Jim Eisele wrote on Saturday, July 20, 2002 2:08 AM
>I have enjoyed the exchange about who does and does not have a soul.
>However, I find Glenn's current "position" fruitless.
>We could spend decades discussing who does and does not have a soul.
>Ultimately, this is a faith/science forum, NOT Philosophy 101.
>Hopefully, we can get back to looking for the intersections of faith
Jim, Let me explain why this isn't philosophy only. If the soul leaves
absolutely no change in behavior, then one has absolutely reason to believe
that it actually exists. It becomes like faeries. If the soul leaves some
form of behavioral change which leaves an observable trace in the
archaeological record, then it is science.
for lots of creation/evolution information
personal stories of struggle
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 20 2002 - 21:02:10 EDT