Those of you who know me will know that one of my least favorite subject is end times (eschatology). That might surprise you, given that I’m a Bible scholar. I mean it, though. Over on my other blog, The Naked Bible, I once wrote a short post on how everyone cheats on eschatology. Eschatology is one of those subjects where most people have no idea why they could be drastically wrong and (worse) why there’s no way to know the right position even if you’re aware of the pitfalls. And anyone reading this who’s thinking, “well, Mike, I interpret the Bible literally and that tells me what’s going to happen in the future” are perhaps the worst off. It’s so much more complicated than that, and literalism doesn’t help, even if we knew precisely what that term meant and how to apply it consistently (which no one does).
Why do I mention this? To get you prepared (at least for point #4 below). I’ve decided to start a thread on this blog entitled “Understanding the Christian Fundamentalist View of UFOs and Aliens.” A better, but clunkier, title would be “Understanding why Christian Fundamentalists Think UFOs and Aliens are Demonic.” Basically, there are four reasons for this:
1. Abductee testimony of the forcible trauma of their experience.
2. The similarity of abductee testimony to early Christian (and otherwise) reports of demonization.
3. The similarity of abductee testimony to the events described in Genesis 6:1-4 (and other ancient Jewish texts).
4. A belief that the events of Genesis 6 (and so, an alien presence) is a specific touchpoint in New Testament teaching about the Second Coming (or, for many, the notion of a rapture — which is not the same as what is broadly thought of as the Second Coming).
Readers of this blog know that I’m not in the fundamentalist camp on this issue, primarily because I don’t see such 1:1 correlations. But on the other hand, I don’t oppose the position either since (see below) I consider to be one of several possible views. I think there are multiple explanations for what are called “alien abductions.” I also do not accept as necessary the idea that UFOs have anything to do with abductions; they may, but they also may be entirely separate issues. Here’s a summary of how I think the UFO / ET / abduction phenomena could be parsed:
1. UFOs and non-human intelligences may or may not even be related issues. Here are the sub-categorizations:
(A) All real UFOs (i.e., those that are clearly not astronomical or meteorological phenomena) are above top-secret human craft, using exotic technologies not even widely used within the military.
(B) All UFOs are produced by non-human intelligences. That may mean they are physical (material), or that they are not physical (material). The latter includes both an inter-dimensional sense and a projected sense (see D below).
(C) Some UFOs are man-made, some are made by non-human intelligences.
(D) Some UFOs are man-made, some are manufactured (visually) by human or non-human intelligences.
2. Non-human intelligences may or may not be related to what the Bible would call demons or aliens. Here are the sub-categorizations:
(A) There may be a complete overlap (aliens = demons, or aliens = angels, some of whom are fallen/evil);
(B) There may be partial overlap (some aliens = demons, or some aliens = angels, some of whom are fallen/evil, but some aliens may be either extraterrestrial beings [occupants of a physical planet somewhere] or some aliens may be extra-dimensional beings [having nothing to do with a planetary existence as we know it]).
(C) There may be no overlap at all (there are demons [or fallen angels] or demons or aliens or extra-dimensional beings, each in its own category or box).
My goal in starting this thread is twofold: (1) to help those outside the Christian community understand the “fundamentalist” view (and I do *not* use that term pejoratively) — to understand how that view coheres given its presuppositions, and (2) to help those who hold the view appreciate that it isn’t as tidy as they might think — that they may not want all their eggs in that one basket.
Some of you might be wondering what prompts this. I was recently interviewed by a Columbia University grad student about Christian involvement with “UFO and alien stuff,” and I was struck (anew) at how many Christians involved in the subject are really of one view (the fundamentalist view). That doesn’t bother me that much, though. More troubling is how the whole subject is linked to a very narrow view of eschatology — one that has significant problems at the presupposition level, where all eschatology is really done. But I can’t really cover #4 without the others.
More pointedly, I’m becoming concerned that this view is so prevalent that, if we ever really find out what all this stuff really is, and it *isn’t* about demons and the rapture, the faith of *many* will be harmed and the Christian message will appear either buffoonish or ineffectual for accommodating an ET reality. Both would be an unnecessary (but understandable) shame.
Stay tuned . . . and contact your friends. This won’t be a lightweight discussion.
Michael: Thanks for dealing with this; I feel it has been much needed, I have been doing this for 37 years and have been contending that this is not just all bad aliens and demons, for me the important issue is the message coming from the manifestations, whether there is technology involved
is not as important as dealing with the conflicting message’s coming from the contact and how it relates to the issues of Jesus Christ being our only hope of obtaining a renewed relationship with God our true creator.
Yeah! I’m looking forward to this.
We’ll stay tuned…
VERY significant Michael, and, I thank the Lord that you’re willing to take your time,(little as there is), to help blow away some of the “smoke”, and reveal the”mirrors”, of this controversial subject.
I feel Einstein best summed up my state of affairs, concerning these matters,(and eschatology in general), when he calmly & humbly stated: “The more I learn, the more I realize that I do NOT know!”
And, for you, (a genuine Scholar), to help us “lay folk” is CERTAINLY appreciated.
I’ll be tuning in as oft as possible, and commenting, methinks…
I’m with Einstein on that! Thanks
BTW…{thought just sprung up}, in your breakdown of the potential various combinations of what we MAY be ACTUALLY dealing with: ‘alien’ = demon; ‘alien’ = ‘malikim’/ angel; fallen/not — etc.; at the end of which, you add that POSSIBLY, there may be no overlap at all, and that each category is one of a kind, only, “each in it’s own category or box”.
I look forward to your elaborating upon that theme, as it’s a bit new to me…
ALSO, will you be touching on the correlation of yeshuah’s Matt.24:36 statement, and the subsequent 37 thru 41 clarification that He provided…and then the similarities in Gen.6 to today’s Genetic manipulations, and alterations, as well as the “Transhumanist movement”, or, is that pertinent to this discussion?
Look forward to this!
Short answer: Yes, in that I’ll be taking you through a long discussion on why anyone who feels secure about how they think end times will happen is either ignorant of the problems for ANY view of end times or just doesn’t care (“don’t confuse me with data, I know what I believe?”). In either case, you should be wary about following them. I for one do not believe that Matt 24 has anything to do with an alien breeding program or new nephilim. And odds are good that it also has nothing to do with a rapture (at least a pre-trib one). We’ll get into all this.
Fantastic Mike! While I’ve been, (for over 35 years), of the basic “Fundamentalist” view — and NOT a Scholar by ANY means — But, nonetheless, I find your propositions absolutely supportable.
It has been becoming clearer to me for years now, just how pertinent and precient Paul was, when he made his observation that “…when I was a child, I thought as a child, I UNDERSTOOD as a child, but, when I BECAME a MAN, I put away childish things. For NOW we see through a glass, DARKLY, but THEN, face to face; NOW I know in part, but THEN shall I KNOW, even as I also am known…”, [I Cor.13:11-12].
To suppose ANYthing else more emphatically SPECIFIC is dangerous at best, and, I think, likely to lead to serious error and falsity.
I look forward with keen anticipation to the coming Blogs on this matter! Thanks!