Alien Ideas: Christianity and the Search for Extraterrestrial Life

CRISIS magazine via CERC ^ | BENJAMIN D. WIKER

[exmarine]

To some, it's easier to believe in alien life than it is to believe in resurrection and virgin birth. Permanent death and non-virginal birth are obvious on a daily basis.

The virgin birth and resurrection are unique singular event in human history. According to Simon Greenleaf, one of hte formest legal minds in history as concerning evidence, concluded after much investigation that the evidence for the Resurrection would stand up in any court of law. It is the most attested fact of ancient history. The evidence is there. If one believes God exists, then the Resurrection is most certainly plausible. On the other hand, if one believes God does not exist, then no amount of evidence will be convincing.

[Pahuanui]

Actually, other posters here have found my arguments quite plausible, your insipid vituperations notwithstanding. By extension then, you are also calling into question the intellectual capacity and logic of others on this thread.

Of course, in light of my prior comments to you, you fail to see the delicious irony in your statement.

No matter, I'm sure you're in bliss.

[stuartcr]

They are alleged, unique events. Without actually observation, and hard proof that death did occur, I doubt seriously that resurrection would stand up in court, regardless of what someone said over 100 yrs ago. It may be the most attested to fact in history, but only to Christians. I certainly believe in the existence of God, and admit that He makes anything possible, but I don't believe that resurrection and virgin birth are plausible.

[mdmathis6]

My first Gut reaction to your posting at 285 is to cite a quotation of Paul(i'll find the scripture reference if the show me types wish it): "In Him we live, and move, and HAVE OUR BEING"(emphasis mine since I wish to differentiate that statement from what Hindu's and Buddhists might state).

The second reaction I have is to point interested parties to CS Lewis' work, The Great Divorce(meaning the great divide or split, or "fixed gulf" if you are a KJV purist) which describes a fictional bus ride from Earth, to Hell, and to Heaven. Lewis thru-out the book works to spring a multidimesional/temporal trap on the reader that leaves one breathless at the very end, in which our present reality looks very large to us, until we spend time in God's reality. and we realize that the entrance that the protagonist(written in first person) took into his kindom has shrunk into insignificance, as the protagonist has grown to fit the proportions of God's kingdom. The end of the book was totally shattering to my consciousness(like a cold slap in the ego), in the sudden finality, like a sleeper awakening from a God given dream, just before God was about to deliver the punch line....then again I don't want to give away too much of the book.

[yendu bwam]

Why do you think that original sin and hell and suffering are just for earthlings?

I assume not, stuartcr. But I don't assume either that all beings created in God's image will decide to repudiate Him.

[stuartcr]

Since I don't know that we are made in the image of God, I didn't get the connection, thanks.

[exmarine]

They are alleged, unique events. Without actually observation, and hard proof that death did occur, I doubt seriously that resurrection would stand up in court, regardless of what someone said over 100 yrs ago. It may be the most attested to fact in history, but only to Christians. I certainly believe in the existence of God, and admit that He makes anything possible, but I don't believe that resurrection and virgin birth are plausible.

Thank you for your reply. First of all, history is told by eyewitnesses, and criminals are condemned to die based upon eyewitness testimony. If you discount these eyewitnesses, why do you not discount eyewitnesses of all other history, e.g. Heroditus on Pelopenesian war, Caesar on conqust of Gaul, and on and on? The atual resurrection was not witnessed as it occurred in a sealed tomb. However, the risen Christ was seen by over 500 people. Christ was dead - ask the roman who speared him; then, 3 days later, he was seen alive; and seen alive over a period of 40 days. You have alot of questions to answer if it did not occur, e.g. who moved the stone? Why didn't the jewish leaders produce his body and crush the new movement? Why did the roman guards (on penalty of death) allow the tomb to be opened after it was sealed? If you look carefully at the evidence, you will notice: One day the disciples ran like cowards, the next day they are all lions of faith and laid down their lives based on the reality of the Resurrection. How do you explain that? Who would die for a lie - knowing it was a lie? Name one other person in history who died for a lie KNOWING it was a lie. All of the counter-theories have giant holes in them and do not stand up to logical scrutiny (mass hallucination, swoon theory, wild dogs tore apart the body, etc. etc.). An objetive person must admit that Resurrection is the BEST explanation of the evidence. Evidence is evidence. Greenleaf wrote textbooks on evidence which are still used today at Harvard Law School. This is an appeal to authority, granted, but it convinced him.

[A.J.Armitage]

I'm not going to get into a pi$$ing contest with you over this. You're the one who's insulted me from the first time you've posted...Read down through...

Can't get anything right, can you?

My first post on the thread to you:

To: Johnny Shear

If aliens are ever proven to exist (Even microbes on another planet or moon), Fundemental Christianity (And many other religions) are DONE!

Nope.

71 posted on 12/17/2002 9:28 PM CST by A.J.Armitage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

It's a wonder I didn't get banned for that horrible insult, nope.

But will you ever admit that, at best, you were imagining things? Of course not. You haven't got the character.

All because I shared some information I got from a Fundementalist Christian...One who believes God created man on earth and life nowhere else. Thus, no life lives outside of earth...Thus, if we ever find it, that type of Chrisitanity will be proven wrong. And many other types of "Religions" too, I can only assume.

The "information" you "shared" is nonsense.

You apparently think of yourself as an expert on fundamentalism because you actually met one. Yes, a real, live fundamentalist.

He told you his person opinion, nothing more. If we discover aliens or microbes on Mars, his personal views will have to change. Nothing more.

If you've got a problem with that information, I simply don't care...

I personally know it to be false.

Not that I care you refuse to admit it when you're wrong. It's your character flaw.

Go preach to someone who doesn't know you're a lying hypocrite

Got any provable examples of this lying and hypocrisy?

[exmarine]

I certainly believe in the existence of God, and admit that He makes anything possible, but I don't believe that resurrection and virgin birth are plausible.

May I respectfully ask you something. If you believe in God, does this God have any power or is he just a disinterested observer? Is he a personal God with a personalilty who created humans with personalities in his image, or is he an it or a thing? What is your belief in God based upon? Your imagination? How do you define his attributes?

[My2Cents]

Killed by the flood.

Oh! Good point. I should have thought of that. Thanks.

[MHGinTN]

Your mention of hydrogen is an interesting note. In the bang concept of creation, the first stars were void of the heavier elements ... hydrogen, helium and lithium, are theorized to be the stuff of first stars. Only after these first stars were destroyed by using up their elements in fusion reactions did heavier elements come to exist in the spacetime realm. There is a small problem with this notion however, since heavier elements have 'coalesced' in the planets and lighter elements have coalesced in gas giant planets, while the lighter elements still run the fusion reactions on the sun. [The existence of neutron stars leftover from super novas and black holes lurking about explains the heavier elements to be coalesced in later solar systems, but the questions of why the future solar systems aligned as they have is still open for theories. There is a recent Discover magazine --or was it a Scientific American article?-- that discusses these questions more effectively than I could. You might find it of interest by doing a site search at the mag sites.] Now, as we discover planets around other stars, we're finding that other (some) solar systems have gas giants in tight orbits around the star ... out of place according to the current explanation of solar system formation.

The location of Jupiter and Saturn in our solar system have tended to do what was witnessed with the meteor impacts on Jupiter, they tend to sweep up debris sailing around or dropping out of distant location at the edge of our solar system. That sweeping action has allowed this planet to sustain life long enough for intelligent life to arise.

And that brings me to the central point of the anthropic principle, the notion that the balance of fundamental forces, so finely tuned at such improbable ratios, is essential to our intelligent life manifesting in the universe and that manifestation may be the reason the forces are so tuned ... so the universe may become aware or be sensed. Cosmologists apply the anthropic notion as a means to shortcut their search for a unifying theory of everything, kind of like peaking at the answer to a calculus problem then backing up in the calculations to find the proper equational flow.

[yendu bwam]

I certainly believe in the existence of God, and admit that He makes anything possible, but I don't believe that resurrection and virgin birth are plausible.

Hey stuartcr. Do you not see the contradiction in your own words?

[MHGinTN]

I have formulated a rather esoteric (to a non-believer reading it) way of describing the universe in which we exist that opens a reasoning line which supports the resurrection, if you're interested in possibilities.

[js1138]

is the most attested fact of ancient history.

I'm amused by your assertions about how evidence works in a court of law. You have a book that asserts that there were eyewitnesses. Not a single document written by any of those eyewitnesses exists. There is no chain of evidence.

By those standards, every wild claim made in every book on UFOs, ESP, and the like would stand up in a court of law. Even more so, because the witnesses are alive and able to testify.

Conan Doyle, a very bright person who made a lot of money writing about the examination of evidence, was completely taken in by a couple of teenage girls who forged pictures of garden fairies.

The simple fact of life is that most people are fools, willing to believe in John Edwards, Uri Geller, Bill Clinton, or anybody else with good looks and charisma.

[yendu bwam]

According to Simon Greenleaf, one of hte formest legal minds in history as concerning evidence, concluded after much investigation that the evidence for the Resurrection would stand up in any court of law. It is the most attested fact of ancient history. The evidence is there. If one believes God exists, then the Resurrection is most certainly plausible. On the other hand, if one believes God does not exist, then no amount of evidence will be convincing.

Well put, exmarine!

[stuartcr]

All those events you mentioned, witnessed in history, with the exception of resurrection and virgin birth are believable, they can, and do happen every day.

[yendu bwam]

The simple fact of life is that most people are fools, willing to believe in John Edwards, Uri Geller, Bill Clinton, or anybody else with good looks and charisma.

It could be that Christians are the greatest fools in the world - or vice versa. For myself, I'll go with the man who taught us love and holiness, perfection and purity, faith and hope, rejection of sin and evil, and pure unadulterated courage. Of course, if Christians are right, non-Christians may get a wake-up call...

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Christian thought is responsible for the scientific breakthroughs in history...

Exactly. As well as the foundation of our governing principles.

By it's very definition, Christianity compels the individual to take God's earthly creation and make it fruitful and righteous, as a reflection of His grace.

Unlike ever other religion in history, Christianity charges its flock to seek, grow and glorify in this life, rather than merely preparing for the next life.

The Pilgrims had it right.

COLOSSIANS I:10-11 "That ye might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God; strengthened with all might, according to His glorious power, unto all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness.

[MHGinTN]

peaking = peeking ... didn't meant o make that odd slip

Websters: (2)peak vb : to bring to or reach a maximum (C) 1995 Zane Publishing, Inc. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary (C) 1994 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated

[stuartcr]

There is a distinct difference between possible and plausible.