after, resurrection. There's no way out of this. All >>this talk about our lack of understanding of life, and whether or not >>to take our intuition seriously is a bunch of horsefeathers that is >>going off on a tangent from this issue. [Padraig] > >I see. At A I have X, and at B I have X, so there must be a continuity of X >between the two. There are so many assumptions implicit in this that it's >hard to know where to start. > >There's quite obviously no point in continuing this discussion. [Charley] Don't stop there!? How do most people feel with regard to this matter? Padraig seems to indicate the life/death/resurrection cycle goes like this: LIFE -------------- ------------- -------..... SOUL ----------------------------------------------------------------... ...and Charley says it is like this: LIFE -------------- ------------- -------..... Of course, by Ockham, one can only logically conclude: LIFE --------------<DASALL FOLKS!> Funny, dat ole debbil Occam was a Christian Theologist! Regardless, I'd be interested in hearing (even dogmatic asssertions of faith) from people on this silly point. -am I existent yet? -ps from "Death" (t zero, Italo Calvino) The risk we ran: living forever. The threat of continuing weighed, from the very start, on anyone who had by chance begun. The crust that covers the Earth is liquid: one drop among the many thickens, grows, little by little, absorbs the substances around it, it is a drop island, gelatinous, that contracts and expands, that occupies more space ateach pulsation, it's a dropcontinent that spreads its branches overthe oceans, makes the polescoagulate, solidifies its mucusgreen on the equator, ifit doesn't stopin timeit - gobblesuptheglobe
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (08/25/85)
(Michael, there were a few groups you forgot to followup to, including net.sport.afterlife and net.politics.reincarnation . I have followed up only to the original newsgroups in which this discussion took place. Of course, feel free to re-expand the discussion if you honestly feel some pressing need to do so.) > Don't stop there!? > How do most people feel with regard to this matter? > Padraig seems to indicate the life/death/resurrection cycle goes > like this: > > LIFE -------------- ------------- -------..... > SOUL ----------------------------------------------------------------... > > ...and Charley says it is like this: > > LIFE -------------- ------------- -------..... > > Of course, by Ockham, one can only logically conclude: > > LIFE --------------<DASALL FOLKS!> Point one: the "lives" in line two above. What connects them? What makes each succeeding life also "you"? Charles implied more than once that people are resurrected. What connects or relates the lives in the so-called "Charlie's line" above? Nothing. Then why do you call the succeeding lives "your" lives? If they are, there must be some connection between your life and the succeeding lives? What? > Funny, dat ole debbil Occam was a Christian Theologist! Oh. Well, there goes Occam's Razor, we'll never be able to use it again now that we know he was a Christian theologist. (WOW!) Christians are not immune from coming up with great thoughts. (Only the ones on the net. ONLY KIDDING!!! :-) And likewise they are not immune from that human failing of not taking one's own advice. -- "iY AHORA, INFORMACION INTERESANTE ACERCA DE... LA LLAMA!" Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr