Morality of Colonizing and Inhabiting Other Celestial Bodies

Status
Not open for further replies.

ZackF

Puritan Board Professor
In his helpful apologetics lectures, Michael Butler remarked that he didn't believe mankind should settle other celestial bodies other than Earth. I don't remember the context as it has been over a decade since I've listened to them through. I had not heard that as a Christian position before other than the typical one you get about fixing problems here first.

This question isn't about looking for intelligent ETs but rather if man should live on the Moon, Mars, the Centauri system, or anywhere else but Earth?

Are there eschatological issues that relate to the question as in the new heavens and new earth?
 
Last edited:
I guess this is an interesting question. I don't think we're there yet, though. You ask may we, but I ask can we. As of right now, even going into space at all is extremely perilous, much less settling another planet or satellite body. I always chuckle at documentaries exploring the possibility of inhabiting Mars. First of all, we can't even begin to get there. Second of all, what are we going to do when we get there? The environment is beyond inhospitable to human life. Crucial electronics can barely function in the colossal sandstorms. It seems like Mars is not even a remote option at this point. And of all possible options, it is the best one, aside from our own moon.
 
I meant to imply "reasonably feasibility" of space travel. Like other cutting-edge technologies of the past, lives will be lost in its development. If more parameters are needed, assume there is adequate radiation shielding, countermeasures for psychological degradation, centripetal gravity, medical advances (such as statis if needed), travel speeds of 0.01c - .1c for interstellar travel and so on.
 
Did you mean the double negative in the OP?

Man was made for earth. It’s his home. I know many astronauts experience psychological issues returning to earth. Something unnatural about being in space and able to see the entire earth at once.

I suppose colonizing another planet would be like culture shock except you’re not just leaving your home and culture, but creation.
 
I suppose colonizing another planet would be like culture shock except you’re not just leaving your home and culture, but creation.
Isn’t that just a matter of scale? God created the heavens and the earth.

Fixed the double negative, thank you.
 
Taylor's right. It's going to be hundreds, if not thousands, of years before we're able to do anything remotely like this. This is something for future generations to worry about.
 
Who will be the first missionary to Alpha Centauri, and how will the citizens of earth celebrate his martyrdom when the Worm-People vaporize him with galactic slime?
 
Part of the hope of the gospel is that, despite what we see in this world today, Jesus is returning to the earth to re-create it and make a perfect, heavenly home where he will live forever with his people. Since that is the future of the earth, the question becomes, "Why would you want to invest in some other planet?"

Colonization of a planet sounds like hard work. Unless that work is going to lay the groundwork for the future of humanity or something, what's the draw? I suppose there might be circumstances that would make it allowable, but the future of humanity is with Jesus—and he's coming to earth. So I'm excited about the future of the earth, which means I would make a lousy colonist of some other planet.
 
I think we will space travel and own lands and maybe even planets in the world to come. The whole universe belongs to us in Christ. We might take a tour of it a few times each millennium or so.
 
I enjoy C. S. Lewis's space trilogy, imagining Mars as ancient inhabited and Venus as edenic. Neither are true but work a bit through a theology of life elsewhere. In Perelandra, a Christian represents the Serpent in the Garden, inadvertently tempting the innocent. 'Till the day she passed, my grandmother believed we messed up the Earth by going to the Moon. And be what it may, we have of course sent human remains into the heavens.
Though our Scriptures are a wee Earth centred regarding human life, I don't agree there's a necessary problem in colonizing elsewhere. The Scriptures were not intended as a scientific guide, and there are many aspects of the universe remaining a mystery to us - things like dimensions, life elsewhere, Nephilim, how John Elefante got into Kansas w/o Livgren or Hope knowing he was a Christian, and the like.
 
Last edited:
I don't think we will ever get to a point of actually "leaving" Earth. Even if we did establish some sort of settlements on the moon or Mars, they would still be completely dependent on resources from Earth to survive. And who would really want to live on Mars? It would be like living in a dirtier, colder Antarctica in winter time. Sometimes we need a dose of reality to burst the sci-fi fantasy bubble. I think the ultimate drive to do something like this is the human love for adventure and curiosity, which is fine. God gave us that desire. But in reality, you would be living indoors or in spacesuits the whole time, and are you really "living" there under those conditions? The only reason to sustain any form of footprint on other moons or planets would be some form of celestial tourism, some sort of military advantage, or to mine/harvest their natural resources, which at this point is not economically sustainable. My two cents...
 
I meant to imply "reasonably feasibility" of space travel. Like other cutting-edge technologies of the past, lives will be lost in its development. If more parameters are needed, assume there is adequate radiation shielding, countermeasures for psychological degradation, centripetal gravity, medical advances (such as statis if needed), travel speeds of 0.01c - .1c for interstellar travel and so on.

Have you read "Project Hail Mary"? From the same author as "The Martian" and in many ways just as good.
 
I do think it's perhaps possible that some scientists somewhere have already genetically engineered little green or gray men, perhaps with larger than normal eyes, and perhaps with life on Mars in mind, and surely with as many ethical, anthropological, & theological issues as space issues.
 
Did you mean the double negative in the OP?

Man was made for earth. It’s his home. I know many astronauts experience psychological issues returning to earth. Something unnatural about being in space and able to see the entire earth at once.

I suppose colonizing another planet would be like culture shock except you’re not just leaving your home and culture, but creation.
And serious physical issues. Current biology suggests man will never be able to live on another body. He may be able to survive temporarily, and only with significant helps. But he'll never be able to make another celestial body his "home".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top