Replies

Thanks in advance for any relevant replies, dearest Betty Boop!

Wow. You set the bar very high there, dear James: What I say must be "relevant." But — relevant by what standard? Lacking that, I do not have a clue as to what you consider "relevant."

I dunno. Maybe it's just that "I'm from Venus, and you're from Mars." (I never read the book, but like the symbols.)

Or maybe it's because my "picture" of reality is different than yours; for mine includes what, for lack of a better term, can be called Spiritual reality. You rule this out in principle. (And then will not allow anyone to question you closely about this.)

I'll try to answer your questions, last to first, and hope my replies are "relevant."

#3: "As we know now, mammalian cloning is a reality. If you were cloned with a muscle cell of yours, and brought to life through the application of known science, would this clone have a soul? What is its mode of salvation? How would it affect your very own?"

Yes we know mammalian cloning is "a reality." We have Dolly the Sheep as proof. The problem I have with your question is: Dolly the Sheep does not have a soul to worry about. I sense you are "kludging" the distinction between man "as animal" (i.e., biological being) and man "as man" (i.e., noetic being, an imago Dei). Dolly doesn't have a soul to worry about; she can pose to her own mind no such question of this kind, for the simple reason that she is not a self-conscious being. Self-aware, probably. But not self-conscious.

If you lose such distinctions — as you must, dear James, if you forbid any understanding of man that includes a spiritual extension — then man is "just a mammal." And if you do that, then you have to account for why Dolly doesn't propose scientific and philosophical theories, build cities, write novels or operas, etc., etc. If ultimately there is no distinction of note as between Dolly and a man (which is evidently your view), then why can man do math, and why can't Dolly?

I really don't know where you want to take that one, dear James.

#2: "What is the mode of salvation for those born mentally deficient? Are they damned?"

I have no idea of the particulars, James. Except to note that a God of truth, justice, and mercy does not hold innocents accountable for what they were helpless to prevent.

#1: "What is the mode of salvation for, say the stillborn infant, of a member of a tribe that has not yet heard of your religion? Is it damned?"

I don't think such a child is "damned." Damnation can only come from God, not by human creeds. The Lord blames no one for "innocent ignorance."

Well, that probably makes total sense to you, dear JCB! Thank you so very much for the conversation.

Hello, dearest Betty Boop!

The 'relevance' refers to your earlier reply.

"You rule this out in principle. (And then will not allow anyone to question you closely about this.)"

Actually, no. I did make it a point to mention that I am not ruling out any "spiritual reality" in principle - only your (and other believed) versions of it, for the reason that they have flaws in them.

Talking about the earlier referenced flaws, you said:

"Yes we know mammalian cloning is "a reality." We have Dolly the Sheep as proof. The problem I have with your question is: Dolly the Sheep does not have a soul to worry about. I sense you are "kludging" the distinction between man "as animal" (i.e., biological being) and man "as man" (i.e., noetic being, an imago Dei). Dolly doesn't have a soul to worry about; she can pose to her own mind no such question of this kind, for the simple reason that she is not a self-conscious being. Self-aware, probably. But not self-conscious."

This has little to do with what I asked. Are you outright stating that it is impossible to clone a human being (a mammal)? I am asking you to consider a cloned human being - your clone. Now answer what was asked, please.

"The Lord blames no one for "innocent ignorance."

So, would it be fair to assume that a tribal born in a faraway island, or for that matter, a feral child, is assured salvation? Would it then also be fair to say that it is better to be still-born and dead, or born to be a feral human being and suffer momentarily, for an easy, assured salvation?

Thanks for the reply, dearest Betty Boop!

#3 - the clone question I endeavoured to answer above -- a clone like an identical twin has its own soul. Man can tinker with the tools to push the birth of a clone, but man does not "create life" and definitely does not create a soul

#2 - this is pretty clear that they are saved by the blood of Christ and do not have any of their own sins. They are not damned, full stop

#1 -- you are correct, The Lord blames no one for "innocent ignorance." -- neither the child, nor the other members of the tribe... What the Lord has planned for the other members, we don't know, we can only have confidence in His love and His kindness.