Steven Spielberg has the christians riled up with his new movie about aliens, Disclosure Day (spoilers at the link: the plot seems utterly ridiculous to me). they are concerned how the discovery of life on other worlds would impact their cult. They do have some reason for this concern since their bible is by ignorant goat herders and any aliens would show that their bible fails from the first page where it says that stars are little lights in a solid dome which can fall off.
and of course, some are sure that aliens would be demons. Of course, like their god, they can’t show demons exist and demons are just anything they don’t like.
this one rather silly christian, Mark Birchler, goes on and manages to shoot himself in the metaphorical face with his concerns. I respond below:
Christianity has quite a problem with aliens since the bible says that stars are little lights in a solid dome. No stars, no planets and then where do aliens come from? And why assume that these beings would care about a god that can’t be shown to exist?
“As a confessing Christian who trusts the testimony of Scripture I would be extremely resistant of claims made by beings whose true essence and purpose are hidden from human understanding. And, the possibility that they are demonic manifestations may end up being the most accurate assumption.”
Curious how christians often claim that their god is “mysterious” and they don’t know its true essence or purpose. That would make it a demon by Mark’s own claims. BTW, for anyone outside the US, “The Federalist” which is quoted in Mark’s blog post, is an typical ignorant and fearful conservative website that spews lots of lies.
As for heresy, it’s curious how every christians calls the other christians heretics and not one christian can show that their claims are any more true than the rest.
He’s also very concerned with “sin” and being saved from them. At the cult’s core, there is only one sin: disobeying god. and since these christians can’t figure out what this god wants, they have quite a problem.
Club Schadenfreude 
Pretty silly of him. I was with him when he was being more rational. But, without any evidence, he believes aliens are DEMONS. C’mon. I guess if he can believe in a god without evidence, he can believe aliens are demons. I lost interest in reading another word!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Dear Dear Vel (or Velkyn or Andrea) and Becky Wiren,
The endless conflict, or rather, the absurd fun, of religions in the eyes of aliens:
Yours sincerely,
SoundEagle🦅
LikeLiked by 2 people
Perfect.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Evidence? What’s THAT?!?! They don’t need anything like evidence to believe anything!
LikeLiked by 2 people
heh. too true.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Let’s face it, ‘evidence’ spoils all the fun!
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think you’re assuming Christians are far more uniform than we actually are.
Some Christians may believe alien life is impossible. Others, including me, leave the question open. I don’t know whether there is life beyond earth, but if there is, I don’t see that as an automatic refutation of Christianity. It would raise questions, certainly, but questions are not the same thing as contradictions.
I saw the movie. For most of it, I was honestly just trying to figure out where Spielberg was going with the story. I did not walk away thinking it was making some grand spiritual claim. To me, it was another Spielberg alien movie suggesting that maybe there is life out there and that governments should be honest with people if they know more than they are saying. My wife walked away still believing it was 100 percent fantasy. I walked away still open to the possibility that we may not be alone. Two Christians saw the same movie and did not process it the same way. That does not invalidate Christianity. It just proves Christians are people.
You often argue that disagreement among Christians proves Christianity is false. I don’t accept that. It proves Christians are human beings who think, interpret, disagree, and sometimes get things wrong. That is true inside Christianity, atheism, politics, science, philosophy, and every other human community.
I do want to ask you for one thing, though: when you say “the Bible says that stars are little lights in a solid dome,” please give the specific reference you believe proves that claim. I’m an English teacher and a former journalist, so I still believe claims need evidence. If the text says what you say it says, then cite it and we can discuss the text.
I’m willing to discuss these things, but only if we can do it without calling each other frauds, liars, cultists, or fools. Challenge my claims all you want. I can live with that. But let’s deal with actual claims, actual evidence, and a civil tone.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hello Doug. Oh, I know that Christians aren’t uniform. Christians don’t even worship the same god since you cannot agree on what this god wants. I know you disagree on the most basic things, just as you disagree on ideas like aliens existing. There is indeed good reason for Christians to be upset at any claim of aliens since that shows their bible is completely wrong in its claims about the earth and how it exists in reality.
it does raise the spectre of contradictions since Christians don’t agree on how to interpret their bible. Is it to be accepted as literal? What parts are to be considered metaphor, symbolic, etc?
I haven’t seen the movie but the plot does seem rather silly to me. That aliens may exist is probably likely, but aliens as described in the movie? Probably not.
I know that Christians don’t like to admit that their disagreement makes Christianity false. However, it does since there is no evidence that any version is true, and Christians are quite certain each other are wrong. You assume there has to be at least one right version, and there is no requirement for that. You can all be wrong. When I watch Christians claim that only their version is true I see a circular firing squad.
Atheists like me who find no gods exist agree on what makes us atheists: there are no gods. Christians do not agree on what makes them Christians. You say that Christians sometimes get things wrong, but that assumes there is a “right”. There is no evidence for that assumption.
I am always bemused when a Christian asks about the little lights in a solid dome. It’s not hard to find, being right on the very first page of the bible.
“14 And God said, ‘Let there be lights in the dome of the sky to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth.’ And it was so. 16 God made the two great lights—the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night—and the stars. 17 God set them in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth, 18 to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. “
The Hebrew term translated as “dome” here is pronounced: raw-kee’-ah Strong: H7549 Orig: from 7554; properly, an expanse, i.e. the firmament or (apparently) visible arch of the sky:–firmament. H7554 Use: TWOT-2217a Noun Masculine
Grk Strong: G3772 G47331) extended surface (solid), expanse, firmament 1a) expanse (flat as base, support) 1b) firmament (of vault of heaven supporting waters above) 1b1) considered by Hebrews as solid and supporting ‘waters’ above – Strong’s concordance
These stars can be knocked off:
“29 ‘Immediately after the suffering of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of heaven will be shaken.” Matthew 24
“12 When he opened the sixth seal, I looked, and there came a great earthquake; the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood, 13 and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree drops its winter fruit when shaken by a gale.” Revelation 6
“10 The third angel blew his trumpet, and a great star fell from heaven, blazing like a torch, and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water. 11 The name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters became wormwood, and many died from the water, because it was made bitter.” Revelation 8
the koine Greek word translated as star is indeed star: aster.
So, Doug, what now? Will you try to claim this is just “symbolic”? If so, how do you know what parts of your bible are to be taken literally and what parts are symbolic?
I have no problem in calling someone a fraud who has no evidence for their claims, like any charlatan or snake oil salesman. Do you have evidence for your claims? We can discuss what you offer. Christians are literally cultists since a cult is just a religion. In modern terms, a cult is often a religion that is considered strange by the culture it is in. Often this is because of what the cult requires, like giving up everything for the religion.
Are you aware of what jesus requires?
BTW, I like bourbon too. Got a fancy bottle of Stagg. And I want to try Old Forester. I also don’t mind Old Crow.
LikeLiked by 1 person
See, we can agree on something. Stagg (the short bottle) or George T. Stagg? I’m guessing the first, because I rarely see the second and when I do, it’s usually going for about $600+. But it’s very good! However, so is the Stagg (Jr.). I’m about to open a bottle of Old Grand-dad 114 Single Barrel. If you can find one of those (for about $50), I highly suggest it. And if you’re going with Old Forester, the 1910 (93 proof) is wonderful, and the 1920 (115 proof) is also very good. Even their low-cost 100-proof bottle is pretty great. Blessings – sip in good health!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Of course we can agree upon something, Doug. Atheists aren’t what christians fantasize about. I’m waiting for your response to my comment, and how you propose to show me wrong.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Stagg Jr. Awesome, especially if you can find them at a decent price. I’m glad we can agree on something.
No, I don’t believe atheists are what some Christians imagine them to be. I’ve said more than once that atheists can be thoughtful, moral, kind and generous people.
As for the rest, I’m not interested in a “show me wrong” contest. That framing turns conversation into combat, and I don’t think either of us benefits from that. I’m willing to discuss specific claims in good faith, one at a time, with a civil tone. But I’m not going to respond to a long list of accusations that Christians are frauds, cultists and liars. That is not a discussion; it is a prosecution.
So if there is one specific question you want to discuss respectfully, ask it plainly and we can see where it goes. Otherwise, I’m content to leave it here and wish you well — especially with the bourbon.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Doug, as soon as you aren’t “interested in a show me wrong contest”, that shows that you can’t show that I’m wrong *or* that you are right. Discussion is combat if you want to define combat as making claims and then needing to support those claims. I know I benefit from that since it can show me that I’m wrong and I can correct myself. I’m wondering why you don’t think you benefit from that?
I’ve made plenty of specific claims, Doug. just choose one and we can discuss it. I’ll give you them again below. You have made claims and have presented no evidence. You seem to assume that I should believe you regardless. You also have done a typical Christian thing by insisting that things must be in a “civil” tone, which is no more than a Christian setting himself up for an excuse why he will leave the conversation. Define “civil tone”, Doug. I am well within my rights to call christians liars, frauds and cultists when they cannot support their claims and they ignore facts in order to try to remain in the religion. Willful ignorance isn’t acceptable to me. I’ve shown how Christians *are* liars, frauds, and cultists. Again, I challenge you to show I’m wrong in my estimation.
“Since Christians don’t agree on how to interpret their bible. Is it to be accepted as literal? What parts are to be considered metaphor, symbolic, etc?”
“I am always bemused when a Christian asks about the little lights in a solid dome. It’s not hard to find, being right on the very first page of the bible.
“14 And God said, ‘Let there be lights in the dome of the sky to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth.’ And it was so. 16 God made the two great lights—the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night—and the stars. 17 God set them in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth, 18 to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. “
The Hebrew term translated as “dome” here is pronounced: raw-kee’-ah Strong: H7549 Orig: from 7554; properly, an expanse, i.e. the firmament or (apparently) visible arch of the sky:–firmament. H7554 Use: TWOT-2217a Noun Masculine
Grk Strong: G3772 G47331) extended surface (solid), expanse, firmament 1a) expanse (flat as base, support) 1b) firmament (of vault of heaven supporting waters above) 1b1) considered by Hebrews as solid and supporting ‘waters’ above – Strong’s concordance
These stars can be knocked off:
“29 ‘Immediately after the suffering of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of heaven will be shaken.” Matthew 24
“12 When he opened the sixth seal, I looked, and there came a great earthquake; the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood, 13 and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree drops its winter fruit when shaken by a gale.” Revelation 6
“10 The third angel blew his trumpet, and a great star fell from heaven, blazing like a torch, and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water. 11 The name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters became wormwood, and many died from the water, because it was made bitter.” Revelation 8
the koine Greek word translated as star is indeed star: aster.
So, Doug, what now? Will you try to claim this is just “symbolic”? If so, how do you know what parts of your bible are to be taken literally and what parts are symbolic?
I have no problem in calling someone a fraud who has no evidence for their claims, like any charlatan or snake oil salesman. Do you have evidence for your claims? We can discuss what you offer. Christians are literally cultists since a cult is just a religion. In modern terms, a cult is often a religion that is considered strange by the culture it is in. Often this is because of what the cult requires, like giving up everything for the religion.
Are you aware of what jesus requires?”
LikeLiked by 1 person
and btw, it was the stagg Jr.
LikeLiked by 1 person
got the 100 Proof Old Forester since I had other things i wanted to pick up at the liquor store. Interesting, less sweet than many bourbons.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m going to step back from this exchange, not because questions are unwelcome, but because the terms of the discussion are not productive.
Several things are happening at once:
First, there is a false dilemma. You seem to be arguing that either all Christians must agree on every doctrine, interpretation and application, or Christianity is false. I don’t accept that. Disagreement may prove that Christians are human, limited and sometimes wrong. It does not prove that there is no truth.
Second, there is a straw man. You keep responding as though I have claimed all atheists are immoral, all Christians agree on everything, and I alone represent “True Christianity.” I have not claimed any of that. In fact, I have said the opposite.
Third, there is cherry-picking. You are selecting particular translations, lexical notes and passages, then treating your preferred reading as the only honest reading. That is not how careful interpretation works.
Fourth, there is genre confusion. Genesis, Matthew 24 and Revelation are not the same kind of writing. An English teacher would not read poetry, apocalyptic imagery, historical narrative, parable, law and theological reflection by the same rules. Recognizing genre is not dodging. It is basic reading comprehension.
Fifth, there is a shifting burden of proof. Atheism is treated narrowly as “I do not believe in gods,” while Christianity is required to answer for every denomination, every fringe group, every interpretive dispute, every bad actor and every historical failure. That is not an even standard.
Sixth, there is poisoning the well. Calling Christians “frauds,” “liars” and “cultists” before the discussion even begins does not invite honest conversation. It assumes the conclusion before the argument has happened.
That is why I am not going to continue debating on these terms. I’m willing to discuss honest questions in a civil tone, but I’m not going to participate in a conversation where disagreement is treated as fraud, interpretation is treated as evasion, and insults are treated as evidence.
You are free to reject Christianity. I understand that you do. But I’m not obligated to defend the entire Christian faith inside a comment thread structured in a way where Christianity can only lose.
That said, I’m glad we found at least one place where we can talk as people rather than opponents. Old Forester 100 is a good pour, though I agree it is not as sweet as some bourbons. If you want something sweeter in that family, 1910 is probably the one I’d suggest. I’m happy to keep talking bourbon. I’m just not going to keep arguing under terms that begin by assuming I’m a fraud.
I wish you well — and sip in good health.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is as expected. Unfortunate, but nothing surprising. You have claimed that other Christians are wrong and atheists are wrong, that in effect we are frauds and liars. I am asking you to support those claims.
You have accused me of many things in your comment and have nothing to support any of it. This is why I call Christians frauds and liars. I call them cultists since they literally are.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As is often the case, a Christian who was sure he had all of the answers now must make up excuses to cover a hasty retreat.
“First, there is a false dilemma. You seem to be arguing that either all Christians must agree on every doctrine, interpretation and application, or Christianity is false. I don’t accept that. Disagreement may prove that Christians are human, limited and sometimes wrong. It does not prove that there is no truth.”
Doug has personally claimed other christains are wrong, as well as saying I’m wrong. If there is one “truth”, then he should be able to present it. He cannot. His claims are as demonstrably wrong as the rest.
“Second, there is a straw man. You keep responding as though I have claimed all atheists are immoral, all Christians agree on everything, and I alone represent “True Christianity.” I have not claimed any of that. In fact, I have said the opposite.”
Doug claimed that he knows that atheists and other Christians are wrong. He has represented himself as the only correct Christian.
“Third, there is cherry-picking. You are selecting particular translations, lexical notes and passages, then treating your preferred reading as the only honest reading. That is not how careful interpretation works.”
I’ve asked Doug to show how I’m wrong. He makes accusations as above, but cannot show where the translations I use are any worse than those he uses or which ones are the ostensible “right” ones. He cannot show that his reading is any more “honest” than my own. His “careful interpretation” only means “that which agrees with me”.
“Fourth, there is genre confusion. Genesis, Matthew 24 and Revelation are not the same kind of writing. An English teacher would not read poetry, apocalyptic imagery, historical narrative, parable, law and theological reflection by the same rules. Recognizing genre is not dodging. It is basic reading comprehension.”
The plea about genres is nothing new for Christians to use. They also cannot agree on which part of the bible is which genre.
“Fifth, there is a shifting burden of proof. Atheism is treated narrowly as “I do not believe in gods,” while Christianity is required to answer for every denomination, every fringe group, every interpretive dispute, every bad actor and every historical failure. That is not an even standard.”
Here we have Doug yet again sure that only he has the right Christianity. For a group that claims to have one truth, they certainly don’t like being held accountable to that claim. It is not my fault that Christianity is the mess it is, where all participants declare they have the one and only truth, and not one can disprove the others or show that their version is the right one. Atheism is literally a conclusion about one topic: do gods exist.
“Sixth, there is poisoning the well. Calling Christians “frauds,” “liars” and “cultists” before the discussion even begins does not invite honest conversation. It assumes the conclusion before the argument has happened.”
I have supported why I call Christians frauds, liars and cultists. The conclusion has been determined by Christian actions. If Doug is not any of these, it is up to him to show why I’m wrong.
“That is why I am not going to continue debating on these terms. I’m willing to discuss honest questions in a civil tone, but I’m not going to participate in a conversation where disagreement is treated as fraud, interpretation is treated as evasion, and insults are treated as evidence.”
Unfortuantely, Doug uses much of what other Christians have done. He implies that I am not honest, and hides behind “civility”. Nowhere has disagreement been treated as fraud, but disagreement amongst Christians is treated as the fact that it is. Interpretation needs to be supported as valid, and there are no insults used as evidence.
“You are free to reject Christianity. I understand that you do. But I’m not obligated to defend the entire Christian faith inside a comment thread structured in a way where Christianity can only lose.”
Really? I’m stronger than god? The claim about the structure is also nonsense and of course is not demonstrated in anyway.
Everyone who makes an unsubstantiated claim is assumed to be a fraud. It up to them to support their claim. Doug asked me where I had found that stars were little lights in a solid dome per his bible and I showed him. I expect the same in return.
LikeLiked by 1 person