Answers in Genesis promotes UFO book, aliens are really demons

Vance · Apr 5, 2005

There is a difference between casting stones and legitimate criticism of ministries that are taking such stands. Do you think it is wrong for us, as Christians, to critique someone like Jim Bakker, or now Benny Hinn? Or maybe AiG itself in its criticisms of Kent Hovind?

Calminian · Apr 5, 2005

Vance said:
If that poll is accurate, I despair for the United States. But, yes, I DO think that there are a lot of people who enjoy the sensationalism of such an idea. A lot more are just conspiracy nuts, or anti-government, and even if they would not otherwise consider the idea of UFO's being legitimate would do so just for that reason. Very, very sad state of affairs.

I think you're going to find these numbers are worldwide. Very few doubt the existence of life in other galaxies. From an evolutionary perspective it just make sense. And people who have witnessed UFOs come from all walks of life from the very affluent to the very poor, from the very religious to the very non religious. Very normal people. For you to scoff at them doesn't show you care, but rather shows you think yourself above them. I don't think myself above them and I really do think they've seen something not easily explained. Maybe you guys should read the book AiG is promoting instead of bashing it blindly. Does that sound very loving to you, vossler?

Calminian · Apr 5, 2005

Vance said:
There is a difference between casting stones and legitimate criticism of ministries that are taking such stands. Do you think it is wrong for us, as Christians, to critique someone like Jim Bakker, or now Benny Hinn? Or maybe AiG itself in its criticisms of Kent Hovind?

The difference is these have been examined closely. You guys are blindly condemning something you obviously know nothing about. Ive yet to hear an argument from your side. So far nothing but demagogy.

SBG · Apr 5, 2005

Vance said:
There is a difference between casting stones and legitimate criticism of ministries that are taking such stands. Do you think it is wrong for us, as Christians, to critique someone like Jim Bakker, or now Benny Hinn? Or maybe AiG itself in its criticisms of Kent Hovind?

You haven't said you read the book or even looked into it closely. Maybe you have and have not said, I don't know.

But, you are casting stones when you make such comments:

"If they are willing to accept this type of idiocy as legitimate "research" and conclusions, it definitely says a great deal about their standards for "scientific" evidence as well."

You are basically calling them idiots for accepting this research and coming to this conclusion. I don't see the need, even if you believe they are wrong, to call them names or insinuate such a name.

I am all fine with critiquing someone, but this lowering oneself down to name calling or even calling their work idiotic is really uncalled for and is casting stones. You could have easily said I disagree and don't understand why they would do this. Simple as that.

You allowed your anger with an entity that doesn't share your views to become apart of how you react to them. When this happens you don't even give the other side a fair chance of being heard.

herev · Apr 5, 2005

vossler said:
I would have to add my own *sign* too. For AIG to promote this book is, in my opinion, rather ill-advised. This really doesn't do anything to promote their cause.

And it also hurts the cause of Mr. Spock and his fellow vulcans, who do not like being associated with AIG (just a joke, don't flame me!)

Vance · Apr 5, 2005

There is a HUGE difference between their being other life in the universe and that life visiting this planet in the form of UFO's. I am honestly appalled that you guys, who all seem intelligent people, are actually condoning such stuff.

Now, seriously, do you think it is even remotely possible that these UFO sitings are genuine examples of either life from other planets or demon activity? Seriously?

Calminian · Apr 5, 2005

Vance said:
There is a HUGE difference between their being other life in the universe and that life visiting this planet in the form of UFO's. I am honestly appalled that you guys, who all seem intelligent people, are actually condoning such stuff.

Now, seriously, do you think it is even remotely possible that these UFO sitings are genuine examples of either life from other planets or demon activity? Seriously?

This is coming off very disingenuous Vance. The life on this planet is getting ready to put a man on Mars. Given evolution why couldn't another more evolved life form be more advance in space travel? Stop with your scoffing elitism and actually work through the logic as most people have. Could it be this vast majority of UFO believers are more logical than you?

Vance · Apr 5, 2005

Calminian said:
This is coming off very disingenuous Vance. The life on this planet is getting ready to put a man on Mars. Given evolution why couldn't another more evolved life form be more advance in space travel? Stop with your scoffing elitism and actually work through the logic as most people have. Could it be this vast majority of UFO believers are more logical than you?

No, it is not disengenuous at all. Again, the gap between going to Mars and going to even the nearest star is mind-bogglingly astronomical. And then when you consider any OTHER stars, much less one of the other billions of galaxies, and their size and distance, the odds against ANY life contacting us is so dramatically high that it makes the "odds against evolution happening" about 1:1.

Now, seriously, do you think that the reports of UFO's are actually contacts from life from other galaxies?

SBG · Apr 5, 2005

You know the late Francis Crick believed in aliens. He even has a theory about it and evolution.

Vance · Apr 5, 2005

SBG said:
You know the late Francis Crick believed in aliens. He even has a theory about it and evolution.

Which just goes to show that even bright people have not-so-bright ideas. Actually, his panspermia idea was just a general possibility of what could have been the source of the original life. He also believed that abiogenesis, as a result of chemical combinations, could have been the cause.

SBG · Apr 5, 2005

Vance said:
There is a HUGE difference between their being other life in the universe and that life visiting this planet in the form of UFO's. I am honestly appalled that you guys, who all seem intelligent people, are actually condoning such stuff.

I chimed in because of your attitude against AIG. It was not very Christian like and you have not looked into this by reading the book or examining it closely. Instead you chimed in to throw another stone at fellow Christians. You, in your own way, made your judgement against them. Then you resorted to the name calling.

I don't see how this benefits this forum, either in subject matter or in how it has been presented.

Vance said:
Now, seriously, do you think it is even remotely possible that these UFO sitings are genuine examples of either life from other planets or demon activity? Seriously?

I don't have to worry about this. What I do have to worry about is how I spend my time here on earth.

Calminian · Apr 5, 2005

Vance said:
No, it is not disengenuous at all. Again, the gap between going to Mars and going to even the nearest star is mind-bogglingly astronomical. And then when you consider any OTHER stars, much less one of the other billions of galaxies, and their size and distance, the odds against ANY life contacting us is so dramatically high that it makes the "odds against evolution happening" about 1:1.

People used to say the same thing about traveling to the moon. We're advancing at incredible rates. Imagine us having this conversation (about moon travel) a 150 years ago on our horses. Now we have space travel, supercomputers, etc.. And we're still evolving (according to evolution). Come on, it's so logical.

Vance said:
Now, seriously, do you think that the reports of UFO's are actually contacts from life from other galaxies?

I don't, no. But that's because I reject evolution. I do believe that demons live in the heavens: Ehp. 6:12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Do you not take demons literally?

Vance · Apr 5, 2005

Oh, yes, I take demons very literally. I just don't take sitings of UFO's as anything at all to do with them. I think people are seeing UNIDENTIFIED objects, yes, many of them are not delusional. But "unidentified" is just what they are, and we must look to see what is the most LIKELY thing they saw. I have no reason, whatsoever, to think that they are either aliens from outerspace, or demons.

And, do you consider the upper atmosphere, or space itself, to be the "Heavenly" realms? Do you think Heaven is out somewhere in space? Or maybe that Hell is somewhere in the bowels of our earth?

SBG · Apr 5, 2005

Do you suggest heaven couldn't be somewhere or anywhere in this universe? And hell for that matter?

What I see here by asking this, is to get off the subject of this thread.

Vance · Apr 5, 2005

SBG said:
Do you suggest heaven couldn't be somewhere or anywhere in this universe? And hell for that matter?

What I see here by asking this, is to get off the subject of this thread.

I don't think that Heaven is a place in our physical universe, and I don't really see how it could be. What, take a left and the third star and go another billion light years? The idea that we could actually travel TO HEAVEN if we just had the spacecraft powerful enough? No, that just seems highly unlikely. Heaven is a real and substantial place, but is that the most likely option?

As for the purpose of this post, you didn't answer my question about AiG's own criticisms of Kent Hovind. They characterized what he was doing as being damaging, and so they spoke out against it. I am doing the same thing. What AiG is doing here is just as irresponsible and damaging as what Hovind does, and so why wouldn't I speak out? Should AiG have not spoken out? Was it not Christian of them?

AiG pretends to be based on legitimate science, yet they often will advocate sheer speculation of this sort. This creates the impression in the mind of non-Christians that Christianity is based on these types of speculative concepts and beliefs. That can not possibly be good for Christianity.

SBG · Apr 5, 2005

Vance said:
I don't think that Heaven is a place in our physical universe, and I don't really see how it could be. What, take a left and the third star and go another billion light years? The idea that we could actually travel TO HEAVEN if we just had the spacecraft powerful enough? No, that just seems highly unlikely. Heaven is a real and substantial place, but is that the most likely option?

What about the Garden of Eden, is it within our world or not? And if it is why can't we find it? I am probably asking the wrong person because if I remember you don't believe in there being a Garden.

I believe heaven and hell are within our universe somewhere, but we cannot see it because we our bound to our physical. Upon Stephen's death, he saw the Kingdom of heaven while here on earth. This confirms to me that it is here somewhere, where .. I don't know. All I need to know is that I will be going there.

Vance said:
As for the purpose of this post, you didn't answer my question about AiG's own criticisms of Kent Hovind. They characterized what he was doing as being damaging, and so they spoke out against it. I am doing the same thing. What AiG is doing here is just as irresponsible and damaging as what Hovind does, and so why wouldn't I speak out? Should AiG have not spoken out? Was it not Christian of them?

Well did they call Kent Hovind an idiot? Did they refer to him and his work as idiotic? Did they call him names and show disrespect and a lack of love by their attitude? If so, they are equally wrong.

But if they said they do not agree with him and his arguments and showed why, then I see no problem.

The issue I saw with you was your attitude against AIG. You didn't just dismiss the article or book because you disagree, you went with a personal attack against them. I don't see why that was necessary, but maybe you can explain why.

Vance said:
AiG pretends to be based on legitimate science, yet they often will advocate sheer speculation of this sort. This creates the impression in the mind of non-Christians that Christianity is based on these types of speculative concepts and beliefs. That can not possibly be good for Christianity.

Well, if they are mistaken, then they are mistakes. You make mistakes don't you? I sure do. So why must we judge them so harshly because they make mistakes? You can simple say I disagree with their position without the personal judgements against them.

Vance · Apr 6, 2005

If there was a literal Garden of Eden, and if it was in this plane of existence, on this earth, then we would have found it by now. So, the only possibilities are that either it was not a literal physical place, or that it is NOT in this plane of physical existence. What you are describing as "not in our physical", and your reference to what Stephen say is exactly what I mean by not being within our physical universe. It is within an arm's reach, but not at all someplace within our physical universe. Heaven, as shown with Stephen, is NOT somewhere up in space, but in another plane of existence altogether.

I think AiG used some fairly blunt language with Hovind, and definitely criticized what he was doing, but neither they or I ever called anyone an idiot. I did call the entire UFO and space alien stuff a bunch of idiocy, meaning the entire concept was entirely unworthy of serious discussion and consideration, not that any who actually believed were idiots. This was not a personal attack, it was an attack on the utter irresponsibility of associating legitimate and SERIOUS issues like demon activity which such wackiness. It does, indeed, show where their standards of "scientific" grounding are.

The problem with AiG is that they refuse to admit their mistakes when pointed out to them. People like Glenn, who used to be one of them, will point out the errors in their science, their misrepresentations, etc, and they just ignore it. Eventually, they have to abandon their positions, but not for years sometimes, and not until after they have infected the Christian body with their loose theories and bogus claims.

TwinCrier · Apr 6, 2005

Vance said:
If there was a literal Garden of Eden, and if it was in this plane of existence, on this earth, then we would have found it by now.

And how would we know we found it? There obviously won't we a sign saying "Welcome to Eden: Population 2"

Vance · Apr 6, 2005

Well, if the Garden were literal, it was guarded by two angels, and thus presumably kept in it's original condition, with the two trees, etc. And since the person who would require a literal Garden would usually be the person who also took the names of the rivers seriously, that would mean it was in Iraq or possibly northern "mesopotamia". If such a Garden were in our universe, our physical plane of existence, and it was literal and still there, it would be there for us to find, but it is not. Now, it could be that it had been in that area and then the act of closing off the Garden involved, or was symbolic or figurative language for, His moving the Garden from our physical universe to another plane of existence, the spiritual realm, another universe, however you want to describe it.

SBG · Apr 6, 2005

TwinCrier said:
And how would we know we found it? There obviously won't we a sign saying "Welcome to Eden: Population 2"

Ah man! I was rolling when I read this. Too funny!!

Answers in Genesis promotes UFO book, aliens are really demons

Contributor

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

CL--you are missed!

Contributor

Senior Veteran

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Contributor

Double Blessed and spreading the gospel

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency