From: Glenn Morton (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Sep 05 2003 - 05:19:05 EDT
>From: Dr. Blake Nelson [mailto:email@example.com]
>Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 10:29 PM
>Seems to me you could just as easily say it is a
>universalist panacea in that in as many universes you
>will be saved no matter what religion may be the
>correct one, because there will be myriad of everyone
>that are pious adherents to that belief.
But it makes religion metaphysically meaningless. Let's say religion X is
the true belief system. In this universe I believe religion X but in other
universes I don't. My salvation depends upon the accidental fact that I was
born in this universe, not another. No activity of a Messiah had any thing
to do with my salvation. And if religion X is capricious religion in which
people are saved by the whimsy of the god, then the god is a fickle god,
saving me in this universe, not saving me in another. So, once again, does
salvation under this scenario have anything to do with the god? I don't
think so because I am saved in this universe by the accident of birth.
I would grant that possibly (and I haven't thought this through) that
reincarnational religions might survive. Why? They tend to believe you do
it over and over until you get it right. MWH is great for them--lots of
chances to do it over. :-)
>So, MWH is far from a religion killer. Ultimately how
>infinite you or me would be reconciled by a God
>depends on the conception of God to begin with. You
>are of course assuming that the myriad of each of us
>are somehow connected in a way that MWH doesn't
>postulate, as has been discussed in passing by Howard
>in the past.
>Anyway, to repeat the point: since there are an
>infinite number of everyone who is saved, salvation
>can as easily be characterized as triumphing under
>MWH. No religion killer there.
Only in the most trivial way and without much effort by God.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 05 2003 - 05:21:36 EDT