rivanna

I appreciate the way Tillich explores the psychological dimensions of the biblical passage, and connects it to Job and the prodigal son parable. It's also reminiscent of the Pharisee and the publican in the temple. Or the young ruler who approaches Jesus, saying he has obeyed every rule all his life...but his heart has become hardened. The terms righteousness and sin could perhaps be seen more as conventional morality vs alienation. To me, Tillich is very careful to point out the difference in attitude between righteousness--ethical conduct-- and self-righteousness. Jesus never rejects sinners, only people who refuse to acknowledge their flaws. As others have noted, feelings of warmth, tenderness and humility are rooted in acceptance despite faults and weaknesses. We don't really experience love, or show compassion, until we've experienced being forgiven.

Mike, I'd be interested in discussing it if there are several others participating.

the scuttlebutt on the next ST movie is that Khan will be back From what I’ve read recently, the new Trek movie’s villain will not be Khan but another character from TOS – a few mentioned are Harry Mudd, Gary Mitchell, Trelaine, and the Talosians…Mudd seems like the most viable possibility. That whole alternate timeline thing bothers me somehow, but I guess it was necessary to generate more prequels! About the “prophets of science fiction” – looks like Arthur Clarke and H.G. Wells will be featured, but I don’t see any listing of Trek writers - ? I agree about Roger Corby etc in TOS -- and “The Offspring” in TNG as a memorable character. Actually, while there are plenty of episodes where humans create an artificial life form, or hologram, or one android creates another, nothing really resembles the Frankenstein story…at least none I can recall. A couple more tidbits from Trek news -- There’s going to be a 55 foot long Enterprise float in the annual Rose Parade in Pasadena, Jan. 2--flying above the Paramount arch. And Google is working on a project to develop a voice controlled personal assistant, which they are naming "Majel" after Majel Barrett Roddenberry. Google purchased a speech recognition software company as part of their plan to "move a little faster towards that Star Trek future" of freeing people from keyboards and talking to their computers. Apparently the voice assistant will be available on Android phones and tablets. I met Majel once at a local Trek convention…very nice lady. She would have loved knowing about this.

Yvonne, glad to know you are a Trekker too! Hadn’t heard that idea from Jung on aliens--interesting. I’ve never gotten into other types of sci-fi, or fantasy, but think religious themes are probably a strong element in all. Bill, thanks for the recap of the science fiction show. Didn’t know that about Mary Shelley’s life—tragic. Your quote reminds me of a line from “The Undiscovered Country” when the Federation president says at the Camp Khitomer conference, “Let us redefine progress to mean that just because we can do a thing, it does not necessarily follow that we must do that thing.” A few associations that come to mind -- Harry Mudd in TOS created hundreds of androids to serve him— a clear cut example of technology used for wrong purposes. In TNG “The Offspring,” Data creates an android daughter, Lal. The story ends sadly when she dies due to a malfunction. Sort of a mixed message there. On Voyager there’s the creation of the EMH, the holographic Doctor. A positive outcome, in that case. In some ways the Borg could be compared to Frankenstein’s monster. Also like your insights on aliens as “windows into the soul” and the analysis of Spock’s character development through the feature films. Somehow I doubt he and Uhura will be much of an item in the next sequel, but who knows. A big part of what made TOS work so well was the trio of Kirk, Spock and McCoy, as you suggest, each portraying one aspect of the ideal human. I’m not sure the rebooted characters have the same chemistry. About God as a monster if He demanded a blood sacrifice-I agree. To me, atonement in the bible reveals that it was never God who had to be appeased, but human beings who needed to be reconciled to God.

I’d like to hear whatever is of interest from the “Prophets of Science Fiction” program. Along those lines –apparently NASA is trying to develop a tractor beam much like the one in Star Trek –to transport lab samples to an instrument, among other things. and this cracked me up in ST news --Eternal Image, Inc. has released an officially-licensed line of Star Trek-themed caskets and will soon release cremation urns as well. For boldly going to the ultimate Undiscovered Country

A few things stood out for me in this chapter-- as Joseph noted, the teaching is similar to the bible (as it’s often interpreted), “be virtuous now for the sake of heavenly reward later.” Quite unlike the Buddhist perspective as I understand it. On the other hand, this chapter also says that the wise man is generous because giving to others brings him happiness, not to ensure his own afterlife. I read somewhere that “the heaven Buddha is speaking of is the limitless expanse of Infinite Consciousness.” Perhaps equivalent to Jesus speaking of eternal life. The image of the moon emerging from a cloud, resonates with the idea of letting your light shine like a lamp, or Jesus as the light of the world. The author describes a lunar wisdom-- not the sun rising and dispelling night completely. The world is still in darkness, only a little less obscure- a limited affirmation. Yet, the final verse makes a strong statement-- that choosing the path of wisdom is the most desirable thing in the universe. Entering the stream seems like a one-time event, then it’s a steady flow in one direction, you never leave it. If the stream is grace, don’t we experience it intermittently, not a constant presence? Maybe I’m being too simplistic. For what it’s worth here is a commentary on those lines (not sure who wrote it)-- “At one point in our evolution we reach the point where the momentum of our spiritual aspiration and merit ensures that we shall indeed move onward to Nirvana without hindrance. Effort will still be required, and obstacles will yet have to be overcome, but the outcome is assured and we will from that time onward be moving in a direct line to liberation. This is certainly better than anything else we might be given, for all those things will be ultimately lost–that is the nature of relative existence. But to pass beyond all things is to gain everything in freedom.”

Thanks, I’d like to hear how that program goes—my cable doesn’t get the Science channel. This bit of Trek news caught my eye a week ago--Star Trek (TOS) and the Legion of Super-heroes are teaming up for a new monthly comic book series. Here’s one cover I know nothing about Brainiac 5, Saturn Girl, Cosmic Boy, Shadow Lass, Lightning Lad, Chameleon, etc but somehow it tickles me that a futuristic partnership is created between them and Kirk’s crew…in the comic book world, anything is possible J

After seeing Robin Meyers’ book in Kenneth’s post, I took another look at it. His voice is one of the most convincing and comprehensive of any PC author I’ve ever read, and includes the evolutionary perspective as well. His style is thought-provoking – a few samples -- “When I was a kid, the message Jesus is the Answer was ubiquitous… the message should be Jesus is the Assignment. The operative question is not Do you love Jesus? but Has Jesus ever been a radically disturbing and transforming presence in your life? What would happen if we accepted original blessing over original sin and stopped trying to prove our worthiness? What if we took seriously Paul Tillich’s counsel, accept the fact that we are accepted? We did not drop from the sky to do battle with our fallen nature; rather we have crawled up out of the sea to work the garden, to protect our young, to contemplate the gifts and obligations of higher consciousness. What does it mean to be human, to ask questions, to solve problems, to make art, and ultimately to discover the most sublime gift of all – love? Much preaching today is framed as an invitation to God to come into our story, but the biblical invitation is radically different: we are being invited into God’s story. In the Sermon on the Mount, there is not a single word about what to believe, only words about what to do. The bible is a conversation…As in the book of Job, even when things seem hopeless, the dialogue must continue. Hope vanishes when we stop talking to one another. There is the creedal road of the Fall and redemption, original sin and the Savior. But before the fourth century, there was the road of enlightenment, wisdom, creation-centered spirituality and transformation. This is the road less traveled, that seeks not to save our souls but to restore them.”

From what I’ve read, the tone of the Dhammapada comes across as more cautionary and stern than Lao Tsu (perhaps not a fair comparison!). The voice also strikes me as similar to Proverbs in the bible – practical, conventional / common sense. Just my own impression. I looked up other translations of this chapter --several ended with “Let one not neglect one's own welfare for the sake of another, however great” -- while this version has “never neglect your work for another’s, however great his need.” The idea of self-protection first, seems a different message from the NT-- unless the definition of “one’s own welfare” is understood in a radical, paradoxical way. The emphasis here on taking responsibility for oneself brought to mind the mention of posting a passage from Thomas Merton elsewhere, that met with a discouraging response – maybe there is a need to “be wary as serpents and innocent as doves." Anyway - I really like the last 3 lines, “Your work is to discover your work And then with all your heart To give yourself to it.” It reminds me of the parable of the talents.

I'd like to think that most of the writers were secular humanists like Gene Roddenberry, but I really don't know. If there is an episode, film or series you'd care to discuss I'd be interested to hear.

The “all is other power” concept isn’t clear to me (it may never be!) but I did find a bit more by Merton on the nature of freedom, in this passage from No Man is an Island. He alludes to the gospel story of Jesus with Mary and Martha – which to me was helpful - “One of the chief obstacles…is the anxiety to get the most out of everything, to be a success in our own eyes and in the eyes of others. We can only get rid of this anxiety by being content to miss something in almost everything we do. We cannot master everything, taste everything, understand everything, drain every experience to its last dregs. But if we have the courage to let almost everything else go, we will probably be able to retain the ‘one thing necessary’ for us -whatever it may be. If we are too eager to have everything, we will almost certainly miss even the one thing we need. Happiness consists in finding out precisely what the ‘one thing necessary’ may be, in our lives, and in gladly relinquishing all the rest. For then, by a divine paradox, we find that everything else is given us together with the one thing we needed.” I like how Merton doesn’t define the “one needful thing” (Jesus left it open to interpretation also)– it varies from one person to the next. Merton says elsewhere that a superficial freedom to wander aimlessly, to make a choice of distractions (like Martha) evades the basic task of discovering who it is that chooses….finding who we are on the deepest level. For me, the one needful thing is my family, that devotion above all – yet without my involvement in art, music, and poetry I might never have opened to God… as Merton said “I have become convinced that the very contradictions in my life are in some ways signs of God’s mercy to me.”

In a book I’ve been reading I just came across this reference to a lecture by Merton, On True Freedom – you probably know of it. “The real freedom is to be able to come and go from our essence, and to be able to do without anything that is not immediately connected to that center. Because when you die, that is all that is left…everything is destroyed except for this one thing which is the reality that God preserves forever. The freedom that matters is the capacity to be in touch with that center. Because it is from that center that everything else comes.” As he puts it, real freedom is not “choice freedom but spontaneity freedom” – which this other author defines as surrendering to the Divine hold on us, and becoming free of the cultural progamming that usually dictates our choices. We do not become a true servant until we become free of all but God. Living from that place of wholeness, we allow our individual authenticity to unfold like Boehme’s ‘string in the concert of God’s joy.’ Is this possible only for a monk, do you think?

Soma, interesting note –one of my kids recently sent me a photo standing by a giant Sequoia in California– awesome. I’d love to see them someday. Trees are poems that earth writes upon the sky. – Kahlil Gibran The groves were Gods’s first temples. – William Cullen Bryant God is the experience of looking at a tree and saying Ah! – Joseph Campbell I like trees because they seem more resigned to the way they have to live than other things do. I feel as if this tree knows everything I ever think of…When I come back to it, I never have to remind it of anything; I begin just where I left off. – Willa Cather

“The Help” qualifies as a PC film -- the kind that makes you ache for more social justice in the world. I had read the book and thought the movie was a sensitive adaptation with outstanding performances. On the one hand it was appalling to realize such intimately cruel domestic discrimination was going on in the deep south, that I had no clue about. Yet it was inspiring to see how the characters found the courage to tell their stories despite terrible risk, and reclaim their dignity.

When I read Bruce’s column I didn’t see the word integral, so I’m not sure what it means in this context--integrating the various ways prayer has been understood through the evolution of religion? About the focus on intercessory prayer --to me, it’s not a good idea to ask God for particular things or events – seems like testing God, and putting our faith at risk. There are times, like if we’re worried sick about a loved one’s safety, that we can’t help being specific. But mostly I pray for qualities like guidance, comfort, well-being, courage, etc for myself and/or others. If God answers prayer, it seems God responds rather than intervenes—perhaps in subtle unpredictable ways that shape us. Henri Nouwen says the main purpose of prayer is intimate communion; the emphasis is on nurturing a relationship, not a result. Sharing whatever emotional state we’re in with complete honesty; standing in God’s presence with open hands, empty, dependent, listening with mind and heart. I also like how progressive theology professor Marjorie Suchocki puts it -- Prayer is God inviting us to be willing partners in the great dance of creating a world that reflects more of God’s character. Prayer opens the world to its own transformation.

I always appreciate hearing what PC books people have found the most meaningful. Albert Nolan is an author we don’t hear mentioned often, but I was glad to be reminded of his excellent interpretation of the gospel. Might check out his two more recent books. Stephen Mitchell – offers some unique perspectives on Jesus’ personality. Marcus Borg – that one is still my favorite work of his also. I had never heard of Tom Stella, Kirby Godsey or Clark Strand, but after looking at the kindle sample I’ve been reading Strand’s book -- intriguing blend of Pure Land Buddhism and biblical analysis. Randolph Ross’ book, which is on line, was discussed here chapter by chapter a couple years ago -- here’s the link http://tcpc.ipbhost.com/index.php/topic/1488-common-sense-christianity/ Cynthia Bourgeault – really admire her work on contemplative traditions. The book I have by her is The Wisdom Way of Knowing. Thanks again for sharing.

“The Final Frontier” was one of the least inspiring Star Trek films, though it did carry out the theme that God isn’t “out there” but within us. Here’s a movie index that reminded me of many spiritual films I’d seen but forgotten - organized by specific categories of social justice, personal healing, family issues, the search for meaning, models of courage, hope, etc. http://www.cinematherapy.com/filmindex.html One that should be on their list - “Something the Lord Made” (2004) --a dramatization of the relationship between heart surgery pioneers Alfred Blalock and Vivien Thomas.

"Contact" is one of my favorites also. Brother Rog posted a good list earlier on this thread...I would add to those, Life is Beautiful Milk Babette’s Feast Antonia’s Line Groundhog Day Amazing Grace Arranged

A couple of recent Trek news items for those interested - http://startrek.com/news_articles A new semester of Trek Class will begin meeting on August 30 at 5:00pm EST, when everyone will be able to join the class discussion on Twitter using the hashtag #TrekClass. Until then, Professor Rotolo is sharing some concepts and reflections from last semester’s class--the latest is a comparison / contrast of current social networks to the Borg. And, Chase Masterson (who played Leeta the Dabo girl on Deep Space Nine and married Quark’s brother Rom) has begun a series of columns on spiritual themes in Trek shows and films. Fascinating!

Thanks for the kind words - when I was on B’net I led a dialogue group on Star Trek, and saved my notes, so it’s not all off the top of my head :-) At the time I was also doing a series of Trek paintings for a show-- might try a few more. About Trek’s optimism and secular humanism--Roddenberry said “I think technology will save us” but he went on to say “And our own goodness--basic human decency. Our ability to sympathize with others. The wish to help. These things are part of our nature.” The comment about valuing differences reminded me of the Vulcan IDIC pin, the acronym for Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations. Spock wore it to the dinner for Miranda Jones, in “Is there in truth no beauty?” At the end when Miranda is leaving, she says to Spock “The glory of creation is in its infinite diversity.” He responds, “And the ways our differences combine to create meaning and beauty.” Unlike most people here, I don’t know what it’s like to be raised fundamentalist / evangelical. But I agree, the idea of humans as inherently depraved doesn’t work. On the other hand, it seems that relying completely on our own strength has its problems too. The best of the Trek characters retain an openness to mystery, an awareness of vulnerability, the mutual need for help, forgiveness and community in order to survive and possibly thrive. The book title sounds familiar -- haven’t read that one, but I have enjoyed several autobiographies by the actors who played Kirk, Spock, Uhura, Janice Rand, Sulu, and especially Chekov -- Warped Factors by Walter Koenig. His sense of humor is delightful.

thanks for the reply. you wrote process theology believes that God may have actually learned to be more loving and compassionate as history progressed. Or it’s very possible that we have placed our own human attributes onto our images of the Divine. To me the latter seems more plausible, though there are instances in scripture where God changes his mind in response to human needs. The episode you referred to is “The Survivors” – Kevin Uxbridge reveals to Picard that he is a Douwd, an immortal energy being with vast powers. In a fit of rage he had annihilated the entire race of Husnock, then in remorse exiled himself to Rana 4 with a replica of his dead wife Rishon. Great story – complex. About false gods using power in negative ways – as you say, the scripts often worked with that idea. Kirk’s friend Gary Mitchell acquires telekinetic abilities and breaks bad in “Where no man has gone before.” Sylvia and Corob play cruel Halloween tricks on the crew in “Cat’s Paw.” The genetically enhanced Khan is a sort of Nietzschean superman who betrays Kirk in “Space Seed.” On the other hand there are also aliens with special gifts who use them only for good purposes -- Gem, a mute telepathic woman in “The Empath,” heals Kirk and McCoy of near-fatal injuries through her compassion and the “laying on of hands.” Gary Seven travels back from the future to prevent world war in “Assignment: Earth.” John Doe, the injured Zakonion in “Transfigurations” (TNG) restores Worf to life after he’s killed. Tam Elbrun, a Betazoid whose telepathic ability causes him terrible pain, forms a mutually beneficial relationship with the mysterious alien GomTuu in “Tin Man.” At the end, Data asks him, “Is that the purpose of existence? to care for someone?” and Tam says yes, it is for him. Guinan, the El-aurian whose entire race was nearly wiped out by the Borg, becomes a friend and counselor to many on board, and has a prophetic role in “Yesterday’s Enterprise.” These aliens could be called ‘wounded healers.’ Star Trek also has many normal humans who fit this role. The enigmatic Traveler has the ability to alter the laws of physics, rescuing crew members in “Where no one has gone before” “Remember me” and “Journey’s End.” Odo the changeling security officer on DS9, uses his shapeshifting to help others and plays a crucial role in defeating the Dominion, before he finally returns to “the Great Link.” Even Q, the trickster demigod who at the opening of TNG presents a menacing threat to the Enterprise, at the end gives Picard the chance to avoid destruction by the Continuum in “All good things.” His particular brand of ‘divine intervention’ actually saves the whole human race in that episode. Maybe he has “learned to be more loving and compassionate as history progressed.”

Interesting. Didn’t know about the new bible translation. Substituting “The Human One” for “Son of Man” reminds me of Star Trek changing “Where no man has gone before” to “where no one has gone before.” About Spock in ST 2 and 3 – more than any other Trek character, he takes on a Christ role in that story arc – the comparison is unmistakable. It’s also a reversal of logic – Spock had justified his martyrdom by saying “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.” But when Kirk has restored Spock to his former self, and Spock asks why would you do this, Kirk responds, “because the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many.” Poetic symmetry. There are many examples of heroic self-sacrificing figures throughout the Trek films and series, characters who give, or risk, their lives for the entire crew. Data in “Nemesis” is another example. But the only character besides Spock who is “resurrected” is Kai Opaka, in Deep Space Nine (“Battle Lines”) – she is a Bajoran spiritual leader killed in a runabout crash, who then miraculously comes to life again. However there is a scientific explanation – the moon microbes change her physiology at the cellular level. In contrast, when Spock’s katra is transferred back to his body, it’s a mysterious ritual performed by a Vulcan priest. The idea of non-divine saviors also brings to mind a common theme in TOS especially – the false god who is exposed and/or destroyed. “The Apple” – Vaal, “Return of the Archons” – Landru, “For the world is hollow and I have touched the sky” – the Oracle; “Who mourns for Adonais” – Apollo; “And the children shall lead,” etc. Also from TNG, “Devil’s Due” – Ardra, and others. A related motif is the false paradise – in “This Side of Paradise” -- the magic spores; “The Way to Eden” --the mad Sevrin and his followers; “The Cloud Minders” – unfairly divided society, and ST5, “The Final Frontier” --the search for the false god of Shakaree. The Nexus could probably also be called a false paradise, though not a malevolent one. So there are many negative examples of what isn’t God, and what isn’t paradise. But Trek does occasionally present glimpses of what truly ideal society would look like. “The Inner Light” (TNG) shows Picard experiencing an alternate adult life on the planet Kataan, with a family – he lives a simple but fulfilling life, learns to play the flute, enjoys his grandkids, becomes a community leader, etc. In “Family,” Picard goes back to his childhood home in France, a country vineyard. His brother Robert avoids the latest technology, e.g. not allowing a replicator to be installed. For awhile Picard is tempted to leave Star Fleet for a more peaceful way of life on earth. And in ST 9, “Insurrection,” the Baku people seem to live the perfect existence – they have the technology for space travel but choose not to use it. They embrace an idyllic, pastoral life as farmers, artists, builders, teachers - sort of a Shangri-la. They have developed extraordinary mental clarity, an altered state of awareness that makes time stand still – they live for hundreds of years. There is no sign or mention of organized religion in these ideal societies, only meditation. Yet there is a solid community spirit, people are respectful, gentle, caring. Sort of like the Tao’s vision of the most desirable way of life.

thanks for the replies. Bill’s comment about the personal vs communal side of faith, started me thinking how that plays out in Star Trek shows and films. In the original series and Next Generation, religion seems obsolete or reduced to individual practice-- like Spock meditating in his quarters or Worf performing a ritual in private or Wesley going on a vision quest. One exception – “Bread and Circuses”—the brotherhood of the Son, i.e. disciples of Jesus. In that parallel world, as Kirk observes, they had both Caesar and Christ. After Roddenberry’s death, Trek altered course, to some extent - in “Deep Space Nine” organized religion is treated openly, part of life. Every day on the Promenade a public worship service is held by the Vedek, and there are communal gatherings like the Gratitude Festival and other celebrations. However it’s not one God but many – the Prophets, the Founders, the Q continuum, etc. In TOS, none of the crew practice religion; on DS9 Captain Sisko becomes at the end, the next emissary of the prophets. Also, in DS9 religion is no longer incompatible with technological sophistication, as it was in TOS and in TNG episodes like “Who watches the watchers?” The Vulcans with their superior intellect believe in the katra living on after death. In “The Undiscovered Country” Spock tells Valeris, “You must have faith... that the universe will unfold as it should.” The Bajoran religion is highly developed, with Prophets and Pah-wraiths, Vedeks and Kai’s, the pagh, the orbs, sacred scrolls, etc. The Klingons have their equivalent of heaven and hell –Stovokor and Grethor--and their legendary Kahless, along with many sacred rites and rituals. Even the Ferengi believe in their own version of celestial afterlife, the Grand Negus, etc. So Star Trek evolved to imagine faith communities among the scientifically advanced races. However, it also seems that organized religion is often associated with violence -- Deep Space 9 is by far the darkest series. Yet the stories are always nuanced with irony and paradox -- good and evil are relative, not absolute qualities--what I love about Trek. The ideal of respect and tolerance remains unchanged from the beginning--in TOS McCoy says to Septimus, “Well, if you’re speaking of worships of sorts, we represent many beliefs.” Kirk says to Elaan of Troyius, “It’s been my experience that the prejudices people feel about each other disappear when they get to know each other.” In DS9, Sisko says to Kira, “My philosophy is that there is room for all philosophies on this station.” In Voyager, Janeway says “There’s a difference between respecting the spiritual beliefs of other cultures and embracing them myself.” I’d add a similar quote from “Enterprise” but am not so familiar with that series. if anyone wants to talk about a favorite episode, feature film, character etc feel free!

Bill, thanks for all your info - the backstory on how Spock was conceived (and I thought I was a geek!) I agree that McCoy was the emotional part of the Enterprise “trinity” with Kirk and Spock. Kirk was often torn between them. For awhile I thought the actors represented a trio of Protestant / Catholic / Jew with Kirk, McCoy and Spock – then I learned that Shatner is from an orthodox Jewish family. Gene Roddenberry was raised Southern Baptist, but his mother was Jewish-- her maiden name was Goldman, according to Susan Sackett, his secretary who wrote the memoir Inside Trek. About “Measure of a Man” where Data is granted equal rights as a sentient life form –it was a satisfying conclusion, but somehow I can’t imagine technology will ever invent artificial life on quite that level - ? About Q – strikes me as a parody of a deity. Similar to the Greek gods –petty, deceitful, capricious rather than compassionate—and/or the Accuser, putting humanity on trial. “The Enemy Within” is one of the best TOS -reflects an essential aspect of the Trek vision, that we have to confront and embrace our own shadow side. I do see a lot of parallels between ST and PC / Evolutionary Christianity – humanity as co-creators of the future. That’s the perspective that seems the most relevant. For instance several PC authors convey the idea that Jesus came not to impose a new religion but to get beyond religion, which resonates with Roddenberry saying he rejects organized religions but accepts the idea of God as an entity in process of growth.“I have faith in something that I can’t know. God is like the leap outside oneself to the source. In Star Trek we let our characters have their own beliefs without examining them too closely.” We only get rare glimpses of this, but for example at the end of ST7 “Generations” when Picard says to Riker, “after all, number one, we’re only mortal” and Riker replies lightly with a smile, “Speak for yourself sir, I intend to live forever.” Roddenberry felt strongly that organized religion was a huge obstacle to world peace. He saw religion as a form of totalitarianism, taking away peoples’ reason and free will. Maybe he never experienced a liberal open-minded branch of Christianity or Judaism. I’m in a tiny minority here, haven’t been a regular churchgoer since childhood, but I can’t imagine the world will ever “outgrow” the need for faith communities. An intriguing question though.

Hi Bill, thanks, I enjoyed your comments. “This side of Paradise” was a classic episode. [btw- I’m sure you meant to quote Kirk as saying “we weren’t meant for Paradise”] It’s true Kirk tears his crew away from the bliss of the spores, but he gives Sandoval the choice of relocating his party or staying on the planet. His response-- “We’ve done nothing here. No accomplishments, no progress. Three years wasted. We wanted to make this planet a garden. I think we’d like to get some work done. The work we started out to do.” It’s like in Star Trek 7, “Generations” when Kirk chooses to leave the Nexus (another paradise) to help Picard save the planet Soren was planning to destroy. Kirk chose a meaningful death rather than eternity in a meaningless dreamworld. As you say, the Trek stories show humans need constant struggle, challenges, goals to mature - even when we finally attain peaceful coexistence on earth, we go out into space and find more problems to solve I also agree about relationships being paramount. Roddenberry thought technological progress would stimulate or accompany cultural progress; but the stories show his highest value was profound friendship and mutual commitment among the crew. “It is only when you look at what unites humans, rather than what divides them, that you have some idea of what it means to be human. In Star Trek, people can disagree and not let it erupt into war. An antagonist does not have to be your enemy.” About Amanda and Sarek needing genetic treatment to conceive Spock – where did you read that? T’pol and Trip Tucker, a Vulcan and a human, had a baby together on “Enterprise.” You recalled that Kirk says at Spock’s funeral (ST2) that his soul was “the most human” -- honoring his capacity for loyalty and self -sacrifice. However, when Spock is thrust into a leadership position, he fails to inspire, as in “Galileo 7” and “Tholian Web.” According to the final interview with Roddenberry, Spock and Kirk were written as two halves of one whole. I’m not sure how to answer the question of whether Jesus was the ultimate definition of being truly human, but it’s interesting that some PC authors say that (?) One film that really focuses on Trek’s secular humanism, is “The Final Frontier” -- Kirk confronts and destroys the false god of Shakiree. It ends with Kirk saying “maybe God is not out there, but in here – the human heart.”