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