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.”