This ministry needs your financial support! Donate now!
Posted by Anthony on November 11, 2009
I have already addressed this in several places- here, and here- so I won’t dwell on things much. Instead, I want to reflect on an article I just read regarding the Vatican participating in an astrobiology conference to discuss the question.
In my previous posts, I argued that if aliens appeared, they might fly in the face of current expectations that are drenched in an evolutionary (and atheistic) outlook. Namely, we may find that these intelligent agents believe in God. They may not, as Richard Dawkins smugly posits, inquire first as to whether not humans have ‘discovered’ evolution. Let us allow that it is a possibility… but they may also possibly have a concept of God and creation that is identical, in theological principle, to what we see in the Christian Scriptures. Naturally, they may have a belief system identical to other systems.
My point is that they may deviate a great deal from the common narrative of aliens either being hostile consumers of resources or super-intelligent, highly technological and benevolent agents that have transcended petty human foibles and myths. In this narrative, both sides assume not just evolution but atheistic presuppositions.
The article I was referring to comes close to my perspective here, with the Roman Catholic Church representative saying that these creatures would still be part of creation. Then it goes on to say,
Still, there are divisions on the issues within the Catholic Church and within other religions, with some favoring creationism or intelligent design that could make it difficult to accept the concept of alien life. Read the rest of the entry… »
Posted by Anthony on November 3, 2009
I am hoping that ABC’s “V” takes the place that Heroes formerly occupied before it jumped dozens of sharks. It is too soon to be sure, but there is certainly promise.
The idea of space aliens coming to earth is something that this blog has explored previously. For example, in this entry I argue that intelligent agents from outer space provide an interesting opportunity to test various world view hypotheses. For example, years of movies and stories lead us to assume that an alien encounter would belong in just two possible classes: 1., the nasty creatures out to conquer us (Ie, “Independence Day” and of course “V.”) 2. the creatures are super intelligent and benevolent to such an extent that they are, for all practical purposes, Divine (ie, “Contact.”) In both scenarios, the atheistic evolutionary framework is presumed. But what if alien contact yields a different result? What if the aliens are mere creatures- but unfallen? Or, what if they hold to a belief system identical to Christian theism? That’d be interesting, eh?
While “V” does not appear to break this kind of innovative ground, it was a breath of fresh air to have one of the main characters be a Christian priest who is… wait for it… skeptical. Christians are often portrayed as gullible or extremist whackos (see again, “Contact”) and your hard core evolutionary atheistic types are veritable bastions of cool headed logic and reason (see the TV show, “Bones.”) (Yes, it’s true that one Christian in “Contact” was more reasonable, but he wasn’t exactly definitive about his beliefs, either).
The Christian priest in “V” issues forth a sermon that makes quite a bit of sense: “Before you jump on the bandwagon, make sure it is sturdy enough to hold you.” There is no atheistic foil in “V.” Nonetheless, I am pretty sure that your hard core secular humanist would accept without question a message presented to them by aliens like those we see in “V.” I know this because they already have. Read the rest of the entry… »
Posted by Anthony on March 11, 2009
I’ve seen this guy on the news lately talking about some space craft being sent or already sent that has the goal of identifying planets that might have intelligent life. This gent is utterly convinced there are, suggesting it would be arrogant and hubris to think we are alone in the universe. This is a fairly common sentiment among atheists (I don’t know if this guy is an atheist) dovetailing into weird arguments like “There can’t be a God because why would he care about us, we’re like ants to him.” This would be like an ant in an ant farm denying our existence because they actually are ants to us. The other weird thing is that whether we are alone in the universe or not, it seems the atheist thinks this proves there isn’t a God. But I digress somewhat.
What I really wanted to address was the ramifications and implications of discovering conclusive proof of an extraterrestial intelligent agent relative to Christian theism.
Already you should be chuckling, because if the atheists are to be believed, it is not scientifically possible to reliably detect intelligent agency. Intelligent Design, we are assured, is pseudoscience at best and closet creationism at worst. On this view I suppose space aliens could land in Richard Dawkins lap at which time they begin wheeling out some of their rumored probes, and Mr. Dawkins would be unable to recognize that something out of the ordinary was happening. Anyway, as funny and as fun as that thought is, I have no doubt that hard core philosophical naturalists will have little trouble ‘reliably detecting intelligent design’ when the chips are down.
I think this is because they will expect these little green critters with big skulls to support them in their atheistic worldview. But I think that will be the atheist’s undoing. They would have been safer denying that a sentient being is conversing with them because what that sentient being actually says might compromise the atheist’s philosophical foundations. Read the rest of the entry… »
Posted by Anthony on February 10, 2009
Hat tip to Charles for pointing this article out to me.
Recently ChristianityToday had an excellent article on the use of science fiction to communicate a distinctly secular and atheistic world view. If you are a Christian that cares for the state of the Church today and our modern challenge, you should read the article.
The article correctly says:
… viewers don’t leave movies such as Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Hancock, X-Men, and Contact—or television programs such as The X-Files or Heroes—scratching their heads in confusion. We are intrigued, but not surprised. Why? Because stories of advanced extraterrestrials, ancient human-alien contact, superior intelligences roaming the universe, and emerging super-races have grown familiar through repeated exposure. Thanks to the longstanding efforts of a wide range of artists, popular writers, and even scientists, we immediately recognize intelligent aliens and advanced humans. We now see space and the future as sources of hope.
One of the things that I’ve noted (see this blog entry on Heroes and Philip Pullman) is that the modern method is to denounce anything we might call supernatural as nonsense in one breath, and in the other breath re-issue the same phenomena but provide a naturalistic explanation for it. Heroes is a great case in point, as most of the ‘heroes’ have powers that, if we ever met them in real life, we’d instantly conclude were supernatural. But Heroes prepares the way for 2 Thess. 2:9-10 in that it provides a ‘plausible’ explanation for how even the miraculous is merely natural. (In my discussions with atheists, no evidence for natural explanations is necessary- plausibility is sufficient. See, for eg., abiogenesis, and Dawkins hemming and hawing at the end of Ben Stein’s Expelled).
Another case in point is Carl Sagan’s Contact, where scientists are able to scientifically detect intelligent design. We are told today that this is impossible; the implications involved in conceding even the mere possibility of reliably detecting design are too frightening to be allowed by our ‘methodological’ naturalists. So, Contact would not have been written today, but even so it served to show how ‘advanced’ information is no evidence at all for God, and can be- and should be- interpreted in natural terms. With this method in mind, it is no wonder that atheists conclude there is no God. They are merely ahead of the pop culture trend, prepared to interpret all facts in naturalistic terms and then smug in their conclusion that no facts exist to support supernaturalism.
So how does one combat this? Read the rest of the entry… »
