Were the Bajorans seriously dumb?

[Timo]

Indeed. And, for that matter:

Faith in the possible - in success, in persons, in the end of the occupation, in the restoration of Bajor - this is entirely reasonable. But faith in the impossible, in the face of evidence that proves you wrong?

Amusingly enough, faith in "success", "persons", "end of occupation" and "restoration of Bajor" was what was proven false in the show: all the Bajoran efforts at unity or independence or agriculture or colonization that were described were shown to be failures, all the persons the people trusted proved to be traitorous assholes, the occupation apparently did not end but only went on a hiatus, and the pre-occupation Bajor never was restored.

In contrast, every bit of faith in the Prophets was proven justified: they did accurately foretell the future, they did perform concrete if supernatural acts in effective protection of Bajor, and they did provide indirect aid and advice through an accredited Emissary whose role was accurately described in the Prophecies. And every aspect of the religious tradition proved to have a practical foundation in keeping in touch with the Prophets: they did live in the Celestial Temple, and their supernatural means of communication, the Orbs, were fully functional and did what was promised and more.

That's 6-0 for religion vs. secular pragmatism. That is, if those two were different things, which they in this case are not.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Sci]

First off, a profit is a sum of money earned in a capitalistic endeavour that exceeds the sum of the costs incurred in undertaking that endeavour. If I spend $5 on a pair of socks and sell that pair of socks for $15, then I will have made $10 worth of profit.

Oh god , your one of those.

Yes, I know, it's terribly unreasonable to expect someone to use proper grammar, I know.

I'm not sure why you say that the Prophets were definitely not "interventionist (theistic) gods." The Prophets have a long history of intervening in Bajoran affairs -- witness their sending of the Orbs to communicate with the Bajorans. That was, in point of fact, the entire crux of Sisko's argument to them in "Favor the Bold:" That the Prophets did have a history of intervention in Bajoran affairs and that they were being inconsistent with their previous behavior by not intervening to stop the Dominion fleet.

1. They sent orbs, and one emissary,

And, if DS9 episodes such as "Rapture" or "The Reckoning" are to be believed, they also communicated to various ancient Bajorans visions of the future that were recorded and venerated. And who knows what other roles the Prophets might have taken in Bajoran history that were simply never established onscreen? The origins of the Bajoran belief system have never been canonically revealed, after all.

contrast that with current earth faiths where God sends dozens of prophets, sends a human incarnation of himself, supposedly moves the eyes of statues in small French towns, cures people etc...

As I noted above, we don't really know how interventionist or noninterventionist the Prophets were in Bajoran history.

As for your feeling attacked:

Pardon me, sir, I misunderstood what you were saying. Your intention seems to have been to say, "Ah, okay, they weren't irrational for believing in the Prophets prior to the discovery of the Wormhole because of the Orbs. However, the Prophets were definitely not gods that intervened in mortal affairs as often as those of Earth's belief systems." But because of your confusing terminology, I believed you were saying, "Ah, okay, they weren't irrational for believing in the Prophets prior to the discovery of the Wormhole because of the Orbs. However, the Prophets were definitely not gods." I apologize for the error, but would suggest that you more clearly define your terminology in the future.

.....and I wasn't saying they were or were not gods, my point was just that subjectivity, I just found it an interesting angle that their gods were not a result of primitive explanations for scientific events they could not explain, as ours developed, but actual alien life forms who really existed.

Who's to say that our gods weren't actual alien lifeforms? For all we know, maybe they were. Heck, TOS's "Who Mourns For Adonis?" establishes that the ancient Greek gods were real.

I think this was a large part of why I disliked the Bajorans. By defining them as very religious persons - and, in many ways, primarily as such - even in the face of evidence of the non-supernatural reality behind their beliefs, the writers painted the Bajorans as a society of fundamentally unreasonable, irrational persons.

... What?

I'm confused. First off, what makes you think that the Bajoran belief system is dependent upon a belief in the supernaturality of their subjects? In point of fact, wouldn't adhering to that belief system logically entail a belief in those subjects' actual, empirical existence -- and, ergo, in the naturality of those subjects?

In other words, a believer in the Prophets is likely to argue that there's nothing supernatural about the Prophets. A Prophet-worshipper is likely to point to the Prophets as an example of a creature that exists outside of linear time, virtually immortal, and lacking in corporeality, and as being, therefore, a source of moral guidance, wisdom, and prophecy worthy of worship.

Again, belief in something that you know exists and that you know possesses all of the traits you ascribe to it -- a capacity to see into the future, extreme age, a lack of linearity -- is far more rational than belief in a god for whom there is no evidence, whose existence must be presumed to violate the laws of physics, to be supernatural. It's more rational to worship a natural god than a supernatural one.

Faith in the possible - in success, in persons, in the end of the occupation, in the restoration of Bajor - this is entirely reasonable. But faith in the impossible, in the face of evidence that proves you wrong? It's just stupid.

But nothing that the Bajorans believed in was impossible. Indeed, everything that they believed about the Prophets turned out to be correct -- the Prophets did not exist within linear time; the Prophets could see the future; the Prophets could and did intervene in "mortal" affairs; the Prophets identified themselves with Bajor and its welfare; the Prophets were engaged in a protracted conflict with a malevolent subset of their kind known as the Pagh-Wraiths; the Prophets did communicate with the Bajorans through the Orbs; the Prophets did provide moral guidance. Everything that the Bajorans believed about the Prophets was possible, and everything they believed about the Prophets was confirmed by empirical evidence.

 

[Triskelion]

Hm, what's worse:

1. Being open to a mysterious universe
2. Absolute faith in one's conclusions

 

[JM1776]

And the name, by the way, implies that they may not share our concept of divinity and divine worship, since they're called the Prophets and not the Gods.

...and, indeed, it's not clear that the Bajorans ever claimed that the Prophets were gods in our culture's sense of the term...

Implications, if indeed that's what they are, are trumped by explicit statements: Kira, when asked about the Prophets by the mirror Bareil in "Resurrection," identifies them more specifically as "our gods."

I think we're perhaps taking "Prophets" far too literally here, as if prophecy and divinity are somehow mutually exclusive. It's more a title than an identifier, I believe. Perhaps we may liken it to a Canaanite hearing an Ancient Greek say, "The Olympians." When asked who they are, the Greek replies, "Our [or the] gods."

Bajorans pray to them seeking blessing, protection and intervention, know they dwell in an extradimensional space, have created a religion around them, venerate and heed their Emissary, etc.

The theological concepts are more than sufficiently similar (if not nearly identical) to conclude that Kira meant precisely what we do when calling them "our gods."

 

[Timo]

...And of course Kira might have finally learned to baby-talk to ignorant aliens like Feds, Klingons and mirror universe Bajorans in their own lingo. Much like a modern American might be saying "Oh, the President? He's our King!" to a visiting nincompoop from the 13th century.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[JM1776]

I think I'll stick with taking Kira at her word, considering the context, rather than giving even momentary credence to a speculation with no substantive logic behind it, clever though it is.

I must admit, though ... I very much enjoy watching you tapdance, Timo. It's always worth the price of admission.

 

[Sci]

And the name, by the way, implies that they may not share our concept of divinity and divine worship, since they're called the Prophets and not the Gods.

...and, indeed, it's not clear that the Bajorans ever claimed that the Prophets were gods in our culture's sense of the term...

Implications, if indeed that's what they are, are trumped by explicit statements: Kira, when asked about the Prophets by the mirror Bareil in "Resurrection," identifies them more specifically as "our gods."

I think we're perhaps taking "Prophets" far too literally here, as if prophecy and divinity are somehow mutually exclusive. It's more a title than an identifier, I believe. Perhaps we may liken it to a Canaanite hearing an Ancient Greek say, "The Olympians." When asked who they are, the Greek replies, "Our [or the] gods."

Bajorans pray to them seeking blessing, protection and intervention, know they dwell in an extradimensional space, have created a religion around them, venerate and heed their Emissary, etc.

The theological concepts are more than sufficiently similar (if not nearly identical) to conclude that Kira meant precisely what we do when calling them "our gods."

But there's no implication that she believes, for instance, that the Prophets are all-powerful or completely immortal. Heck, the Bajoran religion specifically identifies the Pagh-Wraiths as being the same type of beings as the Prophets -- meaning that the Bajoran religion also acknowledges that the Prophets are not automatically purely good. Nor is there any indication that they believe the Prophets to be omniscient.

It seems to me that Kira may well have been using an equivalent term that doesn't quite accurately translate when she referred to them as "gods."

 

[Timo]

I think I'll stick with taking Kira at her word, considering the context, rather than giving even momentary credence to a speculation with no substantive logic behind it, clever though it is.

IMHO, given the context, the last thing we should do is take Kira at her word. In the situation, she is out of words. Who are the Prophets? Well, they are... the Prophets. The very basis of Bajoran life. The thing that Kira has never had the need to describe.

So what she's doing is grasping for synonyms, and probably failing. "God and God, what is God?" "Uh, God is God... He is our Divine Father!" And thus the foreigner is left in the belief that God is believed to sire all humans...

I must admit, though ... I very much enjoy watching you tapdance, Timo. It's always worth the price of admission.

(Takes the bows)

(Robin & Will Scarlet: "Hey... You! Get back! Sheriff! Sheriff!")

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Damask]

I think I'll stick with taking Kira at her word, considering the context, rather than giving even momentary credence to a speculation with no substantive logic behind it, clever though it is.

I thought Sisko pretty much summed it up.


JAKE
But they weren't prophets. They were just some aliens that you found in the wormhole.

SISKO
To those aliens, the future is no more difficult to see than the past. So why shouldn't they be considered prophets?

JAKE
Are you serious?

SISKO
My point is it's a matter of interpretation.

There's also no way of knowing what Kira means by God anyway. God as a Christian God? Or God as in the ancient Greek gods whose roles varied.

 

[JM1776]

But there's no implication that she believes, for instance, that the Prophets are all-powerful or completely immortal.

Nor is one necessary. Neither the Medieval Germanic/Norse peoples nor the Ancient Greeks, among many groups, believed the gods omnipotent, and those of the former were by no means immortal. Such did not make them any less gods, or any less worthy of worship according to the peoples that did so.

Heck, the Bajoran religion specifically identifies the Pagh-Wraiths as being the same type of beings as the Prophets -- meaning that the Bajoran religion also acknowledges that the Prophets are not automatically purely good.

The majority of Christians acknowledge that demons were once angels who rebelled against God's rightful authority. It makes the latter no less spiritual in character.

Nor are gods in other religions considered "good" simply because they belong to a particular pantheon. Loki, Set and Ereshkigal spring to mind as examples of this. Note that the Pagh Wraiths are also worshipped by a small group of devotees.

Nor is there any indication that they believe the Prophets to be omniscient.

Omniscience is not required of gods, else why would All-Father Odin have surrendered an eye, or hung himself from the Yggdrasil for nine days to acquire knowledge and wisdom?

It seems to me that Kira may well have been using an equivalent term that doesn't quite accurately translate when she referred to them as "gods."

I would say, instead, that it's obvious you'd inappropriately narrowed your definition of "god" so as to exclude the Prophets, whereas I have simply used the established one and shown it accurate.

 

[JM1776]

So what she's doing is grasping for synonyms, and probably failing.

Which is precisely what one often does when discussing the divine.

Nice try, though.

 

[JM1776]

There's also no way of knowing what Kira means by God anyway. God as a Christian God? Or God as in the ancient Greek gods whose roles varied.

Actually, I'm sure there are other possibilities, as well. Simply because we do not precisely know the character or portfolios of these beings does not mean they're not considered divine by their worshippers. All evidence, other than wildly imaginative and entertaining but ultimately groundless speculation by certain board denizens, is to the contrary.

We've heard Bajorans use the word "God" before. We've also heard them call the Prophets "our gods." One (though not, by any means, the only) explanation is that they acknowledge a distant Creator who has no part in day-to-day existence, but believe the stewardship of their planet and people is "In the Hands of the Prophets."

Ultimately, we're all speculating, though. As a matter of probability, though, "Prophets as gods" is far stronger than the alternatives offered.

 

[Timo]

But does "Prophets as gods" have any meaning?

We know what the Prophets are, down to rather fine detail. We know that the word "god", especially in plural form, has multiple meanings and interpretations even among those cultures of Earth that speak English, or some related language where the direct connection between "good" and "god" exists. So saying "Prophets are gods" adds no information - it in fact only makes the picture fuzzier.

As for cultures that don't speak English, let's remember that the Cardassian word Gul and the Ferengi word Daimon are left untranslated by the Universal Translator, even though they approximate the English word Captain. Apparently, they don't approximate it closely enough... One would expect that there would exist similarly untranslated native words for the various local deities. And perhaps those do exist, and it's just that Star Trek rarely discusses deities. In the Bajoran case, we have the "pagh", which doesn't translate directly to "soul" or "spirit", but we also have the English word "prophet", which in turn seems to be a pretty good translation. Against this background, the word "god" should indeed logically be an accurate alternate expression for Prophet. Or then the UT acknowledges that the word "god" has no real meaning in the English language and thus is a good synonym for pretty much everything (see the parallel thread where it refers to Kirk's glasses!).

In synthesis of onscreen evidence and above rantings, it would seem that Prophets are at least among Bajoran gods, that a Bajoran person may consider a particular deity (Prophet or otherwise) "his" god, and that both Prophets and Pagh-Wraiths may belong to the category of gods but that there is no evidence for such in the latter case. That's not too far-fetched speculation yet. It's the stuff beyond that which is highly arguable.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Eminence]

Well, I think for the Bajorans, they certainly were gods. But I think you have to consider what it meant to them to think of something akin to what we might consider "God", and acknowledge that of course, that relationship might differ from our own, and to not necessarily try and fit it into the parameters we have for our concept of God. For them, the idea of gods was something different than humans necessarily believe. The Bajorans, for instance, didn't believe that the Prophets created them (at least it wasn't said on screen), which a pretty big part of Western Religion. The Prophets were never portrayed as a wishing well either, which can sometimes occur in terran religions. It was always more about living your life in a certain way; in a manner in tandem with the path of the Prophets (whatever that might have been). But then of course, you see the level of devotion that sort of "adherence to a path" requires and notice that that's very similar to the level of devotion among practisers of terran religions...so there are commonalities as well. I can see now why it's so easy to get confused .

As for continuing to worship them as gods after finding out that they are a type of alien lifeform, I don't see why that would make much of a difference. That's the thing about worship -- as an ingredient of religion, it is less rooted in this idea of "oh, there's this superior being, he's on this pedestal, and we don't want to see him off it" -- I mean, that's kinda what this is more about right? Once the Prophets are found not to be divine, not perfect, how can the Bajorans still worship him?? -- and more rooted in the idea that they're devoted to these beings, and that devotion transcends/mitigates the impact of any individual/specific limitations. Worship can also be many things, and can be an expression of devotion in lots of different ways. You love your wife, you're devoted to her, in a way you worship her because she's so special to you. Or the same about your kids. You worship the ground they walk on, would do anything for them. I think in some ways, the Prophets had more of that sort of relationship with the Bajorans (not exactly as when it's so directly related linked of course), but of the same, or similar vein.

The Bajorans loved the Prophets, they saw them as always looking out for their best interests, no matter what they might entail, and they wouldn't love the Prophets any less just because now they don't fit some arbitrary sense of perfection.

I think for those of us that go to God to ask us to absolve us for our failures, for our imperfections, have to ask ourselves.....if God came to us and asked for absolution for not being perfect, would we be able to give it to him?

PhoenixIreland -- I totally by accident stole your quote from pg 1 for my "Quote thread" !!! I'm so sorry!! I didn't even see it until just now. It's a good quote though, one of my favorite ones of Kira.

 

[Timo]

Since when has God been perfect anyway? The biblical one screws up time and again, and has to correct His mistakes through divine intervention - and that is what defines Him as divine.

Also, who would put his or her faith on a perfect God? Obviously the misery and injustice of the world would then stand proof that this perfect creature either is malevolent, or just plain doesn't care. Much better to believe in a creature of good intentions but a shortage of means, I'd think.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Eminence]

Much better to believe in a creature of good intentions but a shortage of means, I'd think.

Timo Saloniemi

Pretty much, although I think of it more as "He/she/they have good intentions and help out as much as they can, but some things we've been left to us to try and figure out on our own." After all, if they do everything for us, how will we ever grow?

 

[starburst]

Since when has God been perfect anyway? The biblical one screws up time and again, and has to correct His mistakes through divine intervention - and that is what defines Him as divine.

Also, who would put his or her faith on a perfect God? Obviously the misery and injustice of the world would then stand proof that this perfect creature either is malevolent, or just plain doesn't care. Much better to believe in a creature of good intentions but a shortage of means, I'd think.

Timo Saloniemi

Thats the thing tho, in the real world alot of people like to consider that God as perfect, and then make up any number of reasons to why he would allow (or more like cause) natural disasters, suffering and the like.

Gods by deffinition arent and cant be perfect anyway, at least the ones who want to be worshiped and your eternal salvation is dependant on that worship, that need implies ego which is obviously a failing that (going on the assuption whichever God or gods you have in your head are real) was passed onto humanity.

 

[JM1776]

As for cultures that don't speak English, let's remember that the Cardassian word Gul and the Ferengi word Daimon are left untranslated by the Universal Translator, even though they approximate the English word Captain. Apparently, they don't approximate it closely enough... One would expect that there would exist similarly untranslated native words for the various local deities. And perhaps those do exist, and it's just that Star Trek rarely discusses deities. In the Bajoran case, we have the "pagh", which doesn't translate directly to "soul" or "spirit", but we also have the English word "prophet", which in turn seems to be a pretty good translation. Against this background, the word "god" should indeed logically be an accurate alternate expression for Prophet.

Of course, we know that the real world reason for not rendering those particular words is that it allows for flavor in spoken dialogue, as opposed to necessarily representing some subtle gradation in meaning.

Even if "gul," "daimon" and "pagh" do not have a fairly direct translation, clearly "prophet" and "god" do ... and Kira employs them as synonyms, the latter in reference to the former, as an admittedly less exacting but thus more broadly descriptive and applicable identifier.

By your own logical assertion, if, indeed, the Prophets were not perceived as gods by the Bajorans, Kira would have faltered, then resorted to a Bajoran word that lacked an adequate translation. Yet she doesn't fumble around for an explanation when discussing their role, as you implied a number of posts above. She, on the contrary, confidently asserts her truth: "Our gods."

In this even she and Dukat are in agreement. He mentions that the Cardassians' great error was fighting the Bajorans instead of "their gods." [It's of note that the sophisticated Cardassian doesn't look to chroniton particles as his weapon of choice; he turns instead to another god, or demon, if you will.]

By its simplest definition, a prophet is "one who prophesies." And since they have done so, accurately, throughout Bajoran history, it's reasonable that as a group, these have acquired the nomenclature "Prophets." It's simply a convenient descriptive, a la "Tuatha de Danaan" or "Aesir."

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.

Almost all god concepts have subtle differences. This in no way invalidates the fact that the Prophets are gods. One can't have it both ways: "They're not gods if there's nothing empirically verifiable about them, because nothing unreal exists." "They're not gods if we can measure their qualities in any fashion, because gods are transcendant." That pretty much covers all the bases quite conveniently, doesn't it?

As to the attributes of God and whether or not He is perfect ... that's another discussion entirely. Suffice it to say that I've heard the various arguments employed above, and am as impressed by their weight as I was then.

 

[Timo]

Of course, we know that the real world reason for not rendering those particular words is that it allows for flavor in spoken dialogue, as opposed to necessarily representing some subtle gradation in meaning.

Indeed. Then again, we know that Gul doesn't really equate Captain, as it is used to indicate a broad range of ranks and positions (whereas Bajorans for some reason happen to have the exact same number of ranks as the Americans, allowing for 1:1 translation). And it wouldn't be difficult to argue that Daimon in fact is an unholy mixture of the skipper of a vessel and the CEO of a business.

Even if "gul," "daimon" and "pagh" do not have a fairly direct translation, clearly "prophet" and "god" do ... and Kira employs them as synonyms, the latter in reference to the former, as an admittedly less exacting but thus more broadly descriptive and applicable identifier.

Either that, or then as an "admittedly less exacting" and not even truly overlapping best attempt at a synonym when no better ones are to be found. Multiple interpretations can be given, but here I'd argue that the most obvious one is not really an attractive one: Kira is describing things to a foreigner, using a word she has used nowhere else, so the slightly more convoluted "baby talk" theory makes intuitively more sense.

In this even she and Dukat are in agreement.

Which would nicely go with the view that "god" is a foreign term, forced from the language of the oppressor to that of the oppressed.

As to the attributes of God and whether or not He is perfect ... that's another discussion entirely.

And one that the Bajorans probably would like to have. Everyone wants his god or gods to be special. And the Bajoran ones definitely have special attributes and perhaps even a distinct basic nature. It would certainly be in Bajoran interests to separate their Prophets from the mere gods of other peoples.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[JM1776]

Indeed. Then again, we know that Gul doesn't really equate Captain, as it is used to indicate a broad range of ranks and positions (whereas Bajorans for some reason happen to have the exact same number of ranks as the Americans, allowing for 1:1 translation). And it wouldn't be difficult to argue that Daimon in fact is an unholy mixture of the skipper of a vessel and the CEO of a business.

You mean in the same way people say "captain of the football team" or (better yet in reference to the Ferengi) "captain of industry"? Thank you for supporting my point.

Hoist on your own Picard, there, Timo.

[An aside: Actually, Dukat clearly used gul after having seized power in the same fashion Banana Republic dictators employ "colonel" in an analogous situation—to imply a connection with the common man "general" and "legate" both lack.]

Either that, or then as an "admittedly less exacting" and not even truly overlapping best attempt at a synonym when no better ones are to be found. Multiple interpretations can be given, but here I'd argue that the most obvious one is not really an attractive one: Kira is describing things to a foreigner, using a word she has used nowhere else, so the slightly more convoluted "baby talk" theory makes intuitively more sense.

It's not the most obvious to someone without an agenda to support a particular point. According to Occam's Razor, Kira means what she says unless we've significant evidence to think otherwise. We don't. Therefore she means "gods" when she says "gods," considering her expression, the ease with which she employs the term ... and, most devastatingly, the fact that she was in a temple attending services while doing so.

Which would nicely go with the view that "god" is a foreign term, forced from the language of the oppressor to that of the oppressed.

But even more nicely with the idea that "god" is a word with universal applications which Dukat and Kira both fully understand and accept as spot on—to which they gravitated as the proper term.

And one that the Bajorans probably would like to have. Everyone wants his god or gods to be special. And the Bajoran ones definitely have special attributes and perhaps even a distinct basic nature. It would certainly be in Bajoran interests to separate their Prophets from the mere gods of other peoples.

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.