|
Post by JAFisher44 on Apr 8, 2021 11:37:51 GMT -7
We see this chapel used twice in this episode: For a wedding at the beginning (which gets interrupted) and where Kirk finds the bride to console her after her fiancée's death as she is asking why it happened. While the first could be argued as being possibly secular, the second (within the context) is beyond doubt to have the context of a spiritual situation. I agree that a wedding can be secular. However, I do not agree that the second encounter is beyond a doubt a spiritual situation. Grief is a natural human condition and it is entirely possible she has returned to the chapel because of it's emotional significance. After all, she was supposed to get married there that same day. All that said, I did rewatch the two scenes and in both the wedding at the beginning and the chapel scene at the end she kneels and bows her head reverently. Both of these can be seen as evidence that she may hold some religious views. It is still not beyond a doubt. For example there are people who are cultural Jews and cultural Catholics. People who do not believe but still live by the rituals because they are so deeply rooted in their family traditions. As has been pointed out, Star Trek is only a few hundred years in our future and there could be similar situations of cultural religionists who don't believe but still go through the motions. We see the chapel used again in "The Tholian Web" for a funeral. Funerals are not necessarily religious ceremonies. Secular people still mourn the deaths of loved ones. They still gather to remember those who have passed and console each other. In "Who Mourns for Adonis", Kirk states: "...mankind has no need for gods. We find the One quite adequate." So he (at least) believes. I agree that this quote does indicate that Kirk may have some belief in some form of monotheist religion. However it is an isolated statement with no context and was a dig at a being claiming to be a god so it's not telling us much. For all we know Kirk just thought it was a good jab in the moment and used it even though he doesn't believe in any gods. It could go either way. Without further evidence we just don't know. At Spock's funeral, Scotty plays "Amazing Grace" on his bagpipes. An odd choice for an atheist. Or just a song traditionally played at funerals. Traditions carry forward beyond the intent that originally sparked them. It's a beautiful song and it fits the mood of a funeral well. Then you have the Klingons....belief in an afterlife...a form of purgatory....not unlike the Vikings. The klingons are not the Federation and they obviously still have religious beliefs. I don't think anyone was arguing that they don't. The Vulcans have religious trappings (perhaps more in a sense of tradition) and some ceremonies, but they appear to be purely secular. The Romulans seem to have a belief in fate or destiny (to rule the stars), but may or may not have religious connotations. [/quote]
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2021 13:46:52 GMT -7
It seems as though Vulcans and Romulans had religion at one time and outgrew the belief but not the rituals. The quest for logic or dominion over the galaxy is not really a religion, but more of a philosophy. Klingons... are more complex. They claim to have killed their gods, but still have a Valhalla-like afterlife. But, a culture obsessed with honor and glory needs to have some kind of afterlife. You absolutely have to have a big carrot on a stick to get arguably sane people to crave battle as much as the Klingons.
The chapel seems to be a place of peace. Kind of a place reserved for big life moments and, if not worship, certainly meditation. I do think a few crew-members were religious, maybe not Bible thumpers (no one want to be on a five-year-mission with a bible thumper... even other bible thumpers).
Just my 2¢
|
|
|
Post by tinker on Apr 9, 2021 4:55:40 GMT -7
In "Who Mourns for Adonis", Kirk states: "...mankind has no need for gods. We find the One quite adequate." So he (at least) believes. I agree that this quote does indicate that Kirk may have some belief in some form of monotheist religion. However it is an isolated statement with no context and was a dig at a being claiming to be a god so it's not telling us much. For all we know Kirk just thought it was a good jab in the moment and used it even though he doesn't believe in any gods. It could go either way. Without further evidence we just don't know. The other scenarios can be explained away if you take them completely out of their contexts (as you have), but this one has a very clear context. Kirk was not being snide or sarcastic. It wasn't a "good jab" at all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2021 7:18:04 GMT -7
In ST:IV, Kirk does ask "What does God need with a Starship?"
Not "What does a god need with a Starship?" Not "God does not exist," or "There is no God." Not even "Crap. Are you Trellane's dad?" There seems to be a hint of a belief in "something" there. Granted, if he thought he was really talking to the GOD (as opposed to some of the other "gods" he's met), he would not have spoken up. But he knows that God is omniscient and omnipotent, so the idea that God would travel via Starship, or not know who James Kirk was seems to indicate that he has knowledge of the Christian God. Perhaps the way we know of the Roman/Greek/Norse gods.
OR... it could be that it was just a poorly written movie.
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Apr 9, 2021 21:28:47 GMT -7
The other scenarios can be explained away if you take them completely out of their contexts (as you have), but this one has a very clear context. Kirk was not being snide or sarcastic. It wasn't a "good jab" at all. You are correct. I watched that part of the episode again and the line is delivered in a way that seems sincere. It does not seem to be delivered as a jab. As for taking the other scenarios out of context, I disagree. There is not enough context to draw from. You are the one who is claiming that we can know exactly what these small bits of evidence point to. I am just saying that there are other possible, reasonable explanations. The fact of the matter is that there were a lot of production reasons that Star Trek's take on religion is somewhat inconsistent. Pressures from the suits, writers with different agendas, etc. However, whatever the real reasons were we are left with the show that was made and I am looking at that final product and trying to make an honest assessment of that final work. You see it one way and I think that has more to do with your baggage than the show. I'm saying there is room for more than one possible explanation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2021 5:02:07 GMT -7
The fact of the matter is that there were a lot of production reasons that Star Trek's take on religion is somewhat inconsistent. Pressures from the suits, writers with different agendas, etc. However, whatever the real reasons were we are left with the show that was made and I am looking at that final product and trying to make an honest assessment of that final work. You see it one way and I think that has more to do with your baggage than the show. I'm saying there is room for more than one possible explanation. This is a major factor in why "everything", "nothing", and "some things" are canonical in Star Trek. Makes it wonderfully chaotic. I suspect the number of religious blue-shirts is rather low, and the number of religions red-shirts to be a bit higher because 1) Red-shirts die a lot and would probably welcome the idea of a pleasant afterlife, and 2) I've never met a decent mechanic who does not invoke the name of the almighty when he has to get something working in a hurry.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2022 16:07:56 GMT -7
So... a few things going on here. 1. Replying to my own post - a win 2. Necro-posting - another win (can't believe this thread didn't get locked, burned, and scattered across the Atacama).
3. Getting to discuss Religion and Gods in Start Trek without anyone (hopefully) going all nut-house on the topic - WIN!
I though this was an interesting vid.
There are quite a few races that would be seen by people of the 1960's - 1990's as Gods. We're all enlightened and what not in the 21st century so we know they are just very advances aliens (with powers that often defy physics - just ignore that part, we don't understand physics on their level yet... but keep believing the science)
I think in every instance, however, the Gods are revealed to be exactly that... super advanced aliens beings. They certainly blurr the line, especially the Prophets. So the question is where do you draw the line between GOD and Not-God.
I guess that depends upon the observer. I'm gonna see an advanced alien, but certainly one worth as much worship as a popular politician, darn good TV show, or a particularly stunning woman (the Church of Sophia?). Does this make the characters of Firefly a pantheon of gods and demi-gods? I have met seemingly rational people who think so (at anime conventions).
To quote my neighbor, "Whuch y'all think?"
|
|