In Genesis 11:4, the people said, *“Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves...”* God saw this as an act of pride and rebellion, and responded by confusing their language and scattering them. Today, space agencies and astronauts aim to explore or even colonize outer space—what the Bible might refer to as "the heavens." This raises a spiritual question: Are there theological or biblical interpretations that suggest modern space travel could be a continuation of the same spirit of pride or rebellion seen in Babel?

The author of this blog makes a claim that the asteroid belt in space was formed from the remains of the planet that was destroyed when war arose between Michael and Lucifer, and some of the craters on the moon too. >It's possible the fifth planet (now the asteroid belt) was destroyed and many of the craters visible on the Moon's surface were caused at that time. (Subsection Title: Rebellion) Is there any Biblical basis that supports this claim?

I heard a Christian apologist Dr. Frank Turek making a claim that God designed Jupiter that big so He would protect us from destructive meteorites, because the gravity of Jupiter (which is twice as strong as the earth's) pulls these objects to crash on its surface. Photographic evidence has shown that very huge meteorites, some even bigger than the size of the earth, have crashed on the surface of Jupiter thereby making Jupiter a planet that saves lives according to the plan of God. If so, how do they then reconcile this with how another meteorite *did* crash on the Gulf of Mexico which caused the dinosaurs to be extinct?

The economy of God is unbeatable and without peer, as evidenced for example by the fact that, even as semiconductor design and engineering is approaching atom-scale electronics, human and animal brains are still orders of magnitude more energy-efficient and capable than the world's most sophisticated microchips. God has also succeeded at creating enormous fusion reactors the universe throughout while scientists still struggle to get hints of the feasibility of such technology under carefully controlled laboratory conditions. This question is for young earth creationists who believe that all other stars, galaxies and objects in the cosmos were created attendant to the Creation of this Earth, and that there is no life on other worlds (other than perhaps spirits or eternal beings pertaining to, or known by the people on this Earth), or that this Earth is otherwise unique in terms of theological significance or its place in the universe in some pre-eminent way. I refer to these beliefs as "geocentrist" models because they make everything in the universe effectively revolve around this Earth and its purposes. I do not say they deny that the Earth revolves around the Sun, but they still make everything in the universe effectively accessories to this Earth and its Creation. What reasons do they give for why God with such mind-boggling extravagance would create so many other galaxies, stars, solar systems and even planets--given for example the gargantuan amounts of energy that each star outputs--if not a one of them sustains life of its own, or has any other purpose except towards this Earth and its populace? That would actually make life on Earth less energy-efficient than the most primitive creations of mankind, by a large margin. Obviously there are other ways to measure this, but again, why waste the vast, vast, vast (with many zeros added on for good measure) majority of starlight and creative effort on something so far away that our telescopes cannot resolve 99.999999% it to more than a mere point of light? God is doubtless generous, with trillions of photons devoted to striking our eyes each second, and efficiency isn't everything, but is He wasteful? This is a natural question asked by those who ponder why God would create so many quintillions of stars, but only one with life in its system? Why would He break the pattern of sustainable life on other worlds, forfeiting the opportunity to have and redeem quadrillions of quintillions more of His children, when the resources are clearly there and already organized to sustain life? Or if they are not organized in such a fashion to sustain life, surely He has the intelligence to do it--is there some other limitation or reason why, other than simply that He can? To be clear, this is not *my* question or criticism, but rather is a natural question or criticism levied by some secular scientists and engineers regarding common interpretations of Genesis. They might have a point, not against God's ways, but that should help us to correct our own misunderstandings. What can we say that will address the criticism and instruct our own ways?

According to Wikipedia’s data, it says: > “This is a list of exoplanets. As of 1 May 2022, there are 5,017 > confirmed exoplanets in 3,694 planetary systems, with 822 systems > having more than one planet. Most of these were discovered by the > Kepler space telescope.” Source: [Lists of exoplanets (Wikipedia)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_exoplanets) **Q: According to Protestantism, what does God’s Word have to say with an explanation of why God made these exoplanets?**

I've heard that the bishop of the Diocese of Orlando during 1969 claimed that because Apollo 11 was launched from Cape Canaveral and the Kennedy Space Center, which were under his jurisdiction, he became "bishop of the moon" because they were the first to land on it. Is this true? If so, what is the justification?

Background information: An Ordinary, in Catholicism, is a bishop who holds "Ordinary" jurisdiction over a specific territory. He is usually known as the "Bishop of [Place Name]" and holds general authority (though ultimately subject to the Pope) for making rules within his territory, adjudicating cases, ordaining priests, and performing other management functions. In [this](https://space.stackexchange.com/a/24833/17881) answer on Space Exploration.SE, @Ángel spoke about the possibility of a Roman Catholic marriage in space. He spoke about the general requirement of obtaining the permission of applicable Ordinary(ies) for holding a marriage in a place other than where the couple live. That leads me to the following question: Does Catholicism have any concept of an Ordinary having jurisdiction over outer space, or any part of space? Is there a Bishop of the Great Red Spot straining his eyes with a telescope from an observatory in Rome looking for souls to shepherd out of the storm? If there is no bishop with ordinary jurisdiction in space, is there a process for determining who holds canonical jurisdiction over an event that happens in space or a soul who resides there? Do the Ordinaries having jurisdiction over spaceports hold extended jurisdiction over any spacecraft that launches from them and any crew and passengers therein? Do all space missions fall directly under the immediate and sole jurisdiction of the Pope himself?