How come SciFi always recycles the 'false gods' premise?

[Navaros]

How come SciFi always recycles the 'false gods' premise yet never has the balls to use a 'real God'?

I'm getting really sick of just about every SciFi show in existence, and often movies too, recycling the premise of 'false gods'. Star Trek: TOS has episodes that deal with this. Star Trek V was pretty much nothing other than this.

Babylon 5, DS9, the Stargate shows, nuBSG etc. etc. all seem to have recycled the 'false gods' idea ad nauseaum. Enough is enough already.

I for one am fed up with SciFi makers always pretending it's 'bold, original and daring' to recycle this stale old cliched 'false gods' idea, yet will never really be bold, original and daring enough to depict a real God or gods, which would actually take balls to do.

Is anyone else sick of this 'false god' premise being way overly rehashed in all manner of SciFi?

Why do you think this premise gets beaten to death so much?

Why do you think no SciFi (at least that I'm aware of, correct me if I'm wrong) has the balls to present a real God or gods who are exactly what they say they are and that's that? DS9 sort of came close to doing this with it's portrayal of the Prophets, but even so they stopped short since they are ultimately just mortal wormhole aliens, not real gods.

 

[Extrocomp]

Whether a god is real or false depends on how you define the word. The ancient Greeks' idea of a god was very different than the modern Christian concept.

In Star Trek, the recurring idea is that false gods want to be worshipped but their powers are limited and they can be defeated with sufficiently advanced technology (e.g. Apollo). Star Trek has shown plenty of beings with apparently unlimited powers of creation, destruction and change, that could be considered real gods, but these beings are not interested in answering prayers and accepting sacrifices. The Q, Douwd, Gary Mitchell, Thasians, Organians and Nagilum fit into this category. I wouldn't want to worship them. They're more trouble than their worth.

 

[Steve Roby]

How come SciFi always recycles the 'false gods' premise yet never has the balls to use a 'real God'?

Why would it take balls to use a "real God"? And how would you define a real God?

Plenty of fantasy uses "real" gods, gods with real supernatural power who exist on a plane beyond the mortal, because that sort of thing fits in fantasy. It works with fantasy's rules. It's harder to do in science fiction because science fiction is at least nominally about a universe in which scientific principles apply, and there's not a lot of room for a God, because a God (especially in the Christian sense) is beyond the realm of science.

Then there's the question of depicting a God from the real world as a character. If, for example, you depict a God who's supposed to be the Christian God, you're bound to do something with the character that will have half the audience react negatively if you don't match their notion of what the Christian God is like.

A story in which one character knows everything that's going on, can bring the dead back to life, can create the entire universe... well, how do you effectively use an all-knowing, all-powerful God in a story? The characters can't be in conflict with such a God; they certainly can't win against that God. Is God just supposed to show up occasionally and save the day for them? Any of the godlike aliens already on TV could do that, but they generally don't, because it doesn't make for good TV drama.

What exactly do you want to see? How would it work?

 

[Trent Roman]

Simple: sci-fi only depicts false gods because there are no real gods to depict.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[Navaros]

Why would it take balls to use a "real God"? And how would you define a real God?

What exactly do you want to see? How would it work?

I'm not entirely sure why it would take balls to use a "real God", but it seems it would since SciFi doesn't ever dare to do it yet is considered "bold" for depicting false gods over and over again.

I do not know if it is because the very idea of a real God is offensive to most SciFi viewers or what. I was hoping the other members here could shed light on why the idea of using a real God would be so ballsy of a move that it never actually gets done.

How would I define a real God: an omniscient being that is immortal, cannot be defeated, has a will, and won't hesitate to impose it's will upon lesser forms of life for whatever reason it chooses. In imposing it's will (ie: sending plagues, pestilences, natural disasters, catastrophes etc.) it would often be considered offensive behaviour by some members of the lower forms of life. Whilst praised by pious members of the same lower forms of life. It would not be written by the show/film makers to be portrayed by them as 'an evil false god' just because it does some things that some members of lower forms of life consider to be offensive. It would want followers to obey it's will and worship it.

 

[T'Pers0n]

That seems like a nebulous idea to write an entertaining story around. I thought this was going to be "why isn't Jesus a G'ould". But, I'm getting the impression that would fit under your "false god" premise. How would you write a story about an uncompomising, unrelatable, and unbeatable force of nature like that. It's not much of a character.

 

[Navaros]

I think it would make for for very interesting stories to have a SciFi production show how those who do not wish to serve the real God of that Universe much pay the price it chooses to exact on them and there is nothing they can do about that.

Certainly would make for a lot more refreshing & interesting stories IMO then yet another rehash in the endless rehash parade of 'evil false gods that the heroes of the show will expose to their worshippers & everyone else as evil false gods, and then defeat'. Could anything be more uninteresting than seeing that done again for the 100 billionth time?

 

[The Nth Doctor]

But how would tell such a story with a real God? How can their be any conflict when a real God can't be defeated or overcome on any level, whether it's on a physical or intellectual level?

 

[SeerSGB]

I Don't know, I thought Babylon 5's take was less "False God" and more "outgrowing the old gods" and eventually becoming God ourselves.

As for why Sci-fi keeps rehashing the old premise is simple: How do you defeat/kill god? Seriously, he's the ultimate uber character.

 

[Navaros]

But how would tell such a story with a real God? How can their be any conflict when a real God can't be defeated or overcome on any level, whether it's on a physical or intellectual level?

The conflict would be between the lower forms of life, not the lower forms of life trying to defeat God (maybe they could try for an episode or two just to establish how futile it is, and that's it). God would just intervene in their affairs from time to time, perhaps giving favorable blessings to those who serve it, and smiting or afflicting with bad things those who do not.

Although it does seem that any 'God' depiction in SciFi thus far has been "lower forms of life versus God". But why does have to be the case? Why can't God just exist and impose it's will in the Universe of a SciFi production without all the lower forms of life having to try to defeat it?

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

a "real God" is more of a fantasy concept than a science-fiction one. For instance, fantasies like, Clash of the Titans, or even Lord of the Rings (i'm sure there's some lore about so-and-so of the magical gray-haven-dwelling eradularumanastor God or something)

 

[Navaros]

a "real God" is more of a fantasy concept than a science-fiction one. For instance, fantasies like, Clash of the Titans, or even Lord of the Rings (i'm sure there's some lore about so-and-so of the magical gray-haven-dwelling eradularumanastor God or something)

How come SciFi makers are obsessed with endlessly rehashing the 'false gods' idea then? Shouldn't that be every bit as ill-suited to SciFi?

 

[Silvercrest]

But how would tell such a story with a real God? How can their be any conflict when a real God can't be defeated or overcome on any level, whether it's on a physical or intellectual level?

Although it does seem that any 'God' depiction in SciFi thus far has been "lower forms of life versus God". But why does have to be the case? Why can't God just exist and impose it's will in the Universe of a SciFi production without all the lower forms of life having to try to defeat it?

No reason. But this will require some definition of what constitutes righteousness, what constitutes sinfulness, etc. Basically, you have to make up some kind of religious canon. And then, if you declare that this is THE God who rules the universe, you're likely to offend just about anyone who doesn't see God that way. As in all Christians, all Muslims, all Jews, etc. Who's the intended audience, anyway?

And since there's no science anywhere in sight, why does this constitute science fiction?

The conflict would be between the lower forms of life, not the lower forms of life trying to defeat God (maybe they could try for an episode or two just to establish how futile it is, and that's it). God would just intervene in their affairs from time to time, perhaps giving favorable blessings to those who serve it, and smiting or afflicting with bad things those who do not.

Ah, a religious war. That will go over real big.

 

[3D Master]

Why would it take balls to use a "real God"? And how would you define a real God?

What exactly do you want to see? How would it work?

I'm not entirely sure why it would take balls to use a "real God", but it seems it would since SciFi doesn't ever dare to do it yet is considered "bold" for depicting false gods over and over again.

I do not know if it is because the very idea of a real God is offensive to most SciFi viewers or what. I was hoping the other members here could shed light on why the idea of using a real God would be so ballsy of a move that it never actually gets done.

There's nothing ballsy about using a real god. Your idea of a "real god" would make its use not ballsy, but disgusting. And yes, your idea of a "real god" is indeed offensive. It's a being of absolute, pure evil that must be fought and destroyed.

How would I define a real God: an omniscient being that is immortal, cannot be defeated, has a will, and won't hesitate to impose it's will upon lesser forms of life for whatever reason it chooses. In imposing it's will (ie: sending plagues, pestilences, natural disasters, catastrophes etc.) it would often be considered offensive behaviour by some members of the lower forms of life. Whilst praised by pious members of the same lower forms of life. It would not be written by the show/film makers to be portrayed by them as 'an evil false god' just because it does some things that some members of lower forms of life consider to be offensive. It would want followers to obey it's will and worship it.

And is thus evil and must be destroyed. Also, such a being does not exist. Every being can be defeated, if you look hard and long enough. Any god that needs worshippers for it's own insecurities, is A. not omniscient, B. not immortal, C. evil and D. can, must, and will be destroyed.


There is no such thing as a real god. Unless you qualify beings like Q like a real god, and there are plenty of them around in SF. They just aren't called gods, often not even by themselves, rightly so. Any being claiming to be a god and demands worship is a sick twisted evil thing to begin with, and needs to be destroyed.

And false gods are a good premise, will hopefully get people to think, and toss their superstitions out the window.

I think it would make for for very interesting stories to have a SciFi production show how those who do not wish to serve the real God of that Universe much pay the price it chooses to exact on them and there is nothing they can do about that.

No, that wouldn't be interesting, that would be disgusting.

Certainly would make for a lot more refreshing & interesting stories IMO then yet another rehash in the endless rehash parade of 'evil false gods that the heroes of the show will expose to their worshippers & everyone else as evil false gods, and then defeat'. Could anything be more uninteresting than seeing that done again for the 100 billionth time?

There's nothing refreshing about disgusting.

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

a "real God" is more of a fantasy concept than a science-fiction one. For instance, fantasies like, Clash of the Titans, or even Lord of the Rings (i'm sure there's some lore about so-and-so of the magical gray-haven-dwelling eradularumanastor God or something)

How come SciFi makers are obsessed with endlessly rehashing the 'false gods' idea then? Shouldn't that be every bit as ill-suited to SciFi?

Because the "false Gods" have a sci-fi explanation? Aliens with powers? Humans mutated into energy wisps?

These "false Gods" are just Gods run through a sci-fi blender. Given a sci-fi origin (another planet! evolution! alternate dimension!)

 

[FALCONX0N]

"If you do things right, people wont be sure if you did anything at all..."

 

[Navaros]

And since there's no science anywhere in sight, why does this constitute science fiction?

Given that almost nothing that is already in SciFi shows is scientific anyways, I do not think the lack of scientificness can be a valid argument against putting a real God into a SciFi production.

 

[Trent Roman]

^ The point is not whether the science is accurate, but whether there is an in-universe explanation for the phenomena based in science and reason (as opposed to intrinsic power like magic, which is fantasy). The deity you describe is magical, thus fantasy. And if the deity had a scientific explanation like technology or advanced evolution, you could call it another 'false god'. So there's really no uniting deities and sci-fi.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[Silvercrest]

And since there's no science anywhere in sight, why does this constitute science fiction?

Given that almost nothing that is already in SciFi shows is scientific anyways, I do not think the lack of scientificness can be a valid argument against putting a real God into a SciFi production.

Okay. But you haven't stated anything that puts it in the category of science fiction in the first place. It already falls under "fantasy" and "religious fiction", among other things.

And it's starting to sound like you only mean TV. Earlier you said all manner of SciFi. There's a significant difference between what's allowed on TV and what is allowed in other media. If you only mean TV, then you're limited to what the networks, sponsors and producers are willing to show. The answer to why they are not willing to push the limit should be obvious. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

 

[davejames]

Hmm, it basically sounds like the OP is just offended that not enough scifi characters believe in God or practice religion. And that the only gods that seem to exist in these worlds are "false gods."

Something tells me considerations of plot and story have little to do with it...