Heiser-The-Facade - Sparkling Eyes

novelty had been exploited to the fullest and worn off, would result insubstantial changes in perspectives or philosophy in large parts of theAmerican public, at least any more than, let us say, the coelacanth or thepanda . . . If super intelligence is discovered, the results become quiteunpredictable."'"It isn't hard for me to imagine the chaos that would seize militant Christiangroups," Melissa said, concurring with the report. "These people would think the devilhimself had come to earth and the apocalypse was upon them.""Do you really think," asked Malcolm, "that religious types would wet their pantslike that? Seems a stretch.""I'd have to agree," Mark sided with his colleague. "You're a Christian, Brian, andit seems like a pretty `conservative' one at that," Mark said, "and you said earlier youdon't have a problem with the idea.""Right on both counts. I believe that the answer to the apparent dilemma is todemonstrate that the problem is just that—only perceived and not real. I should add, too,that a more recent study into the same question is far more optimistic about the impact onreligious people.""Does that study have a name?" asked Father Benedict."The Alexander UFO Religious Crisis Survey. It's often referred to as the`Bigelow Report' after the foundation that funded it. Despite this study, I think we need tobe as cautious as possible when it comes to assessing how religious people would react toan intelligent ET reality.""So why aren't you fearful?" asked Deidre. "Why wouldn't this harm yourreligious views?""I believe," Brian began, "that the Christian church, and conservative Judaism forthat matter, has fundamentally misunderstood the Old Testament concept of the image ofGod. Once that's corrected, there is no problem with intelligent extraterrestrial life. As itstands now, the way the image is defined only sets the church up for a fall. The idea thatthe image of God should be defined as intelligence or some mental or spiritual faculty ishopelessly flawed, yet that view has monopolized the discussion.""But how is making this correction, whatever it is, different than the churchbacktracking and saying they just misunderstood what the Bible said?" Deidre queried."In one sense, nothing that is, if the correct interpretation were given enough airtime, so to speak, before contact was made. That's the point of my involvement, as I seeit."Neil nodded."On the other hand, it would be a mistake to see this as a retreat. Rather, such aneffort should be interpreted as a return to serious study of the relevant passages.Theology has never been static, even within what you all would think of as anentrenched orthodoxy. Those in the field recognize that theological change has oftenoccurred commensurate with advances in linguistics and archaeological finds, that sortof thing. For our purposes here," Brian continued, "the church needs an academicallydefensible position on the image of God that's rooted in the biblical text, one that's theresult of sound methodology, and one that can accommodate an intelligent nonhumanspecies. If that's done soon enough and persuasively enough, people who take the Old169