Hi Darryl
I would see that Amos 9: 7 as showing that God was as active in the
development of nations often seen as enemies (Philistines, Cushites,
Arameans) as He was with the Israelites. The famous passage of Romans
1:18-20 shows that God has not left people without witness of Himself,
namely the creation, and that this knowledge is sufficient for people to
turn to Him in faith. Paul's sermon on Aeropagus (Acts 17:23-31) adds to
creation the wisdom and even religious traditions of each culture. The
purpose of the evangelist is to bring the good news of that which is
already half glimpsed and expected.
Although sensationalised and perhaps overstated, Don Richardson's
"Eternity in their hearts" is not without value in this area. Also
helpful is his earlier book "Peace Child".
God Bless
Jonathan
Darryl Maddox wrote:
> I would like to thank all those who responded to my question about
> sources dealing with the implications of the religious beliefs of
> allien being (should we ever make such a discovery). Most of the
> references provided were to science fiction novels. That makes me
> think some of those books I read may have not been the trivial drival
> my 7th grade English teacher said they were when I asked if I could do
> a book report on one. I didn't see the connection between the quality
> of my book report and the quality of the book I was reporting on but
> that is another story. However, as pleased as I was to get these
> references, what I was trying to ask for was references to works
> dealing with the salvation, or lack thereof, of the populations of
> cultures here on earth when that culture had not heard of Christ
> untill they were contacted by western civilization. And for a bit of
> slippery slope questioning, how about references to discussions of "to
> what extent memembers of such cultures must be "aware" of Christ
> before they come under condemnation", assuming of course that one
> believes that all are condemed who do not profess (and live?) a faith
> in Jesus as the sole author of salvation. I am not trying to stir up
> any arguments here. I just thought that since I had long had the
> questions unresolved in my mind and that surely some of the great
> religious thinkers must have addressed them and someone in this group
> might have some good references. I was also not trying to change the
> subject from Jonathans fine questions on space travel. Somehow I found
> the statement that the exhaust of our moon landing vehicles more than
> tripled the mass of the moon's atmosphere very troubling. I don' t
> know why. What differnce does it make if the moon's atmosphere has a
> bit more or less mass? I guess it is just the fact that we touched
> something and it wasn't the same after we left as it was before we got
> there disturbs me. The footprints and broken rocks and three cornered
> mirrors (and other scientific instruments?) we left don't bother me; I
> suppose because we, or someone else. could in theory go back and sweep
> away the footprints, pick up the instruments and one more broken rock
> here or there isn't likely to be noticed. And maybe the moon'g
> gravitational attraction is too low to hold the extra gases we
> dumped. I guess that would depend on what they were. As for the
> questions about colonizing and mining planets or their moons for
> materials, Freeman Dyson wrote in one of his books (may have been
> Disturbing the Universe) about the what he considered the levels of
> development (hope I remeber this correctly after all these years): 1)
> surviving; 2) maximizing industry etc by full exploitation of all
> available resources and; 3) living in a sustainable manner. Then he
> applied these three levels to: A) the planet; B) the solar system; and
> C) the galaxy. Thus we are somewhere between steps 2A and 3A
> depending on which country you are in and within some countries, your
> views on environmental issues and your ability to put those views into
> practice. Of course a similar scheme could be applied to any
> particular country or region of the world as new people moved into it
> and developed a culture there. For instance, the Texas Panhandle
> where I live. There were very few people here before the discovery of
> oil in the later 1920's. Those that were here prior to that time were
> almost exclusively farmers, cattle ranchers, or towns people who were
> able to make a living providing goods and services to either the
> farmers and ranchers or to the railroads that crossed the area. It
> wasn't a primative existance by some standards but about the only
> resources they utelized were some irrigation water and the grass the
> cattle ate. But when oil and gas were discovered things changed in a
> hurry and it reached a point some years ago that we were using the
> land to grow crops, water from the Ogallala formation for irrigation
> and drinking, oil and gas to either sell ouside the region or to make
> products which were sold outside the region, and we even tried to
> market the weather to anyone who hadn't heard too many of our weather
> reports and needed a place to put their business that had reasonably
> good weather. Now, we are slowly edging toward a sustainable way of
> living in the area as we are using the wind to a small but increasing
> degree to generate electricty and finding more energy and water
> effecient ways to raise our crops and trying to attract industries (to
> replace those which have inevitably either moved our or simply become
> technologically extinct) that won't put more strain on the resourses
> we have than they can cope with. A big question that is slowly
> creeping into your minds is "How big a population do we want to
> have?" Perhaps the answer to that question depends on our
> understanding of of Genesis 1:28 and perhaps the answer to our
> question of "How big a population do we want to have?" is essentially
> the answer to all the other questions. If we don't care what we do to
> the land and its resources then it just full speed ahead and let the
> future take care of itself. But, if we care about how we utelize the
> land and resources and the degree to which we preserve their orignal
> beauty, then perhaps there are some things we could do but wont'
> because we will deside they are not worth the price. Kind of like my
> friends prospect that I mentioned in my earlier post. To show how
> complicated this can get I'll admit that while I would had to think of
> a mine destroying the beauty of the landscape my friend and I were
> looking at as we surveyed the area he thought might have some
> potential as a mineral prosepect, I am working on trying to develop a
> mining prospect of my own. Whether it ever develops or not may depend
> on the the land owners love for their land more than it does on
> economics. Personally I am torn between two wishes. Darryl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 11 2000 - 15:20:27 EST