Re: MWH -- a different theological deduction

From: Dr. Blake Nelson (
Date: Fri Sep 05 2003 - 14:43:11 EDT

  • Next message: Paul Greaves: "Re: Time"

    Well, when you introduce the term willy-nilly, you
    have introduced an assumption about the process that
    it is simply random, or maximally determininistic, and
    therefore meaningless. That is the same mistake as
    saying that evolution is contrary to a christian
    conception of God because it is willy nilly.

    As I have said before, I see nothing about the MWH
    that is any different from any numerous issues that
    have historically been inherent in examing the mystery
    of salvation and lots of issues that inhere around it
    such as freewill, etc. My point was to underscore
    that there is no reason to presume that salvation
    means nothing if some version of me does not know God
    -- which is entirely different than being *damned*.

    Does anything about MWH say anything about the
    eschatology of any person vis-a-vis damnation and
    salvation? I think the answer is clearly no.

    What basis does MWH have for saying that a God who
    fits the christian understanding damns those versions
    of people who are not christian versus saving those
    versions of people who are? Many (most) christian
    denominations don't even make that claim about the
    people on this planet in this universe -- the
    underlying claim of christianity vis-a-vis salvation
    that I think all christians agree upon is that
    salvation occurs through the second person of the
    trinity, however that may take place. I do not see
    how MWH has any effect on this or any other issue of
    salvation, unless the person making that assertion
    claims to know how God doles out salvation and
    damnation. I would pause seriously before I claimed
    to know how God comprehensively doles out salvation
    and damnation.

    Does anyone see the point I am trying to make?

    Glenn's assertions about the consequences of MWH are
    metaphysical and theological and MWH does not warrant
    either of those leaps to metaphysical and theological
    assertions, including, inter alia, the non-sequitir
    conclusion that that the atheist Glenn is damned. I
    don't *know* that any particular atheist in my home
    town will be damned, much less one postulating
    infinite universes with infinite versions of me
    atheistic, hindu, etc.

    --- "D. F. Siemens, Jr." <> wrote:
    > On Thu, 4 Sep 2003 20:29:04 -0700 (PDT) "Dr. Blake
    > Nelson"
    > <> writes:
    > >
    > > 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.
    > >
    > But an infinite number are willy-nilly damned. Does
    > this help any faith?
    > Dave

    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 05 2003 - 14:45:30 EDT