re: Religious Leaders Told to 'Prepare Now' for UFO Disclosure and 'Bible-Changing' Revelation

quote:

---

Sure and you can do it incorrectly or dishonestly just the same. I'm explaining to you how to do it correctly and rhetorically honest.

---

You are quite exceptional for the amount of hubris you exhibit.

quote:

---

I guess you choose dishonesty.

This is just one hypothetical within my discussion/argument that hasn't flinched.

There has been no "moving on"

---

You certainly have. You have moved on from the mere existence of alien life to alien life that would be made in the image of God. Unless I missed it, I don't think you started talking about alien image-bearers until after I brought it up.

Your initial argument was that the mere existence of organic alien life was sufficient to be problematic for Christianity due to the silence on the matter from the Bible. You were arguing that if such a big thing was left out, that just about anything could be left out, including other truth claims that other religions make.

After I showed that your reasoning was bad and that the existence of alien life alone was not sufficient to disprove or discredit the Bible, you latched on to the idea of aliens being made in the image of God, even though that isn't something we can know for sure even if we can know that aliens exist. I was arguing that the best we could do is to know if they claimed to be made in the image of God, and that your argument about them actually being made in the image of God was a hypothetical akin to granting a hypothetical scenario where God doesn't exist or that another religion was right instead of Christianity: it wouldn't add anything to the discussion.

quote:

---

I"m specifically discussing the impacts of such important variables being left out of the Bible. Aliens created in the image of man fit within that argument perfectly.

---

Again, you shifted the argument to aliens being created in the image of God (you said man just now; I assume that was a typo).

You might as well argue that the aliens are God in this hypothetical situation now, because the mere existence of alien life is not sufficient to be "problematic" for biblical Christianity, and neither is a mere claim from an alien organism that it is made in the image of God. It's why you are jumping from the hypothetical existence of alien life to the hypothetical existence of alien life created in the image of God (not something anyone has claimed, to my knowledge, prior to me mentioning mankind being made uniquely in God's image) and bypassing the hypothetical of alien life claiming to be made in the image of God, which is all we could realistically get if aliens do exist.

You're clearly reaching beyond the original conditions of the discussion in order to win an argument due to your ignorance of Christianity getting the better of you.

quote:

---

It's just giving you problems so now you're doing this attempt to claim I'm moving the goalposts as a clandestine way to move them away from the hypothetical within my argument that gives you problems. And within your attempts to rationalist why you're doing this, you are proving my argument (that leaving out such a major thing would bring the Bible into question) true.

---

Aliens being God would be very problematic for Christianity, yet that isn't what is being claimed. You weren't even initially claiming aliens being made in the image of God as your argument, but only the mere existence of alien life. You've moved the goalposts because you lost on the original premise.

quote:

---

Where does the Bible specifically say aliens couldn't' be made in God's image?

It doesn't, and perfectly fits into the "something important left out of the Bible" issue that's the central point of my argument.

---

You weren't claiming something "important left out of the Bible", but aliens being left out of the Bible. You were honing in on a specific claim and saying that that claim was sufficient to discredit or at least cast into doubt the biblical narrative as sufficient. You only later moved the goalposts to image-bearing aliens as being important enough to discredit the Bible.

And the Bible doesn't have to specifically say that aliens aren't made in the image of God for that to be a true statement. That's why reason is used to understand the Biblical claims in light of concepts like inductive and deductive reasoning. You're trying to act like a lawyer in this discussion and it's not going to work.

quote:

---

Just look at how hard you're fighting having a discussion about aliens being made in the image of God to see me showing that.

---

I'm trying to make an example out of you. That's why I'm being stubborn and not letting you shift the narrative like you do in other topics. You aren't going to win this on merits alone, which is why you keep focusing on the way I'm arguing rather than the points being discussed. It's a typical lawyer trick, which I'm sure you know well.

quote:

---

No. Nothing about aliens being made in the image of god conflicts with or "adds additional requirements to" my argument. That scenario is fully within the scope of my argument.

---

Yes it does. I showed how the mere existence of aliens isn't problematic for Christianity (which was your initial premise), and then you modified your claim.

quote:

---

See you're strawmanning here, again.

There is nothing in the Bible that states aliens can't be made in the image of God.

The Bible says mans is made in that image, but never states that's the exclusive list.

This is exactly the type of example of something important being left out of the Bible that would create issues. We can go back to my original points.

---

I already provided argumentation as to why man is uniquely made in the image of God and that no other creature is made in the image of God. Christianity does not teach that any other creature is made in the image of God. You are making an argument from ignorance of Christianity and the Bible and not accepting my arguments for why aliens could not be made in the image of God because it's now very important for you to include that qualifier in your argumentation, exactly because your initial argument doesn't work.

quote:

---

"Lots of important stuff" = aliens made in the image of God

---

Again, your initial claim was merely the existence of aliens being left out. I called you out for your definition of "important stuff" and how alien life would not be contradictory to the Bible, and therefore no different than the internet being left out of the Bible. You moved the goalpost once your argument was defeated and haven't returned to it as originally stated.

quote:

---

Here that question becomes "Aliens being made in the image of God?"

I think we've clearly, at this point, established a scenario significant enough to have an impact on Christianity by being left out of the Bible

We just have to get you to stop trying to change to discussion, reframe it, or use strawmen to answer that question.

---

Yes, we stumbled upon a scenario in which its existence would be problematic, but not because it was "left out" (as you are now arguing), but because it would be contradictory to the Bible, as I stated earlier. It's not the absence of information, but the contradicting nature of it that is problematic. It's why your argument continues to fail.

quote:

---

Yeah. On Earth.

We don't reflect God's glory to creation on Venus (because we aren't on Venus).

---

Being on Earth is not a restrictive qualifier. I already mentioned how even in thew new heavens and the new earth (with all other heavenly bodies (including planets) destroyed), we will reign with Christ and even judge angels. Christ's reign is not limited to earth, and our union with Him is also not limited to earth.

quote:

---

That's right. We saw how it played out with humans. We wouldn't need to know how it played out anywhere else, with anybody else.

---

You missed the point. The whole narrative includes redemption with humanity at the core and Jesus taking on a human nature (not an angelic nature or an alien nature) in order to fulfill the covenants.

quote:

---

Mankind may have been the only creatures who needed redeeming (and were capable of being redeemed...at least one scholarly theory of why angels don't get any second chances is because due to their nature, they can't repent.)

---

Many angels also fell into sin with no hope of redemption (Jesus didn't take on an angelic nature to redeem Satan and his hosts). You also forget that only mankind is united with Jesus. We have a special place with Him (Christians, at least) that even angels do not have, and no alien life could because Jesus does not have an alien nature. Plus, earth and its creatures weren't the only ones affected by Adam's fall into sin. All creation groans, awaiting redemption when Christ returns, by destroying all things and recreating the new heavens and the new earth as the central focal point, where God dwells with man (not sinless aliens).

quote:

---

I think a whole lot of Thomas Aquinas and in particular his theory of God's Ideas As Exemplar Causes. I'm sure you know that men like Aquinas and Augustine, their whole ministry was about interpreting the pagan philosophies that were popular in their day and either debunking them or showing how they were even more true when interpreted in a Christian context. That's what God's Ideas As Exemplar Causes is; a reinterpretation of Plato in a Christian context.

---

What I'm more interested in is how their (and others) understanding aligned with the Scriptures.

quote:

---

It states that essentially everything physical that exists emanates from the mind of God and therefore in some way reflects or suggests His character.

For example, matter exists in three forms: solid, liquid, gas. It requires a trinity framework: space, time, matter. Each of those is comprised of a trinity:

Time = Past, present, future

Space = Length, width, height

Matter = Energy, motion, phenomena

You get it...this physical world suggests the Trinity in its very being. Those are only a couple of examples, there are many more.

A circle has no beginning, no end, and yet it exists in a finite physical universe. Infinity in a finite space = Christ.

Etc.

Well, if everything that exists is an expression of God's nature and character in some way, then the law really is written in nature. I think that's what Paul means when he says (emphasis mine):

quote:

---

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

---

So I'm not sure about that last statement of yours. I'm not sure we have to be given a command (we were, I'm not disputing that...I'm just saying I'm not sure it's a necessary requirement...all of nature serves as a testimony that we may accept or reject).

---

Paul went on from there (in Romans) to talk about the law in chapter 2, where both Jews (who were given the law) and Gentiles (who were not given the law) both are condemned by the law because the law of God is written on our hearts (2:15). He's not talking about something imprinted in the hearts of all creatures, but in Jews and Gentiles (people).

So I stand by my statement that the law was given to man, not to animals or aliens.

quote:

---

Agreed, I don't think animals have either the agency or the acumen to perceive what Paul is talking about above, although it does get a little complicated when you consider that the OT does say that an accounting will have to be given for the spilling of blood...even from an animal. I know you haven't forgotten about that one as many times as you've quoted it to me.

---

I think we aren't in agreement about what Paul was saying.

Animals are not guilty of sin for spilling blood. God calls for the death of animals not for sin-guilt of animals, but to highlight the value and dignity of humans as His image-bearers. When animals are used for sacrifices in the OT, they aren't chosen for their moral purity, but physical purity, to represent moral purity and the prefiguring of Christ, would would be sinless. Animals aren't held accountable for sin-guilt because they aren't rationale creatures, but because God has not covenanted with them by giving them a law for them to keep.

quote:

---

If Aquinas was right, that makes sense to me. Not because of a system of "rewards," but because if he's right and everything that exists (including life itself) is a reflection of Divine nature and we relate to Him harmoniously, we remain within that flow of life. In other words, if we're good with Him, we're also good with everything that reflects Him. If we rebel against Him, we have automatically opposed life as well, and taken ourselves out of it. I don't think the "curses" in Genesis 3 were punishments so much as they were descriptions of how their actions would change the physical world and their experience in it.

---

They absolutely were punishments, though. That's how covenants typically work. Covenants are agreements between parties where there are blessings for keeping the terms and curses for breaking the terms. The covenant of works (or life, depending how you want to call it) was made with Adam with rewards for obedience and punishments for disobedience. The curses of Genesis 3 certainly are punishments, not merely reflections of disharmony.

quote:

---

Again, there's absolutely nothing in Revelation that says that only humans will reign with Christ. It just says that humans will reign with Christ.

Like my example before, I can just about guarantee you that SDV Tiger will post something childish tomorrow designed to excuse Trump for some thing or another. But just because he's the only one I named, that doesn't mean that he'll be the only one.

---

Just like the issue with covenants, you seem to be missing the bigger picture.

Our reign with Christ is not said to be representative of other creatures (angels or aliens), but we reign because we are His body. We are joined to Him in a covenantal way, with Him as the head and we are His body. That's a union that is not shared with any other creatures. Therefore, our reign with Him is unique. It is also reflected in Jesus taking on a human nature for us to reign with Him, and that He doesn't have any alien nature or angelic nature for aliens and angels to reign with Him. The uniqueness of Christ's nature points to the relationship we have with Him being unique.

quote:

---

Do you have a scripture to support the notion that people belong to Christ through His human nature as opposed to His Divine nature?

---

Yes, our union is through the incarnation, not through His essential kingship or divine essence:

Heb. 2:14-18
Eph. 5:30-32
Gal. 4:4-5

I could flesh that out more but I'm running out of characters.

quote:

---

Explain how aliens being made in the image of god is outside of that question

---

I already explained this. You are describing a contradiction to what is taught in the Bible rather than merely information being left out of the Bible.

Alien life on other planets would be something that is not mentioned in the Bible but not contradictory to its claims. Aliens being made in the image of God would be contradictory to the Bible's claims. That's a big difference, and a different argument than what you were making originally when you were just asking for examples of additional data, not contradictory data.

quote:

---

I already mentioned how even in thew new heavens and the new earth (with all other heavenly bodies (including planets) destroyed)

---

Those little lights up in the firmament.

quote:

---

we will reign with Christ and even judge angels

---

Definitely didn’t come from Enochian literature though, right?

quote:

---

Many angels also fell into sin with no hope of redemption

---

quote:

---

Paul went on from there (in Romans) to talk about the law in chapter 2, where both Jews (who were given the law) and Gentiles (who were not given the law) both are condemned by the law because the law of God is written on our hearts (2:15)

---

Guess the oldest Jewish source of this idea that Yahweh is concerned with the gentiles.

quote:

---

Animals are not guilty of sin for spilling blood

---

1 Enoch is where the tradition comes that animals were herbivores before the flood. Lots of Christians believe this to this day but it isn’t rooted in their Bible but in 1 Enoch.

quote:

---

You are describing a contradiction to what is taught in the Bible rather than merely information being left out of the Bible. Alien life on other planets would be something that is not mentioned in the Bible but not contradictory to its claims.

---

Wrong.

The Bible describes a flat disk shaped earth built on pillars on top of a chaotic ocean, with another ocean on top of an extremely hard and strong dome shaped firmament above the flat disk. It describes all the things in the heavens - the sun, moon, and stars (no difference between stars and planets in the Bible) to be contained within the firmament.

The biblical cosmological model precludes there being other worlds from where aliens could come.