It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What will happen to Christianity when we finally confirm ET?

page: 14
17
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 02:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy

He's suggesting they can both be "tossed in the trash where they belong" because they are "not constant but are variable".


I'm sure you've spent the last 20 minutes googling my claims... am I wrong?


of course you're wrong

you know google works by what you usually search for right?


edit on 19-3-2015 by Akragon because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 02:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

Time dilation pretty much nullifies the concept of a "light year".



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 02:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

no.. it doesn't affect the speed of light...

en.wikipedia.org...




posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 02:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon
Extra terrestrial life is not compatible with Christianity...

The belief that all life in the universe started here is fundamental to Christian belief structure...

Adam was the first man, created by God from dust... but before that...

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Life was created on the third day with the emergence of plants... except

More then likely, Life was in other places in the universe far before it was here...

So what happens to the belief structure when we finally meet and confirm the existence of intelligent life beyond this little blue rock?

Obviously its only a matter of time before we know for sure...

Will Christianity conform to reality?

Or

Will they consider them "devils" which I've heard so many times?

I wonder...



Let me say this ..

Those that are blood bought Christians, secure in their relationship with the Trinity, hear His voice, to which another they will not follow....they will just smile and move on, and consider them just another species The Divine Creator put on another planet /galaxy...

those that are unsure who exactly is completely in control of this planet, doubt that God even speaks to anyone any more and goes to church to make sure their doing the best they can to get to heaven .. will toss all that religion aside and run for the hills and succumb to the lie and begin to worship the creature more than the Creator...




edit on 19-3-2015 by Komodo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 02:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Komodo

Interesting...

Who does control this planet?

And of course you know the trinity isn't a biblical concept... but that is for other threads




posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 02:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

So do you think scientists have the lifespans and growth rates of dinosaurs nailed down as well?

I think we have no reason to assume that 'most forgiving' scenario I described is what the Bible intended since it's not supported by scripture. So there is that.

Let's continue to entertain the most forgiving situation on your behalf. Let's say all the 'creatures of old' were of the 'unclean' type and they were children. So 2x of every kind of child land animal from all these periods:



..and of course 14x of every kind of child land animal that is of the 'clean' kind and 2x of the 'unclean' kind of all the land animals we know of today to be roaming around. Which is in the millions.

So we are talking about Millions of child animals all on a ship significantly less spacious than the Titanic. Years worth of supplies on top of that.



Even with the most forgiving interpretation it absolutely doesn't look realistic. At least to me.

Oh and scripture also says 7 pairs of every kind of bird. 14x babies of the 10,000 kinds of birds said to be in the world. That's 140,000 of them flying around or in cages.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 02:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

Still so much bad faith.

My points were clear and easy to understand. You don't want the truth, you are simply afraid I could be right. If you spent half the time trying to prove me wrong to check facts you would see I'm right.


I will explain one last time because you have trouble with maths.


First let's ignore the part where I said ATS is a sample overly representing the US if this claim bother you despite being true.


My estimation is simple. I do not take all Protestant into account because fundamentalism is a modern and American invention. So I take American protestants into account. Why only protestants? Easy, because other traditions have traditionally supported the allegorical interpretation as advised by their hierarchy. I also proved this and even quoted the pope for example, while you claim "catholic.com" disagrees. I'll trust the pope over your non existing quote any second. Catholiics and orthodox are expected to follow their hierarchy when it comes to exegesis.


American (and other anglo saxons) protestants represent around 220M Christians. And of course, not all are fundies.

My calculation are simple and correct. If you can't understand them you simply refuse to see the truth.

Even without calculation, my claim that most Christians are not fundamentalists and read genesis allegorically can be easily checked with the data you posted. So I don't know why you keep trying to prove this wrong yet post data supporting it?



I think you spend so much time being a skeptic (I like doing it to) that you lost the ability to recognize when you are wrong and someone else is right.

Anyone without preconception can understand my points easily. That you seem blind to them and regularly ignore them indicates that you are starting to simply challenge my point for the sake of it, even if my initial claim can be checked eaaily.


Most Christians do not read genesis literally. If you can't see this you shoud travel more.




Does it bother you that most Christians aren't fundies like in the US? I don't understand, it should be a good thing but you react like this fact bothers you.

Maybe you are disappointed that 2 billions Christians do not resemble the caricature you made of them in your mind?
edit on 19-3-2015 by Develo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 02:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

I'm sure you've spent the last 20 minutes googling my claims... am I wrong?

I spent zero time on it. I was clarifying what you meant. I quoted things you said, did I not?



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 04:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Develo

First let's ignore the part where I said ATS is a sample overly representing the US if this claim bother you despite being true

No. Lets not ignore that. Back that up. Demonstrate that ATS’s Christian member-base is over-whelmingly American. Since you know that’s true that should be easy for you to provide.


Catholics and orthodox are expected to follow their hierarchy when it comes to exegesis.

‘Expected' being the operative word. What’s expected of them and what they actually believe could very easily differ.


American protestants represent around 220M Christians. And of course, not all are fundies.

Good grief!

Again if you can say not all protestants are fundies despite you saying that’s traditionally expected of them, then by what reasoning are all catholics non-literalists? You’re not applying this logic to both sides. You’re applying it only in favor of your argument. It’s absurd. It’s true for one it's true for both. Their particular denomination has particular stances and the catholic or the protestant may or may not be inline with it. Despite the expectations for both. What you can’t do, which you keep doing, is insinuating not all of these protestants are fundies but all of catholics adhere to their ‘expectations’.

Since you say I am 'bad at maths’. Here is a break down. You should like it as it shows a smaller number of protestants in the USA.

319,000,000 people in the USA.
78.4% of them are Christians which makes 250,096,000 Christians in the US.
51.3% of US Christians are Protestant. Which makes 128,299,248 Protestants.

Roughly 128,300,000 protestants in the US. *based on Pew Research Center's findings

There are 800+ million [37.6% of Christians] Protestants in the World.

Please substantiate your earlier claims that..

Only in the USA will you find Creationism
Christian fundamentalists is less than 10% of Christendom and closer to 5%
Christian fundamentalism is almost exclusive to American Protestants.

If you can do that convincingly then you’ll have peaked my interest.


So I don't know why you keep trying to prove this wrong yet post data supporting it?.

The reason is that you have been saying protestants are fundamentalists. The data shows they make up 37.6% of Christendom. Your claim however has been less than 10% and closer to 5% are fundies. That's not what the data shows if we assume protestants are fundies just as you want us to assume catholics are not.

I originally showed data to demonstrate catholicism was only 50% of Christendom.

Realistically we can't know the minds of every Christians and how they view Genesis and the bible as a whole. Whether they are Catholic or Protestant. We can make the educated guess that a majority of catholic and protestants will adhere to the expectations of their belief, but that's all it is... an educated guess.

Which leads full-circle back to me talking about my personal experience online and in 'real life'. My experience has been that a significant amount of believers view Genesis literally. Not just on ATS.


I also proved this and even quoted the pope for example, while you claim "catholic.com" disagrees. I'll trust the pope over your non existing quote any second.

Here are the quotes from Catholic.com I read. And yes the literal domain address is www. catholic .com


The argument is that all of this is real history, it is simply ordered topically rather than chronologically, and the ancient audience of Genesis, it is argued, would have understood it as such.

It's real literal history. Albeit it's not to be read chronologically.


Even if Genesis 1 records God’s work in a topical fashion, it still records God’s work—things God really did.

Even when read topically it's still a literal account of things god actually did.


It is impossible to dismiss the events of Genesis 1 as a mere legend. They are accounts of real history, even if they are told in a style of historical writing that Westerners do not typically use.

Ultimately it is not metaphor but it is in fact an account of literal history.


It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall as a fiction



The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one


Further elaborated on by a Pope:


Pope Pius XII stated: "When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own"

In other words. The story of Adam and Eve is to be taken literally. They were literally our first parents, the two that all others came from, and they fell from eden after literally committing that original sin.


Still so much bad faith.

Good. I’m still using my brain then.
edit on 19-3-2015 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 05:21 AM
link   
You have to be American, right?

Only an American can be as biased as to believe Christian creationism is something important outside the borders of the US.
Only an American would quote Pius XII to explain what modern Christians believe in (Pius XII believed in the Big Bang theory though, so it really shows you quote out of context to support your beliefs).
Only an American would doubt Christian fundamentalism is 100% a protestant thing (but Protestantism isn't 100% fundamentalist, contrarily to the lie you posted about what I said earlier).


the truth is you have no idea what Christians worldwide believe in. You simply assume. You assume from the fundies you met in the US. You assume from the fundies you read online. You assume from your own preconceptions about Christians.


If you actually TALKED with Christians outside the US you would see how wrong you are.

I talked to Christians from dozens of countries so far, and I have NEVER met someone believing genesis is an historical account besides in the US. I'm sure such people exist though, I'm just saying they are marginal.




The answers to all your questions are already in my previous posts. If you cannot or refuse to see them, I cannot help you more.

All I can do is show you it was stupid to assume boards like ATS are a statistically representative sample of the whole world.

This is the current stats from the main competitor board of ATS (obviously ATS owners don't want to share their info with me but the stats are most likely similar).




If 50% of Americans is in any way representative of the world to you, I understand better your position that everyone in the world must think like Americans do, for example on topics like genesis.



I enjoy discussing with smart people, but when they are blinded by their own certitudes and get too obtuse to be intellectually honest, there is no point in engaging in such discussions anymore.

Have a great day, just please don't always assume you know what other people believe like you are doing here.
edit on 19-3-2015 by Develo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 07:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Develo
I wasn't talking about scriptures. I was talking about modern testimonies from living people who claimed to have a mystical experience.


Well maybe you shouldve been clearer when you said:


People who claim to have "met" god usually describe it as a personal experience of a non-dual state. So basically what they mean is that god is the equivalent of a universal consciousness.


This may come as a shock, but most theists in the world believe in a different kind/type of god to you, most also involve some kind of ancient scribbles....


I'm not even partial to Christian faith in particular. When I first started to explore the topic of theism and spirituality, I read from all traditions and religions, in a comparative way, to find the similarities rather than the cultural differences.

What I found is that you don't have to read the Bible or the Torah to get testimonies about god.

There is no shortage of modern "witnesses" to share their experience. And it's even better to discuss with them since they are alive and we understand their cultural background better.

We can even measure what happens in their brain when they experience what they call "the divine" or "the sacred".

If you truly want to explore the concept of "god", of theism, of transcendence, in order to understand better what religions are and what scriptures really talk about, you have to do it seriously and not simply based on your opinion about religious people.


You've made my point for me, here you have your very own personal god/religion that you are convinced is true, not unlike pretty much every single other theist. All invent their own god, their own conditions for this apparent god, have their own relationship with it and think they possess the real truth. Just like you. Anyone can do it.


That you mention scriptures to discuss the concept of god is not only short-sighted, it's also a fallacy.


The vast majority of theists follow religions that have some kind of ancient writings, to think that your own personal religion should be included in a general overview of religion seems kinda arrogant and misguided tbh...


Humans started to experience the sacred way before religions and scriptures. We can even partly explain from a neurological point of view how we are hard-wired to experience this "sacred", this transcending reality.


Crack coc aine will do that, or ecstasy....


Plenty of scientists and philosophers did the same, and many come to the conclusion that a "Spinozan god" is the closest to a universal definition of god that would reconcile most beliefs.

And conveniently, it's also what mystics of all religions are saying about the god they experience during their meditations.

Now if you consider god MUST be some sort of "conscious being" who created the world (what we tend to do automatically because of anthropomorphism) of course science will tend to prove you wrong.

But if you follow the logic of what the mystics are sharing through their testimonies, you will see god is more like a force, a potential waiting to be unleashed. If it is truly universal and "intelligent" then it would be impossible for our minds to understand its intelligence or motivation.


'Mystics' 'testimonies'.........and a force?

Like Jedi force? are the mystics small and green?


On the other hand, I recon that all spiritualities and religions share a common ancestry, which is the experience of the divine, a transcending vision of reality strong enough to deeply transform the individual, making him less selfish and more open to others.

I also recon this universe, this life seems to be happening not because of pure chance, but following a certain drive, a certain direction which is to fulfill a potential and increase its complexity always more.

Some people consider consciousness is an accident of nature.

Other like me consider it was the goal all along, and that the universe always contained in itself the template for it, like DNA contains the template for a full conscious being. And that template/potential universal consciousness/drive for more complexity, I call it god, because it seems to be what most spiritualities and religions are trying to express but always fail to do it clearly since an infinite reality cannot be bound by finite words, so words will only pervert and distort the absolute complexity of what mystics have encountered in their inner journeys.


What you 'think' or 'recon' is great and everything, but without some kind of evidence then the above is no different from the ramblings of a madman or a child.
edit on 19-3-2015 by Prezbo369 because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-3-2015 by Prezbo369 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 08:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Prezbo369
What you 'think' or 'recon' is great and everything, but without some kind of evidence then the above is no different from the ramblings of a madman or a child.


I wasn't trying to convince you of anything. I know it's subjective and I also know it could be nothing but the delusion of a sleep-deprived brain.

I was just trying to explain you my point of view so you don't need to assume I'm your average religious person. You know, trying to exchange personal experiences, sharing, that kind of stuff



Also I think you are being dramatic when saying I sound like a child or a madman while I was sharing my beliefs, but I'm OK with that.



All along my post I simply tried to demystify this concept of "god", to explain it doesn't automatically have to be supernatural like most people believe based on the claims of religions.

You can attack the concept of god depicted in the Bible all you want.

I'm interested not in trying to prove/disprove the existence of such a god, but more to understand "what are these people really talking about?" in the first place. Maybe you don't care about that kind of stuff, but personally I like asking people who suddenly went from complete atheists to complete theists because of one life-changing experience "WTF happened to you".


Without judging the validity of their beliefs, it's 100 times more interesting than sterile debates about whether "god" sits in the clouds to punish those who masturbate.
edit on 19-3-2015 by Develo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 08:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

While you two are arguing about how many Fundamental Christians there are in the US, there are definitely some Fundamental Christians around the world.

But I would like to remind you of some that actually believe the aliens are coming for them....

Heaven's Gate: Not Christian
Scientology: Not Christian

The Word (Branhamites) :While quasi-Christian, it is all over the world.

And there is a man in Australia who believes he is Jesus Christ and a man somewhere else who believes he is Moses.

Christianity is diverse, but to say that Fundamentalism is an American construct, that's a pretty big stretch. The difference is that there are more diverse Christians in the US simply because we have a higher population. There are Christian Fundamentalists in the UK, France, Romania...well, all over Europe, Africa and Asia.

Forget about the number of Fundamentalists in the US if you are saying it is the majority, because Christian Fundamentalism can take on many different forms. Fundamentalism can vary in degrees.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 08:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Develo
I wasn't trying to convince you of anything. I know it's subjective and I also know it could be nothing but the delusion of a sleep-deprived brain.

I was just trying to explain you my point of view so you don't need to assume I'm your average religious person. You know, trying to exchange personal experiences, sharing, that kind of stuff


But it was exactly what I previously described, a self/home made religion, no different to the billions of other religeons created by every other theist.


All along my post I simply tried to demystify this concept of "god", to explain it doesn't automatically have to be supernatural like most people believe based on the claims of religions.


Well you didn't do a very good job, if anything you made the issue unnecessarily complex, even more so. And talk of 'transcending reality', 'mystics' doesn't sound very natural.


I'm interested not in trying to prove/disprove the existence of such a god, but more to understand "what are these people really talking about?" in the first place. Maybe you don't care about that kind of stuff, but personally I like asking people who suddenly went from complete atheists to complete theists because of one life-changing experience "WTF happened to you".


Of course I care, im in the religious forums after all. I just do not buy any of the claims made for which there is no evidence. Especially the baseless and extraordinary claims such as yours.


Without judging the validity of their beliefs, it's 100 times more interesting than sterile debates about whether "god" sits in the clouds to punish those who masturbate.


Each to there own, I find both sets of claims to be of equal value...



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 08:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: WarminIndy
Christianity is diverse, but to say that Fundamentalism is an American construct, that's a pretty big stretch.


No it's not


Christian fundamentalism:

movement in American Protestantism that arose in the late 19th century in reaction to theological modernism, which aimed to revise traditional Christian beliefs to accommodate new developments in the natural and social sciences, especially the advent of the theory of biological evolution. In keeping with traditional Christian doctrines concerning biblical interpretation, the mission of Jesus Christ, and the role of the church in society, fundamentalists affirmed a core of Christian beliefs that included the historical accuracy of the Bible, the imminent and physical Second Coming of Jesus Christ, and Christ’s Virgin Birth, Resurrection (see resurrection), and Atonement (see atonement). Fundamentalism became a significant phenomenon in the early 20th century and remained an influential movement in American society into the 21st century.

www.britannica.com...

It's funny how it's obvious to people outside the US that Christian fundamentalism is American, while American have hard times seeing it since it's part of their culture, so it's all they know and assume the rest of the world is similar.
edit on 19-3-2015 by Develo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 08:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: WarminIndy
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

While you two are arguing about how many Fundamental Christians there are in the US, there are definitely some Fundamental Christians around the world.

But I would like to remind you of some that actually believe the aliens are coming for them....

Heaven's Gate: Not Christian
Scientology: Not Christian

The Word (Branhamites) :While quasi-Christian, it is all over the world.

And there is a man in Australia who believes he is Jesus Christ and a man somewhere else who believes he is Moses.

Christianity is diverse, but to say that Fundamentalism is an American construct, that's a pretty big stretch. The difference is that there are more diverse Christians in the US simply because we have a higher population. There are Christian Fundamentalists in the UK, France, Romania...well, all over Europe, Africa and Asia.

Forget about the number of Fundamentalists in the US if you are saying it is the majority, because Christian Fundamentalism can take on many different forms. Fundamentalism can vary in degrees.



In the western developed world the US has the highest amount of people that deny evolution, that's all you really need to know......



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Prezbo369

Even worse:



I don't think there's another single western country where 1 person out of 3 believes the universe is less than 10.000 years old.


It shows a complete failure of the American education system which has been hijacked by fundamentalists.


If you want to know how they achieved it, watch this and weep for this lost youth:



European Christians had their dark ages 1000 years ago. American Christians are in the middle of it right now.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 09:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy

Then you missed my rebuttal. He's framing it within a USA context but why??


Because (he said) fundamentalism is primarily an American phenomena. If he's right about that, then one *should* only frame it within a US context because it is scare outside of the US.



I'm not. Nor should we. It was his attempt to undermine what I said about my experience on ATS. That's all it was. But of course ATS is international and there is no reason to think ATS's Christian base is either mostly American or Protestant. Which was his argument there. What he said originally was that Christians in general think a certain way. Namely, the vast majority of Christians take Genesis, and other parts of the Bible, allegorically. He also more or less equated protestant = fundamentalist. He proposed fundamentalists would make up less than 10%, closer to 5% of Christendom. Yet as I showed [versus him merely saying it's so] Protestants make up 36.7% of Christendom.


From what I've seen, ATS is nowhere near a representative sampling of Christians. Also, IIRC, he didn't equate Protestants to fundamentalists, he said that most fundamentalists could be found within the ranks of American Protestants. Go back and reread his post, it was much more nuanced than you're making it out to be.



As you can see here his framing of protestants being more or less exclusive to the USA is not accurate. Nor should that have any bearing on the matter to begin with!


He was not saying that Protestants are exclusive to the USA, he was saying fundamentalists were a subset of Protestantism which was primarily a US-based thing. I don't have good, solid data either way, but you're not engaging what he is actually arguing.



Then of course we need to address the underlying premise that most protestants are literalists, and more importantly that most Catholics are not. The crux of his argument hinges on the notion most Catholics don't view Genesis, and other parts of the Bible, literally. Which by the way is NOT what I am reading on Catholic dot com right now. If that's a good indication. I would imagine it is.


Do most Catholics follow Catholic church dogma? (Doubt it.) Does Catholic church dogma require literalism? (Doubt it.) If so, is literalism the same thing as fundamentalism? Is Catholic.com the official site of the Catholic church? (Doubt it.)



Good question. What sects/denominations would you say take a literal interpretation to the Bible, and or specifically towards Genesis?


Off the cuff, I'd say most Baptists, some nondenominational churchgoers. There's going to be some in every church though.

How does a literal reading of Genesis connect to ET anyway? Nothing in Genesis rules out ET life.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 10:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: StalkerSolent
Does Catholic church dogma require literalism? (Doubt it.)


As early as Church fathers like St Augustine, literalism over genesis was rejected among most Christian scholars.

Over centuries, this position has shaped the views of all Christians worldwide.


I know it's very hard for Americans to realize the literalism found among American Christians today is a modern and local thing, but it is.


The rest of the world hasn't been really influenced by Christian fundamentalism like the US were. Excepted other anglo-saxon countries and evangelical missions.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Develo

originally posted by: StalkerSolent
Does Catholic church dogma require literalism? (Doubt it.)


As early as Church fathers like St Augustine, literalism over genesis was rejected among most Christian scholars.

Over centuries, this position has shaped the views of all Christians worldwide.


I know it's very hard for Americans to realize the literalism found among American Christians today is a modern and local thing, but it is.


The rest of the world hasn't been really influenced by Christian fundamentalism like the US were. Excepted other anglo-saxon countries and evangelical missions.


^Truth. We've talked a lot about Catholics and Protestants on this thread, but Russia, Greece, and their neighbors are dominated by Orthodox Christianity. But nobody talks about them on ATS (or the rest of the Western world) because we are preoccupied with the Western tradition and culture.

Thanks for taking the time to do your homework. Lack of understanding of Christian tradition is rampant, even among Christians, sadly.




top topics



 
17
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join