Religious creation stories do not account for other worlds

The argument

There is no explicit information in religious scripture about other worlds and alien species. Some religious figures have even stated that it is impossible that extraterrestrial life exists because it is not in the bible. It is absurd not to believe in the existence of aliens due to scripture, especially when there is mounting evidence that is not only possible but very likely. With the discovery of alien life, people with unwavering faith in centuries-old prophetic books will be left questioning their beliefs. Modern science has already presented a challenge to religious belief, as ancient religions do not account for scientific discoveries such as evolution. If religious documents truly are works of divine revelation, they should be able to produce scientific knowledge and expand human understanding. The discovery of life on other worlds would be their greatest challenge yet as scripture does not mention aliens, and places earth at the center of all creation. Religious institutions have a long history of murdering those who propose scientific ideas that contradict scripture. If discoveries were not a threat to religion as others claim, there would not be a long history of persecution. The catholic church burnt Giordano Bruno during the renaissance for suggesting, among other things, there are a multitude of other worlds. Religious preachers are threatened by the steady development of science, including the possibility of extraterrestrial life.

Context

The discovery of alien worlds will show that religious scripture cannot provide a true account of creation.

Premises

Counter-arguments

While some used to see extraterrestrial life something foreign and dangerous, that’s not quite the case today. People feared the idea of unknown entities but with the worlds knowledge of science and astronomy continuing to evolve, so too does human understanding. While there’s still fear that it’s outshined the curiosity of these unknown and mysterious beings. Religion did not account for the sciences to discover ideas such as life outside of earth or evolution but has adapted to fit with the era. That’s not to say that religion has fundamentally changed what it is or stands for, but that it has been looked at with new eyes to determine its meaning. Depending on a person's faith and religion, it might affect how they view alien life and whether they exist. What it boils down to though is not if alien life exists for humanity to discover or convert; it’s if humanity is ready for aliens. People like Giordano Bruno have died for their own beliefs, and in the past, it’s quite easy to say that the revelations of today would’ve never been accepted as truth. Humans don’t know if aliens exist, but their existence would not necessarily derail their faith.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] Silence is not denial. That scripture does not mention other worlds leaves the question open rather than closed, which is how most theologians have treated it — and the premise's own example, individual figures denying extraterrestrial life, locates the position with particular interpreters rather than with the traditions. An unanswered question in a text is also not a threat: creation accounts have been read figuratively for many centuries, long before there was scientific pressure to do so. [Rejecting P2] The evolution comparison works against the argument. Evolution was resisted and then largely absorbed, with most major denominations now accepting it, so the precedent cited is one of adaptation rather than damage — the counter's point. Bruno was tried over a wide range of theological positions, including on the Trinity and the incarnation, so treating him as the case of cosmological persecution claims more than the episode shows. [Rejecting C] The conclusion requires "does not account for" to mean "is contradicted by", and that step is never made. A discovery threatens a belief only if some doctrine rules it out, and the argument identifies no doctrine that does.