Re: MHW - a different theological deduction

 While the MWH may not be a 'religion killer', it certainly is a 'Christianity killer'.

 

Why invent many different worlds?  MWH scientists perceive them to be the simplest explanation in that they require the least addition of assumptions to predict correctly experimental results.  However, the one assumption it does make is such a mammoth one!  It seems a large assumption to make to keep hold of an "objective reality". 

 

If in these world there are other "you"s,  what implications does this have for the nature of humanity.  No longer are we unique, it only feels like it.  Our uniqueness is an illusion!

 

What implications does this have for the incarnation?  Does it mean that God had to be incarnated in each world?  What does that mean for the Trinity?  Is it possible that Jesus chose a different path in any of these worlds?   Could there be a world in which Jeus did not choose the cross - what happens about redemption in that world then? 

 

Can God really be said to be the creator when these worlds spring into existence at each quantum decision?  

 

Everett viewed the universes as totally autonomous with no interaction betweeen them. David Deutsh thinks that there any be occasions when they do interact.

 

These universes cannot be seen or communicated with so they cannot even be used to justify occult phenomenon such as UFOs or ... .  However, neither can they be verified or falsified.  There existence is a step of faith.  

 

This appproach completely blunts Occam's razor! 

 

The MWH is in many ways a faith position.  Each world is created ex nihilo. 

 

It has many theological implications many of which are incompatible with a Christian worldview.

 

It is no wonder that Wheeler, though once advocating a MWH approach, rejected it as carrying too much metaphysical baggage.

 

Steve