More than a few people have complaints about how religion seems to play a part in sci-fi too often these days. We had it in Battlestar Galactica, for sure. With the apparent purpose of Destiny revealed within the past couple of episodes, we’ve seen it mentioned a few times on SGU.
My issue here — albeit a small one — is that using God to explain things in science fiction is starting to feel like a bit of a crutch. Admittedly, I had more of an issue with this on BSG than with SGU, but to see it again is bringing back sour memories. If those “fingerprints” at the edges of the universe can only be explained as being classified as from a “god,” I’m OK with that. It’s the whole Kane and Eden thing that I’m not sure about.
So, as far as the Eden crew goes, I can’t imagine that will remain unanswered. It’s certainly an odd situation, especially in that aliens most likely had a hand in reviving them and bringing them to Destiny. But … it’s all really odd. How did they reach Destiny so fast? How did they find them? And why bother? Whatever the answers are, it’s clear my initial theory of them being picked up and brought back to Earth won’t pan out. I sort of threw that theory out the window once Destiny’s bridge was breached anyway.
Not much more to say than that, except that I think Greer is my favorite character on the show. His interaction with Chloe and Scott was great, and he’s pretty much an all-around badass. If he ever gets killed off, I’ll be pretty pissed off.
Clacked by Keith McDuffee 
on Nov 23, 2010 @ 23:13 EST5EDT
Could the aliens be the Ancients? It would seem likely that a rogue ascended ancient would want their decedents to complete their work. Perhaps, even in ascension, they do not have all of the answers.
On the note of religion in the show, I was always annoyed with the folks that settled do to some divine path they wished to follow. It never seemed to mesh well with the overall themes of the Stargate universe; I am not referring to SGU, but the whole Stargate property.
My idea of the Ancients involvement would work if you think in context of what Eli quoted from Arthur C. Clark: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”
I chuckled at the Winston Churchill line. :)
I agree with lolzerker that it could be ‘Ancients’ that brought the people from ‘Eden’ back to Destiny. It could also explain why the Shuttle looks so new. Earlier in the series someone, I think maybe Col. Young, mentions that while there are (at that time)two shuttles aboard Destiny, there are three shuttle docking bays. Perhaps a group of Ancients(pre-ascension)did make it aboard Destiny, thousands or millions of years ago, but for some reason left aboard the third shuttle and that may actually be the shuttle that the residents of Eden were sent back in. The question is why were these people re-animated and sent back? Possibly there is technology aboard destiny that could have saved them from dying a second time, technology Ancients would surely know about, but is currently unknown to the current Destiny crew! The involvement of Ancients could also explain TJ’s dream after loosing her baby. The Ancients have been known to take different forms and may have, in this case, taken the form of the Eden residents in order to appear more accepting to TJ when they told her her baby was safe with them, when infact they (the Ancients) may have helped her baby to ascend!
You could be right, but it seems to be well covered territory. I hope that the explanations are more creative.
Did you all like the new Viper right off the showroom floor? Oh, I mean shuttle.
As you might guess, I like small amounts of delving into the Mysteries of Faith. Especially if it does not step on Gospel. When writers get lazy and lean on it too much, to explain all mysteries, I start to worry. As long as we don’t end up with Star Trek The Final Frontier, we should be o.k.
Actually, I think much of Sci-Fi handles Faith well. Stargate SG1 and Firefly (Book!) come to mind immediately.
I really liked the scene with Greer and Chloe.
This is my favorite show on television right now.
This is also my favorite on the air at the moment.
Brand new Viper the week after Eli’s “Stairway to Heaven” comment?
It even has that “new shuttle” smell!
I too, think this has quickly become one of my favorite shows on TV right now.
Greer’s scene with Chloe was outstanding.
SGU has grown on me to the point that I also am a Greer fan (I couldn’t stand him at first).
Regarding God in sci-fi: I think it’s a reaction to the Star Trek type of sci-fi, which made a point of explaining away the supernatural through science and excluding religion from its vision of the future (or portraying religion as something caused by the influence of aliens or advanced science). BSG was trying to be different, to offer a fresh twist to this tired genre, and by accepting God as part of its universe, BSG was bucking the trend of “Star Trek” sci-fi.
Firefly is an example of a show that did a good job of including religion in its universe without making it a central theme of the show.
Stargate SG-1 has always been about gods and religions. SG-1 was all about exposing false gods (the Goa’uld and the Ori) and liberating subjugated peoples. Atlantis departed from that, but SGU may be going back to that theme from SG-1 – either continuing the theme or turning it on its head, which would be an interesting twist.
I don’t think it’s a cop-out any more than the Ancients were cop-outs. So it’s okay to attribute inexplicable phenomena to superpowerful aliens – that’s not a cop-out? It’s all semantics. If you want, you can think of God as a giant, benevolent alien who started everything. It’s just the word “God” that scares people. If we substituted “the Ancients” or “the Prophets aka the Wormhole Aliens” (DS9) then it would be safe for sci-fi.
What I’m saying is this: if you consider the God explanation to be a cop-out, then you should consider all of the “superpowerful aliens” explanations to be cop-outs as well. Yet the “superpowerful aliens/computers being responsible for inexplicable phenomena” is a sci-fi staple – so why isn’t God (aka The Superpowerful Alien/Computer) also acceptable in sci-fi as an explanation for inexplicable phenomena? Either they are equally acceptable, or they are equally cop-outs.
Aw come on Ruby, Sisko was deeply religious and even became the emissary completely in the end. DS9 is my favorite Sci-Fi show of all time and I an agnostic. I guess you meant STNG?
There’s no problem in having faith on a sci-fi show or better: people believing in a godlike creature on a sci-fi show as long as it isn’t _explicitly_ said that it was god or better not explained that there is a chance of it NOT being god (the reason why I hated BSG Season 4 because it clearly said “This was god”) as long as you aren’t a strict atheist.
I don’t have a problem with higher powers.
The problems I have are with faith-based idiocy, in real life as well as on TV. There’s no problem for me when the last of the survivors tells the doctor that she has to believe that her daughter is in a better place (it gives her hope) and that the crew has to continue the mission. Because nobody says explicitly that them showing up is an act from god. I can sit here and easily think that the Aliens or whoever created “Eden” or even Destiny (!) managed to create the brand new Viper and the people who were left on Eden just to get the crew to stay on board and fulfil the mission. I mean we saw in the timeloop episode that Destiny was able to dabble with the minds of the people on the ship. Who knows what else the ship can do? Who says that the ship hasn’t a personality of its own, like HAL or the ship on Farscape?
DS9 especially always managed to keep things sane. SGU did this too with this episode and that is why I like the show (only parts of this comment are directed at you, I guess halfway through I turn to analyzing the episode in general so please don’t take anything personally, I am not criticizing :-) (had to put the disclaimer at the end, people tend to hate me for just talking about what I think :-D
I love DS9 too. Sisko did surrender to the role that was forced on him, but he was pretty clear that he considered the Prophets to be “Wormhole Aliens.” Only to the Bajorans were they gods. To everyone else, they were just powerful aliens who are interested in Bajor.
Star Trek pretty consistently portrays all gods as aliens or computers that are so powerful that they seem like gods. That’s my point. That is so cliche now. BSG went in the opposite direction and said that within the universe of BSG the supernatural does exist. And I think you proved my point about semantics. You said it’s okay as long as it’s not “explicitly” said to be God. It’s just the word that frightens people.
Every sci-fi show sets the rules for its universe. Within the parameters of a show’s universe, they can invent an alien superpower, like the Ancients, to explain any random shit that they want to explain. Well, why can’t a show include God within the parameters of its universe?
Sci-fi is really close to fantasy in this regard. Each fantasy universe has its own mythology. In Terry Goodkind’s Sword of Truth series, there is a Creator (analagous to God) and a Keeper of the Underworld (analagous to Hades), who are equal and opposite. In Tolkien’s universe, there are the Ainur (analagous to angels or to gods of Norse mythology) and Iluvatar (analagous to God).
Just as fantasy universes have their own mythology, their own parameters, so do sci-fi universes. BSG established its own mythology. SGU – I don’t know what SGU is doing – but I think it’s fair game to include God as an element of sci-fi storytelling.
The problem is that in sci-fi, we usually try to portray humanity on the way of becoming something better. Outside of “The Scary Door” (I mean Twilight Zone) Humanity in Sci-Fi is always on the way of improvement.
The problem is: god, as he/she/it is described in human “mythology” (e.g.: The Bible, The Koran, etc. etc.) is contradicting all the time, and interpreted all the time. To introduce an infallible entity into Sci-Fi is against this idea of humanity improving. You can’t improve if you think an infallible god who takes care of you is there for you. I know the example is absolute bullshit but that is why “Studio 60″ failed. And it is why “BSG” failed (there, much better example). You can’t just have people who are supposed to be analytical and striving to be better on a show while at the same time have the idea of a god on the show as well. Because every decision, every mantra on the show becomes obsolete. Because NOTHING you do has any effect anyway. If we were to believe that god rescues us anyway if we run into problems like that whackjob who’s now becoming head of the energy commission in the US who thinks we can’t ruin our planet because the bible says we can’t, then there is no suspense, no peril, nothing. It would be like “Zardoz” where in the end you can die as many times as you want because the machine will revive you every time.
An infallible God against the notion of humanity improving? I don’t see it. Even when I view it through various earth religions. God gives humankind free will. Humankind has choice to improve or not to improve. Now if you remove free will, you have something else altogether. That would make science fiction very boring.
If God allows free will, then every decision counts. We/or the particular Sci-Fi Universe can be held accountable for our actions. It’s the very opposite of obsolete. And my dear Sebastian, if there is free will, and accountability, then there is most certainly potential peril. Of the Eternal kind.
Sheesh Sebastian, this will be like the 3rd time in 2 months you make my prayer list! :)
Sebastian, the main flaw I see in your argument is the idea that sci-fi is supposed to portray humanity on the way of becoming something better. I don’t think that’s what sci-fi is about at all. In fact, a lot great sci-fi does NOT show humanity becoming something better. Sci-fi is often used for cautionary tales, parables, and what-if scenarios. I would argue that more recent shows like Firefly, Farscape, BSG, and even SGU are not trying to show humanity improving – the humans in those shows are pretty much just like the flawed humans of our real world.
That humanistic idea of mankind evolving into something better is a “Star Trek” sci-fi thing. It’s a Gene Roddenberry thing. I am a Star Trek fan, but I don’t buy into Gene’s philosophy, and frankly I find it arrogant and unrealistic. I believe that a couple centuries from now we will still have all the same flaws that we have today – maybe we’ll look different, dress different, maybe we’ll be making different kinds of trouble for ourselves, but selfishness is an inherent part of human nature, and that’s not going to change with the invention of replicators and warp drive (IMHO).
Hum…
to be honest I don’t really see the difference. You say Sci-Fi is about cautionary tales – for who? I guess for the viewer, who then again is human as well. So if I am not mistaken, this is about the viewer learning something from it and then not making the same mistakes, whereas (as you point out) Star Trek is about Humanity not making these mistakes. You don’t like it that way, I understand that. Maybe “The Scary Door” experience is better, maybe not, I don’t know. I just don’t like stories with bad endings because life itself has enough of those. I like happy fluffy stuff and I believe in the good in people. Scary Sci-Fi tends to believe in the bad in people and I don’t like that.
Anyway, that wasn’t really the point now, was it? The point was if there is a being that can reverse everything. Because I think if there is one, then your actions don’t count. Believers think as long as they have good intentions, they’ll get saved in the end. And that is a pile of rubbish in a Sci-Fi setting. You just can’t have a higher power just interfering to save your ass all the time. If you look at it that way, that is what the prime directive was all about – a set of rules that would keep the story interesting. You said in Star Trek there was always a higher power or higher being, an Alien race that explained everything that could be interpreted as “god”. Funny enough you disregard the prime directive completely, in which every interaction of the crews on Star Trek would themselves acted as “gods” just because they had more knowledge (!).
And that is my whole point. And the point of everyone on this earth on this day who says that you can’t believe in a god when you simply didn’t reach the end of the road of development. Until you have learned everything about the universe, there is ALWAYS the possibility of a being that is simply more evolved than you who has the power to do things you just can not.
Interpreting it in the way that this is a “god” or even worse, “deity”, to me, is stupid. And I wouldn’t like it on Sci-Fi at all. Or Drama. Saying something is done “by god” is, to me at least, basically saying “I am too lazy to find out what happened there”, and with that, I am unwilling to evolve. Saying that Sci-Fi is often about a cautionary tale then would be to me to say that it is about people who were just too dumb to know better, or, even worse, who researched and were killey by what they discovered. Most of the time discovery leads to shifts in power and with that the loss of power for people who are in certain positions, be it a government or, again even worse, a religious sect, no matter which one, who found their power on the basis of religion.
So, to sum it up, research and questioning is usually something that religion doesn’t want. And that is, IMHO, not a good thing to have in a Sci-Fi show. It’s ok if there are people running around who believe, but it is always bad to have them be the people in power on that show, because that usually means you paint yourself in a corner because you can’t further the plot anymore. Or better: there’s not plot anymore.
Final note: I agree with you completely about selfishness. But: I am not religious but every day I try very very hard to be good. Not because I want to go to heaven, but because I think that hurting other people is wrong. I don’t need a promise of eternal joy or damnation to have that idea run my life. With that I guess comes the problem that the world in general is different. People are stupid (= religious) and do the exact opposite of what would be good for them, and with religion as a reason do bad things to other people. I don’t buy into the fancy schmancy idea of the bright future for everybody without colds either (I guess Ferengi rules would apply if we ever reach that level of space travel) but it would be _nice_. And I don’t look up to the sky and pray for it to happen. I am trying my damnest every day to MAKE it happen. And that, IMHO, is what will lead to something that could look like what ROddenberry envisioned. What I (!) hope for (not PRAY for) is that some day there will be more people like me (sorry for sounding like a self-righteous ass here) who don’t think more about themselves and that maybe the death-tax might apply to them or that they would get all their millions get taxed away if they shoudl ever “make it” but rather think about how we all could SHARE everything so everyone has a better life.
You know, the basic idea of Star Trek.
But again we could just keep doing what we’re doing and get on our knees each night and pray for the flying spaghettimonster to save us all.
I say this with no malice: you do sound like a self-righteous ass. Your concept of what a religious person looks like is narrow-minded and almost laughable. Your experience with them may be limited to one type. Mine has not been. I know a wide, wide spectrum of religious people, and sure, there are some that are like your stereotype, and there are many who are not. My mother for example (analytical, non-emotional woman; 5 university degrees; 3 languages; has lived on 4 different continents; and is one of the kindest, most generous people I know, while also being voracious for knowledge and relentlessly logical). But I’ve been in brilliant academic communities most of my life, not just for college and grad school but because I’ve worked at a couple different highly ranked universities. Clearly the religious people I know are different from the ones you do. In any case, I’m not trying to convince you of anything, except not to use ridiculous blanket statements about entire people groups. I would think that labeling entire groups of people as inferior and stupid would be disapproved of in Germany now.
But hey, it’s your choice to believe what you want to believe. I’ll go enjoy my Thanksgiving now. Cheers!
Yes I think you hit the nail on the head: I never, in my life, met a religious person who isn’t absolutely full of themselves when it comes to faith, belitteling me and telling me I was bitter and lost in the world.
I mean it’s too bad you had to tackle Goodwin’s law at the end. I almost didn’t have a point there.
“I never, in my life, met a religious person who isn’t absolutely full of themselves when it comes to faith, belitteling me and telling me I was bitter and lost in the world.”
Then you haven’t met many religious people. What you describe there would fit less than 1% of the religious people I’ve met, and I’ve met, and know, many. You should get out more.
In my experience it’s the people without religion who are more self-righteous without cause, more defensive about their lack of faith and less inclined to be open-minded. I’m a very religious person, but I don’t judge others’ personal choices in faith, or lack thereof. My daughter’s best friend is an athiest and he’s always welcome at my home. His personal choice for a belief system is truly none of my business because it really doesn’t affect me at all, nor do my personal religious beliefs affect him.
The old saying, “Live and let live” is the basic tenet of most people of faith. You are basing your entire view of religious people on a myopic selection of your own choosing that best justifies your desired viewpoint rather than basing it in actual fact. If it is true that the very religious are doing so much belittling, why is it that we only hear from those who lack any religious foundation on the subject of how others should believe? The comments I’m hearing sound like they’re based more in some deep-seated insecurities than in a real-world view of the people you seem to abhor.
I find your comments to be extremely inappropriate, bordering on personal insults.
Excuse my chuckling but I can’t get past the boatload of irony you included in your comment.
Was it that you said I was someone who told you what to believe in after telling me to get out more in the second paragraph?
Or was it telling me how open minded you are with the example of how you let someone in your home even though they are atheist, right after you called me self-righteous?
Seriously guys, you are on a roll. bsgfan2003 is praying for me, Ruby explains how someone who belives in god can also be intelligent with a barrage of degrees only to then calling me a Nazi, and now you Tom.
I honestly think I don’t need to get out more to meet more people of faith. I got them here all neatly in a row doing all the things I so love about them and ow and then I have Latter Day Saints and Jehova’s witnesses knocking at my door asking me how I feel about god. And I didn’t even get into the whole thing about muslims trying to blow up planes and the leader of the free world telling me on TV that he’s on a mission from god. Or people up for election telling me they aren’t a witch. Or people who are about to get into control of climate control that god’s not going to let it all go to pieces.
You are right. It’s ME who is telling you what to do. You are the one who is oppressed by people who tell you you are stupid.
Next time I’m at the dentist and he calls me out for not coming in more often and having cavities that I was a straight A student in school, and when he says it’s stupid not to brush my teeth more often I tell him that I am not against people brushing their teeth I even lot people with cavities into my home. Oh and then I’m going to call him a Nazi.
Yep, been praying for you for a long time. Can’t help it, Can’t explain it. People of Faith aren’t perfect. I’m not perfect. Far from it. Just another beggar who happened to find out where to go for Bread.
Yeah but you KNOW that while reading that makes me a tad angry every time it doesn’t make me hate you or that I want you to change your belief-system. I don’t curse in the comments because of you and when I then get a “I pray for you” in return, I feel like that isn’t returned.
But at least I am not running around and want a prize for it like Tom.
I should have kept it to myself. The fact that you want to lash out and you hold yourself in check says good things about you. Trust me when I say that Tom has made real progress in the way he disagrees with people. I don’t want you to feel attacked. Tom and Ruby and you all seem to be nice folks.
Peace.
Sebastian, when someone (in this case you) makes broad-sweeping and prejudicial statements like you have they know damned well they’re going to get resistance for it. In fact, you seem more than intelligent enough to outright know you’re being insulting to a large majority of readers, but you still remain adamant in your stance. That would be the equivalent of a commenter coming in here knowing full well you’re German and saying something like, “All the Germans I’ve ever met are assholes” and not expecting you to take issue with it.
Making blanket statements about any group of people is damned near always wrong and while that is insult enough, you continuing to act justified in your apparently fear-based beliefs just adds fuel to the fire. We are all here to discuss television, and while that can and will sometimes bring us into potentially touchy areas there is no reason for any commenter to be insulting to another, whether by direct attack or by inference as you have done here.
I’m sorry if your experiences with people of faith have been bad ones, they obviously have, but please don’t insult the rest of us by assuming all religious people are the same way. And to prove to you that we aren’t I’ll tell you something that should give you at least a little comfort: Knowing your preferences, I won’t pray for you, not because I’m upset with your actions, but because I know that’s what you’d want. That’s called treating others with respect.
Erm, well Tom, no.
That is _exactly_ what I don’t do. I wouldn’t at all get angry if you say all the germans YOU (!) met are assholes because that doesn’t include me.
I would take offense when you then say “so you are an asshole too”.
And again I don’t see the point in my comments where I personally insulted you. I explained why to me, as an analytical, logical person, believing is idiotic. It is illogical. In the context of TV.
And then YOU GUYS made it personal.
Seriously, if you are oh so tolerant then you just have to accept that I think anyone who is believing in god has some kind of shortage in their brain. And asking me to “tolerate” that doesn’t change it.
And you should full well know that when I say “every religious person I met” I didn’t mean anyone on the street who walks by me or anyone in the world who I happen to have talked to, but rather people who thought it would be intelligent to convert me or talk me into god. Because you don’t knwo who in your surroundings is gay or into BDSM or maybe even pinning live butterflies to a cushion either and I’m sure there’s something in there you find absolutely idiotic to do.
What really irks me though is that you really believe tolerating someone is some kind of feat that makes you a good person. That’s called being decent. It’s a given. I do that every day to anybody I don’t know something about that really pisses me off, like being a Nazi or racist who I then WON’T let into my home. I mean honestly don’t you get what you said there? You saying you even let an atheist in your home is as if you let some kind of monster in all the while calling me ignorant and self-centered. That’s mind-boggling to me.
First off, I never said it was personal, just skirting very close to it, hence my use of the word “bordering” in my statements.
Secondly, can you honestly tell me that you don’t feel about all religious people the same way you feel about the ones you’ve met? If you didn’t then you wouldn’t have made such statements public in the first place, at least not worded the way you did. You never phrased it, “all the religious people I’ve met” to imply that it’s only a small fraction and obviously atypical. You stated it that way to imply that since everyone you’ve met is that way it’s obviously the way the majority of religious people must be. If not, then you need to clarify exactly what you meant otherwise I think anyone of faith reading your comments would be justified in taking some offense to your statements.
Hi! My name is Dorv. Nice to meet you!
Tom… I don’t understand you. Seriously.
Do you believe I hate religious people? Because I didn’t say that anywhere. I explained it to you multiple times now. As an analytical person I can not, for the life of me, understand how someone can believe in fairy tales, mediums, card laying, Santa Claus, The Tooth Fairy etc. etc… and god. Because that is all the same. These stories are all about a mythical creature who is supposed to be there but of whom there is no evidence. To me, believing in fairy tales is stupid. That is all I said.
Now when I come into contact with people who are religious, I don’t have a problem to brush that aside and just be decent, regular, normal, everyday life. The only difference is that when they bring the discussion to god, and ask me my honest opinion, I GIVE IT TO THEM. And when they then feel the need to keep pressuring me about it, why I can’t “tolerate” them, “accept” their belief system, I get ANGRY. Because in the end THEY don’t accept ME. They want me to give in.
You know. Just like you at the moment. So please do me a favor and stop pissing me off. I don’t have a problem with you. I was asked what I think about something, I said what I think, and I am not running around with the urge to make people believe what I do. That is he essence of getting along without forcing people to do anything. But your need to make me say something or NOT say something what I do believe in is basically what you think what I am supposedly doing. I am not making you stop believing in god, but you are trying to make me stop believing the idea of god is stupid.
I can give you a much easier example. I think killing yourself is stupid. You basically ask me not to say that I think people who commit suicide are stupid, just so I don’t hurt their feelings. That’s really gaga. I might refrain from telling people what I think in certain situations, but I won’t stop thinking that there’s enough beautiful things in life to keep on living. I UNDERSTAND why people kill themselves (intense pain, depression) but that doesn’t make me not think that the act of suicide is stupid.
So again, please don’t make me say things I don’t believe. I was asked, I gave an answer. I am just someone who says what he thinks about something. You think god is great. Every time you go out and tell that to people in public, you are most likely annoying all the atheists in the room. Does that mean you stop telling people publicly that you believe in god? I doubt it.
Ruby always makes clever points.
Thinking about SG1. When that Prior was defeated he said, “I was blind and now I see.” I felt that it was a nice shout out to me. Of course, everyone has their own interpretations.
No Sanctification without Sacrifice is pretty universal and I’m happy if that makes it in anywhere.
But truly, give me a space vessal, space battles, battle tactics, aliens, different worlds, fancy tech, and novel solutions and I am satisfied. I have The Mass, The Bible, and The Rosary for my spiritual needs.
Fantasy can include God as being real.
SciFi can not include God as being real. Some characters can believe in God in SciFi, but “science fiction” should be based on our physical understanding of how the universe operates or is likely to operate. At the very least there should be some scientifically plausible explanation for things in scifi.
Advanced aliens are not unlikely somewhere in the universe and are certainly not beyond scientific plausibility. Advanced computers are clearly plausible scientifically. God as the creator of earth and as someone who listens to prayers and selectively answers some of them with absolutely no plausible scientific explanation…. DOES NOT BELONG IN SCIENCE FICTION.
Agreed. I don’t want to see seas parted and miracles performed in my science fiction. I don’t think SGU is anywhere near that, but the writers probably want to stir up some controversy by making some viewers believe that is where it is going. Like it or not, we all know controversy turns heads and gets attention. It certainly got the comments going here!
*POST AUTHOR*
I find it interesting for those who are stand-by-the-bible, very religious folk, and embrace science fiction so much. Let’s say, Star Trek, for example. It’s supposed to be based on the future — our future — and where aliens are discovered. Do religious people stand firm that the idea of extra-terrestrial life is absolute and complete could-never-happen fiction, or do they believe aliens would say, “Oh yeah, we know you Earthlings — it’s where Jesus lived?”
My guess is the answer is aliens are complete hogwash, and this is all fiction, pure and simple. Am I right?
For me at least, I don’t know if aliens/life on other planets is hogwash or not. It’s a big universe. If they in prove to be real at some point, I will trust that The Creator indeed did create them.
Jesus is The Word of God. All things were created through him. Jesus is Truth.The Truth does not change, even if aliens were involved.
Perhaps if there are aliens, God has revealed his Truth to them in some way. I just don’t know. I’m really just a small person, confined by my human understanding of such things. I trust in God, I know that only for sure.
Does that make sense Keith?
“My guess is the answer is aliens are complete hogwash, and this is all fiction, pure and simple. Am I right?”
You couldn’t be more wrong, Keith. I’m absolutely certain that intelligent life is abundant in our universe, the odds are in favor of it. I think religions here don’t ever account for anything outside of our own planet simply because most religious texts were written well before any real understanding of the universe was gained. I’d bet even most religious leaders such as priests and preachers would say they believe the possibility of extraterrestrial life is great; I know my pastor does and he’s a huge Trek fan.
It’s been my observation that those who don’t have any basis in religious upbringing don’t understand those of us who do very well, hence your incorrect guess about how we think regarding alien life. I don’t say that to be insulting, but to make the point that many of your beliefs about religious people in general are probably wrong. If the only data you have about people of faith comes from sources like news stories I can certainly understand how you’d have a bad impression. After all, the only kinds of reports the news seems to like are those of the worse examples of humanity.
It’s tiring hearing all the uninformed opinions about how I probably think from people who neither have, nor understand, faith.
*POST AUTHOR*
Tom — My questions we’re meant to be taken personally. I genuinely wanted to know, hence, yes, I’m uninformed. :)
Keith, I tried to post what I’m about to say earlier, but bad weather killed my internet connection and I’m just getting back now.
I want to apologize for my last sentence in particular. It sounds insulting; I was just exasperated and thinking out loud, so to speak. Everyone please ignore that bit of frustrated fluff I typed, please!!
Anyway, I think you already have your answer. The problem is if you aren’t raised in a religious setting most of what you may learn about people of faith as you go through life is what you see and hear from loudmouthed, holier-than-thou kooks. You know, the vocal minority that gives the rest of us a bad name. The vast majority of religious people are open-minded, peace loving and accepting people, but we are also fallible people who don’t always live and act according to what we were taught.
I’ve always been taught that God didn’t create the entirety of existence for just we humans. To think that would be, as bsgfan’s Vatican quote put it, “putting limits on God’s creative freedom.” I’m Catholic and most of the priests and nuns I was taught by told me that even though the Bible says we were created in God’s image, the big dude has an infinite number of images. You’d be surprised at how many of those priests and nuns are big scifi fans and it’s never been a contradiction with our faith. To the contrary, the unlimited imagination of science fiction serves to bolster our belief that God is pretty handy in the universe building department.
Now I’m not saying that it’s science fiction that says all these different forms of life were created by God, only that we who believe in God think it. We’re not out to make you or anyone else believe as we do, but we also don’t appreciate anyone belittling us for our beliefs. We’re only human…I think.
I also believe that all miracles can be explained scientifically. To me that’s just another testament to just how cool God is because it would be a cop-out if they were just magical happenings. Why would He create us and all the billions of intelligent lifeforms, then endow us with curiosity only to confuse us with what is tantamount to magic? He *wants* us to explore and understand the wonderful science in His creation, not simply bow down and accept it all as magical. Hell, that would be boring for everyone.
I know I am the wrong person to answer that question but IMHO the way I understand the church as a system, believers are going to believe in an almighty deity no matter what. Aliens don’t contradict the existence of god and even if (to get this around to the topic) the people on Destiny would find out that Aliens created the whole universe (which contradicts the bible) they would then think the Aliens weren’t god but that god made the Aliens.
Every time science contradicts the bible, the ideas of Christianity were changed. And that is where my doubts came in. The church argues that these stories were delivered by word of mouth, and with that are open to interpretation (something that every other sect has done since then). Nothing is set in stone with religion, everyting is always worked around what is currently accepted as fact and a higher power is built into that.
I don’t have a problem with that but you guys all know what I think about doing that ;-)
Take out the “in” that was in front of prove.
From an MSNBC article:
” VATICAN CITY — The Vatican’s chief astronomer says that believing in aliens does not contradict faith in God.
The Rev. Jose Gabriel Funes, the Jesuit director of the Vatican Observatory, said that the vastness of the universe means it is possible there could be other forms of life outside Earth, even intelligent ones.
In an interview published Tuesday by Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano, Funes said that such a notion “doesn’t contradict our faith” because aliens would still be God’s creatures.
The interview was headlined “The extraterrestrial is my brother.”
Funes said that ruling out the existence of aliens would be like “putting limits” on God’s creative freedom. ”
Here’s the link:
https://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24598508
I have a question too:
Do atheists deny the supernatural altogether or just God?
Altogether.
People who don’t believe in god but don’t deny that there might be a higher power of some sort are called agnostics.
You know, like me :-)
I agree with lolzerker that it could be ‘Ancients’ that brought the people from ‘Eden’ back to Destiny. It could also explain why the Shuttle looks so new. Earlier in the series someone, I think maybe Col. Young, mentions that while there are (at that time)two shuttles aboard Destiny, there are three shuttle docking bays. Perhaps a group of Ancients(pre-ascension)did make it aboard Destiny, thousands or millions of years ago, but for some reason left aboard the third shuttle and that may actually be the shuttle that the residents of Eden were sent back in. The question is why were these people re-animated and sent back? Possibly there is technology aboard destiny that could have saved them from dying a second time, technology Ancients would surely know about, but is currently unknown to the current Destiny crew! The involvement of Ancients could also explain TJ’s dream after loosing her baby. The Ancients have been known to take different forms and may have, in this case, taken the form of the Eden residents in order to appear more accepting to TJ when they told her her baby was safe with them, when infact they (the Ancients) may have helped her baby to ascend!
I don’t think it’s going to be the ancients. I think SGU wants to make a departure from the previous SG’s. I think if the alien race is going to be anyone its got to be the furlings. I just really want to see them. They’re just so mysterious and we got to meet the rest of the four races.
I have been waiting for the Furlings as well.
I don’t see the shows writers and creators suddenly embracing the notion of the Christian God being a player in the storyline of SGU. Certainly, using the God concept as story material works to humanize and rationalize peoples experience aboard Destiny. However, Stargate has always been about the understanding of existence through science and exploration versus religion. This is most obvious in SG-1. If I need to explain, then you obviously missed all ten seasons fighting false gods.
Atlantis didn’t cover religion, but what it did cover was technology that is beyond your comprehension could appear as divine and miraculous works.
So, for the creators to suddenly say, God is the source and subject of all events in SGU, would invalidate the overall theme of Stargate. I do not believe it will be a divine source.
Side note: I am not against exploring religion in their characters, but when it works against the established universe in which the characters are set, I have issue with it.
Oh yes, they fought false gods in SG1, all true, but the writers never stomped on people of faith. I could even say that SG1 always made the point that false gods are always takers, and users. For someone like me, that just reaffirms my love for servant leadership, and of course that ultimate in that regard is my sweet Jesus.
I don’t see the writers embracing what I believe, and I don’t need them to. I’ve been really happy with the Stargate product, and I imagine I’ll continue to be happy with it. Can’t wait til Tuesday! :)
I hope I did not come across as a confrontational atheist in my previous posts. I am an atheist, but I was not trying to put down anyone’s beliefs.
For me, I come equipped with pre-placed doubt about any being claiming to be a god. So, I often assume that those involved with Homeworld Security and the gate program, would naturally fall into the agnostic and atheist camps based on the evidence presented in the missions of the SG teams.
However, based on what you say bsgfan2003, I now could see how the stripping of the godhead from the false idles could easily reaffirm one’s belief in a true god. This was a great insight and I do thank you. Well said.
I also cannot wait for Tuesday. This show is just fantastic and I am very pleased with everything that has happened.
I did not take it as confrontational at all, and thank you for your kind words :). When we both get our jobs at Stargate Command we can work well together!
I will look forward to that.