The Vatican Looks to Attract the Trekies

[Groundhog]

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23696497-401,00.html
Alien life 'doesn't negate God's existence'

From correspondents in Vatican City
May 14, 2008 05:59am

<!-- END Story Toolbar --><!-- Lead Content Panel -->THE search for extraterrestrial life does not contradict belief in God, the pope's chief astronomer said today, adding that some aliens may even be innocent of the original sin.


"As an astronomer I continue to believe that God is the creator of the universe," Jose Gabriel Funes said in the Vatican mouthpiece, the Osservatore Romano.

Even if "we don't currently have any proof... the hypothesis" of extraterrestrial life cannot be ruled out, said Father Funes, a Jesuit priest who directs the Vatican's observatory at Castel Gandolfo, near Rome.

"Just as there are a plethora of creatures on Earth, there could be others, equally intelligent, created by God," he said.

Original sin, which by Christian tradition occurred in the Garden of Eden when Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit of a particular tree, refers to the fallen state from which humans can be saved only by God's grace.

Asked about the difficult theological question, Father Funes said: "If other intelligent beings exist, it's not certain that they need redemption."

They could "have remained in full friendship with their creator" without committing the original sin, he said.

If not, extraterrestrials would benefit equally from the "incarnation," in which Jesus Christ, the Son of God, assumed earthlings' flesh, body and soul in order to redeem them, which Father Funes called "a unique event that cannot be repeated".


A fine example of why the Vatican should steer clear of the topic of science... I can picture it now: A giant futuristic ship lands in NY city, a highly advanced creature emerges from the ship, and the pope rushes up to meet him and tell him that it's vital that he determines whether his sould needs redemption - did this highly advanced being's distant, distant ancestor also eat the apple???

I'd think that if intelligent life was discovered, it'd be a pretty major theological blow to a lot of religions. Not one the most devout couldn't reconcile, but it'd definately require some crafty explaining...

[Mac Howard]

Another quote from the same article:

To strengthen its scientific credentials, the Vatican is organising a conference next year to mark the 200th anniversary of the birth of the author of the Origin of Species, Charles Darwin.

Wow! Galileo, Darwin. How long before Richard Dawkins is canonised? :)

[Cringer]

THE search for extraterrestrial life does not contradict belief in God, the pope's chief astronomer said today, adding that some aliens may even be innocent of the original sin.

I guess Kodos is innocent of the original sin.

[EagleFan]

I'd think that if intelligent life was discovered, it'd be a pretty major theological blow to a lot of religions. Not one the most devout couldn't reconcile, but it'd definately require some crafty explaining...

This takes me back to a "discussion" I had with an ex who was quite religious. When I said that there could be alien life she whole heartedly disagreed saying that would go against her religious beliefs. Her arguement stated that nothing is mentioned in the Bible of there being life anywhere but here.

My response ended the discussion and left her without a reply...

"Why would God have to tell us if he also created life elsewhere? By my judgement if he created us, we have to answer to him not the other way around."


That same answer kind of applies here. Alien life des not prove or disprove religion, only the perspecitve that some people have towards their religion, other religions or religion in general.

[molson]

I think the Pope knows something we don't.

[Groundhog]

This takes me back to a "discussion" I had with an ex who was quite religious. When I said that there could be alien life she whole heartedly disagreed saying that would go against her religious beliefs. Her arguement stated that nothing is mentioned in the Bible of there being life anywhere but here.

My response ended the discussion and left her without a reply...

"Why would God have to tell us if he also created life elsewhere? By my judgement if he created us, we have to answer to him not the other way around."


That same answer kind of applies here. Alien life des not prove or disprove religion, only the perspecitve that some people have towards their religion, other religions or religion in general.

To take the OT and it's offshoots as the example religion, it just seems kind of odd to me that the creation story left that part out (assuming intelligent aliens exist), which is a pretty major point really, given that we were created in god's image and all the rest of it. What if these intelligent aliens look nothing like us at all (which would be very probable if they exist), and are superior intellectually and in every other way? How do you rationalise them in to the scheme of things from a Christian/Catholic/Jewish/Islamic perspective?

[Groundhog]

I think the Pope knows something we don't.

I'd argue the reverse is true.

[Mac Howard]

With approximately 20,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (twenty thousand billion billion) star systems in the universe and each star a million times or more the size of the earth it does seem, aliens or not, that Genesis does miss a point or two in its description of creation and wouldn't it seem an awful waste of space if we're the only intelligent life?

And Sod's Law convinces me that there are aliens, probably in the dark matter, who are constantly interfering with my life - intelligent they may be but they still have the mentality of a six year old :rolleyes:

Whoops there goes my plasma TV ............................. :eek:

[fantom1979]

wouldn't it seem an awful waste of space if we're the only intelligent life?


I've seen this movie before (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118884/)

[st.cronin]

I'd think that if intelligent life was discovered, it'd be a pretty major theological blow to a lot of religions.

No. There is a sphere of human inquiry in which theology is appropriate, and a sphere of human inquiry in which science is appropriate. If you find an answer in one sphere, you can't apply that answer to a question asked in the other sphere.

[JediKooter]

Meanwhile, somewhere in the Blurblap star system, a debate is being waged on whether or not life exists on other planets...

[Groundhog]

No. There is a sphere of human inquiry in which theology is appropriate, and a sphere of human inquiry in which science is appropriate. If you find an answer in one sphere, you can't apply that answer to a question asked in the other sphere.

Why?

[Tigercat]

Both science and religion are more adaptable to changes in the world, without losing fundamental old principles, than people in the Vatican, in this thread, or throughout the world would have you believe.

[Tigercat]

To take the OT and it's offshoots as the example religion, it just seems kind of odd to me that the creation story left that part out (assuming intelligent aliens exist), which is a pretty major point really, given that we were created in god's image and all the rest of it. What if these intelligent aliens look nothing like us at all (which would be very probable if they exist), and are superior intellectually and in every other way? How do you rationalise them in to the scheme of things from a Christian/Catholic/Jewish/Islamic perspective?


If religion was given to us by us alone, or inspired by a creative force, either way it was meant to be functional for those that participated in it.

If it was inspired by or directly given by a creator, do you think it makes sense that he mention aliens? That he makes sure religious narrative includes aliens? There would be no purpose in telling that side of the story to people thousands of years removed from exploring space.

[molson]

Both science and religion are more adaptable to changes in the world, without losing fundamental old principles, than people in the Vatican, in this thread, or throughout the world would have you believe.

I think what's considered "fundamental old principles" is also clearly adaptable.

[Groundhog]

If it was inspired by or directly given by a creator, do you think it makes sense that he mention aliens? That he makes sure religious narrative includes aliens? There would be no purpose in telling that side of the story to people thousands of years removed from exploring space.

Honestly, I think it would make sense. That changes the whole scope of the religion. I'd expect it to paint a picture of man and his world in the larger scheme of things. If aliens do exist, then suddenly there is obviously a lot missing in the bible's explanation of things.

You can use the excuse that it was written by people thousands of years removed from space travel and discoveries like this, but that just highlights the flaw of having your entire belief system based on a book that is two thousand years old. And it's not like you can just update it with the latest info - it's the infallible word of God, and he hasn't seen fit to personally send any messengers with updated info over the past few millennia (or a little less than that, if your Islamic). A discovery like intelligent life on another planet would be a good time for God to speak up.

[Abe Sargent]

To take the OT and it's offshoots as the example religion, it just seems kind of odd to me that the creation story left that part out (assuming intelligent aliens exist), which is a pretty major point really, given that we were created in god's image and all the rest of it. What if these intelligent aliens look nothing like us at all (which would be very probable if they exist), and are superior intellectually and in every other way? How do you rationalise them in to the scheme of things from a Christian/Catholic/Jewish/Islamic perspective?

Unfortunately you make the assumption that if God created us other life, he screwed up in Genesis by not mentioning it. However, after creating life here, he may have elsewhere.

In fact, I believe God must have created life elsewhere. That life may not be in our universe, but he must have created it (or else he has no foreknowledge, which I am willing to accept as well.)

[Groundhog]

Unfortunately you make the assumption that if God created us other life, he screwed up in Genesis by not mentioning it. However, after creating life here, he may have elsewhere.

In fact, I believe God must have created life elsewhere. That life may not be in our universe, but he must have created it (or else he has no foreknowledge, which I am willing to accept as well.)

You're right, he may have done a lot of things. Maybe it's time he updated us all?

[Abe Sargent]

Honestly, I think it would make sense. That changes the whole scope of the religion. I'd expect it to paint a picture of man and his world in the larger scheme of things. If aliens do exist, then suddenly there is obviously a lot missing in the bible's explanation of things.

You can use the excuse that it was written by people thousands of years removed from space travel and discoveries like this, but that just highlights the flaw of having your entire belief system based on a book that is two thousand years old. And it's not like you can just update it with the latest info - it's the infallible word of God, and he hasn't seen fit to personally send any messengers with updated info over the past few millennia (or a little less than that, if your Islamic). A discovery like intelligent life on another planet would be a good time for God to speak up.

It doesn;t change the Bible one bit. There are no flaws if aliens exist to the Bible or faith. The Bible doesn;t speak to it one way or the other. It also didn;t speak to people living in America one way or the other, but that doesn;t matter to the Bible and the understanding of God's love for us.

[Abe Sargent]

You're right, he may have done a lot of things. Maybe it's time he updated us all?

There hasn't been an update on a lot of things. There is no Bible verse that says abortion is wrong (or right if you are of that ilk). There is no Bible verse that says owning another person is wrong (note that the slavery used in the Bible is more of a debt slave, enslaved because of debt than of race, and all slaves were set free every seven years.) If aliens exist, there is no update of that.

Why not? Because it isn;t necessary. We already received our update with the New Testament, in which Jesus boils all of the Old Testament rules and regulations and precepts that he taught into two rules for living:

And one of the scribes came and heard them arguing, and recognizing that He had answered them well, asked Him, "What commandment is the foremost of them all?"
Jesus answered, "the foremost is, 'Hear O Israel! The LORD our God is one LORD;
and you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind and with all your strength.'
The second is this, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no other commandment greater than these.

Mark 12:28-31

Then the scribe answered that Christ was right, it was the correct answer for it meant more to love God than all of the burnt offerings and sacrifices and Christ, seeing that he truly understood these words, told the scribe that he was not far from the kingdom of God.

Mere understanding that these were the right precepts to live your life by gets you real close. Action takes you the rest of the way. Christ already boiled life down to these two principles. There is a certain art to elegance, and this is no exception. There is no need for an addendum, because we already got it, and it was this base version of way to live life in a Christlike manner. Not thousands of rules, not hundreds of regulations, not anything other than two simple statements about love, respect, and civility.

Details don't need to be added to that.

[Groundhog]

There hasn't been an update on a lot of things. There is no Bible verse that says abortion is wrong (or right if you are of that ilk). There is no Bible verse that says owning another person is wrong (note that the slavery used in the Bible is more of a debt slave, enslaved because of debt than of race, and all slaves were set free every seven years.) If aliens exist, there is no update of that.

There's no need to defend the slavery mentioned in the bible AFAIC. It was written 2,000 years ago, give or take. Very different world.

Not thousands of rules, not hundreds of regulations, not anything other than two simple statements about love, respect, and civility.

Details don't need to be added to that.

That's a very un-Catholic approach. ;)

Honestly, I have no problems at all if you want to hold that particular passage up as the defining point of your religion. I'll never understand why a god needs to be worshipped by his creations, but the second part, or the "Golden Rule", is noble enough in theory, and it's a key component of other religions and belief systems - Confucius called it the "Silver Rule" long before the NT was pieced together.

It's a shame that more folks don't follow your line of thinking. My problem lies with people that do look to the bible and its 2,000 year old parables to explain current issues, and those that would choose very different passages than the one you listed to sum up their religion.

The Vatican are the biggest offenders, and they more than anyone else (or perhaps even they alone) intend everything they say to be taken as if straight from the mouth of God. The pope himself is worshipped like a god. Read through the NT and it's tough to think of an organisation less Christian than the Vatican.

[Passacaglia]

No. There is a sphere of human inquiry in which theology is appropriate, and a sphere of human inquiry in which science is appropriate. If you find an answer in one sphere, you can't apply that answer to a question asked in the other sphere.

Isn't that just something Descartes said to get religious people off his back?

[st.cronin]

Isn't that just something Descartes said to get religious people off his back?

I think he actually believed it.

[Groundhog]

I think he actually believed it.

If he didn't, he would have probably died for saying otherwise. 'The World' wasn't held back from release because of problems with the editor.

[Mac Howard]

Isn't that just something Descartes said to get religious people off his back?

Descartes was a practising Catholic. Despite his (heretical) disagreement with the Church over the motion of the earth (he agreed with Galileo) he remained a practising Catholic.