> On Sun, 10 Mar 1996, Juli Kuhl wrote:
>
> This is something, on the other hand that has confused me since my
> conversion. Perhaps someone can spread some light on it:
>
> Why must Christ's salvation be linked some particular metaphysics.
> I see no reason in scripture or tradition to link the story of God to
> some particular metaphysics.
I think that this is right when it concerns fine particulars, however,
I would think that one would have to believe in some basic metaphysical
systems as opposed to others. For instance, one would have to reject
naturalism, as you said below. One would also have to reject that all is
mind or spirit, since the physical incarnation and ressurection of the
second person of the Trinity is essential to the Christian faith (Bishop
Berkeley not withstanding). One would have to reject a metaphysic that
God is one with the universe, and that evil and sin are illusions, etc.
> What first attracted me to Christianity, n fact, is that it was so
> much more than a world view but was a relationship in which one could
> evaluate various world views and deal with them knowing they didn't
> matter in the end. Christianity, of course, excldes ceratin world views
> (e.g. strict relativism, or strict naturalism) but why are we so
> concerned about secondary issues when the issue is how and when does God
> make his love for us manifest and how do we deal with those events?
Worldviews do matter, not only because we act based upon our worldviews,
but we are also saved according to our worldview. However, as you point
out, we should major on the major issues and not break fellowship over
the minor (that doesn't mean, however, that we can't have "in-house"
discussions over them!).
Jeff