Aliens and Demons

My brother-in-law posted a good "follow up" to my last post over on his blog where he dealt with the "Aliens" that "visit earth" or "abduct people." I completely agree with his conclusions . . . the "aliens" that show up today (the ones that aren't hallucinations/imaginary, outright lies/hoaxes, or secret government aircraft) are surely demons deceiving people. They often deliver an unbiblical message along the lines of "you are luminous beings and by inner reflection you can attain world peace" (as opposed to "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" and "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.") and the ones that abduct people are the perfect ready-made explanation for the rapture, should it happen anytime soon.

As to demonic activity being more prevalent in "third-world" countries with a tendency toward spiritism/voodoo/witchcraft, I think that C. S. Lewis gave a good explanation. He said,

There are two equal and opposite errors into which our race can fall about the
devils. One is to disbelieve in their existence. The other is to believe,and to
feel an excessive and unhealthy interest in them. They themselves are equally
pleased by both errors, and hail a materialist or magician with the same
delight.

I think that most places here in the US do not see as much obviously demonic activity because most Americans are pretty secular. They tend to ignore the existence of the supernatural (divine or demonic) for all practical purposes (except for Christmas, Easter, when something goes horribly wrong, or when they want a favor from God). For demons to go around possessing people, trying to scare/injure missionaries, etc. would be counterproductive as it would reinforce the existence of the supernatural and people in the "first world" are already sufficiently led astray by the god of materialism. It's much more effective to pose as more "science friendly" extra-terrestrials whose existence supposedly somehow "proves" the Bible to be false.

On the other hand, in areas where there is more fascination with the occult religions, I think that more obviously demonic activity occurs. In those areas there is already plenty of belief in the supernatural so the demons are happy to oblige by impersonating someone's Auntie at a seance, serving as a "familiar" for a witch, delivering messages through a medium, hurting someone that a Macumbeira put a curse on, etc. And, of course, when people are messing around that much with demons (though they generally would refer to them as "spirits") there are going to be more cases of demon possessions, freaky occurrences, and such.

As far as the theological relevence of discussing extra-terrestrials: it is currently a "hot topic" in the world and, as Christians, we should be able to give an intelligent answer if the subject comes up. Besides . . . what sci-fi geek doesn't enjoy discussing the possible existence of intelligent extra-terrestrial life?!

Extra Terrestrial Life and the Bible

Internet classes are back in session for me, so that means I have a minimum of 10 online postings due every week. I haven't posted anything on here for a while, so I'm going to "double dip" and post some of my comments from this week's class discussion. One of the topics we are discussing is whether intelligent life could exist on other planets . . . and as strange as this topic is, it's even stranger that the class this is coming from is "Church and Baptist Distinctives" (I think the prof is trying to make the point that in systematic theology our primary source is the Bible, but logic is another source). Anyway, here is my answer to "Is there intelligent extra-terrestrial life?":

I believe it is HIGHLY unlikely that God created intelligent life (aside from angelic beings) anywhere else in the universe. The love and attention that God has given mankind seems to leave little room for sentient beings on other planets. In the creation account man appears to be the pinnacle of God's creation. In the incarnation, God became a man. In the eternal state the New Jerusalem will descend to the new EARTH. There is no mention of any alien race in the Bible, including in the end times events and the eternal state. This is largely an argument from silence so I suppose there is the minute possibility of the existence of another sentient race (unless I'm missing something). Overall, I'd say I'm 99.99% sure that there is no such thing. (but if there were, would they be fallen as well or would we have a "Perelandra" situation?)

--Someone asked me to clarify my statement that "The love and attention that God has given mankind seems to leave little room for sentient beings on other planets." so here's the next part of my reply:

By that statement I meant that God's actions in space and time (that are revealed in the Bible) seem to be directed toward the earth and mankind (for God's glory, of course) and this extends into the eternal state. I wouldn't say God "used up" all His love etc. on this planet, but from what He has revealed to us (what with making man in His image, eventually setting up His kingdom on earth, etc.), the earth certainly seems to be where "all the action is". Like I said, I suppose there's a remote possibility that God is just keeping it secret from us that there's another sentient race out there on another planet, but I doubt it. Though, I'm wondering how similar this logic is to that of the Roman Catholic scholars in Galileo's day who said that the earth must be at the center of the solar system and/or universe for fairly similar reasons.

--Someone else asked whether I though the discovery of intelligent extra-terrestrial life would prove Christianity wrong and/or completely destroy it. Here's my reply to that (the C.S. Lewis references are to his science fiction trilogy made up of Out of the Silent Planet, Perelandra, and That Hideous Strength):

I don't see why it would [disprove Christianity]. The Bible does not explicitly state that there is no other intelligent life. It would not "prove evolution" any more than life on earth proves it. It would raise all kinds of new theological questions . . . Are they like C. S. Lewis's Perelandra/Venus where they never fell and live in a perfect world (unlikely since "all creation groans and travails . . .")? Are they like Lewis's Malcandra/Mars where the people are unfallen, but their planet blighted by earth's fall? If they are fallen, can the be saved? . . . interesting speculation, but I really don't think we have to worry about it.

Where have all the heroes gone?

I am currently reading Rise to Rebellion: A Novel of the American Revolution by Jeff Shaara. So far (I'm about 120 pages in) it is an excellent book. (Though I doubt that an English person would appreciate his portrayal of the English)

In the introduction, Shaara points out the recent (ongoing) trend of ripping apart the heroes of our past. The names of our founding fathers are regularly dragged through the mud to make them appear "more human." Now, even though my patriotic loyalties are a bit divided (I grew up in Brazil), I find this practice unnecessary and annoying (as does Shaara, apparently). Yes, the men had flaws because they were human, but what is the point in making their flaws the focus of one's study? We study them because of the great things they achieved in spite of their flaws.

I don't think that a hero has to be lowered to the status of "just an ordinary guy who happened to be in the right place at the right time but he's really not a very good person at all, in fact anyone could've done it and would've done a better job." Often the greatest heroes were not seeking greatness, but when it was necessary for them to do what was right, they did it. They rose to the occasion and did do above and beyond what others were capable of doing (or willing to do).

Pop culture seems to be enamored with the idea that a "true hero" has to be poked and prodded along the whole way as he acts reluctant and makes every mistake possible. While some heroes are like that (I think of Gideon or Barak in the Bible), it's nice to see heroes who perform true acts of nobility and/or courage without having to have someone holding their hand and telling them what their next move should be (like Joshua, Caleb, or David in the Bible . . . or in the movies, Indiana Jones, Han Solo, or Jack Ryan . . . yes, I like Harrison Ford movies).

In case you're wondering what brought this on, it's a combination of reading Rise to Rebellion where the founding fathers are shown flaws and all, but not dragged through the mud (a good example), and watching the Lord of the Rings movies where Peter Jackson sucked a lot of the nobility out of the main characters (a bad example). Apparently good old PJ couldn't have all the noble characters that Tolkien wrote so he changed the story so that: Aragorn is afraid of his birthright, Faramir tries to take the ring before deciding he shouldn't, Theoden tries to hide instead of going to battle, the ents decide not to help until practically forced to by Pippin, Elrond borderline hates men, Arwen almost abandons Aragorn until she realizes her father was half-lying, Sam leaves Frodo on the stairs of Cirith Ungol, Gimli serves as little more than comic relief, etc. (Yes, I'm a rabid Tolkien fan/Geek and though I do enjoy the movies the books are so much better).

Anyway, kudos to Shaara, and here's hoping for more stories with heroes of true nobility and courage (3:10 to Yuma that I watched the other night wasn't half bad).

Back to School (and not very happy about it)

Well, classes are starting up again already. My "Polishing the Pastor's Preaching" module (which starts tomorrow) cuts two weeks off my Christmas break which greatly annoys me. There's nothing I can do about it because it's a required class and this is the only time it's offered.

It also kind of annoys me that I have to take another preaching class. I already had a year of public speaking in highschool, 6 credits of preaching and at least 4 credits (it might've been 5) of public speaking in college, and last semester's 2 credits of preaching in seminary. I know my delivery still needs improvement, but honestly, my preaching/teaching/speaking has improved a lot more from doing it in various church ministries than from any of my classes. Okay, I'm done whining (for now). I am looking forward to my other three classes.

So that means the blog is going back to its once or twice a week schedule. Oh wait, I never went back to my 3-4 times per week schedule. Never mind . . . as you were . . .

Iowa Caucus Rant

Why on earth is there so much hype over the Iowa caucus?! I lived in Iowa while attending college (and for a couple years after) and don't understand why everyone cares so much what they think. Ooooo . . . just because the windy, boring Midwestern state that's covered with corn and smells like pigs half the year and buried in snow with temperatures well below freezing for the other half of the year does their primary thing first let's all let them decide the course of the election for us! (Sorry all you Iowans for that unflattering description of your beloved state, but even after living there for 6 years that's still how I think of it)

I mean, Iowa only has 1.3% of the electoral votes (7 out of 538), and they don't even have a primary election. They do some kind of antiquated caucus with bizarre rules that most people don't understand and which discourages participation of those who want to just show up and vote for their candidate. Yet, the news people are acting like this is the most important event of the entire primary election (closely followed in importance by the New Hampshire primaries: 4 electoral votes out of 538: 0.74%!). I'm just going to be glad when the elections are over . . . of course, about that time they'll start gearing up for the next round of congressional elections. Oh well, it beats living in a dictatorship.

Welcome to 2008!

Well, it's the new year, and the old year did it's best to make sure that I was glad to see it go. The last week of 2007 was probably the worst work week I've had since starting at this job. The head teller was on vacation and the backup head teller (referred to in a past posting as "Captain Crisis") freaks out anytime anything occurs that is even slightly out of the ordinary. Since that week was sandwiched between two holidays and was the last week of the year it was a bit hectic anyway. Add in the person in charge spazzing out and running around in a panic accomplishing next to nothing half the time, throw in a couple hours of computer failure on the last day of the year, and it was not a good week. Welcome 2008!

New Year's Day was "interesting." It started out with Katie waking up and barfing at 7:30 (so much for sleeping in) and doing so periodically for the next 6 hours or so (poor Katie!). Karen took care of the barfings, and I watched a movie with Katie ("The Swan Princess") and built her a big train track for her Thomas the Train toys (yes, I got the easy part . . . thank-you Karen!).

On the plus side, the Michigan Wolverines FINALLY won a bowl game for the first time in years. Granted, it was only the "Capital One Bowl" but they finally won (and against a ranked team at that)! Maybe the new coach will improve things and they'll actually beat Ohio State next season. Anyway, once Katie started feeling better it was a nice relaxing day where I did next to nothing.

I don't generally make New Year's resolutions because everyone knows that you just break them within 2-6 weeks anyway. This year I broke tradition and set a goal for myself that I suppose you could call a resolution. But I was smart and made it something that I want to do. For my birthday I got a nice diglot Greek/English New Testament, and I'm going to try to read all the way through it (the Greek half . . . with help from the English half when I don't know a word) by the end of the year for my daily devotions. We'll see how it goes.

Anyway, Happy New Year everyone!