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.
Freiheit wrote: » What implications would it have for 'people of faith?'....
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.
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?
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!:)
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
ShooterSF wrote: » The bible doesn't even mention kangaroos so I doubt Aliens appearing would concern them.
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?
: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.
Tut tut, philo. Telling fibs makes baby Yoda cry!
I suppose "fingers in the ears" is one way to react.
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?
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?
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 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.
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. ...
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.
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.
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...
