Star Trek Voyager: Sacred Ground

Faith & Science Conversation
,
1

IMHO this is essential viewing for anyone who tries to rationalise science into faith. Janeway is the ultimate scientific sceptic who must see a rational and scientific explanation for everything.
For once the writers do not offer an answer or judgement over whose view is correct. Janeway goes away convinced of her scientific answer and the believers’ faith is unshaken.
What is fascinating is to watch the interaction between the two schools of thought. Both are convinced of their own view and mock the opposing one, either openly or behind their backs
It comes across as if both can be both right and wrong, a concept that seems beyond the scope of many if not all on this forum.
There is no reason why God should limit Himself to the realities and restrictions of this Universe and yet many seem to think He either does by choice, or even by necessity. There is also an underlying belief that people of faith must accept all science and scientific findings even if it contradicts their faith.
In the program the people of faith accommodate Janeway even though she shows only begrudging respect for their faith and customs.
The end is typical television. All’s well that ends well, Kes is restored and all is right with the world The science could work so it is assumed by the scientists that it did and the people of faith that it didn’t

The discussion, if we choose to accept it, is about the dogmatisms involved either by the faithful or the scientists and whether one perspective must preclude the other or at least dominate the other

I have been criticised for setting my faith above all else and have been equally critical of those who set science above all else. It would seem that there aught to be (must be?) a middle ground?

Richard

2

I disagree a bit. The fact we all believe in god means we all allow space for faith that goes beyond science. What many do t agree with is using magic/supernatural deceitful methods that contradict clear science as arguments for gaps in natural science and histories.

2 Likes
3

deceitful?

How can it be deceitful if it happened?

Why must God comply with science?

How do you explain things that science cannot explain, especially in the medical world?

Why must God be excluded from His creation (as in the Universe)?

Richard

1 Like
4

Like what? What’s a specific example?

1 Like
5

I’ll share a few things that I consider.

First I’m 100% open to seemingly supernatural events happening that falls under miracles. But most of the time I think there is some confusion or hyperbolic layers added to it. When not, there seems to often be a legitimate naturalistic explanation to it.

So we sometimes read of a paralyzed man in this modern era learning to walk again. Normally it seems like there is no cases of someone who’s been paralyzed for years and then instantly being able to walk and run. Normally it seems more like a person who was brokered to not be able walk learns to walk over time. There are no cases of vets who lost legs have them growing back.

We see examples of men like Benny Hinn who seemingly magically heals people. I once saw him swirl his jacket above a crowd and hundreds fell down slain by the spirit. All instantly being healed of sickness, toothaches, demons and so on. I just don’t believe it.

Then there is real life stories that while true, seeens to have grown into a myth.

Such as Jean Hilliard (1980, Minnesota). A woman who passed out in -22°f temps for 6 hours but was revived. This is probably a true story. It’s also a “miracle” she survived. Some seems hyperbolic. Such as saying she was frozen solid as wood, needles broke when they tried to give her an IV.

Taylor Hale 2011, Iowa was declared brain dead and moved off of life support. Suddenly while family was praying she begin to breath on her own and recovered.
So could she have been supernaturally saved? Sure. It’s possible. But we hear of this near death unresponsive r recovering. We hear of many many more who don’t. Was it prayer or did she simply breath on her own after being taken off. Why her out of hundreds of thousands of people who die?

Now let’s also be very clear. None of these outlier events, supernatural or not, breaks science. None of it is related to things like men created from mud and so on.

6

I personally believe that science and faith merge into one truth, as did of all people, Isaac Newton. Yet his Principia led to the cause and effect ideology of most modern people that don’t understand quantum physics or theories of relativity, which I admit I barely do.
What seems like a contradiction is merely a lack of understanding.
I was once a big fan of Star Trek and still am to some extent. But it has a materialistic worldview, and in this episode I believe it is really suggesting that the spiritual view is unrealistic and the materialistic worldview is the truth.
No Jesus anywhere in this fake ideology.
I wonder what Isaac Newton would have come up with if the discovery of relative time and the effect of observation per quantum physics were know to him during his lifetime.

1 Like
7

I am sorry but any specific stories i tell would be beyond proof one way or the other. Second hand at best. However I have been a part of, and witnessed events that defy scientific explanation both medical and physical.

I am more than skeptical of “professional” or public healers who revel in their own glory .IME God does not work in the limelight or in situations whereby he might be identified outside the fellowship of faith. Having said that i do not dismiss the notion that there are “supernatural” forces at work both Good and evil that would be hard to scientifically explain.

Richard

1 Like
8

I had to google Taylor Hale, as was unaware of her story. Here is a link to what happened and how she did. Evidently, she did recover from a serious head injury to achieve a functional but evidently with a somewhat impaired state, but I have seen similar injuries with similar outcomes as well, just not as hyped. She evidently was able to complete high school, and in a sense, her recovery was a miracle, but I would not say it was supernatural from the news report given, but rather within the realm of possibilities.

2 Likes
9

As an aside, on a tangent, isn’t it sort of disturbing how when the news picks up these types of stories, it is almost always a cute skinny blonde? If you are overweight, plain, or poor, evidently these miracles never happen to you. Or if you are plain, poor, obese, or of color, you never go missing, or if you do, no one ever looks for you. (Sarcasm font on.)

3 Likes
10

Interesting post there Richard.

There is a middle ground…Creation Ministries/Answers in Genesis, and Seventh Day Adventism.

These offer the closest adherance to the bible narrative that there is.

We have lots of ever increasing scientific evidences through CMI/AIG and the SDA church is the only religious denomination that is demonstrably shown to follow the bible in its entirety exactly as its written. Individuals here on the forums regularly cite the latest advancements in science, seems that principle doesnt apply to religion…or does it (thinking about someone here who was involved in writing a new bible paraphrase!)

11

I have not seen much Star Trek. I liked Star Wars as a kid. I’ve always been more into horror and cosmic horror or sci horror was the closest I got to sci fi. But I’ve been slowly getting into non horror sci fi , though i hop back into horror quite often. Such as I’m currently reading “hit house” by Brian Aldiss.

But I may start with the original Star Trek and work through a few episodes a week. Though if he’s to long I’ll just start abd finish the 1200 episodes of dark shadows.

12

As much as I like Star Trek, I would agree that at times an episode will defeat the lesson it is purportedly teaching. That being said, I don’t agree with the characterization that God is “confined” by science. It is more that God appears to do things a certain way. The way he does things is what we call might call natural processes. At other times he does it a different way. I don’t think this means that he is going against natural law, simply that he might be manipulating the laws of physics in a way that we don’t understand and are unable to replicate for the same reason an advanced extraterrestrial civilization might be able to do things that we cannot replicate, a better understanding of physics. God created physics, so he would obviously know how to use it in ways that we would not. I have no problem with God being able to do things that don’t conform to our understanding of science, but that doesn’t change the evidence that most of the time God operates the universe in a way that we find comprehensible and can predict. In fact, that is what makes science possible and is probably a result of God’s grace.

2 Likes
13

Forgive me for sounding rude, but you do not accept science as scientists do. Instead you reinterpret science to fit your theology. That is not balanced it is biased to Scripture.

Richard

14

“A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is ‘merely relative,’ is asking you not to believe him. So don’t.”–Roger Scruton

If someone’s faith requires them to believe the Earth is flat, what would be the middle ground?

2 Likes
15

Except it doesn’t – insofar as it is YEC, it ignores the grammar and the context of the scripture whenever convenient.

Prezactly!

1 Like
16

Absolutely not, try again.

Richard

Edit.

Sarcasm and insult resisted, to both you and whoever liked your post.

17

Then you are running into the same problem that scientists are running into. We have mountains and mountains of evidence supporting a long list of scientific conclusions just as we do for a globe shaped Earth. So how should scientists find a middle ground with people who reject all of this evidence because they believe it is required by their religious beliefs?

18

No, you just do not understand what I mean by middle ground apparently.

Any flat earther or YEC is ignoring science, therefore is not middle ground.

And any scientist who ignores faith is also not middle ground.

Middle ground is to be able to combine faith and science, not separate it as many seem to here. It involves not taking either as precedent or infallible.

Richard

19

So how does one find the middle ground between YEC and science?

20

You don’t.

They are incompatible.

Richard