Jesus only for humans? Or for everybeing?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mystophilus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mystophilus

Guest
I was just wondering how one could evangelise to another life-form if Jesus only came here and they never had an Incarnation…
 
40.png
Mystophilus:
I was just wondering how one could evangelise to another life-form if Jesus only came here and they never had an Incarnation…
Click to expand...
I realise that this may look utterly daft, but I am actually serious. If Jesus was only incarnated here, then another life-form might reject the Gospel on the basis that it is speciesist: for humans only. If Jesus was incarnated on other worlds, then God had not one, but many, sons/offspring, and Jesus died/will die many times for the sins of the people.

I realise that we have no current way of knowing what is true, but I am curious as to what you all think.
 
Back when it was not for certain that the world was spherical and other theories were discussed as reasonable topics, I recall that a philosopher once proposed that if the world were a disc and there were “other people” on the bottom of the disc, that Christ must have been incarnated on the reverse side of the disc as well, setup a Church, etc.

It seems to me that in looking for theological discussion about aliens that might exist elsewhere in the galaxy, that it might be worth doing some research on this sort of “on the other side of the world…” theology… as I think it is fairly compatible. In other words: we may not have to start from scratch. But it might take some digging and some luck…
 
That’s a question we need not answer unless we in fact discover intelligent non-human life elsewhere in the universe.

The only ones I’m aware of at the moment are the angels–a non-human life form capable of sinning, but not capable of repenting, so there was no need–or possibiity–for Jesus to redeem them.
 
Thinking about it logically, if there were aliens, they would be in one of 2 possible states:
  1. A sinful state (like what we are in), in which case we should definitely be concerned if they visit because they will have evil tendencies such as we do. Whether or not Christ also died for them is unknown. Personally, I would think it unlikely since he only talks about the salvation of men (meaning mankind).
  2. A non-sinful state (like Adam and Eve before the fall), in which case they would be in perfect communication with God and would probably not be visiting us unless He told them to, which I find unlikely since we are sinners. They would also not need Christ.
Just my opinion.

Andy
 
40.png
AHapka:
Whether or not Christ also died for them is unknown. Personally, I would think it unlikely since he only talks about the salvation of men (meaning mankind).
Click to expand...
While he did only talk about the salvation of humans, he was only talking to humans. There was no reason to mention other beings, although there is a reference which could be claimed for them in “I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. These also I must lead, and they will hear my voice, and there will be one flock, one shepherd” (John 10:16).
 
40.png
PaulDupre:
Most people understand that to refer to the gentiles.
Click to expand...
Thus the adjective clause with the modal and the representational verb: “which could be claimed”. Were we to discover intelligent life elsewhere, I am quite sure that people would start reading that passage that way, justifiably or not.
 
C.S. Lewis had an interesting view on this in his book “Perelandra”.
 
I dont see how the answer to such a question could further any mans faith. If it is beneficial in growing closer to God then it is good, if not, it only distracts man from the already impossible task of reaching perfection.

IMHO, such questions are irrelevant.

When you get to heaven, ask away, but while we rest on this earth, focus on Christ and Him alone.

If the answer to this question is important to you, then ask the church to pronounce a dogma on it. If not, let it rest. You have Christ, what else do you need?

In Christ.

Andre.
 
40.png
Angainor:
C.S. Lewis had an interesting view on this in his book “Perelandra”.
Click to expand...
I think he also addressed this in Mere Christianity (or in the collection of essays with The Worlds Last Night

I believe the basic layout was:
  1. Do other worlds exist with life on them?
  2. Is some of this life intelligent?
  3. Has this intelligent life fallen? (as pointed out by AHapka - they may not need redemption)
  4. Do Christ’s actions apply to them?
  5. Have they been redeemed by some other method that we could not comprehend? (and here Perelandra fits in)
In the end we don’t know the answer to any of these questions, so I assume that God, in his infinite love, has found a way to bring all his creatures home to him who love him in return. 👍
 
40.png
Magicsilence:
I dont see how the answer to such a question could further any mans faith. If it is beneficial in growing closer to God then it is good, if not, it only distracts man from the already impossible task of reaching perfection.
Click to expand...
If, as you say, the task is impossible, then being distracted from it is not going to affect our degree of success. Thus there is no opportunity cost in considering the question.
IMHO, such questions are irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Curiosity is gratuitous. This does not make it bad.
If the answer to this question is important to you, then ask the church to pronounce a dogma on it. If not, let it rest. You have Christ, what else do you need?
Click to expand...
Well, I have Christ, and so I do not need a church to pronounce a dogma.
 
40.png
Angainor:
C.S. Lewis had an interesting view on this in his book “Perelandra”.
Click to expand...
That was the Adam and Eve reprise on Venus, was it not?
 
I have often thought about this question.

Disclaimer: what follows is pure speculation, and should be taken with a grain of (perhaps blessed?) salt. 😉

It seems to me that it is a good “thought exercise” because it helps us focus our attention on certain realities of the incarnation and of salvation.
  1. We were saved because The Word became man, and *we *are *men. *If alien beings are NOT human, than how can Christ who is fully human and fully divine, act on their behalf?
  2. Being human IS a function of biology. Sure there can be other types of persons or creatures or beings, but a HUMAN being would look like us, right?
  3. So. . .“aliens” either are humans and Christ took their form too when he “took the form of a man”, or they are not humans and therefore Christ is not their “head”. Presumably the head and the body have to be the same creatures, no?
  4. So. . . “aliens” if sapient, and if fallen, would be in need of some form of salvation. But not the same way right? Because:
  5. Christ cannot reincarnate and take on another nature. He has a human nature and a Divine nature, hypostatically joined in Divine Person – and this is the way He is now and will always be.
  6. So, unless there is another type of “salvation history” – a totally different method of saving these non-humans that *does not involve the incarnation, *then they would either be
  • 1)unfallen [lets reject that, because they had free will right? So there at least could have the *possibility of a fall and this cause problems because of the points outlined above]
  • 2)fallen but saved through some other method [lets reject this because it doesn’t seem “fitting” for God to have two types of salvation – one which involved the great act of Love of the Incarnation, Suffering, Death and Ressurection, and one that did not.
    [* 3)fallen but not saved [lets reject this because it seems manifestly unjust]
  1. Therefore it seems that IF there is intelligent “alien” life it would have to be Human, just on a different planet. Since we have our glorified bodies in heaven (since we are body and soul) then any other material sentient being would also have bodies. And wouldn’t it be strange to have One High Priest who had a human body and only some of the other denizens of heaven who share that with Him? The others having non-human bodies? It wouldn’t make sense to me.
  2. So, I have always felt that IF there is intelligent “alien” (read extra-earth) life, then it must be human.
  3. Given the problems that would pose for our “original parents”, I am inclined to speculate that there ARE no extra-earth intelligent beings. (There may be *life *on other planets, but not sapient.)
What do you think? Can anyone point out problems with my thought process on this?

I think it is an interesting exercise. No wonder CS lewis wrote a whole series of book on it.

Thanks,
VC
 
Verbum Caro said:
5. Christ cannot reincarnate and take on another nature. He has a human nature and a Divine nature, hypostatically joined in Divine Person – and this is the way He is now and will always be.
Click to expand...

This is the part which I would have to question. First, God, being God, can do anything: this is what omnipotence means. Thus, Christ could reIncarnate. Second, while we define his human and divine natures as indivisibly joined, that is only really our description of that data which we have. Were to have other data, e.g., his having Incarnated elsewhere, we would then have to adapt our description to take account of the new information.

Thus, I do not think that we can rule out the possibility of another Incarnation.
So, unless there is another type of “salvation history” – a totally different method of saving these non-humans that does not involve the incarnation, then they would … be …
* 2)fallen but saved through some other method [let’s reject this because it doesn’t seem “fitting” for God to have two types of salvation – one which involved the great act of Love of the Incarnation, Suffering, Death and Ressurection, and one that did not.
Click to expand...
I am not so sure about this point. Without knowing what other possible method of salvation there might be, how can we accurately judge whether or not it has any particular quality, e.g., ‘fitness’? The mere fact that we know one method, which was good, does not rule out the possibility that there is another method, which is also good.

With the rest of your argumentation, I have no demur (and I am quite glad that there is another person who is willing to consider the possibilities rather than merely write the question off as being, ‘too hard’ , ‘inappropriate’, or ‘unnecessary’).
[/quote]
 
We are also assuming that aliens have souls. Are aliens, if intelligent lifeforms, necessarily given souls? Or are they like really intelligent pets. My dog won’t go to heaven. God only breathed into Adam.
 
Grace & Peace!

I have a problem with the options given as I believe that in dying for Men, he died for all creation. If Man is the sum and summit of creation, the priest of creation, as it were, then the God-Man, in suffering for Men, is suffering for all and working through Man the redemption of all creation. As such, I think it is through Man (because it is through the God-Man Christ) that even the angels will be restored to lost glory if it is possible for them to do so.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

Deo Gratias!
 
Deo Volente:
I have a problem with the options given as I believe that in dying for Men, he died for all creation. If Man is the sum and summit of creation, the priest of creation, as it were, then the God-Man, in suffering for Men, is suffering for all and working through Man the redemption of all creation. As such, I think it is through Man (because it is through the God-Man Christ) that even the angels will be restored to lost glory if it is possible for them to do so.
Click to expand...
Option 2 is there for people in your position.
 
40.png
mellysue:
We are also assuming that aliens have souls. Are aliens, if intelligent lifeforms, necessarily given souls? Or are they like really intelligent pets. My dog won’t go to heaven. God only breathed into Adam.
Click to expand...
I would suggest that you might want to think very carefully about that conclusion, and here is why: in Genesis 2:7, we are told that God breathed into the man and the man became a living being. You read that (as many do) as the infusion of the soul into the man. However, you are also reading it as an exclusive event, suggesting that, because we do not see it for other creatures, it did not happen for them. This is very important, because we do not see it for the woman. Thus, if we follow this line of reasoning (as some Rabbis have), then women do not have souls. :eek:
 
I would be careful about dogs not going to Heaven.

Jesus said that nothing is impossible for God. If a person in Heaven is being rewarded and asks to have his dog back, is it not possible that God may grant that person their dog? I’m not saying it happens, I know of no teaching that is definite.

However, God was concerned about animals in Jonah. He called all of creating, including animals good. Therefore, since Heaven will have good things in it, I think there very well could be animals there.

Either way, we will be completely fulfilled with Him.

Andy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top