For the religious - a question
-
It seems, at least in my mind, ever more likely that life exists outside of this planet - in some form at least, maybe just at the microbial level. If this is proven to be the case, how does this affect your religious outlook - does this fit in with your personal view of how the universe came to be, or would it conflict with it? And if your view is different from the 'standard party line' of your religion, what about the two viewpoints?
No hidden agenda here, not just looking for answers from christians - hopefully Os can chime in, we maybe have different types of christians along with any lurking others. I'm genuinely interested to find out.
-
1. I think the human mind is far too primitive to grasp the complexness of the universe, it's laws, and it's properties.
2. We always talk about religion vs. Science, but what about the thousands of scientist who constantly disagree and fight amongst each other over certain theories?
3. What we know as "physics" could simply be wrong or proven wrong by a totally different set a physics. Certain galaxies exist and particles being in the same place at the same time, as well as things traveling faster than the speed of light totally defy the laws of physics. Once things go "quantum" all the rules go out the fucking window.
4. I really don't think we as humans understand "time".
5. The theory of everything =
The theory of everything will be the ultimate discovery. It would combine quantum mechanics and general relatively to solve all the riddles around us into a neat little package. It would be able to name all the physical constants in the universe, whether or not those constants vary over time, locate other fundamental elements in the unobservable universe (such as dark matter and dark energy), and so on.
Time Travel =
No explanation needed, can it be harnessed?
Heat Death =
The explanation: If the universe was infinitely old, then stars should be cool because they warmed their surroundings, making the temperature across the universe uniform. However, there are stars and the universe doesn’t have an equal temperature throughout (as detected by cosmic background radiation). This idea also only works if the speed at which the universe is expanding has remained constant because such ideas as cosmic inflation claim expansion is not always the same. When you have variables such as dark flow and dark energy also pushing and tugging on matter, heat death’s vision of a starless sky appears dim (slight pun intended).
Many worlds interpretation:
On the subject of an omniverse, the many-worlds interpretation takes a different approach explaining multiple universes. While I can tell you that this concept of quantum mechanics argues the objective reality of space but denies the reality of wavefunction collapse (or rather the condensing of physical possibilities into one single occurrence) but I go cross-eyed just thinking about that. Basically, the interpretation says for every decision we make, a new universe is born.
We are a hologram =
On the subject of the unreal, there’s another theory that suggests we’re not in an elaborate computer program but that much of what we think is the universe is nothing more than a hologram made by the universe itself.
The idea is when we look at the night sky, we’re seeing a wall with an image on it (that includes all the galaxies and stars). This holographic principle might explain why the universe appears grainy on the most basic of energy scales. Remember that a holographic image is created when an object is bathed by the light of a laser and a second laser jumps off the first’s reflective surface (which is then recorded). A third light illuminates the image to reveal the holograph. If changes to gravity waves is caused by patterns of light, than it would simulate what is, essentially, the process of creating a holographic image. If this was proven, then it would change most of what we think we know about the universe.
Ekpyrotic Universe =
The ekpyrotic scenario provides an alternative to the widely accepted Big Bang theory. It suggests that, unlike the Big Bang that began from singularity, our universe is one of a pair of universes that collided. The effect of the collision resets the universe. From there, it expands for billions of light years (the way we imagine the Big Bang occurring) until it contracts back to the Big Crunch. The speed and energy of that reduction creates another massive collision and the universe is reborn. The cycle continues for infinity.
Did you catch the crazy part? This theory states there’s another universe out there. That’s not too strange considering we accept the possibility of parallel universes. But if the ekpyrotic scenario is correct, our twin universe is right next to us in another dimension, separated by a distance less than the diameter of an atom. That’s close, even for siblings.
http://listverse.com/2010/07/12/10-craziest-scientific-theories/
-
Personally, I do believe in god but I also don't believe gays cause earthquakes and I'll burn in a pit of fire for lusting over woman.
-
Way to stay on topic...
I'd respond to some points, but I don't want to derail the original question. I'm genuinely curious.
-
I would bet my life on the idea that there is life somewhere else.
As far as changing whatever my personal spiritual philosophy might be that makes absolute zero difference.
At this stage of our evolution mankind is completely unable to comprehend infinity. I assume our grasp on the unknown is almost the same as those who thought the stars and Sun revolved around the earth.
WSS
-
It seems, at least in my mind, ever more likely that life exists outside of this planet - in some form at least, maybe just at the microbial level. If this is proven to be the case, how does this affect your religious outlook - does this fit in with your personal view of how the universe came to be, or would it conflict with it? And if your view is different from the 'standard party line' of your religion, what about the two viewpoints?
No hidden agenda here, not just looking for answers from christians - hopefully Os can chime in, we maybe have different types of christians along with any lurking others. I'm genuinely interested to find out.
It seems, at least in my mind, ever more likely that life exists outside of this planet - in some form at least, maybe just at the microbial level. If this is proven to be the case, how does this affect your religious outlook - does this fit in with your personal view of how the universe came to be, or would it conflict with it? And if your view is different from the 'standard party line' of your religion, what about the two viewpoints?
No hidden agenda here, not just looking for answers from christians - hopefully Os can chime in, we maybe have different types of christians along with any lurking others. I'm genuinely interested to find out.
There is undoubtedly life outside earth. Intelligent life even. That in no way disproves the notion of a god. We have no idea what the universe really is or how it works. For all we know we could be a single molecule in God's fingernail.
-
with all due respect - why does religion have to do with the statement by NASA?
It is a simple answer for a believer to think and know that if the Creator of heaven and earth
can make life out of nothing.... a microbe at Europa is small potatoes?
So I think that (faith?)is what is ultimately (attacked?) here with this discussion..
That and whether Assimov or Roddenberry had better storylines?
-
The universe is a vast vast place. The furthest reaches of what we can see is similar to looking through binoculars on a clear day and seeing twenty miles or so.
-
The universe is a vast vast place. The furthest reaches of what we can see is similar to looking through binoculars on a clear day and seeing twenty miles or so.
The universe is a vast vast place. The furthest reaches of what we can see is similar to looking through binoculars on a clear day and seeing twenty miles or so.
yes if the Hubble is relative, the limits of which uncovered exactly what Carl Sagan called "billions and billions"
of galaxies, and we still just scratched the surface?
-
I'm not trying to attack anything and I'm sorry if you feel I am.
I guess the angle I'm thinking is "great creator, made the universe for humans" - the traditional holy books typically present humanity as the chosen species and the earth as the chosen planet of their respective deity. If we find other life, how does that reconcile with that stance? And what about intelligent life?
-
Well, being very much a man who knows God is there and is indeed our Creator,
but not being religious at all,
I won't comment.
Nah.... it makes no difference to me at all - God doesn't have to have the Bible
explain that God also made other planets with different forms of life in other universes.
I do believe that in the infinite expansions of the universes...that surely God made life
elsewhere, maybe even people like us,
except they would be classier and not allow the invention of pittsburg steelers....
-
I would think discoveries like this would require believers to have an even looser interpretation of their holy book.
On time travel, I don't really see how that's possible without a multiverse theory (from my understanding of it at least). Maybe going forward in time though, which theoretically is already possible.
-
The Bible and thr Torah and the koran were all written when man was ignorant of the universe. If there is a god and he created all why would you reveal the infinite universe to someone who wasn't ready?
Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind... -
I would think discoveries like this would require believers to have an even looser interpretation of their holy book.
On time travel, I don't really see how that's possible without a multiverse theory (from my understanding of it at least). Maybe going forward in time though, which theoretically is already possible.
I would think discoveries like this would require believers to have an even looser interpretation of their holy book.
On time travel, I don't really see how that's possible without a multiverse theory (from my understanding of it at least). Maybe going forward in time though, which theoretically is already possible.
somehow "looser interpretations" comes off as funny from an engineer whose discipline is grounded in strict interpretations?
when it is exactly discoveries such as those gathered so far, that exclaim more intellegence than ourselves, even if it seems mysterious.
-
I'm not trying to attack anything and I'm sorry if you feel I am.
I guess the angle I'm thinking is "great creator, made the universe for humans" - the traditional holy books typically present humanity as the chosen species and the earth as the chosen planet of their respective deity. If we find other life, how does that reconcile with that stance? And what about intelligent life?
I'm not trying to attack anything and I'm sorry if you feel I am.
I guess the angle I'm thinking is "great creator, made the universe for humans" - the traditional holy books typically present humanity as the chosen species and the earth as the chosen planet of their respective deity. If we find other life, how does that reconcile with that stance? And what about intelligent life?
actually the jews are the chosen people through the ancient covenants by God described in the hebrew texts of the Torah ( and later transcribed into greek.)
the claims made by the bible writers are only taken by faith and are simply put to the reader or seeker as "will you believe?"
-
which leaves it as just faith.... not science first and only - but a faith proved by scientific discovery?
-
What does the Bible say about the number of stars? Jeremiah writes: ‘As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant’ Jeremiah 33:22. At that time, when men of learning were convinced that there were only about 3,000 stars, Jeremiah wrote that nobody would be able to count the stars.
The bible does take into account the vastness of the universe. There is no evidence in science or the Bible that there is life elsewhere. We are His handiwork.
-
What does the Bible say about the number of stars? Jeremiah writes: ‘As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant’ Jeremiah 33:22. At that time, when men of learning were convinced that there were only about 3,000 stars, Jeremiah wrote that nobody would be able to count the stars.
The bible does take into account the vastness of the universe. There is no evidence in science or the Bible that there is life elsewhere. We are His handiwork.
What does the Bible say about the number of stars? Jeremiah writes: As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant Jeremiah 33:22. At that time, when men of learning were convinced that there were only about 3,000 stars, Jeremiah wrote that nobody would be able to count the stars.
The bible does take into account the vastness of the universe. There is no evidence in science or the Bible that there is life elsewhere. We are His handiwork.
There's life elsewhere.
-
What does the Bible say about the number of stars? Jeremiah writes: ‘As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant’ Jeremiah 33:22. At that time, when men of learning were convinced that there were only about 3,000 stars, Jeremiah wrote that nobody would be able to count the stars.
The bible does take into account the vastness of the universe. There is no evidence in science or the Bible that there is life elsewhere. We are His handiwork.
What does the Bible say about the number of stars? Jeremiah writes: ‘As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant’ Jeremiah 33:22. At that time, when men of learning were convinced that there were only about 3,000 stars, Jeremiah wrote that nobody would be able to count the stars.
The bible does take into account the vastness of the universe. There is no evidence in science or the Bible that there is life elsewhere. We are His handiwork.
No evidence yet. The question was based on the supposition that, as anticipated by NASA, evidence of some form of life is found. How would you reconcile your beliefs as expressed above with that news?
-
The Bible and ETs
It is often asked, ‘Just because the Bible teaches about God creating intelligent life only on Earth, why couldn’t He have done so elsewhere?’ After all, Scripture does not discuss everything, e.g. motorcars. However, the biblical objection to ET is not merely an argument from silence. Motor cars, for example, are not a salvation issue, but we believe that sentient,intelligent, moral-decision-capable beings is, because it would undermine the authority of Scripture. In short, understanding the big picture of the Bible/gospel message allows us to conclude clearly that the reason the Bible doesn’t mention extraterrestrials (ETs) is that there aren’t any.1 Surely, if the earth were to be favoured with a visitation by real extraterrestrials from a galaxy far, far away, then one would reasonably expect that the Bible, and God in His sovereignty and foreknowledge, to mention such a momentous occasion, because it would clearly redefine man's place in the universe.
- The Bible indicates that the whole creation groans and travails under the weight of sin (Romans 8:18–22). The effect of the Curse following Adam’s Fall was universal.2 Otherwise what would be the point of God destroying this whole creation to make way for a new heavens and Earth—2 Peter 3:13, Revelation 21:1 ff? Therefore, any ETs living elsewhere would have been (unjustly) affected by the Adamic Curse through no fault of their own—they would not have inherited Adam’s sin nature.
- When Christ (God) appeared in the flesh, He came to Earth not only to redeem mankind but eventually the whole creation back to Himself (Romans 8:21, Colossians 1:20). However, Christ’s atoning death at Calvary cannot save these hypothetical ETs, because one needs to be a physical descendant of Adam for Christ to be our ‘kinsman-redeemer’ (Isaiah 59:20). Jesus was called ‘the last Adam’ because there was a real first man, Adam (1 Corinthians 15:22,45)—not a first Vulcan, Klingon etc. This is so a sinless human Substitute takes on the punishment all humans deserve for sin (Isaiah 53:6,10; Matthew 20:28; 1 John 2:2, 4:10), with no need to atone for any (non-existent) sin of his own (Hebrews 7:27).
- Since this would mean that any ETs would be lost for eternity when this present creation is destroyed in a fervent heat (2 Peter 3:10, 12), some have wondered whether Christ’s sacrifice might be repeated elsewhere for other beings. However, Christ died once for all (Romans 6:10, 1 Peter 3:18) on the earth. He is not going to be crucified and resurrected again on other planets (Hebrews 9:26). This is confirmed by the fact that the redeemed (earthly) church is known as Christ’s bride (Ephesians 5:22–33; Revelation 19:7–9) in a marriage that will last for eternity.3 Christ is not going to be a polygamist with many other brides from other planets.
- The Bible makes no provision for God to redeem any other species, any more than to redeem fallen angels (Hebrews 2:16).
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login