If extra terrestrial life was discovered

Ninjamonkey

what a crock of ****e. There is no evidence for aliens.

Personally I dont think anyone would give a rats ass if aliens were discovered. Unless they can bring down the price of petrol, clear our bank debt, noone would care a **** if they existed or not, and why should they ?

The world is flat - you have been conned into believing otherwise.

Insect Overlord

Ninjamonkey wrote: »

what a crock of ****e. There is no evidence for aliens.

Personally I dont think anyone would give a rats ass if aliens were discovered. Unless they can bring down the price of petrol, clear our bank debt, noone would care a **** if they existed or not, and why should they ?

The world is flat - you have been conned into believing otherwise.

Epic. Rock on, brother.

philologos

Freiheit wrote: »

What implications would it have for 'people of faith?'....

What implications do you think it should have? Unless you outline this, the discussion is pointless.

I can think of none. The Bible as Christians understand it is God's word communicated to humans. There's nothing limiting the possibility that God could have spoken to other intelligent life on their own terms.

Freiheit

Well why would a biblical God create life on other planets and not mention it in the bible?would it not make the bible look even more ridiculous? If they are human like why was christ sent to save earth humans only?

Sarky

philologos wrote: »

What implications do you think it should have? Unless you outline this, the discussion is pointless.

I can think of none. The Bible as Christians understand it is God's word communicated to humans. There's nothing limiting the possibility that God could have spoken to other intelligent life on their own terms.

Well that didn't take long.

Freiheit

'The earth is a circle' Isaih 40:22
The earth has corners....revelation 7:1
The earth rests on pillars...Samuel 2:8
The earth does not move,Chronicles 16:30

How did they explain those away? mistranslations ? No doubt they'd find a way of explaining aliens away too!:)

philologos

Freiheit wrote: »

Well why would a biblical God create life on other planets and not mention it in the bible?would it not make the bible look even more ridiculous? If they are human like why was christ sent to save earth humans only?

Think about it this way, what is the Bible according to Christians?

It's God's revelation to mankind. It needn't delve into extensive depth, because it is about God and what He has done in respect to humankind.

I'm still trying to figure out what is so difficult about that notion even in the light of potential "extraterrestrial" life in the universe.

philologos

Freiheit wrote: »

'The earth is a circle' Isaih 40:22
The earth has corners....revelation 7:1
The earth rests on pillars...Samuel 2:8
The earth does not move,Chronicles 16:30

How did they explain those away? mistranslations ? No doubt they'd find a way of explaining aliens away too!:)

Perhaps you should present the verses in their correct context rather than slicing out choice words?

It would be like me delving through a 30 minute conversation that you had with someone and selecting a small passage, or selecting numerous words and concatenating them together without consideration of what the conversation was actually about.

Delirium

philologos wrote: »

Think about it this way, what is the Bible according to Christians?

It's God's revelation to mankind. It needn't delve into extensive depth, because it is about God and what He has done in respect to humankind.

I'm still trying to figure out what is so difficult about that notion even in the light of potential "extraterrestrial" life in the universe.

Two words, original sin. If the bible is revelation to mankind that would imply there another intelligent species that aren't living with the possibility of eternal damnation for not bending the knee to your deity.

Then you have the puzzle of why God wouldn't say something along the lines of, "btw I created a much better behaved species on a planet in the tangerine nebula." It would be pretty important especially if that species was to appear, say around the year 32AD claiming to be the son of the creator. When in actual fact it was our intergalactic cousins on safari.

philologos

koth wrote: »

Two words, original sin. If the bible is revelation to mankind that would imply there another intelligent species that aren't living with the possibility of eternal damnation for not bending the knee to your deity.

The Biblical text clearly refers to man. By the by I'd have to ask by what you understand by "original sin" as the phrase is not found in the Bible?

Just because the Bible is God's word to mankind doesn't of necessity preclude God from speaking to other species in their own terms.

koth wrote: »

Then you have the puzzle of why God wouldn't say something along the lines of, "btw I created a much better behaved species on a planet in the tangerine nebula." It would be pretty important especially if that species was to appear, say around the year 32AD claiming to be the son of the creator. When in actual fact it was our intergalactic cousins on safari.

Who says that aliens must of necessity be "better behaved"? Actually, heck who said that being "well behaved" was the central focus of Christianity?

It doesn't seem that the idea of God revealing Himself to human kind through the Bible doesn't draw any difficulty to considering extra-terrestrial species.

Sarky

You're using something that WASN'T said to establish the likelihood that it exists.

That's really, really stupid.

decimatio

I don't think it'd change much to be honest. It'd probably be much less of an issue for them than Evolution was/is.

The thing about religion, what makes it so weak from our perspectives, a non-requirement for evidence and an unfalsifiable nature, is exactly what makes it so strong to adherents.

If you believe in xianity for example what does it matter if 90+% of it needs to be reinterpreted every few decades ? By believing in the first place you've already shown that evidence in relation to your religion is meaningless.

Nevermind Aliens, they could find documentation written by eyewitnesses and validated as such, which contradicted some specific belief like Jesus rising from the dead for example, or contradicting something Saul of Tarsus said, a non-eyewitness who practically made xianity.

Would it matter? Not an iota.

Delirium

philologos wrote: »

The Biblical text clearly refers to man. By the by I'd have to ask by what you understand by "original sin" as the phrase is not found in the Bible?

The whole tantrum God had when Adam and Eve decided to have some fruit. The fall of Man I think is another phrase I've seen used also.

Just because the Bible is God's word to mankind doesn't of necessity preclude God from speaking to other species in their own terms.

Well the bible doesn't say "Adam, Eve and A.L.F ate the forbidden fruit". He could speak to man in his own terms but why leave out other life-forms? I mean the snake got a mention, why not mention the aliens (who may or may not have eaten the fruit too) as well?

Who says that aliens must of necessity be "better behaved"? Actually, heck who said that being "well behaved" was the central focus of Christianity?

Never said the aliens must be better behaved. I'm suggest a possibility, that's all. It wasn't a comment about "well behaved" being part of Christianity as we know from old testament it's a bit of a sticky wicket.

It doesn't seem that the idea of God revealing Himself to human kind through the Bible doesn't draw any difficulty to considering extra-terrestrial species.

Well you would say that as you're a fan of the book. And it's not considering aliens but what impact proof of them would cause for members of certain book clubs.

How do Christians resolve the problem of a more advanced peace loving species existing without Christianity to guide them? It would suggest that its not necessary for a society better itself.

philologos

koth wrote: »

The whole tantrum God had when Adam and Eve decided to have some fruit. The fall of Man I think is another phrase I've seen used also.

Well the bible doesn't say "Adam, Eve and A.L.F ate the forbidden fruit". He could speak to man in his own terms but why leave out other life-forms? I mean the snake got a mention, why not mention the aliens (who may or may not have eaten the fruit too) as well?

The Bible says that Adam and Eve fell into sin at the fall. What it doesn't say is that I'm guilty of their particular sin, but rather I've sinned in my own right and I am guilty of it before a holy and righteous God. I'm inclined towards sin, that's not quite the same as being guilty of the sin of Adam.

It doesn't matter who was present. Adam and Eve are describing what generally happened to humankind. The Bible was God's revelation to man. It doesn't surprise me very much that it doesn't concern aliens much as it doesn't surprise me that it doesn't give extensive details of God's relationship to pet dogs.

koth wrote: »

Never said the aliens must be better behaved. I'm suggest a possibility, that's all. It wasn't a comment about "well behaved" being part of Christianity as we know from old testament it's a bit of a sticky wicket.

I don't agree that it is a "sticky wicket". Indeed, I've touched on that here before, but that's for another discussion.

koth wrote: »

Well you would say that as you're a fan of the book. And it's not considering aliens but what impact proof of them would cause for members of certain book clubs.

That's a bit silly. The OP is the one claiming that I should somehow have a grandiose difficulty in respect to extraterrestrial life. If so, I'm one of the people who should know far better than you as to what difficulty it would pose to Christians in all due respect.

koth wrote: »

How do Christians resolve the problem of a more advanced peace loving species existing without Christianity to guide them? It would suggest that its not necessary for a society better itself.

Christians would presumably nonetheless point to a better God - who came into the world, died in our place so that we could find the only true place where peace is actually possible - unity through Christ.

Aliens or no aliens the Gospel still holds together.

666irishguy

Depends on what kind of ET life it was. Bacterial life would be debated until they had DNA proof it was non terrestrial in origin or until somebody could for example land on Mars and find more of it in a place that couldn't facilitate the argument that it came from Earth on a piece of rock. If they landed on the White House lawn I would imagine the world would go ape **** for a few weeks and then slowly over the course of a few years come round with the odd pocket of holdouts not believing they are real or claiming they are demons or something else. It would be religions worst nightmare however, if they had been here before (or all along as observers) and kicked the legs out from under the whole show with proof the religious texts were not historical. My greatest nightmare with regards to ET visitors would be akin to the plot of Halo. The Aliens are religious extremists and as the ramp comes down from the saucer, a voice from inside says "can we interest you in the word of God".

Delirium

philologos wrote: »

The Bible says that Adam and Eve fell into sin at the fall. What it doesn't say is that I'm guilty of their particular sin, but rather I've sinned in my own right and I am guilty of it before a holy and righteous God. I'm inclined towards sin, that's not quite the same as being guilty of the sin of Adam.

So why isn't everyone in the Garden of Eden if we're not carrying the burden of Adam and Eves dietary indiscretion?

It doesn't matter who was present. Adam and Eve are describing what generally happened to humankind. The Bible was God's revelation to man. It doesn't surprise me very much that it doesn't concern aliens much as it doesn't surprise me that it doesn't give extensive details of God's relationship to pet dogs.

:rolleyes:
a talking snake gets a mention but the other species that was also created in Gods image doesn't even make the cut? Aliens didn't get a mention because the desert dwellers couldn't imagine other intelligent beings living on another world.

That's a bit silly. The OP is the one claiming that I should somehow have a grandiose difficulty in respect to extraterrestrial life. If so, I'm one of the people who should know far better than you as to what difficulty it would pose to Christians in all due respect.

Tut tut, philo. Telling fibs makes baby Yoda cry!

The OP was:

Freiheit wrote: »

What implications would it have for 'people of faith?'....

It's a "how would the religious adapt to ET visiting" question.

Christians would presumably nonetheless point to a better God - who came into the world, died in our place so that we could find the only true place where peace is actually possible - unity through Christ.

I suppose "fingers in the ears" is one way to react.

Aliens or no aliens the Gospel still holds together.

ShooterSF

The bible doesn't even mention kangaroos so I doubt Aliens appearing would concern them.

Sarky

ShooterSF wrote: »

The bible doesn't even mention kangaroos so I doubt Aliens appearing would concern them.

It doesn't say anything about Jesus being a wife-beating drunk who once strangled a child either. This is, by Phil's logic, evidence enough that if proof were found of Jesus being an abusive alcoholic husband and child-murderer, then that's perfectly ok and doesn't change the gospel.

Airtight, so it is. Atheism is over, everyone, go home.

endacl

ShooterSF wrote: »

The bible doesn't even mention kangaroos so I doubt Aliens appearing would concern them.

Why would kangaroos be concerned at the appearance of aliens?!? Australia's full of weird yokes. Kangaroos have seen it all before.

philologos

koth wrote: »

So why isn't everyone in the Garden of Eden if we're not carrying the burden of Adam and Eves dietary indiscretion?

Humans are inclined to sin as a result of the fall. We've sinned ourselves individually, and as a result we deserve nothing but God's wrath. Thankfully God sent His Son Jesus to stand in our place and take the condemnation we deserve if we believe and trust in Him. Wonderful news that I marvel at every day.

:rolleyes:
a talking snake gets a mention but the other species that was also created in Gods image doesn't even make the cut? Aliens didn't get a mention because the desert dwellers couldn't imagine other intelligent beings living on another world.

Satan gets a mention because he's a real force we'll have to deal with in this life.

Tut tut, philo. Telling fibs makes baby Yoda cry!

How is it a lie to say that as a Bible believing Christian I'm a good candidate to say it wouldn't affect my faith one iota because the Bible is God's revelation to man.

It's not lying to say that the OP in his posts so far has implied that it should be a difficulty. After all if he wanted a real answer he wouldn't have posted it here. There's no reason why an atheist should have a clue as to how this would affect a Christian who sincerely believes in the Gospel.

I suppose "fingers in the ears" is one way to react.

Except that's not what I'm doing. I'm telling you clearly and Biblically that there's no good reason why it should affect my faith. I've asked you why it should and the reasons are fairly poor so far.

If the Bible is a book about God's relationship with man why should I expect extensive treatises concerning aliens. You've missed the point. What is the purpose of the Bible in Christian belief?

Bloodwing

philologos wrote: »

Humans are inclined to sin as a result of the fall. We've sinned ourselves individually, and as a result we deserve nothing but God's wrath. Thankfully God sent His Son Jesus to stand in our place and take the condemnation we deserve if we believe and trust in Him. Wonderful news that I marvel at every day.



Satan gets a mention because he's a real force we'll have to deal with in this life.



How is it a lie to say that as a Bible believing Christian I'm a good candidate to say it wouldn't affect my faith one iota because the Bible is God's revelation to man.


Except that's not what I'm doing. I'm telling you clearly and Biblically that there's no good reason why it should affect my faith. I've asked you why it should and the reasons are fairly poor so far.

If the Bible is a book about God's relationship with man why should I expect extensive treatises concerning aliens. You've missed the point. What is the purpose of the Bible in Christian belief?

Phil regardless of whether or not the appearance of ET life would conflict with the bible or your interpretation of it do you not think it strange that the common creator of these two life forces would choose not to reveal one to the other?

When he sent forth his son to educate us in the wonders of himself why didn't he tell us then. There was a lot of effort put into teaching us about how he created all life on earth and the earth and heavens themselves so why not take that opportunity to tell us about our "brothers and sisters" living on other worlds. If there is life out there it's huge, it's bigger than almost anything that's come before so why leave it out.

My personal opinion is that the people of the time when your god and religion were created were not advanced enough to even comprehend other earth like planets and as a result never saw ET life as an issue that could conflict their stories.

We don't even need to look to other planets for similar situations. The stories and teachings of your religion are very much based around the one area of the planet that the religion originated from. We also hear little or nothing about the creatures of earth who came before man, is this because nobody felt it important to explain that god didn't create all life at the same point in history or is it again because the people of that time had no comprehension of the existence of these creatures and how their existence would create another inconsistency in the stories?

philologos

Bloodwing wrote: »

Phil regardless of whether or not the appearance of ET life would conflict with the bible or your interpretation of it do you not think it strange that the common creator of these two life forces would choose not to reveal one to the other?

No I don't largely because the Bible is about the holy and righteous God who created all things and how He relates to us. Now if the Bible was a book intended to describe all life forms in the universe I might agree with you.

When he sent forth his son to educate us in the wonders of himself why didn't he tell us then. There was a lot of effort put into teaching us about how he created all life on earth and the earth and heavens themselves so why not take that opportunity to tell us about our "brothers and sisters" living on other worlds. If there is life out there it's huge, it's bigger than almost anything that's come before so why leave it out.

The question is what is most important for us to know. Christianity says Jesus, Him crucified and Him resurrected. The Bible doesn't promise to tell us everything about creation. Heck the Bible doesn't even promise to tell us everything about God, but it does tell us enough about our situation and what God has declared and what He has done.

My personal opinion is that the people of the time when your god and religion were created were not advanced enough to even comprehend other earth like planets and as a result never saw ET life as an issue that could conflict their stories.

I'm still confused as to why you think God has an obligation to tell us everything about the universe? Or why that is a logical necessity?

We don't even need to look to other planets for similar situations. The stories and teachings of your religion are very much based around the one area of the planet that the religion originated from. We also hear little or nothing about the creatures of earth who came before man, is this because nobody felt it important to explain that god didn't create all life at the same point in history or is it again because the people of that time had no comprehension of the existence of these creatures and how their existence would create another inconsistency in the stories?

I have to ask have you read the Bible? Honestly one look at the Gospel of John and many other texts would show you the Gospel was intended for all nations. Heck even read just chapters 2 to 4 where Jesus clearly states the Gospel is for the whole world.

God intended the Bible as His word to us about knowing Him, acknowledging His abundant mercy to us and living and speaking for Him until Christ returns.

PlainP

philologos wrote: »

Humans are inclined to sin as a result of the fall. We've sinned ourselves individually, and as a result we deserve nothing but God's wrath. Thankfully God sent His Son Jesus to stand in our place and take the condemnation we deserve if we believe and trust in Him. Wonderful news that I marvel at every day.

But when we are born, according to the Christian faith we have original sin this is one of the reasons we are baptised to remove this original sin.

I always had a problem with this as having had two children I know that the minute they were born they did not have any sort of sin original or not.

Ellis Dee

philologos wrote: »

No I don't largely because the Bible is about the holy and righteous God who created all things and how He relates to us. ...

Indeed, and the Beano is about a fox who is always trying to steal chickens, gets a load of buckshot in his arse nearly every week, and yet is back again a few days later and up to his usual shenanigans. Nearly as good as getting crucified and rising from the dead three days later.:rolleyes:

The Beano is also about a cowboy with an adoring aunt. He shaves by driving in the stubble with a hammer and eats pies made of whole cows, horns and all, that his aunt bakes for him.

And so on.

I have to admit that what I read in the Beano - and even more so in the Dandy - does tend to tax my credulity sometimes.

But my faith is strong, and after all the tangible evidence supporting the veracity of the Beano and Dandy stories is no less strong than the proof that anyone could present that the Bible stories are true.

The truth is out there all right, but you won't find it here:

philologos

PlainP wrote: »

But when we are born, according to the Christian faith we have original sin this is one of the reasons we are baptised to remove this original sin.

I always had a problem with this as having had two children I know that the minute they were born they did not have any sort of sin original or not.

The term original sin is not found in Scripture. Most Reformed denominations hold that man is guilty of their own rebellion and rejection of God. Where the fall comes in is in terms of our inclination towards sin.

You're right that the RCC teach that bit it isn't Biblically based as far as I can tell.

Baptism doesn't remove sin. Jesus on the cross takes our sin away and takes God's wrath on Himself. Baptism is an external sign of an inward motion. Coming to new life in Christ. I'm more inclined towards adult baptism for this reason.

nozzferrahhtoo

Freiheit wrote: »

What implications would it have for 'people of faith?'....

Very little I imagine. Given there is no reason to think there even is a god... this leaves the concept being pretty labile. For example people of faith once thought disease and epilepsy were caused by demonic possession. When medical science and the Germ Theory of Disease was progressed however the religion merely swept those nonsense claims under the carpet and moved on whistling innocently.

I can think of no reason to expect alien life to be any different really. It might slightly erode the play area religion has... as most scientific progress tends to do... but given the wanton editing powers of people of faith I can only expect they would reinterpret their beliefs in such a way as to leave them unchallenged by the new data... and move on.

In short, the less substantiated an idea is (in this case not substantiated at all) the more labile it is to wrap it around the facts we have without actually touching any of them.

PlainP

philologos wrote: »

The term original sin is not found in Scripture. Most Reformed denominations hold that man is guilty of their own rebellion and rejection of God. Where the fall comes in is in terms of our inclination towards sin.

You're right that the RCC teach that bit it isn't Biblically based as far as I can tell.

Baptism doesn't remove sin. Jesus on the cross takes our sin away and takes God's wrath on Himself. Baptism is an external sign of an inward motion. Coming to new life in Christ. I'm more inclined towards adult baptism for this reason.

Just had a quick google and found this??


http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/articles/what-is-the-biblical-evidence-for-original-sin

There are several lines of biblical evidence for the historic Christian doctrine that we are all born into the world with sinful natures, due to the sin of Adam.

housetypeb

philologos wrote: »

... but rather I've sinned in my own right and I am guilty of it before a holy and righteous God. I'm inclined towards sin, that's not quite the same as being guilty of the sin of Adam...

Always with that servile crap.
Daddy is going to be mad,he loves me but he's always judging me in everything I do,he's so good and I'm so bad.
I'm a bad bad boy and know that I deserve to be punished, I try so hard to please him and be good, but I always end up failing as I'm really bad inside-and so on and so forth......

Sin City

Sure God (If you take it literally, not of this earth) is an alien,

Jesus then would have been a hybrid human alien

Those that ascended into Heaven in body like Ezekiel and Mohammed were alien abductees.

**Dons tin foil hat**

The bible is littered with alien references masquerading as divine.

Angels, Demons Devils Gods, all extra terrestrial

Think about it, why can’t we see the face of God?
Surely God could have given us that ability

Or is the reality, that God would probably scare the bejaysus out of us as he resembles the predator or something


The end times in revelation in talking about an alien invasion and an epic battle between too factions


I dunno about ye but.......
Armageddinoutta here

Muppet Man

Not be adding fuel to the God fearing folk fire, but almost certainly they would claim Ezekial 1:1-28 was speaking about aliens. Its about something coming down out of the sky with 2 wings and wheels turning within wheels and travelling in all four directions without turning. Its all mad sh1te really as far as I can tell, written by a prophet after too many bad figs.

That being said, with all the ascending into heaven carry on, I would have more faith that Jesus was astronaut or time traveller than the son of God.

Muppet Man