Reading some of these responses to the question of alien life one could as easily substitute Taliban for Christian. After all, one man's orthodoxy is another's heresy. History is replete with examples. Imagine the reception a modern evangelical would receive in the court of Henry V - perhaps England's greatest King - and a notably devout one. Considering his persecution of the Lollards (proto protestants of the early 15th century), burning at the stake would have been a mercy compared to the drawing and quartering a bible thumping, dancing in the spirit mega church leader would receive.I find it curious that a modern Christian can rely with such certainty on the literal interpretation of a Bible that was assembled over generations by men essentially meeting in committee and often responding to political events as much as divine guidance. The councils of Hippo (393 AD) and Carthage (397 AD) were the two most influential in that regard in creating the 27-book New Testament. The council of Nicaea, which is often cited as the author of the 27-book decision was actually far more focused on grappling with the divinity of Jesus and the Trinity. None of this was finalized until the Council of Trent in the 16th century when all 73 books of the Old and New Testament were recognized as canon in response to Protestantism. Of course protestants had edited their own version eliminating the Deuterocanonical books.
I do not see any of this as vote of no-confidence in the existence of God, but rather strong circumstantial evidence in the fallibility of man in trying to interpret the uninterpretable. I think that very inexplicability is what has driven so many to narrow faith-based interpretations that allow no debate or further interpretation. Condemn, destroy, or pray for anyone who disagrees.
We are very fortunate in the West that the enlightenment emerged out of the renaissance. It provided a host of safe havens for a wide array interpretations of the Bible and God himself. It is why most of the founders of this country were quite comfortable addressing God in their public works and consistently unwilling to sponsor a particular interpretation of that figure. For instance, notice the prevalence of the terms God or Creator or Providence in the founding documents and the total absence of the name Jesus. As products of the enlightenment, most of the founders (notably Jefferson, Franklin, and Washington among many others) were philosophically "Deists" rather than denominational. They believed in a creator, but were skeptical of an omnipotent God being limited by a particular dogma or sectarian religion created by man.
So, back to alien life. If God is, as he must be, truly omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent then alien life forms have long been part of his creation. After all, the current universe as we understand it is at least 13.8 billion years old. Homo Sapiens have existed for approximately 300,000 years, so .002% of that time. Within the Milky Way alone there are somewhere between 100 and 400 billion star systems, and there are further billions of galaxies. Even if the right conditions for the development of life are limited to one in a million systems, that could mean the possibility of millions of star systems holding life.
However, two elements make it very difficult for us to to come into contact with such planetary systems. First, there is that Einstein fellow and the limitations of the speed of light. It would take a very, very, very long time to visit even immediate neighbors. Toss in the problem of time scale and it gets worse. We have been advanced enough to understand and record contact with an alien species for only around 4,000 years. That is a micro-second on a cosmic clock. To me at least, it is unsurprising that no one has yet landed in central Park and said "Take me to your leader." And that would have absolutely nothing to do with any sectarian belief.
