RE: [asa] Multi-worlds, parallel histories, and theology

From: Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com>
Date: Sat Mar 22 2008 - 18:58:47 EDT

George said:
"I'm afraid no, on a couple of counts. 1st, certainly "Christ Jesus
came into the world to save sinners" (I Tim.1:15) & "for us & for our
salvation he came down from heaven" (Nicene Creed). But that doesn't
have to mean that he would not have come into the world, that the Word
would not have become incarnate, if humanity had not sinned. "

 

If humanity had never sinned, then Christ would have never had to die on
the cross- correct? And if He didn't die on the cross, what would his
resurrection mean (how relevant- Easter season).

 

...Bernie

 

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of George Murphy
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 2:38 PM
To: ASA
Subject: Re: [asa] Multi-worlds, parallel histories, and theology

 

Bernie -

 

I'm afraid no, on a couple of counts. 1st, certainly "Christ Jesus came
into the world to save sinners" (I Tim.1:15) & "for us & for our
salvation he came down from heaven" (Nicene Creed). But that doesn't
have to mean that he would not have come into the world, that the Word
would not have become incarnate, if humanity had not sinned. While the
belief that Incarnation was contingent upon sin has been the dominant
tradition (as witnessed by the "happy fault" line I quoted), it has not
been held universally & Eph.1:10, as I pointed out, suggests the
contrary. In the Middle Ages there were theologians (e.g., Albert the
Great & Alexander of Hales) who held this view, & in the 20th century
Karl Barth was a strong exponent of it. Creation is for the sake of
Christ - God made a world in which "flesh" could come into being so that
the Word could become flesh & unite "all things" with himself. (This
can be called a "Theanthopic Principle" - cf. my article at
http://www.luthersem.edu/word&world/Archives/13-3_Science/13-3_Murphy.pd
f .

 

N.B. - this is merely a theological opinion. I am not arguing that
those who think that the Word would not have become incarnate if
humanity had not sinned are heretics or anything of the sort. OTOH the
church has never defined the latter view as dogma either. It is also a
theological opinion, & I think not as good a one as that of Barth et al.

 

2d, for intelligent creatures who were created through the evolutionary
process, sin was inevitable though not a logical necessity. It doesn't
take omniscience or divine foreknowledge to see that. Thus the
possibility that humanity would not have sinned is quite unrealistic.
This does not mean, however, that "we were built by God as sinners."

 

 

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/

        ----- Original Message -----

        From: Dehler, Bernie <mailto:bernie.dehler@intel.com>

        To: ASA <mailto:asa@calvin.edu>

        Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 3:56 PM

        Subject: RE: [asa] Multi-worlds, parallel histories, and
theology

         

        Hi George- I thought Christ came for the sole purpose of
redeeming man. If no fall, no redemption is necessary. Christ came to
reverse the curse-no sin, no curse, no redemption needed... no Christ
entering the world to redeem it, since it doesn't need redemption,
therefore no relationship or knowledge of Christ. Christ did come
because we sinned, and God knew it would happen (in this world), so he
knew from the start He would send Christ.

         

        But if we believe there was no real Adam, he's a metaphor, then
there was no historical fall event and we are sinners and still need
Christ, because we were built by God as sinners.

         

        Of course, we all agree this is nonsense (multi-verse), right?
Therefore, all the multiverse speculation is nonsense, correct?

         

        
________________________________

        From: George Murphy [mailto:gmurphy@raex.com]
        Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 7:00 PM
        To: Dehler, Bernie; ASA
        Subject: Re: [asa] Multi-worlds, parallel histories, and
theology

         

        Your 2d paragraph assumes that the Incarnation was contingent on
human sin. I think that that is not the case, but that the Incarnation
is the purpose of creation - cf. Eph.1:10. (I am very happy to have
excised from the Exsultet at our Easter Vigil tomorrow the line "O happy
fault that deserved to have so great a redeemer." That doesn't express
a profound mystery, as sometimes thought, but just a misconception. We
didn't earn Christ's taking flesh by sinning!)

         

        Shalom
        George
        http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/ <http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/>

         

        ----- Original Message -----

        From: "Dehler, Bernie" <bernie.dehler@intel.com
<mailto:bernie.dehler@intel.com> >

        To: "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu <mailto:asa@calvin.edu> >

        Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 6:13 PM

        Subject: RE: [asa] Multi-worlds, parallel histories, and
theology

         

        Christine- to take it further- could there be a world were God
forgives
        Satan? He forgives everyone? No need for hell?
        
        Also, in a world where the fall never happened, Christ never
came to die
        on the cross, so there would be no relationship with Christ. If
the
        fruit of the "knowledge of good and evil" were never eaten,
would
        everyone be perpetually ignorant?
        
        
        -----Original Message-----
        From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
<mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]
On
        Behalf Of Christine Smith
        Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 6:36 AM
        To: asa@calvin.edu <mailto:asa@calvin.edu>
        Subject: [asa] Multi-worlds, parallel histories, and theology
        
        Hi all,
        
        I was pondering the multi-worlds hypothesis last
        night, and came across a question that I don't think
        has yet been specifically addressed on the listserv
        yet?
        
        As I understand it, the multi-worlds hypothesis states
        that there is just one universe (with one set of
        physical laws), but that within this universe, every
        possible outcome at a quantum level (and by extension,
        the macroscale level) occurs. Assuming my
        understanding is correct, would this imply that in
        other "worlds", Biblical events such as the Babylonian
        exile, the crucifixition and resurrection of Christ,
        the conversion of Paul, etc. would not happen?
        Likewise, would that imply that of the multiple copies
        of "me" in other worlds, some would be Christian and
        some would not? What would this then imply about the
        nature of heaven and hell, and of God's plan of
        salvation? Indeed, would there be some worlds where
        "the fall" never happened?
        
        In short, although multi-worlds could be broadly
        consistent with Christianity (or perhaps Theism is the
        better term here) in the sense that it does not
        contradict the doctrine of God as a sovereign Creator
        of a rational universe, how would/could it be
        consistent with other Christian doctrines, if at all?
        
        In Christ,
        Christine (ASA member)
        
        To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu
<mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu> with
        "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
        
        
        To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu
<mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu> with
        "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Mar 22 19:01:55 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Mar 22 2008 - 19:01:55 EDT