Reconciling Christianity with ET Aliens

[awitch]

Aliens are demons.

Yeah, but to be fair, pretty much everything is a demon.

 

[Brian Mcnamee]

It is a good toss up question and I see you have noted a basic truth the lens you see the scripture through will determine your theology. The young earth guys believe God's word is a real history and without error so you have in Genesis the earth created before the rest of the planets and sun and moon. Then life is created all on the same day with fish, birds animals creeping things and they all breed after all their own kind. This again taken literally would eliminate evolution over billions of years as a possibility. When you introduce the topic and you again see two camps. Those who believe there are ET's and those who think it is a demonic manifestation and this ties in big time with end days possibilities. Why is man genetically modifying all of our plants and gene editing animals and working towards trans humanist ideas and even proposing merging man and machine a link with your brain to a computer? Nature is God's creation and man was made in the image of God and life is precious so we see Satan trying to remake and modify the very creation and those who take the mark of the beast will not or can not be forgiven. It also notes that the beast will be given power by the dragon and will cause all to worship the dragon and himself. In 2 Thess it says the man of sin is revealed in the temple exalting himself over all that is God. He performs lying signs and wonders that deceive even the elect if it were possible.
So at this juncture we can look back to the day of Noah and who were the Nephalim who were worshiped as gods and had human sacrifices performed and all? Look up videos by Tom Horn, LA Marzuli and Steve Quayle they have done some digging into this topic and is sure looks like CERN and all are trying to bring up demons back to the party for this end times run.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Yeah, but to be fair, pretty much everything is a demon.

To some people anyways.

 

[solid_core]

I watched a Christian documentary about UFOs which asserted that the existence of extraterrestrial aliens cannot be reconciled with Christian theology. If Christian theology is true, then ET aliens do not exist and probably the unexplainable UFOs are demonic deceptions. The lecturer in the documentary was Gary Bates ( Gary Bates - creation.com )

Just wondering what people think.

There was a new story that brought this topic to mind:
Texas Politician Alienates Twitter Users By Suggesting E.T.s Need Religion

Young earth creationists incline to various forms of extremism and antiscientific bias. I would not consider such opinions to be too important.

Jesus has become a human to save fallen human race. We do not know in what relationships are creatures on other planets with God, we also do not know how are they related to humanity. Therefore we simply do not know how would they fit into Christianity.

Maybe it would be for them also, maybe its exclusive just for humanity. I am pretty sure that God would give us specific instructions when we would begin to commonly meet extraterrestrials, like He gave clear instructions to Peter about pagan nations.

 

[The Righterzpen]

The bible talks about 3 worlds.

The world that was [before flood],
the world that is [current],
and the world soon to come [mill].
All are on the same earth.

Although it's true that this word "worlds" is the Greek here in Hebrews is the word "aion" (a marking off of a time span or an "age") and not "cosmos" (although cosmos is never plural because there is only one universe); to say that verse includes all the "ages" as related to the current cosmos; I don't think is quite accurate either based on the usage of the verb "created". It's aorist indicative active which is a secondary past tense. The "world to come" isn't here yet. (At least not in it's fullness.)

Not that other passages don't speak of "age to come"; but this particular passage in Hebrews, based on the verb, doesn't seem to be speaking of future age.

Then arises the question of how many "aions" are there actually?

In Hebrews 1:1 "times" (past) the word "palia" is used (which is where we get "paleo" from; indicating pre-flood). Which makes sense in this context. That's not the word "aion".

Now although the pre-flood earth was very different in some of the types of life it possessed; it was still the same planet, in that it is currently still the same fallen world from Adam. The recreated world though will no longer bear that fallen nature or the potential to fall. And so it is a very different "aion" or "age".

"Aion" though apparently is used post resurrection "age" as well as future "age" in Ephesians 2:7. Matthew 24:3 also speaks of "the end of the age" meaning the end of OT Judaism.

Although in that chapter, Jesus also speaks of the end of the cosmos. "Heaven and earth will pass away.... of that hour knows no man.." (not even Jesus at that point. - Although I think He knew post resurrection when the end of the cosmos was going to be.)

Yet raises a valid question ("end of the age") of whether Jesus is actually speaking of a whole continuous age that stretches to the end of time?

I'd have to do some more investigation on the overall use of this word "aion".

As to the question of extra-terrestrial life; this passage doesn't prove that it doesn't exist. We know there are multiple planets and logically assume there are multiple solar systems.

Now if we look at John 3:16; it raises another intriguing question. "For God so loved the cosmos that He gave His only begotten son...." Note that word "world" is the word "cosmos". It's not "world" as in "inhabitance of an area". That Greek word is used in "A decree went out from Augustus Caesar that all the world (inhabitance of an area) be taxed." Which of course makes contextual sense because Augustus wasn't taxing all the people on earth. (I.E. the Chinese, the peoples in the Americas, etc.) He was taxing all within the empire.

So knowing that non-carbon based entities called "angels" aren't part of the redemption plan; God loved the cosmos that He gave His Son doesn't apply there. Yet the giving of the Son applies to the cosmos? So..... if the only planet in the cosmos that has life on it is earth; than John 3:16 doesn't make sense.

Also we know the entire cosmos is recreated.

So... what's out there? (I guess we'll find out on the other side of eternity.)

 

[The Righterzpen]

This is a silly argument because it tries to take what the Bible does not talk about - alleged intelligent life on another world - and put it in the context of what happened in this world.

In reference to Romans 8:22.

Though I agree with the rest of your point about the spread of the gospel. This statement in Romans about the creation groaning and travailing brings up another interesting possibility (which could very well apply also to extra-terrestrial life, but also definite to non-human life on this planet. Maybe this statement makes the two related?

Scripture speaks of "life" as constituting everything that possesses "the breath of life". We know this includes humans, (at least) land based animals and plants. A passage in Job defines what possess the breath of life as being "life" actually. (Job 33:4)

This delineates carbon based entities from non carbon based entities. Carbon based life possesses that life because of the breath of life granted it by God.

Which raises the question of whether or not "angels" are actually "life forms" because they are not carbon based. Is this why they are outside of the redemption plan; in that if they fall there is no possibility of reconciliation. Yet the non-carbon based angels that haven't fallen still exist in this fallen cosmos.

So if individual angels can exist in a corrupted universe and not be corrupted themselves; this possibility would hold true for other sentient (possibly "carbon based life"?) of comparable intelligence to humanity.

Yet if "carbon based" is the definition of "life"; we still see all other life on this planet is subject to the fall. Everything that possesses the breath of life has the potential to die; whereas non carbon based angels do not.

So, is there other "life" (as is defined "carbon based") out there living on other planets? (Possibly - but it would still be subject to the fall.)

We know absolutely there are other (non-carbon based) entities in the universe.

So, could a carbon based life form of comparable (or even superior) intelligence to humanity exist and still not be created in the image of God? That's a good question; seeing how we generally consider comparable intelligence to be a "marker" for God's image. Yet, Scripture clearly defines that all created in God's image are strictly the prodigy of Adam (or in Christ's case Eve).

So how do dogs, cats, cows, horses etc. "groan and travail awaiting the revelation of the sons of God". Being the recipients of the breath of life; they would have to bear some cognizant appreciation for the reality of the Creator. How an ant or an ameba (LOL) would have that awareness is another question; but fact remains that they are clearly life forms.

So, any (at least carbon based life) would appear to be subject to hold up under the same constitution as non-human life on this planet does.

Imagine being a fairly intelligent extra-terrestrial life form who's lived a fairly comfortable existence for, how ever long the fall on earth took; and suddenly the life on your planet begins to die and you have no idea why? That'd be pretty terrifying!

Interesting complexities that verse in Romans brings up.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Little red men in flying saucers!?

How about big pink and cat puke green polkadot crustaceans in flying saucers!

How is it humanity assumes extra-terrestrial life would resemble us?

 

[cloudyday2]

Regarding the demon theory of UFOs, there is a common pattern where a person will witness a UFO and then begin to have more unambiguously paranormal experiences such as poltergeists. The men-in-black experience that often follows a UFO experience is more like paranormal than FBI agents. So I can see how a person might wonder if the whole thing is demonic.

However, I have a hypothesis that an objectively real but disturbing experience might cause a person to become psychologically unstable and begin to experience hallucinations such as poltergeists, men-in-black, etc. In other words, the UFO might be objectively real, but the experiences following the UFO experience might be hallucinatory.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Regarding the demon theory of UFOs, there is a common pattern where a person will witness a UFO and then begin to have more unambiguously paranormal experiences such as poltergeists. The men-in-black experience that often follows a UFO experience is more like paranormal than FBI agents. So I can see how a person might wonder if the whole thing is demonic.

However, I have a hypothesis that an objectively real but disturbing experience might cause a person to become psychologically unstable and begin to experience hallucinations such as poltergeists, men-in-black, etc. In other words, the UFO might be objectively real, but the experiences following the UFO experience might be hallucinatory.

It is possible that one real traumatic event could trigger one to question other aspects of their reality.

You might find this study interesting. There are some natural explanations as to why there are certain common threads to certain types of experiences (like the "alien abduction" stories.

Bible Study: Theory on Angels, Ghosts & Extra-Terrestrial Life Chapter 1: What are Angels?, a bible fanfic | FanFiction

 

[Sketcher]

Regarding the demon theory of UFOs, there is a common pattern where a person will witness a UFO and then begin to have more unambiguously paranormal experiences such as poltergeists. The men-in-black experience that often follows a UFO experience is more like paranormal than FBI agents. So I can see how a person might wonder if the whole thing is demonic.

However, I have a hypothesis that an objectively real but disturbing experience might cause a person to become psychologically unstable and begin to experience hallucinations such as poltergeists, men-in-black, etc. In other words, the UFO might be objectively real, but the experiences following the UFO experience might be hallucinatory.

There are also tie-ins with New Age beliefs for some of these people who believe that UFOs have come to Earth, which hallucinations don't really cover. Hallucinations may explain some of it, but it's not a complete explanation for all of what is reported. Since Christianity associates any real power within the New Age milieu with the demonic realm, it makes sense why Christians will say this. Of course, one would have to give credence to these stories to make a real alien=demon assertion, and that wouldn't necessarily explain other extraterrestrials out there which have not yet visited Earth.

 

[Sketcher]

In reference to Romans 8:22.

Though I agree with the rest of your point about the spread of the gospel. This statement in Romans about the creation groaning and travailing brings up another interesting possibility (which could very well apply also to extra-terrestrial life, but also definite to non-human life on this planet. Maybe this statement makes the two related?

Scripture speaks of "life" as constituting everything that possesses "the breath of life". We know this includes humans, (at least) land based animals and plants. A passage in Job defines what possess the breath of life as being "life" actually. (Job 33:4)

This delineates carbon based entities from non carbon based entities. Carbon based life possesses that life because of the breath of life granted it by God.

Which raises the question of whether or not "angels" are actually "life forms" because they are not carbon based. Is this why they are outside of the redemption plan; in that if they fall there is no possibility of reconciliation. Yet the non-carbon based angels that haven't fallen still exist in this fallen cosmos.

So if individual angels can exist in a corrupted universe and not be corrupted themselves; this possibility would hold true for other sentient (possibly "carbon based life"?) of comparable intelligence to humanity.

Yet if "carbon based" is the definition of "life"; we still see all other life on this planet is subject to the fall. Everything that possesses the breath of life has the potential to die; whereas non carbon based angels do not.

Angels are spirits, not what we consider biological life. Yet, the Bible describes them as having sapient activity, so I would say they are definitely "alive" in a sense.

So, is there other "life" (as is defined "carbon based") out there living on other planets? (Possibly - but it would still be subject to the fall.)

Maybe, maybe not. If deeds on this planet could corrupt life on another planet, that opens up a lot of questions and possibilities. But we don't know that in fact happened, even if intelligent life on another planet exists. Paul was clearly talking about life on Earth, that we know. I see no indication that he was describing anything that might have happened on another planet, or that such a possibility entered his mind.

So, could a carbon based life form of comparable (or even superior) intelligence to humanity exist and still not be created in the image of God? That's a good question; seeing how we generally consider comparable intelligence to be a "marker" for God's image. Yet, Scripture clearly defines that all created in God's image are strictly the prodigy of Adam (or in Christ's case Eve).

Maybe. From one standpoint, it could be considered convenient, they would deserve no more dignity or protection than animals. A counterpoint to that is that the scope of Genesis 1:28 is clearly limited to Earth and its animals, so we wouldn't have the divine right to subdue extraterrestrial worlds and beings like we do on this planet.

 

[cloudyday2]

Bible Study: Theory on Angels, Ghosts & Extra-Terrestrial Life Chapter 1: What are Angels?, a bible fanfic | FanFiction

Very interesting ideas in that link.

 

[renniks]

It's a non-issue. If there is other life in the way that we understand life, it is so far away that we can never know for sure. There is not even a habitable planet in our own solar system. No, Mars is not habitable. Mars has 1/3 the gravity of earth. No technology can overcome that. UFO's are demonic deceptions, illusions or misunderstandings of natural phenomena.

Arguing from silence is not helpful. However, the fact that God does not mention aliens means that it is not important. We surely have enough problems on earth. One day everything will be known that can be known. Until then, the Kingdom of God should be our focus.

This is pretty much what I believe also. If God created creatures or humans somewhere else, how does that affect us?
Had anyone read CS Lewis' Space trilogy? He imagined that God created many worlds and all the original couples had the choice of whether they ate the forbidden fruit or not. I need to read it again, but it was an interesting concept.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Angels are spirits, not what we consider biological life. Yet, the Bible describes them as having sapient activity, so I would say they are definitely "alive" in a sense.

Agreed that these non-carbon based entities called angels are definitely animate entities that have an independent volition with the ability to make choices of themselves.

Yet it does not appear to me that they possess the breath of life; despite that they are also created by God. Creatures that possess the breath of life appear very much to be a different category.

Now what makes angels "alive"; though obviously in a different sense "alive", God only knows. The only thing we do know is that they aren't spirits in the same sense as God is Spirit because obviously they don't bear omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, immortality and existence that has no beginning and no end.

Ironically, though at one point several years ago, I was reading Ezekiel and found an interesting nuance in the Hebrew language that described the seraphim's "once dead" bodies.

Now the indication wasn't that they were "once dead" / "raised" but more in the context of that if the cosmos came under judgement to be destroyed and not recreated (i.e. if there was no atonement); then even these obedient angels would have been destroyed along with everything else that had been created and it would be "back to square one", where the only eternally existent entity was God.

Which leads into the next subject.

Maybe, maybe not. If deeds on this planet could corrupt life on another planet, that opens up a lot of questions and possibilities. But we don't know that in fact happened, even if intelligent life on another planet exists. Paul was clearly talking about life on Earth, that we know. I see no indication that he was describing anything that might have happened on another planet, or that such a possibility entered his mind.

This question (does the fall affect the rest of the cosmos) does seem self evident based on the fact that the entire cosmos is recreated. Yet how this is defined would depend on the answer to what is the scope of evil, as well as its origin.

Now from the very inception of creation we have "darkness upon the face of the deep". That's not just "absence of light" darkness; that Hebrew phrase carries the context of a "moral evil"; even though there was nothing in "the beginning" that evil could inhabit to create a fallen world. Unless angels were the very first entities created on day one.

Scripture is very clear that before "the beginning" nothing existed but God; so based on what we read in Job where the angels witness the creation of earth, we can conclude they would have been created on day one.

So if we have "darkness" (or "evil") existing from the inception of creation; where'd it come from? (I have a theory on that.)

I believe the inception of evil was the "opposite reaction" to God's creative action. (To every action is an equal and opposite reaction.) This "knowledge of good and evil" that God possessed before He created anything; was only theoretical until He "did" something. It is the "reaction" (every thing God is not) in the created realm.

Now this theory makes sense in that angels who aren't part of the "environment" of all things created on earth, are still subject to the fall. We know this because there are fallen angels. We also know that the potential to become corrupt pre-existed Adam's disobedience because Satan fell before Adam did. Note the tree in the garden was "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil"; not "the tree of good and evil".

So, because Scripture tells us the entire cosmos is recreated and we have angels who have fallen; this means that this destructive corruption involves more than just earth.

Now unless there are multiple worlds with various forms of "Adam" who endure their own "knowledge of good and evil" test; thus requiring their own form of the incarnation; then yeah, the fall of humanity would have manifested corruption in the entire universe.

Maybe. From one standpoint, it could be considered convenient, they would deserve no more dignity or protection than animals. A counterpoint to that is that the scope of Genesis 1:28 is clearly limited to Earth and its animals, so we wouldn't have the divine right to subdue extraterrestrial worlds and beings like we do on this planet.

Again, this would depend on if there is only one "Adam". If there isn't; all those rules could potentially apply in reverse and they could subdue us, if the nature of their corruption is similar to ours.

Yet looking at the size of the universe and the limits of matter; it doesn't seem likely that creatures of this material universe would be capable of interstellar travel. At least in the universe as we understand it. There may be factors outside of what we can observe that we're not aware of.

If other worlds are like this one; any life could be literally tethered to the planet of its origin.

There was a Russian scientist prior to WWI; who'd posed a hypothesis that outer space is actually hot, not cold. His theory makes some sense given all the electromagnetic energy that comes off the sun. Radiation destroys life that's not protected. Thus the Van Allen belts; which themselves are intensely radioactive.

Now here's another controversial subject. NASA is trying to develop the Orion space craft to take humans to Mars. There's a video on YouTube that makes a very interesting statement about trying to shield the occupants of the craft from the radiation of the Van Allen belts. The only earth occupant we know went into the Van Allen belts was the Soviet dog Laka on Sputnik II; and.... the Australians recorded what happened to that poor dog!

So.... if you allegedly got through the Van Allen belts in 1969 with far inferior technology; what's the problem now guys?

Now here's a video that will have you scratching your head! And this is the History Channel!

 

[The Righterzpen]

Very interesting ideas in that link.

Did you read the chapters about ghosts, UFO's and electromagnetic energy fields?

 

[cloudyday2]

Did you read the chapters about ghosts, UFO's and electromagnetic energy fields?

No, I didn't see that. I read the chapter on angels which had some interesting hypotheses that I had not heard before.

 

[JohnDB]

First off,

If aliens from another planet were to actually visit this planet they would move on as they wouldn't find one bit of intelligent life here.

Space is huge huge.
Exoplanets are rare. Ones capable of supporting some form of life are even more so.
By far most of the planets discovered in other solar systems have a Jupiter sized gas giant in the same location as our planet is from the sun/star with an orbit so elliptical that there's no way anything could survive.

Our orbit around the sun is more circular than 99.999% of all other solar systems with planets. Then calculating the ONE system that possibly has a planet our size in the right spot in a circular orbit...

Let's say for arguments sake that it is possible and actually has life like ours in it.

They are all dead and gone.

Because light from that place took so long to arrive here to Earth to be viewed by our strongest telescopes in orbit that the star has long since burned out. It's already gone. Been gone for a few thousand years too.

Even if there was another planet that had life...
We can't build a big enough and strong enough ship to travel there. The amount of energy needed to attain any significant portion of light speed would deplete all energy reserves from the Earth. Leaving said fictional ship without enough energy for the years long process of slowing down when it finishes it's 1500+ year long trek across the universe that would attain maybe one twentieth of the distance...if (and it's a fairly big if) they could devise a means of shielding the crew from the intense radiation of the universe. (There's a reason most astronauts die from cancer)

So...where alien visitors might make great movies and sci fi...there's no truth to any of it whatsoever.

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

I would ask respondents to this thread a couple of questions.
1) Do you consider Aliens and Extraterrestrials one in the same entities?
2) To you,Does Extraterrestrial mean not of Earth?
3) If you are Christian, do you think Heaven is another planet somewhere "out there"?
4) If Christian, do you believe there is intelligent life in Heaven?

I ask because it seems that to most respondents, Heaven is not considered when discussing the possible existence of life outside of Earth.

 

[cloudyday2]

First off,

If aliens from another planet were to actually visit this planet they would move on as they wouldn't find one bit of intelligent life here.

Space is huge huge.
Exoplanets are rare. Ones capable of supporting some form of life are even more so.
By far most of the planets discovered in other solar systems have a Jupiter sized gas giant in the same location as our planet is from the sun/star with an orbit so elliptical that there's no way anything could survive.

Our orbit around the sun is more circular than 99.999% of all other solar systems with planets. Then calculating the ONE system that possibly has a planet our size in the right spot in a circular orbit...

Let's say for arguments sake that it is possible and actually has life like ours in it.

They are all dead and gone.

Because light from that place took so long to arrive here to Earth to be viewed by our strongest telescopes in orbit that the star has long since burned out. It's already gone. Been gone for a few thousand years too.

Even if there was another planet that had life...
We can't build a big enough and strong enough ship to travel there. The amount of energy needed to attain any significant portion of light speed would deplete all energy reserves from the Earth. Leaving said fictional ship without enough energy for the years long process of slowing down when it finishes it's 1500+ year long trek across the universe that would attain maybe one twentieth of the distance...if (and it's a fairly big if) they could devise a means of shielding the crew from the intense radiation of the universe. (There's a reason most astronauts die from cancer)

So...where alien visitors might make great movies and sci fi...there's no truth to any of it whatsoever.

Those are all good points, but I think some of them are not as strong as they would seem at first glance.

First of all, contact with ET aliens doesn't necessarily mean a human and an alien shaking hands. Just as a seed can be planted and build a tree from soil and water and air, a tiny device might be launched to a distant planet where it builds a relay station and in-turn launches more tiny devices. Over thousands of years a network of relay stations can be built connected with laser beams. At some point one of these devices lands on Earth and constructs a relay station allowing humans and aliens to establish communications for the first time - "first contact".

Even though neither the humans nor the aliens have actually traveled from their home worlds, the same theological problems are presented to Christianity. These two species are communicating and Christian theologians must wonder how Jesus applies to the aliens.

 

[JohnDB]

Those are all good points, but I think some of them are not as strong as they would seem at first glance.

First of all, contact with ET aliens doesn't necessarily mean a human and an alien shaking hands. Just as a seed can be planted and build a tree from soil and water and air, a tiny device might be launched to a distant planet where it builds a relay station and in-turn launches more tiny devices. Over thousands of years a network of relay stations can be built connected with laser beams. At some point one of these devices lands on Earth and constructs a relay station allowing humans and aliens to establish communications for the first time - "first contact".

Even though neither the humans nor the aliens have actually traveled from their home worlds, the same theological problems are presented to Christianity. These two species are communicating and Christian theologians must wonder how Jesus applies to the aliens.

You are forgetting the resistance and speed of light problems.

One of the brightest stars in the sky is over 1500 light years away. Scientists say that it's about to go out. (It's rather old)
Meaning that at the speed of light, communication takes 1500 years each way.
Meaning just exchanging greetings takes 3,000 years at the speed of light.

And here all we see is a spec of light....but that star would swallow our sun and all planets out to Mars... because of resistance and lack of focus.
Also, that star is actually gone. Only the light from it is left that we see.