Were the Bajorans seriously dumb?

[Admiral2]

If Jesus turned out to be an energy based alien along the lines of the Q who was just here for some amusement, there would still be people praising his name.

Because Jesus fed people, healed people, loved people and raised people from the , all things which Q might have done but never did, because Q was a douchebag.

And to put my response in context, If I found out Jesus was a benevolent Q I still wouldn't feel stupid for believing in him, because it would mean he existed. How his existence is defined by non-believers is not my problem.

 

[starburst]

If Jesus turned out to be an energy based alien along the lines of the Q who was just here for some amusement, there would still be people praising his name.

Because Jesus fed people, healed people, loved people and raised people from the , all things which Q might have done but never did, because Q was a douchebag.

I still think this is partly why the Stargate writers gave the Ancients powers like healing

And to put my response in context, If I found out Jesus was a benevolent Q I still wouldn't feel stupid for believing in him, because it would mean he existed. How his existence is defined by non-believers is not my problem.

Although then you would have to accept a change in his backstory, as if he were a Q he isnt necessarily the son of god...unless you say the Q are God(s)

 

[Admiral2]

If Jesus turned out to be an energy based alien along the lines of the Q who was just here for some amusement, there would still be people praising his name.

Because Jesus fed people, healed people, loved people and raised people from the , all things which Q might have done but never did, because Q was a douchebag.

I still think this is partly why the Stargate writers gave the Ancients powers like healing

And to put my response in context, If I found out Jesus was a benevolent Q I still wouldn't feel stupid for believing in him, because it would mean he existed. How his existence is defined by non-believers is not my problem.

Although then you would have to accept a change in his backstory, as if he were a Q he isnt necessarily the son of god...unless you say the Q are God(s)

Not necessarily. We are all the sons and daughters of God. Jesus was just the first to state it plainly. We revere him as the son of God because he could do things none of us can't, but even if he were one of the continuum, that just means he was the son God loved and trusted enough to be his instrument on earth, while the rest of the Q - the sons and daughters God had no use for - got exiled to their own space.

 

[Michael]

We are all the sons and daughters of God.

No, God is not my father.

 

[Timo]

Which they did not do, because Kira and other Bajorans also use the term "God," as a singular, as opposed to "gods," when speaking of the Prophets—from which one can reasonably infer that they accept the Prophets as their local stewards, but acknowledge a Higher Being that created them, as well.

Doesn't sound at all "reasonable". Why invent a separate deity when your main argument is that the Prophets are already Gods? Surely one can pick a preferred Prophet (like you say, certain individual ones are known by specific names) and consider that "My God!", or then equate the manifestation (real or figurative) of Prophet influence with a single Prophet/God rather than the whole lot of them.

It may in theory be that Bajoran faith has "secret" elements, like a separate God virtually never spoken of out loud but still referred to in utterances like Mora Pol's. After all, they have these secret sects for Pagh Wraiths and all. But if you like Occam's jaw smooth as an android's bottom, those secret elements should not exist.

Personally, I don't consider Occam's razor to be a valid tool in treating Trek drama. It's not a mass of evidence to be weeded for the likeliest explanation. As written, it's a half-baked thing missing half the vital ingredients, and typically desperately needs at least some more salt to be edible. However, as regards Bajoran faith, we already have so many pieces in place that it would make sense to take it mostly as given. It's just that I always like to point out the alternate possibilities... Of which the separate Creator God certainly is one. Just not "reasonable", but merely entertaining.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Admiral2]

We are all the sons and daughters of God.

No, God is not my father.

Okay. All of us except NCC-1701, who was obviously an accident of evolution.

 

[Michael]

We are all the sons and daughters of God.

No, God is not my father.

Okay. All of us except NCC-1701, who was obviously an accident of evolution.

I thought you folks don't believe in the concept of evolution.

 

[SoM]

At least one former Prophet has a proper name: Kosst Amojin. Of course, this might simply translate to "Evil One," but the point is clear.

Having watched the end of S6/start of S7 the other day, it's clear that "Kosst Amojin" is simply an alternate term for "Pah-Wraith", one preferred by the Prophets themselves. Why?

TWO separate Pah-Wraiths (the one fought by the Prophet in Kira's body in The Reckoning, and the one released by Dukat from the statue on Cardassia-Prime, and sent into the wormhole to bung it up in Tears of the Prophets and expelled/dissipated in Shadows and Symbols) are referred to as "the Kosst Amojin" - by the Kira-Prophet in TR, and by the Sarah-Prophet in S&S.

There's other stuff (e.g., the fact that the Pah-Wraith 'bible' is the book of the Kosst Amojin), but that's the clincher for me.

 

[JM1776]

Two separate Pah-Wraiths (the one fought by the Prophet in Kira's body in The Reckoning, and the one released by Dukat from the statue on Cardassia-Prime, and sent into the wormhole to bung it up in Tears of the Prophets and expelled/dissipated in Shadows and Symbols) are referred to as "the Kosst Amojin" - by the Kira-Prophet in TR, and by the Sarah-Prophet in S&S.

You're assuming facts not in evidence and drawing a conclusion therefrom.

There's insufficient proof to conclude that the Kosst Amojin in "The Reckoning" and the one we see in "Tears of the Prophets"/"Shadows and Symbols" aren't one and the same ... and some (also inconclusive) evidence to indicate he may well be. Recall that the combat in the former was inconclusive, allowing Kosst Amojin to flee and hide himself—perhaps in an artifact of malign power, one that would facilitate rejuvenation until his strength had been fully restored? [I'm speaking, of course, of the ungainly little statue Dukat later breaks open. No doubt the Pah Wraiths would avail themselves of the advantages to an existence not defined exclusively by linear time and attempt countering the Prophets so doing.] In addition, we have no certainty the being emerging from said statue (who for the sake of argument we'll assume for the moment is that selfsame Kosst Amojin we saw in "The Reckoning") actually dies when expelled from the Celestial Temple in "Shadows and Symbols." Considering that, as a god (assuming he is a god), he might well be immortal, he may simply reconstitute himself, bide his time, re-enter Dukat's body (this time with the aid of the Book—which would, like the statue, also serve to augment his depleted might) ... and only after it this last alternative source of energy is destroyed find himself trapped forever with Dukat and his fellow Pah Wraiths.

It's quite possible that Kosst Amojin was the cleverest and/or most powerful of the Pah Wraiths—the one who somehow avoided imprisonment in the Fire Caves and remained a wild card/thorn in the Prophets' side until definitively defeated by Sisko and Winn in "What You Leave Behind." Hell, under his leadership, perhaps the Pah Wraiths could have set creation on fire. He was, after all, the only Pah Wraith imprisoned alongside a Prophet; certainly such means he's afforded a special enmity and respect by his adversaries.

 

[JM1776]

Doesn't sound at all "reasonable". Why invent a separate deity when your main argument is that the Prophets are already Gods?

Because my argument is that the Prophets are gods, not God—a critical distinction I may not have made clear. Many societies look to specific deities for guidance and aid, but acknowledge beings more powerful. Athena is the matron of Athens ... but bows to the power of Zeus. Later Norse writers Christianized their mythology, giving homage to the Aesir but accepting the concept of Gimle and an All-Father far more powerful than Odin, their local jarl, as it were.

I'm not inventing a thing, Timo. If the Prophets are gods, and the Pah Wraiths were expelled from the Celestial Temple, the inference is that they are former members of the pantheon fallen from grace ... or simply on the shitty end of an ideological war.

It may in theory be that Bajoran faith has "secret" elements, like a separate God virtually never spoken of out loud but still referred to in utterances like Mora Pol's. After all, they have these secret sects for Pagh Wraiths and all. But if you like Occam's jaw smooth as an android's bottom, those secret elements should not exist.

Smooth is not necessary—just less jagged than your take.

The occasional utterance is more than enough to establish such a being's existence in the minds and hearts of the Bajoran people. It fits seamlessly in with the examples given above.

Boy, you like your religion quite simplistic, don't you?

Personally, I don't consider Occam's razor to be a valid tool in treating Trek drama. It's not a mass of evidence to be weeded for the likeliest explanation. As written, it's a half-baked thing missing half the vital ingredients, and typically desperately needs at least some more salt to be edible.

It's valid as far as it goes ... but I'll definitely grant that it isn't far enough. We're merely speculating with what we've been given.

However, as regards Bajoran faith, we already have so many pieces in place that it would make sense to take it mostly as given.

And weeks later, he comes clean.

It's just that I always like to point out the alternate possibilities...

Dude ... you're like Timo the Tellarite: You love to argue. But, then again, here I am enabling you.

Just not "reasonable", but merely entertaining.

My explanation is the only one thus far that fits all the facts, as opposed to stressing some and ignoring others.

That makes it eminently reasonable, and entertaining as well—both the show and the explanation.

I agree, though, that reasonable is not conclusive.