Religion Are Christians believing in life outside Earth compatible?

[MarAzul]

I said nothing about the philosophical value of the teachings of Jesus. The point was if the Torah was not "inspired" and was embellishment based on the whim of the authors the same could apply to any part of the bible.

Not to my way of thinking. The old testament the Torah, shows us the origin and the way it was, that sorely needed improvement. The new testament is about teach us the improvements needed. The whole idea of that section is that it was indeed inspired by Jesus irrespective of whether the old testament was inspired by God or not. I suppose that question is for the Jews to answer, I don't see the need for a Christian to be concerned with the issue or the answer.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

i guess if you believe in the bible more than you believe in god?

 

[donkiez]

Im not a christian so this is my opinion. But generally I think that religion is threatened by the possibility of life on other plants and how it might effect their followers and belief system here. I find that religions in general are not really open to new ideas and fear change. However if life was to be discovered on another plant I think all the religions would find a way to accept it and adapt it into their current belief system. First question I would ask intelligent life though is what is your belief system. If they follow something similar to earth it could give lots of validity to our current religions.

I tend to think all the life in the universe is connected and the origins of life on one plant can be traced (after evolution) to a comment or other celestial body carrying microbes from a land far far away. When those microbes find the right conditions they flourish and create life adapted to their environment. Maybe its just a nice thought that every living thing in our reality and beyond is linked together is some web of life type way. That also doesn't answer the question of where did it start?

 

[crowTrobot]

Not to my way of thinking. The old testament the Torah, shows us the origin and the way it was

You just implied it doesn't, at least not reliably.

The whole idea of that section is that it was indeed inspired by Jesus irrespective of whether the old testament was inspired by God or not.

Again I'm talking about historicity, not philosophical inspiration. By not inspired I mean God was not actually there guiding/overseeing the author's intent or accuracy. For example if God was not weeding out agenda-based embellishment by the authors of the OT, which you say might be present in the Torah, why is the NT necessarily any more reliable in that regard?

 

[MarAzul]

Again I'm talking about historicity, not philosophical inspiration. By not inspired I mean God was not actually there guiding/overseeing the author's intent or accuracy. For example if God was not weeding out agenda-based embellishment by the authors of the OT, which you say might be present in the Torah, why is the NT necessarily any more reliable in that regard?

Well it seems to me the NT teaching is consistent, and good. Nobody says they were inspired by God, we know they were written by the disciples of Jesus. I see no agenda other than teaching
the message of Jesus. Can't say that about the OT and in many cases the message there is what Jesus said needed to change, like stoning people. There seems to be an obvious difference
between the messages of the OT and the NT. Perhaps not the message in the OT but the practices under Hebrew law. The NT does seem to be inspired, where the OT in many cases seems to be somewhat of a documentation of the old way, and the things that needed to be changed.

When I said , perhaps there was and agenda influencing the OT in some places, I don't know that, it just seems possible. I don't not get that impression from the New Testament, only one agenda involved, the teachings of Jesus on how to improve the world of men.

 

[barfo]

The earliest books [...] were probably written [...] even earlier than [...] the later books

Good point.

barfo

 

[magnifier661]

i guess if you believe in the bible more than you believe in god?

See this is what I'm talking about... If everyone followed the textbook, then advancements can't be made. Instead, you use the first "law or whatever" as the foundation, then build on it. It would be no different than the Constitution... It's a living rule that can evolve as time evolves. I don't expect many to "change the bible", but apply the teachings and principles to the modern era.

 

[crowTrobot]

See this is what I'm talking about... If everyone followed the textbook, then advancements can't be made. Instead, you use the first "law or whatever" as the foundation, then build on it. It would be no different than the Constitution... It's a living rule that can evolve as time evolves. I don't expect many to "change the bible", but apply the teachings and principles to the modern era.

You mean apply the principals of the modern era (modern morality and science) to the teachings of the Bible, which is in fact what you're doing.

 

[magnifier661]

You mean apply the principals of the modern era (modern morality and science) to the teachings of the Bible, which is in fact what you're doing.

If that's what you want it to mean

 

[MarAzul]

You mean apply the principals of the modern era (modern morality and science)

What is modern morality?

 

[crowTrobot]

What is modern morality?

The current state of socially evolved common sense behavior that most Christians use to form an external moral standard which they compare the Bible against (not the other way round).

 

[magnifier661]

The current state of socially evolved common sense behavior that most Christians use to form an external moral standard which they compare the Bible against (not the other way round).

Would that be anything different than the scientists that used to think the world was flat, then changed their views when evidence presented itself? Or maybe something's could travel faster than the speed of light if new evidence supported that theory? Maybe we discover a "multiverse", which could completely change the ideology of the Big Bang?

Or maybe the "world-view" that accepted slavery years ago, only to evolve and understand its inhumanity?

Fact is, there is nothing wrong with evolving your belief as new evidence presence itself. You can have the same "foundational" belief, just like a scientist can use the same scientific method, but change as new evidence changes.

 

[crowTrobot]

Would that be anything different than the scientists that used to think the world was flat, then changed their views when evidence presented itself? Or maybe something's could travel faster than the speed of light if new evidence supported that theory? Maybe we discover a "multiverse", which could completely change the ideology of the Big Bang?

It's not different from how science operates, but most religious people don't think of their religious belief this way. You are somewhat unique in that regard I guess.

Also as an irrelevant note it's probably inaccurate to say "scientists" used to think the world was flat. Most students of nature going back to Aristotle or further concluded it wasn't.

Or maybe the "world-view" that accepted slavery years ago, only to evolve and understand its inhumanity?

Fact is, there is nothing wrong with evolving your belief as new evidence presence itself. You can have the same "foundational" belief, just like a scientist can use the same scientific method, but change as new evidence changes.

You're implying the Bible isn't authoritative about anything (slavery is effectively endorsed in the Torah and as far as we know was never condemned by Jesus or any of his disciples), so I don't know what you mean by "foundational" belief here. In what sense is there a foundation if everything is subject to evolving morals and new evidence?

 

[magnifier661]

It's not different from how science operates, but most religious people don't think of their religious belief this way. You are somewhat unique in that regard I guess.

I can only speak for my own belief because it's the only one I can safely admit is right for me.

Also as an irrelevant note it's probably inaccurate to say "scientists" used to think the world was flat. Most students of nature going back to Aristotle or further concluded it wasn't.

Okay, but you understand the point I was making no?

You're implying the Bible isn't authoritative about anything (slavery is effectively endorsed in the Torah and as far as we know was never condemned by Jesus or any of his disciples), so I don't know what you mean by "foundational" belief here. In what sense is there a foundation if everything is subject to evolving morals and new evidence?

The foundation of Christianity is not about law, but of forgiveness and love. The law can evolve once a Christian understands how to forgive and love.

 

[crowTrobot]

I can only speak for my own belief because it's the only one I can safely admit is right for me.

Right for you? You could be talking about your favorite ice cream, art, music, drug of choice etc. If you think of religious belief as an aesthetic preference, or preferred "self help" method or whatever it obviously loses any objective significance.

Okay, but you understand the point I was making no?

Yes, but I'm not sure you do.

The foundation of Christianity is not about law, but of forgiveness and love. The law can evolve once a Christian understands how to forgive and love.

You're pretty much making up your own religion here, as previously noted incorporating your own personal common sense and giving it priority over any reasonable interpretation of the Bible.

Which is great actually. If every fundamentalist in the world did that it would instantly be a better place. If radical Islamists approached their belief thinking individually rather than with a clan-authority mentality it would fall apart.

 

[MarAzul]

Wow! this forum is surely populated with more than it's rightful share of poorly informed atheist. They can not decipher the information available for themselves and are way too stubborn to hear from those that have. They cite ancient text from the Torah as ill advised teaching of Christianity. Then a guy tries to set him straight and he is charged with creating his own religions because his view doesn't match the ill informed atheist's notion.

Christianity is about what Jesus was tiring to teach people, to live a less judgmental way and more forgiving than the law of the Romans and the ways of the Hebrews.

Leviticus rails against the homosexual, and another ancient Rabbi, turned scribe, suggest stoning of the adulteress. The Torah is loaded with examples of when to use the rod on this or that perpetrator.. Including your own child, for his own good of course. All this included in the Old Testament, the front two thirds of the Bible. It seem the atheist can only read half a book because they never criticize the teachings of Jesus that comes in the New Testament. The last third of the book.

The main theme that Jesus taught for the Good Christian is the way to heaven, through believe in him. All laid out in Romans. All too much for this man to accept, so according to some, I can not qualify as a Christian. So be it.

But it seems to me that this is not the end, all of the rest of the teachings of Jesus are valid, good for men, good for his society. It makes a better world to live in when men follow these
teachings. And I am please to see that some 80% of my countrymen accept and vouch for Christianity. Even most atheist will adhere to the common practices because they came to adulthood
living with people that practice the common way even though they will not admit it.

The main theme in the teachings of Jesus comes with three thoughts, in my humble opinion.

. Judge not , and ye shall not be judged

.Judgement is mine saith the lord. However, this is to difficult for men so at least they have to remember;

. Vengeance is Mine, I will repay, saith the lord.

Then there is the lack comment by Jesus on "lay on the Rod" which is significant by it's absents.

I may not qualify as a Christian but I do see the good and I am glad for these teachings. I think of the Rod, when I hear of some jerk advocating or actually beating a child. Totally pisses me off.

However, Christianity does not have a unique claim to these same concepts, the same principles can be found in Buddhist teaching, and Hindu. While the Islamic religion accepts the New Testament as a book in their religion, the Koran surely over rides it. They exclude and Judge a whole lot in that book.

This is why I think the atheist position of religion is ridiculous, look around you, the teaching is apparent and good and it has not a damn thing to do with how strongly you believe in science!
The modern day excessive faith in science is only practiced by people that are attempting to become upstanding member of the the New Clerisy. But science is not a religion
nor are it's over active advocates capable of teaching society humanity ethics.

 

[magnifier661]

Right for you? You could be talking about your favorite ice cream, art, music, drug of choice etc. If you think of religious belief as an aesthetic preference, or preferred "self help" method or whatever it obviously loses any objective significance.

Weird... I thought this was a forum for people to express their opinions. Forgive me if this is place is only an informative site.

Yes, but I'm not sure you do.

um, if you agree what I was trying to make (about science evolving discover based on new evidence) then I find it funny that you would say I don't know. Lol

You're pretty much making up your own religion here, as previously noted incorporating your own personal common sense and giving it priority over any reasonable interpretation of the Bible.

Which is great actually. If every fundamentalist in the world did that it would instantly be a better place. If radical Islamists approached their belief thinking individually rather than with a clan-authority mentality it would fall apart.

Thank you, I would pass this "open mindedness" request to you. Try it sometime, it's pretty cool!

 

[crowTrobot]

Weird... I thought this was a forum for people to express their opinions. Forgive me if this is place is only an informative site.

Not sure what you're referring to. My only point was if your personal religious belief isn't right for someone else it isn't objectively true.

Thank you, I would pass this "open mindedness" request to you. Try it sometime, it's pretty cool!

All I'm doing is pointing out that your approach invalidates the authority of the Bible, and any real significance to its historicity. It doesn't matter whether it is historically true or not - it's the life lessons that matter. It doesn't matter if Jesus was god or not because he had a lot of good advice on how to live, etc. If you are fine with all that so am I.

MarAzul. TL and too boring DR

 

[barfo]

I can only speak for my own belief because it's the only one I can safely admit is right for me.

You mean Islam is also right for you, but you are scared to say so?

barfo

 

[magnifier661]

You mean Islam is also right for you, but you are scared to say so?

barfo

If I agree with Islam, I would definitely say that.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

I have obliviously stated that i do believe in life outside the planet Earth, but I do know the vast majority doesn't. I would assume those Christians take the entire Bible for exact historical reference and being 100% the word of God.

I do believe that God has inspired the Bible, but I question that it's exactly what God has said or wanted to say. I do believe that God has the ultimate authority for the entire universe, so if he wanted to have just Earth support intelligent life, he would have the power to do so. But I don't think this is the case. I do believe that there is life on other planets, with the same God empowering and inspiring that civilization differently.

So back to the question... Do you think that Christians can believe in life outside this solar system?

You've stated so many things obliviously that it is hard to imagine what you are going for.

This topic is like asking if a kid who thinks Superman is real can also believe that Batman is real too.

 

[magnifier661]

You've stated so many things obliviously that it is hard to imagine what you are going for.

This topic is like asking if a kid who thinks Superman is real can also believe that Batman is real too.

I thought you were gonna put me on ignore? You can't get enough of me I guess.

As for your superman and batman response... I only support marvel. Try again kiddo

 

[barfo]

This topic is like asking if a kid who thinks Superman is real can also believe that Batman is real too.

I don't know about Batman and Superman, but I was in a deli near Times Square last week and Elmo was in there with his head off, and I can tell you that Elmo is an unattractive young woman.

barfo

 

[jlprk]

Christians believing in life outside Earth are compatible with Christians who believe in life and are outside Earth.