The Theological Implications of Water on Mars

It looks like there is running water on Mars.  Perhaps it only runs during the summer months but it runs at least sometimes.  This means that there is a chance life exists there today or that life used to exist there. 

I am a Seventh-day Adventist Christian (though no doubt some in the church probably wish I was not) and I have said for years that my church, along with the Christian church as a whole, needs to formulate a theological response should the day come when we do discover that life exists elsewhere in the universe.  I personally believe that day will come and we will discover that organic life is not a unique phenomenon on Earth.  The Christian church is ill prepared for such an eventuality just as it was ill prepared for Darwin’s theory of evolution by means of natural selection in the 19^th century.  It is worth reviewing the history of Darwin’s impact on the Christian church here because something similar will almost certainly happen if the big discovery of extra-terrestrial life is made.  In my view, it is a matter of when, not if.

We often think today that Darwin’s theory hit like a bombshell.  It was completely unexpected.  Not really.  At the start of the 19^th century, just about everyone in the west at least believed the earth was around 6,000 years old.  Those in India and Central America were a little ahead of us there.  Gradually, however, the age of the earth increased, first to around 10,000 years, and eventually to around 1 million years.  This came about because of innovations in geology which was then in its infancy.  On the biological front, as Europeans began “discovering” other parts of the world – which of course had been well and truly discovered by others beforehand – they noticed something interesting.  There were a lot of plants and animals.  In fact, there were so many plants and animals, they could not all have fit into Noah’s ark.  Some explanation was required and it was Darwin who provided it in 1859.  But before Darwin provided the explanation that changed the world, increasing numbers of educated people realized something was not right with the literal interpretation of Genesis.  Alfred Wallace, who was a contemporary of Darwin, contributed to the deepening concern over the validity of Genesis in terms of a literal historical authority and what became known as the Wallace Line posed a huge problem for Christian literalists.  Essentially, Wallace asked how all those animals migrated from Mount Ararat to various parts of the world which were isolated by large bodies of water.  The Wallace Line marked such a barrier.

When Charles Darwin provided the explanation, the Christian church was brought to its knees because it had not kept up with the science. Christian literalist spent the first half of the 19^th century condemning Wallace and others, claiming they were deceived by Satan.  Instead of questioning, they should simply have faith in the word of God.  Compounding the problem for Christians was the rise of the science of critical textual analysis.  This discipline, when directed toward the Bible, cast doubt as to whether Genesis was one harmonious source written by Moses and pretty much dictated by God.  That is, Christians believed Genesis was inspired by God as he communicated history to Moses.  The textual critics of the Bible acted as a wrecking ball to that belief. 

Thus the Christian church was attacked on three sides:  geology, biology, and textual biblical criticism.  It had no defence.  This spawned two opposite reactions within Christianity.  Theologians scrambled to embrace what science was showing and adapted their theology accordingly.  This is why today, many mainstream churches believe in evolution and a very old earth, while still believing in Jesus, the cross, and his resurrection.  Another reaction in Christianity was to become rabidly fundamentalist.  A series of “revivals” occurred which basically tried to get people back to good old biblical Christianity.  This stream of Christianity rejected scientific discovery and believed it was all Satanic deception.  My church went down this road and this led to many embarrassing statements.

For example, Ellen White, a prophet to Seventh-day Adventists was given an explanation from God regarding the cause of earthquakes.  That explanation is so ridiculously wrong that any honest reader of her writings can only cover their face in embarrassment.  A much more serious problem is the idea, again supposedly from God, that some races of “humans” were actually crossbreeds with animals.  My church may deny such statements were ever made – and it certainly does deny this - but such denials constitute a retreat into historical Fairyville.  In the real world, these statements were made, and my church needs to confront these and the issues which result from them.

Before Christian theologians adapted to Darwin’s theories – and mind you some adaptations were extremely unfortunate – they fought the “new science.”  A series of debates occurred and Christian theologians were consistently destroyed in debate after debate.  When people saw the ineptitude of supposedly educated Christian clergy, faith in the religion suffered severely.  This is why many of the revivals consisted of head-in-the-sand theology and eventually died out.  Well, the revivals themselves died out but denominations spawning from them, such as the Pentecostal denominations of today, remain and are still engaged in head-in-the-sand theology.

Today, the majority of Christians accept Darwin and a very old Earth and the church survives.  Those who do not accept Darwin are in the minority though this might be hard to believe in some parts of the United States in which a high number of people still believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old.

In 1988 I had the chance to speak to a Jesuit who was in his 70’s and working on his 6^th Ph.D.  I asked him about the theological implications should life be found elsewhere.  We spoke at length on this topic.  He told me the Vatican has a committee whose job it is to form a theological response should that day ever come.  He agreed that the theological implications could destroy the church and that the Vatican felt it necessary to prepare in advance.  Would that other churches, including mine, were as farseeing as the Vatican.

So let’s look at the implications of life elsewhere in the universe.  First, let us suppose we find microbial life elsewhere.  For example, let’s pretend we discover living and dead microbial life on Mars.  Or, it could be all dead.  What are the implications for the church?

In order to understand this one must understand the main implication of Darwin’s theory on the church.  For hundreds of years the church taught that mankind was created perfect and that Adam and Eve lived in paradise.  There was no sin there and no death.  But our parents blew it and we were cast out.  Death entered the world along with sin and we have been suffering ever since.  Man fell and therefore man needs a redeemer.  Enter Jesus Christ, our redeemer.  The first Adam blew it but the last Adam – Jesus, saves us. 

If you accept Evolution then we did not fall.  The only thing we might have fallen from is a tree.  We evolved in a world in which survival of the fittest was always there.  In theological terms, this means sin was always around – though whether our ape ancestors could be held accountable is a side issue.  Death has always been here.  Our animal nature is a result of evolution, not a fall from paradise.  Thus, we have not fallen from a perfect state.  We were always barbaric.  And if we have not fallen, why do we need a redeemer?

You see many Christians have this terrible understanding of redemption.  Once upon a time our first parents displeased God.  As a result, we were condemned to die.  We deserved to die.  But instead of killing us, God decided to kill his own Son instead.  His son was willing to die in our place.  So long as the blood price was paid, God was cool with it.  We deserve to die but Christ died in our stead.  Thanks to that, we have a chance at eternal life. 

With this Medieval understanding of things (this understanding actually did arise in the Middle Ages), we can see why Darwin was such a threat.  Why did God blame us for sinning when we evolved in a dog-eat-dog world in which survival depended on brutalizing others?  In this context, evolution strips away the need for a redeemer. 

I would say that other concepts of what a redeemer is are fully compatible with evolution but sadly, many Christians have not figured that out yet.  So for me, evolution is no big deal.  But for those with the standard substitution concept of a redeemer, the discovery of life elsewhere will most certainly deal a death blow to their faith.

If we discover microbial life elsewhere, it will mean that death exists elsewhere.  This will weaken the view of a deathless paradise.  Did the whole universe exist in a deathless state until someone on an obscure planet, in an ordinary galaxy ate from a tree they shouldn’t have?  So suddenly because Adam and Eve ate from a tree on Earth, in a galaxy far, far away, things started to die and micro organisms started to eat one another? 

Of course the logical implications from such a discovery are that there was no deathless paradise and that evolution rules the universe.  Death has always been around along with survival of the fittest.

Seventh-day Adventists believe there is extra-terrestrial life but that sin and death only exist here on Earth.  So for my church, a discovery of death elsewhere in the universe, even if it only involves micro organisms, should put a nail in that belief.  But at least my church has made some effort to look at the possibility of life elsewhere.

If we discover sentient life elsewhere and that life is not tainted by sin, then my church will be shown to have been right.  That life can set us straight.  But if we discover that life also has death, then we’re in trouble and so is Christianity.  Suppose we discover an advanced race out there that is completely peaceful and awesome.  Suppose they tell us that in their past, however, they killed one another and so on.  We then have to ask whether they also had a redeemer.  Did God send a Jesus Christ type entity to them and if so, then how is our Jesus the unique Son of God?  And if there was no Jesus entity or if different factions of this advanced race believe in a number of enlightened beings, just as we do on Earth, then this would have staggering implications for how we think of Jesus.

None of the questions I have posed here are without answers.  I think the Christian church can cope with such a discovery.  But it can only do so if it prepares in advance.  Otherwise, such a discovery will do to the church today what Darwin unintentionally did to the church in the 19^th century.  Only this time, the church might not recover.  It is time that my church, and other Christians extract their heads from the sand and look at the stars because that is where the next theological crisis will arise.