In the image of God: just how weird can aliens look?

I believe in aliens. Really, I do.

First from a scriptural standpoint, and secondly from a scientific - once given a foothold, life is just too adaptable. Bacteria, viruses, and even a certain dust mite, can survive deep space, so life is bound to have ended up elsewhere.

But merging those two agreements is giving me grief. On one hand, I want to say, all of God's children are in his image, so they must obviously look like us. There is some UFO evidence to support that (the so-called Nordics). But it strikes me as so fundamentalist and simplistic, I worry that I am over-literalizing the scripture.

Just what does "In the Image of God" mean anyway?

Does a kid with a birth defect life a cleft palette and lip count as still in the image of God?

What about something more severe? Like this from the effect of dioxins in Veitnam-


I was about to show a few more pictures, but I have not gotten around to eating dinner yet, so I am going to forbear. Just a google image search for "birth defects". Might be useful for dieting.

Now, with a case like this, we have two choices - either a child like this is not in the image of God (we can treat him like an animal) or he is in the image of God. I don't think we should treat him as an animal, but the corollary is that outward appearance is, to some degree, irrelevant. (That or God may have really bulging eyes.)

So then, if the worst birth defects, are still children of God, in his image, then what should we say about aliens? (No Senor, not the illegal variety, the extra-terrestrial sort)







Just what is the real criterion for "in the image of God" ?















Sci-fi has some pretty weird aliens.... What about the Giger inspired baddies from the 'Alien' movies? Is anything from Star Trek kosher? What about the Gou'ald parasites in StarGate? Can we keep Yoda?

Just where and how do we draw the line?