|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 8:04 am
How can we show just how ludicrous the ‘alien Jesus’ conspiracy theory really is? Jian L. from Australia writes:  Quote: I’m not sure if this particular conspiracy is discussed here, but some people make the outrageous and ridiculous claim that Jesus was merely an alien and NOT the Son of God, pointing to his various miracles and resurrection as proof that he was an alien visitor. Apart from the impossibility of the existence of aliens and the infallibility, inerrancy and inspired nature proving that he is the Messiah, what would you say to these people? CMI’s Shaun Doyle responds: There are several reasons beyond the ones you mention for why the ‘Jesus is an alien’ idea is a ludicrous conspiracy theory. The ‘alien Jesus’ idea has only one thing (supposedly) going for it that other failed naturalistic ideas don’t: it (seemingly) explains Jesus’ miracles. But there’s an absurdly large cost for affirming this. If this idea is right, the documents that reliably report Jesus’ ‘miracles’ (the Gospels) either tell us about Jesus’ teachings unreliably, or reliably tell us about Jesus’ unreliable teachings. It can’t be the latter, because the Gospels clearly honour Jesus. The Gospel writers didn’t think Jesus was a charlatan. On the other hand, if the Gospels report Jesus’ teachings unreliably, why believe their reports about the miracles? If the Gospels can’t be trusted to report reliably on mundane things (e.g. what Jesus taught and what 1st century Judaism was like), we can’t trust the miracle reports either. If the Gospels are that unreliable, it would make much more sense to say that we can’t learn much about the historical Jesus from them than to say that they are evidence that Jesus was an alien, and that’s why He did miracles. Indeed, this is what many of the most articulate skeptics of the Gospels say. (See Can we know anything about the past? A review of Jesus Before the Gospels by Bart Ehrman) But the link between the reliability of Jesus’ teaching and the reliability of His miracles is even closer than that. The Gospels put on the lips of Jesus a close link between His teaching and His miracles. For Jesus, according to the Gospels, His miracles were sure evidence for His claims and His teaching (Luke 11:20, John 5:36). But He taught that the one true God of Israel was setting up His kingdom in and through Jesus, His beloved eternal Son. Based on these miracles, Jesus declared His authority to call Israel to repentance, and to reform God’s true people around Himself as their Lord. This sounds like something that at least could make sense in the context of 1st century Judaism. But aliens? How does that make sense of anything about Jesus’ teaching and context? (See Gospel Dates and Reliability, Can we believe the Gospels?, and Should we trust the Bible?) The ‘alien Jesus’ proponent would likely retort: ‘Maybe they just weren’t ready for the truth!’ Well, if they weren’t ready for the truth, then what was the point of Jesus? Did the aliens misjudge when to send Him? Did the aliens send Jesus just for a laugh at our expense? And again: what evidence do we have for any of this? Just because the ‘alien Jesus’ proponent can dream up witty retorts that sound like they keep the theory afloat, that doesn’t mean they have any evidence for it. This is just a failed attempt to explain away the fact that all the evidence we have stands against the ‘alien Jesus’ idea. But what about the miracles? Couldn’t aliens have done the miracles? For argument’s sake, let’s first assume that they could have. First, any ‘miracles’ aliens can do, God can do. So, what supposedly makes aliens a better explanation of Jesus’ miracles than God? After all, aliens do not fit the context for Jesus’ miracles, but God does. The answer is typically that aliens would be physical beings that do things solely by physical means, and we know physics works. In other words, as ludicrous as aliens are as an explanation, they’re a naturalistic explanation, so we should always regard them as a more plausible explanation than God. Indeed, precisely because God is supernatural (i.e. transcends the laws of nature), they regard Him as a non-explanation. But this just assumes naturalism regardless of (and even in spite of) the evidence (see Defining arguments away—the distorted language of secularism and How do miracles happen?). But, why assume naturalism? The ‘alien Jesus’ proponent admits Jesus’ miracles couldn’t have happened by spontaneous physical causes. They had to happen through intelligent agency (they would say, technology). To say that God is always the most implausible explanation in such a context, the ‘alien Jesus’ proponent needs good reason to think God doesn’t exist, or that God didn’t care about supporting Jesus. I don’t know how they could prove the latter, so it seems they need to show that God doesn’t exist. Even in their attempt to keep Jesus’ miracles within physics, they must go into metaphysics to show that we should explain Jesus’ miracles solely by (intelligent) physical (natural) causes. But, there are plenty of good reasons to think God exists (see Does God exist? and Philosophical arguments for God). Science itself is one of them (see Why does science work at all? and The biblical roots of modern science). But it gets worse for the ‘alien Jesus’ proponent. We have no evidence for any extra-terrestrial (ET) life, let alone sentient ET life (and not for lack of looking: SETI—coming in from the cold of space). Indeed, the practical impossibility of chemical evolution makes even our very existence miraculous on a naturalistic view (see Five Atheist miracles). Or did aliens make us? Well, since they too are physical beings that would’ve had a beginning, who made them? (see Who created God?) If naturalism is true, chemical evolution must have happened at least once. But admitting that aliens designed us shows that chemical evolution is nothing short of a naturalistic fairy tale. And we can’t have an infinite regress of alien designers with beginnings. Thus, if aliens exist, God ultimately made them! (see Without Excuse) And, again, since God fits right into Jesus’ context, and aliens don’t, God is still the better explanation for the miracles. The previous section presumed that aliens could’ve done Jesus’ miracles. But could they, given what we know about physics? No. Aliens wouldn’t even be able to survive the trip to Earth in the first place, according to physics (see Alien visitors to Earth? and More space travel problems: g-forces). If aliens couldn’t even get here, how could they perform Jesus’ miracles? No matter how good technology gets, it can’t allow us, or aliens, to switch physics off. Nor can technology create new physics. That’s important, because the testimony about Jesus’ resurrection body is that it’s immune to death (Romans 6:9). Can our bodies be immune to death, given the physics we know? No. Jesus’ resurrection body behaves in ways that transcend the ‘bondage to decay’ behavioural constraints of this fallen physical cosmos (e.g. Romans 8:18–25, 1 Corinthians 15:35–49). That’s something only the Sustainer of the cosmos could pull off, i.e. God. This ‘alien Jesus’ view is motivated by Arthur C. Clarke’s quip that “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” That’s simply not true. Physics limits technology. Only supernatural beings can transcend physics. And only God can change physics itself. If the ‘alien Jesus’ proponent wishes to say that physics can spontaneously change, then they’ve undercut their faith in science as the only reason for ruling out God as an explanation—science can’t work if physics can spontaneously change (Why does science work at all?). Obviously, the ‘Jesus was an alien’ idea is ludicrous. Even atheists know this. The reasons are legion. It undermines the general reliability of the very documents that need to be reliable for the theory to work. Ruling out God in favour of the ‘alien Jesus’ is an even more blatant and baseless sop to naturalism than is typical of atheists. And even science itself stands against the theory. On top of that, we can include the reliability of Scripture and the impossibility of alien life. The ‘Jesus was an alien’ idea is a conspiracy theory in the worst sense of the term; it denies the obvious to establish the ludicrous. But it’s important to note that it’s a naturalistic conspiracy theory. It’s an absurd last-ditch hope for the naturalist to deny God in the face of the reliability of the Bible. If someone really believes this, reading the Gospels would be the worst thing for their ‘faith’ in their ‘alien Jesus’. They already trust the hardest-to-believe aspects of the Gospels, and Gospels don’t allow for any other explanation for Jesus’ miracles other than that He truly is God’s unique Son.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 5:52 pm
This subject will always be an annoyance if believers won't define their words clearly ("alien", "extra-terrestrial") like they do of others (e.g. "supernatural"). The very terms themselves ("alien", "extra-terrestrial") do not contradict Scripture, yet apologists insinuate that the very terms do. He was capable of defining "supernatural" literally. Why did he not allow truth to reign over the terms "alien" and extra-terrestrial" as well?
If apologists want to speak against Hollywood's beliefs of flying saucers and midget men from space, but never define "alien" as such, but only keep saying "alien" undefined, the apologist inadvertently ends up speaking against the Bible to anyone who bothers to look up the word because...
Alien primarily refers to:
Extraterrestrial life, life which does not originate from Earth
Specifically, intelligent extraterrestrial beings. See List of alleged extraterrestrial beings.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien
...is the earth Jesus' actual origin? Is earth God's origin? did angels originate on earth? No. Are any of them dead? No. None of the above originated on earth, and yet they're all alive (thus life not originating on earth). God created the earth, and the angels witnessed His creation of the earth (thus were around before the creation of the earth; earth is not the angels' origin, much less God's [YHWH's] who created the earth).
Job 38:4-7 (NIV)
4 “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?
6 On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone—
7 while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels[a] shouted for joy?
Footnotes:
a. Job 38:7 Hebrew the sons of God
Reality: Hollywood, like any other pagan, takes some ideas from reality/the Bible, but mixes it into their fiction/scripts of science fiction (thus Sci-Fi) to make their fiction more believable. Or some misguided Christians in Hollywood thought it would be okay to make a parable of the Bible in another format, and mix it into fiction, so that people would accept the ideas of Scripture. Just further reason why the Truth should not be mixed in with lies (fiction/untruths, workings of one's own imagination, myths). The pagan without discernment believes the whole thing, including the myth/fiction parts of it. On the other hand, believers start shooting down the truth that came from Scripture, which was mixed into the myth, in their attempts to shoot down the fiction part of the science (what is observable and that we have physical and historical evidence of).
Truth: Jesus went up into the clouds and will come back in the clouds the same way He left us (thus He went into the skies and will come back from the skies).
Acts 1:9-11 (NIV)
9 After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight.
10 They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. 11 “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.”
Same with angels:
John 1:51 (NIV)
51 He then added, “Very truly I tell you,[a] you[b] will see ‘heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on’[c] the Son of Man.”
Footnotes:
a. John 1:51 The Greek is plural.
b. John 1:51 The Greek is plural.
c. John 1:51 Gen. 28:12
Life beyond our skies exists: God and the angels. God is not dead/Jesus is not dead. Angels are not dead. They're alive and they do not originate on earth.
Or even going by the legal definition:
alien
1) n. a person who is not a citizen of the country. 2) in the United States any person born in another country to parents who are not American and who has not become a naturalized citizen. There are resident aliens officially permitted to live in the country and illegal aliens who have sneaked into the country or stayed beyond the time allowed on a visa. 3) v. to convey title to property.
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/alien
Is earth Jesus' citizenship?
No.
John 8:23 (NIV)
23 But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.
John 3:31 (NIV)
31 The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is from the earth belongs to the earth, and speaks as one from the earth. The one who comes from heaven is above all.
Philippians 3:20 (NIV)
20 But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ,
Hebrews 11:13-16 (NIV)
13 All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance, admitting that they were foreigners and strangers on earth. 14 People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. 15 If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.
Revelation 21:2 (NIV)
2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband.
Revelation 21:10-27 (NIV)
10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the Holy City, Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God. 11 It shone with the glory of God, and its brilliance was like that of a very precious jewel, like a jasper, clear as crystal. 12 It had a great, high wall with twelve gates, and with twelve angels at the gates. On the gates were written the names of the twelve tribes of Israel. 13 There were three gates on the east, three on the north, three on the south and three on the west. 14 The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
15 The angel who talked with me had a measuring rod of gold to measure the city, its gates and its walls. 16 The city was laid out like a square, as long as it was wide. He measured the city with the rod and found it to be 12,000 stadia[a] in length, and as wide and high as it is long. 17 The angel measured the wall using human measurement, and it was 144 cubits[b] thick.[c] 18 The wall was made of jasper, and the city of pure gold, as pure as glass. 19 The foundations of the city walls were decorated with every kind of precious stone. The first foundation was jasper, the second sapphire, the third agate, the fourth emerald, 20 the fifth onyx, the sixth ruby, the seventh chrysolite, the eighth beryl, the ninth topaz, the tenth turquoise, the eleventh jacinth, and the twelfth amethyst.[d] 21 The twelve gates were twelve pearls, each gate made of a single pearl. The great street of the city was of gold, as pure as transparent glass.
22 I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. 23 The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. 24 The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it. 25 On no day will its gates ever be shut, for there will be no night there. 26 The glory and honor of the nations will be brought into it. 27 Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life.
Footnotes:
a. Revelation 21:16 That is, about 1,400 miles or about 2,200 kilometers
b. Revelation 21:17 That is, about 200 feet or about 65 meters
c. Revelation 21:17 Or high
d. Revelation 21:20 The precise identification of some of these precious stones is uncertain.
There is literally a city that can be physically measured—streets, gates, foundations and all—even measured with human measurements (v. 17), a city that will descend from the sky. Hollywood likes to take this and turn it into something else (along with Ezekiel's wheels which, to make the idea more palatable to them, they turn into a flying saucer, but it's not once anyone fully reads its description i.e. Ezekiel 1, Ezekiel 10).
And you, Lady Aryel, either (A) need to start posting a disclaimer when you post on the subject of aliens alerting that the terminology itself is not what nullifies the Bible, but Hollywood's concepts of it or (B) not post the articles discussing this subject at all if they do so in an erroneous fashion because you are misleading people: away from truth, Biblical truth, how terminology like "alien", and "extra-terrestrial" do not nullify Biblical concepts, and are minimizing the reality that pagans have taken from the Bible to inspire their science fiction (and thus we cannot shoot down terms that describe Biblical concepts). For the record: I'm not saying that this excuses downing / participating in / ingesting the paganism (half-truth is still a half-lie that will mess with one's discernment), but it's the truth of what happens in Hollywood/the film industry/the idolatrous [deviant-ideas-about-God] factory that is the entertainment industry. I don't think anyone with the knowledge of God should be entertaining themselves with such movies/ingesting such "spiritual" nutrition. The Bible/the Word of God is the 100% trustworthy witness, not the film industry that mixes in lies and false ideas of their own imagination.
And truly, I'd go with the second option (not posting the article at all) because the article reads like nonsense to anyone who knows the true definitions of these words (e.g. extra-terrestrial [originating "beyond the earth"] / alien [not a citizen—whether of a specific country or the planet itself]). I don't see why it's so hard for him to define "extra-terrestrial" and "alien" literally like he clearly demonstrated he was capable of doing when he defined "supernatural" (beyond/transcendent of the natural). That's hypocritical of him and dishonest. Agreed, the Bible does not describe Hollywood's flying saucers and little green men. But yes, the scrolls of the Bible do describe aliens / extra-terrestrial life; "aliens" and "extra-terrestrial life" do not inherently describe/assume naturalism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
