Sisko's mother:

[Hando]

I would like to point out that the majority of gods are mortal. However strange that may sound.
...

"Strange" is not the right word. "False" is. In most mythologies gods are described as immortal. When Cronus eats his children, they stay alive inside of him for centuries until Zeus frees them. You have some reading up to do.

Please do not start this.

It depends on how you define death. Remember that gods are a lot sturdier then humans. And it becomes even more problematic when you have a working afterlife.

To debunk your example, the young Olympians were swallowed whole and as Prometheus showed they would not have needed anything to survive, how could they have died.
I am saying that gods can die trough a unnatural death, they are exempt from sickness and aging by default (depends on the pantheon, some have one but not the other).

And there are indication that Greek gods can be killed:
Pan - dead
Menoetius - killed and banished to Tartarus
Dionysus - ripped to pieces and eaten, but reborn from his heart, does this constitute a death or not? But he may not count as he started as a demigod.
Titans who ate Dionysus - burned to ashes by Zeus' thunderbolts

The general understanding for the death of Greek gods is, that when they die, they go to Tartarus, and can come back later.



But back to the Prophets, we learn that chroniton radiation is uncomfortable, even lethal to them. But how can we be sure, is it not possible that it just "incapacitates" them for a few million years?



On the issue of Sarah, a little timetable can be +/- but just so we can a sense of what happened:

June 2331: Joseph and Sarah meet in New Orleans
August 2331: Joseph and Sarah marry
August 2332: Ben born
August 2333: Sarah disappears
July 2336: Sarah, working as a holo-photographer in Australia, dies in a hovercraft accident
August 2336:Josephs tracks Sarah down


This is all we know about Sarah, I would therefore like to ask some questions to stir up the discussion:

Are the additional information on Sarah's work, living place and the style of her death important? Why did Joseph tell them?
Her working as a holo-photographer, does it mean that she was not an artist? That she did not own a holo-camera? Or that she was not artistic?
Why Australia? Was he trying to escape to a different country, continent, ...?
A hovercraft accident, does it mean, it was a cover-up or a suicide?
Why did it take 3 years to find her? In the 24th century people are found within a day (Neutral Zone comes to mind). Did she change her name, one way or the other? What about her parents, she was still young where are they or what happened to them? Why was Joseph not notified when she died, or was this how he found her? Are we sure it was her, who died and not some look-alike?
Why leave at such "exact" date? She could have left sooner.
Who was in charge vs understanding of emotions. Who ever Sarah was she had to fake good enough to make Joseph fall in love with her.

 

[kirkfan]

I would like to point out that the majority of gods are mortal. However strange that may sound.
...

"Strange" is not the right word. "False" is. In most mythologies gods are described as immortal. When Cronus eats his children, they stay alive inside of him for centuries until Zeus frees them. You have some reading up to do.

I seem to remember that the Norse gods are mortal, right? They need to eat those apples to sustain themselves until Ragnarok? Doesn't make them any less like gods.

I didn't say all gods were immortal but most of them definitely are. Even in Norse mythology the mortality is more theoretical than "real", they always seem to get those apples on time. And if not for that crazy Valkyrie Brunhilde setting it on fire so would the Valhalla, stay forever....

There's a difference between needing something like apples or ambrosia once in a while and being vulnerable to a beam of particle any space station of the 24th century can produce, though. The latter makes you very weak. It's a wonder that they have lasted so long without a member of the pah wraith cult flying up to them a giving them a quick coup de grace before anyone from DS9 could even notice.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Emissary:

Prophet:What comes before now is no different than what is now, or what is to come. It is one's existence.

Prophet Motive:


Accession:

Akorem: So that I would be spared the occupation so that I could bring the D'jarras back to Bajor.
Sisko: Is that true? Is that what you want?
Prophet 1: The D'jarras are part of what the Sisko would call the past.
Prophet 2: The Sisko taught us that for you, what was, can never be again.

Here are the sections of dialogue in which the Prophets show their lack of knowledge of linear time, even their disdain for the concept, and credit meeting Sisko for what they know about it. There are many other passages, which I have not included, in which the prophets question Sisko or Quark about linear time, drawing out differences between the Prophets and corporeal beings. These are the basis for discussion their temporal nature.

The problem is that the prophets communicate using human language, and human language requires an understanding of linear time. It's like saying: "Hey, that guy is mute, he just told me so."

Is this some sort of extreme Neo-Whorfianism? Different cultures have been documented to have different perceptions of space and time. Those differences are reflected in linguistic use. And we have communicated with them. You can see plenty of examples in terms of Native American and Polynesian societies.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

There's a line in 'Til Death Do Us Part -"You shared my mother's existence, you must have some idea what love is". Seems to me Sarah loved Joseph in some way.

To be fair, it's possible Sisko is trying to rationalise and justify what happened. I know I'd want to believe the best case scenario if I found out something like that.

(Although there's probably no way to know either way.)

Really, there is a lot of ambiguity about how the Prophets intervene and what threat their perceived. It may have been that they sensed Sarah might use contraception that day. It would still mean that they coerced conception.

Did sharing Sarah's existence mean that the Prophets knew something from her emotions? Again, ambiguous. From The Assignment, we know that the Pah Wraiths--same species--do more that just control the movements of the individual. They go even beyond accessing the individual's thoughts and emotions. They play through that person's emotions seamlessly, acting in the exact same manner. Perhaps Sisko was saying that they should have known about love (1) because of Sarah herself or (2) because Sarah was naturally in love herself or (3) by living corporeally through Sarah.

all that stereotypical "angels and demons" Judeo-Christian tropes with the Pah-Wraiths and immaculate conception and epic battles between good and evil and all that nonsense.

There is nothing "Judeo-" about those things.

 

[kirkfan]

Emissary:



Prophet Motive:


Accession:

Here are the sections of dialogue in which the Prophets show their lack of knowledge of linear time, even their disdain for the concept, and credit meeting Sisko for what they know about it. There are many other passages, which I have not included, in which the prophets question Sisko or Quark about linear time, drawing out differences between the Prophets and corporeal beings. These are the basis for discussion their temporal nature.

The problem is that the prophets communicate using human language, and human language requires an understanding of linear time. It's like saying: "Hey, that guy is mute, he just told me so."

Is this some sort of extreme Neo-Whorfianism? Different cultures have been documented to have different perceptions of space and time. Those differences are reflected in linguistic use. And we have communicated with them. You can see plenty of examples in terms of Native American and Polynesian societies.

We're talking about alien beings here, not different HUMAN cultures. All humans have the same physiological characteristics and have in common more than 99.9 percent of their DNA. I don't think we're speaking of the same thing.

No human being who's not a lunatic would ever say: "I am looking forward to yesterday and I remember what I saw tomorrow very clearly." Apparently, a wormhole alien would.

 

[Darren Mooney]

"Strange" is not the right word. "False" is. In most mythologies gods are described as immortal. When Cronus eats his children, they stay alive inside of him for centuries until Zeus frees them. You have some reading up to do.

I seem to remember that the Norse gods are mortal, right? They need to eat those apples to sustain themselves until Ragnarok? Doesn't make them any less like gods.

I didn't say all gods were immortal but most of them definitely are. Even in Norse mythology the mortality is more theoretical than "real", they always seem to get those apples on time. And if not for that crazy Valkyrie Brunhilde setting it on fire so would the Valhalla, stay forever....

There's a difference between needing something like apples or ambrosia once in a while and being vulnerable to a beam of particle any space station of the 24th century can produce, though. The latter makes you very weak. It's a wonder that they have lasted so long without a member of the pah wraith cult flying up to them a giving them a quick coup de grace before anyone from DS9 could even notice.

Fair point, and I didn't argue that all or even most gods are mortal. I am simply observing that being mortal and being divine are not mutually exclusive concepts. Even in human theology, let alone that of a fictional planet like Bajor.

I don't think making the Prophets "killable" diminished them. I think sculpting them into the tried and tested pattern of western theology's definition of "gods" - with angels and demons and good and evil diminished them.

But each's own.

 

[kirkfan]

I seem to remember that the Norse gods are mortal, right? They need to eat those apples to sustain themselves until Ragnarok? Doesn't make them any less like gods.

I didn't say all gods were immortal but most of them definitely are. Even in Norse mythology the mortality is more theoretical than "real", they always seem to get those apples on time. And if not for that crazy Valkyrie Brunhilde setting it on fire so would the Valhalla, stay forever....

There's a difference between needing something like apples or ambrosia once in a while and being vulnerable to a beam of particle any space station of the 24th century can produce, though. The latter makes you very weak. It's a wonder that they have lasted so long without a member of the pah wraith cult flying up to them a giving them a quick coup de grace before anyone from DS9 could even notice.

Fair point, and I didn't argue that all or even most gods are mortal. I am simply observing that being mortal and being divine are not mutually exclusive concepts. Even in human theology, let alone that of a fictional planet like Bajor.

I don't think making the Prophets "killable" diminished them. I think sculpting them into the tried and tested pattern of western theology's definition of "gods" - with angels and demons and good and evil diminished them.

But each's own.

All I am saying is that we've established that they die. If we could prove that they also are born and sometimes reproduce. That would make them beings with advance scientific knowledge, not gods. Besides, note that they all say that the wormhole has been ARTIFICIALLY created and is maintained also artificially. If it were the creation of a god, wouldn't that make it natural? So far we only apply the term "artificial" to things we do, and though in the 24th century that term could be widened to any being in the quadrant of a mortal nature, I don't believe it will ever apply to something done by gods.

 

[Hando]

^Please do not confuse God and god.

 

[kirkfan]

^Please do not confuse God and god.

Please do not try to impose your arbitrary rules on me.

 

[Hando]

They are not arbitrary rules. And they are not mine. I just follow the dictionary definitions.

I would like to point out than even acts of God (literal) are artificial. Be it the Flood or any miracles...

As it stands a stable wormhole is not natural, so by extension a stable wormhole is artificial.


But as you wish. I had no intention to hurt your sensibilities or enter a theological debate.
As such I shall keep a hands-off approach to this thread until we return to the topic of Sarah Sisko.

 

[Nightdiamond]

I always saw the Prophets as somewhat powerful aliens that could pass as minor gods, until some weaknesses started showing.

They seem hardly aware of humanoids, and generally ignore them. I got the impression that the Bajorans totally misinterpreted them.

The chroniton thing, and their ignorance of corporeal existence and behavior. They seem more like angels than actual gods.

The thing that sets them apart is their ability to manipulate time at will. Even some of the most powerful aliens couldn't tamper with time.

And inside the wormhole, they probably have no limits.

They could easily replicate miracles from the bible, except for the creation of life and universe.


I tend to think there 3 possibilities on what happened with Sarah Sisko;

Sarah was blanked out when she married and had Sisko. No consent.

Sarah was aware, but completely immobilized when she married and had Sisko. No consent

She was aware and willing when she married and had Sisko.


But the problem is, she left Joseph (probably as soon as the prophet left her body) and abandoned her son as a baby.

That suggests she totally freaked out after she became aware of what had happened, left Joseph and possibly committed suicide later from being so confused.

I never considered the suicide theory before. That is damn creepy when you think about it.

 

[kirkfan]

They are not arbitrary rules. And they are not mine. I just follow the dictionary definitions.

I would like to point out than even acts of God (literal) are artificial. Be it the Flood or any miracles...

As it stands a stable wormhole is not natural, so by extension a stable wormhole is artificial.


But as you wish. I had no intention to hurt your sensibilities or enter a theological debate.
As such I shall keep a hands-off approach to this thread until we return to the topic of Sarah Sisko.

I was just pointing out that we each have different views on the subject and from an objective point of view or at least one that strives to be, there not one that's really better than the others. They're all equally un-provable.

I have never heard of anything real called artificial by (IMO) respectable sources, that wasn't man made. If beavers make a dam for example that dam will be called natural. Same thing if monkeys make a bridge (which they sometime do).

 

[Hando]

I always saw the Prophets as somewhat powerful aliens that could pass as minor gods, until some weaknesses started showing.

They seem hardly aware of humanoids, and generally ignore them. I got the impression that the Bajorans totally misinterpreted them.

The chroniton thing, and their ignorance of corporeal existence and behavior. They seem more like angels than actual gods.

The thing that sets them apart is their ability to manipulate time at will. Even some of the most powerful aliens couldn't tamper with time.

And inside the wormhole, they probably have no limits.

They could easily replicate miracles from the bible, except for the creation of life and universe.


I tend to think there 3 possibilities on what happened with Sarah Sisko;

Sarah was blanked out when she married and had Sisko. No consent.

Sarah was aware, but completely immobilized when she married and had Sisko. No consent

She was aware and willing when she married and had Sisko.


But the problem is, she left Joseph (probably as soon as the prophet left her body) and abandoned her son as a baby.

That suggests she totally freaked out after she became aware of what had happened, left Joseph and possibly committed suicide later from being so confused.

I never considered the suicide theory before. That is damn creepy when you think about it.

This is only valid if the Prophet's leaving was responsible for her leaving.

I apologize, I do not want to put anybody down, I don consider it that probable, but what if she had an mental illness?
Basically why did she leave Ben? Is it not more likely that she would have taken him with her?

Also perhaps she was disturbed by the entity - who was living inside her -'s disturbing interest in her son. So she feared this entity would posses him, so she left to protect him.

Or - alright here I am influenced by TV too much - she had a stalker who threatened her family.


I put the suicide idea only because of the hovercraft incident. (Have just recently reread the Honorverse novels) But given how few cars/hovercrafts we have seen in Star Trek, it seem highly suspicious to me.

 

[kirkfan]

It looks to me like she was traumatized by being forced to do things against her will for so long a time. I believe that kind of stuff would make anybody crazy. You'd have to be a robot not to be devastatingly affected by that.