Vatican: It's ok to believe in aliens

[aelf]

I just think it is unfortunate that yet another thread has become a debate either on the nature of belief and disbelief or whether God exists. Should we expect this from now on any time God or religion is mentioned in the OP?

So have we come to expect that everytime a thread is about religion some customary vocal atheist would come in and denounce religion? If we have, why not this as well? If we have not, why not ask the former and earlier question first?

I only provoked this discussion when I questioned the belief of an atheist who felt self-righteous enough to denounce religion here.


PS: Hmm... Self-righteous atheist... What an irony. I guess a belief based on doubt is not very compatible with doubt itself.

 

[Great Librarian]

Wait, assuming you're referring to me, you're not really telling me that because I was critical of the Vatican I'm somehow self-righteous? I didn't denounce religion in this thread, I called out the Vatican on its claims of being credible and as an organization that holds sway over policy world-wide despite the fact that it is really reprehensible. A religious person can do that without being self-righteous. Why should I not judge the Vatican? Certainly you don't think the Vatican is the pillar of morality and rationality in this world, do you? I definitely don't think it is and I fail to see how that makes me self-righteous.

The truth is that you provoked the discussion and it has nothing to do with what I wrote about the Vatican because you, erroneously, think that I denounced religion and was acting in a self-righteous manner, when really I was just being critical of the Vatican. Are you really incapable of accurately reading what I wrote and it is necessary for you not to take total responsibility for what you did instead of indicating that my post incited you to call out my 'self-righteousness'? Really, who exactly is the self-righteous one here?

 

[Cu Chulainn]

Believing that the universe may contain alien life does not contradict a faith in God, the Vatican's chief astronomer said in an interview published Tuesday. The Rev. Jose Gabriel Funes, the Jesuit director of the Vatican Observatory, was quoted as saying the vastness of the universe means it is possible there could be other forms of life outside Earth, even intelligent ones.
"How can we rule out that life may have developed elsewhere?" Funes said. "Just as we consider earthly creatures as 'a brother,' and 'sister,' why should we not talk about an 'extraterrestrial brother'? It would still be part of creation."
In the interview by the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano, Funes said that such a notion "doesn't contradict our faith" because aliens would still be God's creatures. Ruling out the existence of aliens would be like "putting limits" on God's creative freedom, he said.

But wouldn't the existence of a superior race kinda nix that that whole arrogant "made in god's image" line? I mean, how can we be the image of god if this new race that looks like Cthulu has superior technology and philosopy?

 

[LightFang]

But wouldn't the existence of a superior race kinda nix that that whole arrogant "made in god's image" line? I mean, how can we be the image of god if this new race that looks like Cthulu has superior technology and philosopy?

You assume they have superior technology and philosophy.

 

[classical_hero]

I don't see anything in there saying that Earth is the only world with life.

Those verses are talking about the total nature of the fall and the fact they are under subjection and are in pain. This does include the whole universe so for any alien life to be around, they are unwillingly subject to the fall and are suffering as a result of Adam's actions. It is talking about how the whole of creation is now under bondage and when redemption comes for mankind, the creation is waiting for that time to have the curse will be lifted. The reason the universe is in trouble is simply due to man's actions alone and this would be inpacting on the Aliens for no reason at all.

 

[Cu Chulainn]

You assume they have superior technology and philosophy.

But of course, the problem would not arise if the aliens had inferior developments.

I've heard it said that if we ever do encounter an alien race we had better hope they are stronger than us and better than us. For if they are not stronger we will surely exploit them, and if they are not better they will surely exploit us.

 

[El_Machinae]

But wouldn't the existence of a superior race kinda nix that that whole arrogant "made in god's image" line? I mean, how can we be the image of god if this new race that looks like Cthulu has superior technology and philosopy?

If we're quick enough, we'll have the superior technology and philosophy by the time we meet them! If we're quick enough

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

But wouldn't the existence of a superior race kinda nix that that whole arrogant "made in god's image" line? I mean, how can we be the image of god if this new race that looks like Cthulu has superior technology and philosopy?

Well, I really see nothing arrogant about that claim.

Anyways, I hope that we have figured out that coming from a civilization with greater technology does not make one superior. A heck of a lot of nasty things were done in the name of that belief.

 

[DNK]

But wouldn't the existence of a superior race kinda nix that that whole arrogant "made in god's image" line? I mean, how can we be the image of god if this new race that looks like Cthulu has superior technology and philosopy?

Why is it I feel like most people that bash Christianity or Christian ideas have a very shallow understanding of the respective ideology?

 

[Elrohir]

But wouldn't the existence of a superior race kinda nix that that whole arrogant "made in god's image" line? I mean, how can we be the image of god if this new race that looks like Cthulu has superior technology and philosopy?

Made in God's image =/= perfect. There are people which are, in my view, more accomplished, more moral, and more "valuable" to society than others. By your logic, shouldn't I have to say that they are truly made in God's image, while the unaccomplished and less moral members of society are not, and aren't really "human" in the same way we are?

There are differences between individuals, and I wouldn't be surprised if there were differences between sapient species. Neither implies less value to their Creator.

If we're quick enough, we'll have the superior technology and philosophy by the time we meet them! If we're quick enough

See, that's something I've never understood. Why is it so likely that, if we meet an intelligent alien civilization at some point in the future, that they're going to be massively me advanced than us? Just because if they aren't advanced, we probably won't meet them? (At least, in the relative near future)

 

[El_Machinae]

It's just a matter of probability, I guess. The advanced civilization might be more likely to be the one that travels far enough to meet us (unless life is common); being advanced might be a prereq to successful long-distance travel. As well, if there are alien civilizations out there, then they're either going to be more advanced or less advanced: eventually you'll meet one that's more advanced, as time progresses.

 

[Great Librarian]

See, that's something I've never understood. Why is it so likely that, if we meet an intelligent alien civilization at some point in the future, that they're going to be massively me advanced than us? Just because if they aren't advanced, we probably won't meet them? (At least, in the relative near future)

Isn't it fairly obvious that any civilization that came to Earth from anywhere outside of our solar system would have to be far more technologically advanced than us? In fact, it's necessary that they are or they could never propel themselves the distance in any reasonable amount of time or survive the journey. Our current technology is hardly capable of effectively reducing the enormous risk posed by cosmological radiation and potentially devastating micro-particle collisions in the short term let alone during an interstellar journey, not to mention the sheer logistical problems of navigating space (you can't just launch and aim toward your target even during interplanetary travel). The fact of the matter as it stands is that there may be life somewhere else in the universe, however, considering the vast distances and physics, even if there were sentient life and we intercepted a radio transmission, from what we know of the nearest planets that may be capable of supporting life, it'd be so far away that when we received any such transmission whoever sent it would be very, very long dead. Second to that is how any other civilization could know of our existence as our most distant radio broadcasts have made it only about as far as 80 light years. The most distant and currently the only signals from Earth that are in interstellar space. If any civilization made it to Earth themselves, I'd want to know how long they'd been in travel, because the nearest star to Earth is itself 4 light years distant and the most distant man-made object from Earth is Voyager 1 (10.5 billion kilometers) launched in 1977 and it's also the fastest which is still pissing slow relative to even interplanetary distances (it'll be interstellar in a few years).

So, yeah, just why does everyone think that any civilization that visits Earth would have to be more technologically advanced than us? You answered your own question only what you added is plain wrong. They won't likely reach us ever.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

But technologically advanced =/= intellectually superior. They could have just had more time. Just like how the European colonizers of Africa weren't really any smarter than the natives, they just thought they were.

 

[LightFang]

But technologically advanced =/= intellectually superior. They could have just had more time. Just like how the European colonizers of Africa weren't really any smarter than the natives, they just thought they were.

The African people supposedly evolved first, so they had the most time of all...

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Well, no, they just never left Africa. They had the same ancestors as their European conquerors if you go back a couple tens of thousands of years.

And the aliens might have different cognitive abilities form us, being a different species (and unlike any such differences between races of humans). But there is no reason they have to be greater - a species slightly less intelligent than us with a couple millennia more to work on high technology might do what we can't yet.

 

[Elrohir]

It's just a matter of probability, I guess. The advanced civilization might be more likely to be the one that travels far enough to meet us (unless life is common); being advanced might be a prereq to successful long-distance travel. As well, if there are alien civilizations out there, then they're either going to be more advanced or less advanced: eventually you'll meet one that's more advanced, as time progresses.

Isn't it fairly obvious that any civilization that came to Earth from anywhere outside of our solar system would have to be far more technologically advanced than us? In fact, it's necessary that they are or they could never propel themselves the distance in any reasonable amount of time or survive the journey. Our current technology is hardly capable of effectively reducing the enormous risk posed by cosmological radiation and potentially devastating micro-particle collisions in the short term let alone during an interstellar journey, not to mention the sheer logistical problems of navigating space (you can't just launch and aim toward your target even during interplanetary travel). The fact of the matter as it stands is that there may be life somewhere else in the universe, however, considering the vast distances and physics, even if there were sentient life and we intercepted a radio transmission, from what we know of the nearest planets that may be capable of supporting life, it'd be so far away that when we received any such transmission whoever sent it would be very, very long dead. Second to that is how any other civilization could know of our existence as our most distant radio broadcasts have made it only about as far as 80 light years. The most distant and currently the only signals from Earth that are in interstellar space. If any civilization made it to Earth themselves, I'd want to know how long they'd been in travel, because the nearest star to Earth is itself 4 light years distant and the most distant man-made object from Earth is Voyager 1 (10.5 billion kilometers) launched in 1977 and it's also the fastest which is still pissing slow relative to even interplanetary distances (it'll be interstellar in a few years).

So, yeah, just why does everyone think that any civilization that visits Earth would have to be more technologically advanced than us? You answered your own question only what you added is plain wrong. They won't likely reach us ever.

No, I understand that if aliens came to Earth, they'd have to be much more advanced than we are today.

What I'm disputing is that sentient alien life, if it exists, is necessarily or even probably more advanced than us. Obviously if they come here, then they are more advanced - but I'm speaking in more general terms. Why is extraterrestrial sentient life probably more advanced than us? Apologies for the confusion, but I'm not talking about aliens that hypothetically visited us, I'm talking about aliens in general.

 

[Zarn]

Wait, assuming you're referring to me, you're not really telling me that because I was critical of the Vatican I'm somehow self-righteous? I didn't denounce religion in this thread, I called out the Vatican on its claims of being credible and as an organization that holds sway over policy world-wide despite the fact that it is really reprehensible. A religious person can do that without being self-righteous. Why should I not judge the Vatican? Certainly you don't think the Vatican is the pillar of morality and rationality in this world, do you? I definitely don't think it is and I fail to see how that makes me self-righteous.

The truth is that you provoked the discussion and it has nothing to do with what I wrote about the Vatican because you, erroneously, think that I denounced religion and was acting in a self-righteous manner, when really I was just being critical of the Vatican. Are you really incapable of accurately reading what I wrote and it is necessary for you not to take total responsibility for what you did instead of indicating that my post incited you to call out my 'self-righteousness'? Really, who exactly is the self-righteous one here?

Why were you critical of the Vatican again?

 

[Great Librarian]

No, I understand that if aliens came to Earth, they'd have to be much more advanced than we are today.

What I'm disputing is that sentient alien life, if it exists, is necessarily or even probably more advanced than us. Obviously if they come here, then they are more advanced - but I'm speaking in more general terms. Why is extraterrestrial sentient life probably more advanced than us? Apologies for the confusion, but I'm not talking about aliens that hypothetically visited us, I'm talking about aliens in general.

In that case, no, they aren't necessarily more advanced than us. Going along the same lines as before, if they were more technologically advanced than us, they're probably already long gone. Our sun is a late generation star. It probably won't release enough matter for a new star once it's gone. Given that our solar system is some 5 billion years old or so, it stands to reason that any sentient life in the universe is long gone if it's not living around a star of a similar age to ours.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Well, although our sun is about the ideal size for a planet with intelligent life (and size determines lifetime), I don't think that there is any sort of strict timeline for intelligent life developing. It could have happened much earlier on our planet if things had gone differently. What we don't yet know is how long a species with a high level of technology can survive. We have gone less than 10,000 years since agriculture (which is what really started it all).

 

[Great Librarian]

Why were you critical of the Vatican again?

It doesn't really matter anymore, however, I wrote this:

It's about time the Vatican stopped and closed its hypocritical and backward mouth. That the Vatican has any credibility is laughable considering, alone, the things that the Pontiff has said (or written) over the last hundred years. I am very much tired of the joke and very much tired of people and governments taking these superstitious and self-appeasing . .. .. .. .. . seriously.

It's okay to believe in aliens? It's okay to believe in god too, according to the pontiff. I sense a pattern.

Essentially, I'm saying that the Vatican really should be considered a laughing stock. It just now decides that Alien life doesn't contradict the bible, but on the other hand condemns genetic engineering as one of its new seven deadly sins? Most recently, sex is a drug (if sex is a drug what isn't? I have a biological prerogative to eat, urinate and make bowel movements too. I wish I could quite those drugs). I just find the Vatican silly and rather arbitrary in its statements. Over the long run, I find the Vatican to be hypocritical and backward and it generally irritates me that countries take edicts from the Vatican seriously or take the Vatican seriously at all.