RE: Questions for theists.
November 11, 2011 at 3:06 pm
(This post was last modified: November 11, 2011 at 3:07 pm by tackattack.)
Just because something creates more questions does not make it somehow invalid or of no use whatsoever. Occam's Razor doesn't make the claims that make less assumption invalid, it just looks for the simplest answer first. It doesn't by nature eliminate anything, just focuses the discussion to something manageable. I agree the problem is complex by nature.
It was asked what happens after death. You rightly started with the simplest premise, nothing. I agree that nothing happens materially after biological death. That's the end of that.
As far as which side of the fence I strddle, that's why I'm been asking you to define your criteria.
The question wasn't "what happens after biological death", it was a question about souls and the after-life. The very nature of the question invalidates your biological stopping point or qould at least be outside it's defined attributes. Theology and philosophy, and subjective experience have many examples and postulations of that afterlife. I think I clearly showed my perspective on that. Here you start to question that stopping point with your questions of the eye. If we are to discuss that relationship let's start a new topic, so as not to clutter someone else's thread with topics outside this discussion's parameters.
It was asked what happens after death. You rightly started with the simplest premise, nothing. I agree that nothing happens materially after biological death. That's the end of that.
As far as which side of the fence I strddle, that's why I'm been asking you to define your criteria.
The question wasn't "what happens after biological death", it was a question about souls and the after-life. The very nature of the question invalidates your biological stopping point or qould at least be outside it's defined attributes. Theology and philosophy, and subjective experience have many examples and postulations of that afterlife. I think I clearly showed my perspective on that. Here you start to question that stopping point with your questions of the eye. If we are to discuss that relationship let's start a new topic, so as not to clutter someone else's thread with topics outside this discussion's parameters.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
