Hick’s Replica Theory, H.H Price’s Dream-World Mr. DeZilva

John Hick’s Replica Theory John Hick’s (1922 - ) Replica Theory stems from his concept on the Irenaean Theodicy (soul-making concept, and our life now is simply a test for a later life) Replica Theory is the theory that an identical recreation of a person means, in fact, being regarded as the same person – it can be seen as an extension of resurrection or reincarnation Hick’s soul-making concept implies the need for life after death, so that our souls can continue to progress and we can have a retrospective opinion on our actions and decisions

Hick continued He believed that the body and soul are inseparable; when the individual dies, God creates a replica of the individual in another world (this is due to God’s Omnipotence) We cannot achieve our true potential in this life, and thus, need the afterlife

Hick’s Example Example: someone who ceases to exist at place A comes into existence at place B. The person in place B simply disappeared from place A and reappeared in place B. It is not a spatial transition, just a reappearance. (I.e someone who dies in London may appear as a replica in New York) There is continuity of memory, or bodily features, habits. The person is conscious of the transition, but would not understand how they came to be in a different place. Hick believes that a person is an everlasting psycho-physical unity, therefore the body is a necessity

Hick Continued Hick rejects the traditional doctrine of an eternal hell, because it is incompatible with belief in a God of love This belief was more of a development for social control and using fear to encourage people to act in a particular way Just because you were a member of another religion, Hick doesn’t believe that God would prevent people from an opportunity of an eternal life – everyone has the capacity to continue developing their soul

Criticism to Hick Brian Davies: There is still a difference between the self and the replica of the self (i.e. the replica doing something in 5 minutes is not the same thing as the current self doing something in 5 minutes) Jesus’ death is pointless if Hick truly believes that any religious believer can attain Heaven in their afterlife If we are constantly replicated, and will eventually get to Heaven, where is the incentive to become a better person?

Criticism continued Disembodied Existence after death Might it be possible for us to survive without bodies? Swinburne: We can imagine a situation where we could exist without a body (and if we can imagine it, then it is coherent as a concept We have bodies, not we are bodies Consciousness could potentially exist on its own, without the body (mind/body problem)

H.H. Price (1889 – 1984) & LAD Concerned with the issue of the clarity of ideas about survival after death IF the whole idea of survival after death is something we cannot possibly imagine, then there is no point in taking discussion of evidence for or against it any further With that said, Price deems that LAD is conceivable via disembodied existence Compares it to that of a dream – not bound by time or space, but a world made up of mental images that we have had and can have

Price continued People could potentially have mental images after death that resembled physical sensation and felt as though they had identities – this would be enough to qualify as a “life” after death This image/dream-world for Price would be a result of the experiences we have had, and may be pleasant or unpleasant This suggests a subjective afterlife  we may have people in our dreams, but they might not have us in theirs.

Criticisms of H.H Price Not consistent with traditional Christian teaching or any other world religion, for that matter) – directly contradictions Resurrection and Reincarnation There is no contact with ultimate reality or with God  no judgment, no eternal life. This concept is tough to apply to babies or people with insufficient mental processes (incapable of memories, desires, etc.) Hick  humans are social creatures, and this thought puts humans in a non-social state. There is no genuine contact with one another.