Part of the Hubble Deep Field; every speck of light here is an entire galaxy. Copyright NASA.
Space is big. Really big. You just won’t believe how vastly hugely mindbogglingly big it is. I mean you may think it’s a long way down the road to the chemist, but that’s just peanuts to space. – Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy
The Bible includes many claims that are difficult to believe–talking animals, a worldwide flood, divine appearances, and of course the resurrection–but Paul’s claim that “creation waits with eager longing for the revelation of the children of God” (Romans 8:18-23) must rank fairly high. Perhaps that made sense to those who believed “the heavens” were a hard dome overhanging the earth, but what about today?
People have always recognized the universe is big, but we now know that “big” does not even come close to doing it justice. In truth, the universe is so unimaginably vast that nothing in our experience can even provide a suitable analogy. You could imagine the whole earth were the size of an atom (but can you really imagine how small an atom is?) and the universe would still be bigger by comparison than anything can see.
Remember the famous image of Earth as a “pale, blue dot”? This picture was only taken from the edge of our own solar system, and our sun is just one of more than a hundred billion stars in our galaxy alone. How many is a hundred billion? If you started counting stars today, one per second, it would take you three thousand years to finish our one galaxy. Imagine how long it would take to visit all those, much less the uncountable multitudes of other such galaxies that we know must exist. The idea that the inhabitants of this one tiny speck could have a central role in such universe is, on the face of it, patently absurd.
Stargate Universe well illustrates the problem (watch it on Hulu). The show follows a group of people who have been transported to an ancient starship hurtling through the far reaches of the universe, “several billion light years from home.” The ship, called The Destiny, has been travelling faster than light for hundreds of thousands of years to get this far, yet even its fantastically long voyage has only brought the ship through an infinitesimal portion of the universe as a whole. You could imagine its entire journey as a single thread dropped into the Pacific, and you would barely approach the vastness of space though which it has traveled. The point should be clear: humanity could spend millions if not billions of years colonizing the stars, and we would still fall far short of visiting–much less remaking–the whole of creation.
Of course, Paul was certainly not thinking of converting aliens in distant galaxies when he wrote of creation awaiting “the revealing of the children of God,” but that doesn’t really solve the problem of the incarnation in such an unimaginably vast universe. Paul’s point was that God’s coming in Christ–and the gift of God’s spirit–had fundamentally changed the game–the universe as a whole is different this side of the incarnation. That Paul didn’t realize how small a part of the universe the Earth actually occupies doesn’t make his claim any easier to swallow. Whether he realized it or not, there is simply no way we have the ability–in ourselves–to play such a central role in the cosmos.
Then again, the biblical authors were hardly unaware of the absurdity of humanity’s place in the universe, even if they would not have described it in the same terms we do. After all, it wasn’t as though we needed to learn about distant galaxies to realize that, in the grand scheme of things, humanity is a small thing. As the Psalmist put it:
When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars that you have established, what are human beings that you are mindful of them, mortals that you care for them? (Psalm 8:3-4)
In other words, the significance of humanity relative to the rest of the cosmos–if we have one–rests not on humanity’s inherent prominence or abilities, but solely on the grace of God. Nor is it so absurd that a small or rare thing could have such significance. Children are common but invaluable; diamonds are valued precisely because they are rare.
On the one hand, if intelligent life is unique to earth after all, then our small size relative to the whole is totally inconsequential. If, on the other hand, humanity is but one among many races of thinking beings spread across the universe, then things are more complicated, but until we actually go out and see for ourselves what those others are like–or if they even exist–we cannot really know whether our religious conceptions will stand up to the encounter, or only be revealed as wild hubris. But we can speculate, and perhaps no mainstream science fiction has gone further with such speculation than the Stargate franchise.
Stargate, admittedly, has not always been friendly to religion. The basic premise is that the ancient gods were actually highly advanced aliens who transplanted humanity across the galaxy (if not the universe). A major theme of the first Stargate series (SG1) was the attempt to free the galaxy from slavery to these “false gods” and their armies of brainwashed followers. Still, the idea that humanity might not be restricted to Earth does suggest a broader significance that is explored in a variety of ways in the first two series. As the story progresses, humans from Earth are indeed instrumental in saving the peoples of several galaxies, human and non-human alike.
As far as Christianity itself is concerned, the previous series have been notably ambivalent, as seen especially in season 3 episode Demons and in the transparent caricatures of fundamentalist Christianity in the season 8 episode Icon and the Origin story-line in the final two seasons. Stargate Universe, however, has so far taken a much more positive approach.
For instance, the two most recent episodes, titled Darkness and Light, include characters praying the 23rd Psalm and the Lord’s Prayer at key points in the narrative and embody a fairly clear, if symbolic, death and resurrection story-arc. Like Battlestar Galactica (to which it owes a great deal), SGU clearly recognizes that religion will not simply disappear as technology advances and new frontiers are opened, and its effects need not be negative. Also like BSG–and rather unlike previous incarnations of Stargate–our heroes here are broken people, variously prideful, needy or both, and as much in need of enlightenment as they are likely to bring it to the superstitious masses. In other words, they are just like us: clinging to their religious heritage, and interpreting their experiences in its light, no matter how far from home they get, not because they have it all figured out, but because it is the best they know.
The more interesting question is whether their religious conceptions have any merit beyond psychological comfort, and here again SGU is more like BSG than previous incarnations of Stargate. This was particularly seen in the third part of the Pilot, titled Air (spoilers follow). When the ancient ship’s life support system begins to fail, the crew is forced to travel to a desert planet in search of materials necessary to fix it. The episode is positively dripping with Christian imagery, highlighted by several flashbacks of one character’s own history with the Christian church.
First, there is the fact that they must go into the desert–a symbol of death–to seek life, and while there they repeatedly test the sand with a red chemical that looks like blood, each time pouring it out onto the ground. The symbolism later becomes literal as a few of the team give up hope and decide to try a different planet that The Destiny had warned them against. Two people go through, and are never heard from again, but a third is prevented from going when the others shoot him–spilling his blood but ultimately saving his life. At the climax of the episode, another man is on the verge of death when he sees a vision of a crucifix standing over the very spot he had been searching for, then collapses into a dream. He is a teenager, confessing his sin to a priest, who assures him: “We have redemption through his blood.”
If this symbolism were not enough, the episode supplements it with a second set of imagery involving water. They travel to this planet through a portal that looks like a pool of water, and at the end of the episode one character holds the portal open by sticking part of his body into it, knowing it could close at any moment and kill him. He does this to buy his friends enough time to escape themselves, before all three pass through the waters to life. Nor was this act of self-sacrifice the first instance of baptismal imagery in the episode. Dehydrated and dying, the same man who saw the crucifix also meets an apparently sentient whirlwind, which offers him water in the desert, reviving him and revealing the material they need to fix their life support system. Here again is biblical imagery: The whirlwind symbolizes the Spirit of God, which is associated with revelation and new life in a variety of biblical texts. Isaiah speaks of the Spirit bringing forth springs in the desert; John says “the spirit blows where it wills”; God addressed Job from the whirlwind.
In the end, like the rag-tag crew of The Destiny we do not know what sort of beings might live in the far reaches of the universe–was that intelligent whirlwind truly God’s Spirit, or a previously unknown form of embodied life, or perhaps even God working though such an alien being?–but it appears that even out there God’s presence can still be felt, redemption is still on offer, humanity still has a grander Destiny, even if we do not yet know where it is taking us.







I’ve found the science fiction of both Stargate, and Battlestar Galactica, to offer a great venue for religious discussion. I’m an avid watcher of them all. Stargate does seem to offer some “religious”, or “spiritual” truth in the form of ascension – which Daniel attains, and chooses to return to humanity from. One could also take the ascended spirits ambivalence about human matters as a dig at deism.
By: JohnO on October 24, 2009
at 6:38 pm
I haven’t followed any of the Stargate series, so this is interesting, especially (to me) the differences in the writers’ ideas about God in the first series as compared to the most recent. If there is a God, and if he has a plan for creation and a desire to save and redeem creation, it creates story lines with greater nobility, I think. Humanity is searching for its purpose, God is protective of his creatures, sacrifice and life have meaning, etc. In a universe devoid of God, living creatures simply live and love (and hate) and die in a rather meaningless and random series of events. It’s far less satisfying, both for the characters in the story and the audience watching.
But aside from making for more interesting stories, the search for meaning and God also resonates with most of us, and probably draws viewers more into the stories. A good thing.
By: Charlie on October 24, 2009
at 7:29 pm
Yea Stargate (up until Universe) has been a thoroughly ‘modern’ storytelling, where each episode closes in on itself, and the only true arc is in the enemy they are facing.
By: JohnO on October 24, 2009
at 7:33 pm
Yeah, in the previous series, even when they allowed for higher beings or an after-life, they were usually quick to offer some sort of (pseudo-)scientific explanation. Still, the value of a show isn’t necessarily in its literal truth–if they don’t affirm Christianity, forget them, right?–and Daniel’s story-line especially was in many ways religious, even if given a scientific veneer. And of course, the franchise has always been filled with religious imagery, just never quite like this.
Thanks for the stimulating comments!
By: Ken Brown on October 24, 2009
at 9:39 pm
I haven’t been able to maintain interest in either of the earlier Stargate series, but SG-Universe is holding my attention, so far, and from what I have seen, I’d say your comments are on target. BSG started out interesting from a religious or spiritual angle and became either less so, or so convoluted that it was just impossible to figure out where to jump in. For my money, the prize for respectful and intriguing presentation of religions, including Christianity, in space & the future, still goes to Babylon 5.
By: Beth on October 25, 2009
at 4:43 pm
My money for respectful treatment of religion in science fiction goes to Firefly, short-lived though it was (and Serenity, as much as I love it, didn’t quite do this aspect of it justice).
I never got into Babylon 5, though I see that it is available on Hulu, so maybe I’ll have to give it another try at some point.
You’re certainly right that BSG got convoluted by the end, though it still managed to do some very interesting things with its religious themes. For instance, see these two posts of mine, and Carmen Andres’ many excellent posts on the series, like this one.
By: Ken Brown on October 25, 2009
at 5:23 pm
Beth, I just can’t get into the crazy creatures in Babylon 5. I can’t suspend belief for the story to take hold. I’ll have to try again sometime.
By: JohnO on October 25, 2009
at 4:46 pm
I’ve not gotten into Stargate yet, though I may at some time, based on your post and Robert Picardo being in it (or so I heard).
One things that’s interesting is that some Christians have used that Romans 8 passage to argue against life on other planets. I think the idea is that the Bible is so earth-centric, and, if Jesus’ work for people on earth affects the entire cosmos, then there must not be life on other planets.
Okay, that may not make much sense, but I’m not sure how to phrase it. Here’s a quote from a Christiananswers.net article:
“What bearing does this have on the question of extraterrestrial life? The timetable (and the whole reason) for this destruction and re-creation clearly seems to be based on God’s plan for us Earthlings. If God had created intelligent life on other worlds, it is hard to imagine that their lives would be calibrated by the failures of Earth’s inhabitants. It seems unlikely and unfair that their distant planets would be destroyed by God because of His plan for Earth. The implication of Scripture is that there are no other intelligent beings besides man, animals, and the angels.”
By: James Pate on October 27, 2009
at 5:34 am
Richard Picardo only plays a minor and occasional character who first appears in season 7 of SG-1, and at various points in SGA. It isn’t until the last season of SGA that he really becomes a main character.
I’ve heard plenty of Christians claim we must be alone (usually as some sort of back-handed attack on evolution), but I’ve not seen so direct an argument for it. It seems to me that Paul’s Earth-centric perspective should instead discourage us from extending its point to distant planets. If for Paul “the world” means Earth (first and foremost), then it is to the Earth that we should apply his comments. Any implications they might have for other worlds can only be speculated about, certainly not proved.
That said, I think the quote you offer depends on a very particular interpretation of the Fall, which sees a perfect creation that is fundamentally altered by a historical act of sin by the first humans. I think that is one version of Christianity that can safely be dismissed in light of what we know of the cosmos. When we can look out and see galaxies billions of light-years away (not mention fossils on our own planet from millions of years ago), it is rather difficult to argue that the universe has been fundamentally altered within the last 10,000 years or so. It sure doesn’t look like it has. If on the other hand, God created the world “very good” (but not perfect), and gave us a role in bringing it to final completion, then our sin did not alter the universe itself, it merely derailed God’s plan for its completion. In that case, Jesus’ death and resurrection can still be seen as the turning point of the universe, not because the universe itself has been changed, but because he has made it possible for humanity to get back on track, so to speak.
The deeper problem for me, as I suggested in the post, is that God himself would become man. It doesn’t seem like the sort of thing that God would do over and over again on different planets (then again, we really cannot know that), so why is Earth so special? I guess the short answer is: It’s not, but God loves us anyway. I suppose that’s the same answer as you’d have to give for “why did God choose the Jews?”, but that leaves a lot unanswered.
By: Ken Brown on October 27, 2009
at 9:16 am
So when Romans 8 says the creation was subjected to bondage (or something like that), are you saying that means God’s plan for his creation was derailed?
By: James Pate on October 27, 2009
at 12:03 pm
On Paul’s statement that “creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God” (8:20-21 NIV), since decay (entropy) clearly predates humanity, I would apply this statement to the original creation state, though I admit that is probably not what Paul meant. I don’t think “the fall” was a historical event so much as a description of how all of us choose pride over obedience and so cannot be allowed to take for ourselves eternal life (that would be part of the bondage). Only as we come to trust ourselves entirely to God can we be trusted with such power, and can creation begin to find its own freedom–all by God’s grace alone.
That’s admittedly speculative, but so is most everything one might say about the ultimate origins and destiny of things.
By: Ken Brown on October 27, 2009
at 12:16 pm
Great post! When I read stuff like that about our universe it makes me want to shout praises to God. It amazes me that he would even consider a speck like me worth saving!
Thanks bro.
By: Joe McBee on October 27, 2009
at 9:30 am
That’s the other side of it, eh? If God really did become human to save us, it is that much more incredible in a universe like ours.
By: Ken Brown on October 27, 2009
at 9:47 am
[...] skeptical about. Here are a couple of excerpts that bear on the conversation in the comments on my last post: The doctrine of a universal redemption spreading outwards from the redemption of Man, mythological [...]
By: C.S. Lewis on Universal Redemption « C. Orthodoxy on October 27, 2009
at 10:54 am
[...] Christian Carnival 300 This week’s Christian Carnival is number 300–is it really possible they’ve been doing these for nearly 6 years?–and is hosted at Brain Cramps for God. It includes my post on Stargate, the Christian Story and the Role of Humanity in the Universe. [...]
By: Christian Carnival 300 « C. Orthodoxy on October 28, 2009
at 3:37 pm
According to Joe Malozzi, Origin is more a take on Islam than any variety of Christianity. Christianity has its moments, though. In one episode they revealed that Teal’c had read the entire Bible, and he seemed to have nothing negative to say about it. They made it clear in Demons that Sokar had suppressed typical Christian beliefs to capitalize on one element of them, and they notably have never had Yahweh as an alien the way they have with every other divinity. But they clarified that Sokar was using already-existing elements of Christianity. It wasn’t that Satan in Christian thought had originally referred to him.
It would have been interesting to have a Christian character thinking through how these revelations affected their faith, though, the way they did on B5 with Brother Theo and his monks, especially in “Passing Through Gethsemane” (and even moreso in the recent direct-to-DVD episode about an actual demon trying to escape Earth, which I found absolutely fascinating).
I’m surprised no one has mentioned DS9. They took on religion in that show and often did a decent job.
By: Jeremy Pierce on October 29, 2009
at 8:40 pm
It seems to me that Origin (like the Cylon religion in BSG) is meant to implicate fundamentalist monotheistic religion in general, not just Islam (or Christianity). For instance, the Ori war is called a Crusade, not a Jihad. That said, the picture is by no means uniformly negative towards Christianity (which is why I said “ambivalent”), and the same Origin storyline also includes SG1’s most explicit use of Judeo-Christian symbols for good, particularly the “Sangraal” (Holy Grail) and Ark of Truth. It is also in one of those season 9 or 10 episodes (I cannot recall which) that Mitchell remarks that just because aliens play at gods doesn’t prove that there isn’t a true God behind everything (though I think he qualifies it with: “at least, that’s what my grandma would say” heh).
Similarly, and as you noted, the portrayal of Christianity in “Demons” is not wholly negative either. Certainly the Bishop offers a very negative caricature of the Catholic Priesthood, but in contrast the villager who helps SG1 evidences genuine faith, and it is his perspective that wins out. It’s also in that episode that Teal’c explicitly denies that any Gu’auld “possesses the necessary benevolence that I have read about in your Bible” (Jack’s reaction is classic, BTW), and the episode even implies that the people’s deliverance by SG1 could be interpreted as an answer to prayer.
I agree about DS9 as well, and Voyager and Enterprise also attempted something of the same respectful treatment of religion, with varying success.
By: Ken Brown on October 29, 2009
at 10:11 pm
[...] (named “Adam” and “Eve”–Man and Life–or otherwise). As I wrote not long ago: When we can look out and see galaxies billions of light-years away (not to mention fossils on our [...]
By: Was the Fall Necessary? « C. Orthodoxy on December 10, 2009
at 1:03 pm