Star Trek Beams Us Up Again

Hi All!

I LOVE Star Trek, always have and always will. I must say though that although the original series was great, Star Trek: The next Generation, took everything to a new level. While Kirk came across as flamboyant and at times a "Tsar", Jean-Luc Piccard was the ultimate commander.

His love for history, the arts, music and culture all together, combined with his "wisdom" made me love the series even more.

I stand with Athena's conclusion.

The unfortunate part is that some people are too obstinant to even consider another's point of view, and those are the ones that will cause trouble no matter what. Sad, but true!

i read a book by francis collins called "the language of god". i has a great explanation of dna/genes/mutations and their role in evolution. the claims (i'm always skeptical of this) that he was an atheist and that studying dna brought him to god.... he says cute things like "dna is god's instruction book". another evidence for god he cites is "the moral law".

of course i would disagree that the moral law is evidence for god, but these are MUCH better arguements than "this ancient scripture here says so".

interesting theory re: spidey's ulterior motives. frankly i love when people post crazy stuff like that - gives me something to respond to. i mean, if we're all on the same page there's nothing to talk about.

Walter and Calsailor,

Spidey is really something else, isn't he? Many of us have tried to get through to him, to no avail. He just keeps going and going, like some totally off-the-wall energizer bunny. This bit about countries listed in the bible is not new with him, but it varies. A year ago I believe he said there were 15 countries that were going to wage war against America and destroy it. Yet during the recent election, he switched to saying that blue states would be nuked and red states would be spared. All in the bible, of course.

There have been suggestions here, and there is some merit in them, that Spidey's game is to make right wing Christianity look silly and thus drive people away from it. If this is so, he is succeeding quite well.

I've made my peace with Spidey, and no longer bother him. Nor does he bother me much.

Mean Spider,

This will make your head explode. The leading scientist on the Human Genome Project is an evangelical Christian. He has started an organization for evangelicals to bridge the gap between faith and science.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/08/AR2009050802383.html

Collins, an evangelical Christian who was home-schooled until sixth grade, wants to raise the level of discourse about science and faith, and to help fundamentalists -- both in science and religion -- see that the two can coexist. To that end, he created the BioLogos Foundation and last month launched a Web site -- BioLogos.org -- to advance an alternative to the extreme views that tend to dominate the debate.

CalSailor,
he was responding to this post of mine:

spidermean2, you said,
"You guys make this wold unsafe because of your stupidity. The Bible has already named the countries to be destroyed in the coming doomsday. They wre written in metaphors which the idIots can't understand."
____________________________________
i must have planks in my eyes or something. please help me, if you're allowed to reveal it to an atheist, which are the countries to be destroyed?

Posted by: walter-in-fallschurch | May 14, 2009 12:07 PM
_____________________________________

of course he's talking about the part where jesus says he talks in parables to confuse "outsiders" (mk4:11-12).

Spidey:

You say (regarding the request to name to countries you think are going to be destroyed on doomsday...)

"I don't think I have the permission to name the specific countries. Read the Bible. The clues are all there."

Where in the Bible do you possibly get the idea that you "don't have the permission to name the specific countries". [and just who might give you "permission" anyway? Your pastor? your next door neighbor??? Nope] There is NO SUCH limitation in scripture. NOWHERE does it say that there is such secret knowledge that only the true believers hold. That is called GNOSTICISM...from secret knowledge: "gnosis". That has been absolutely rejected from day one of the church. The only thing the bible says concerning the end times: No one knows when it will be. It will be marked by the return of the Son. That's all the knowledge your gonna get: When it happens. There is NO secret list in the bible of which country is (or is not) going to be destroyed.

Pr Chris

spidermean2,
HAHAAHAhaHaaHAHAAHAahAhaHhAhah. WOW that's great! thanks.! it's like a caricature. i couldn't have made up anything better....

you said,
"What are these countries? If your country or state believes in Humanism, Darwinian evolution, gay marriage, etc, chances are it will be doomed.
I don't think I have the permission to name the specific countries. Read the Bible. The clues are all there.
But I always say in this forum that the liberal evolutionist gay marrying Democrat coastal states in America will be doomed."
__________________________

ah...so clearly you think god likes fascist, ignorant, bigoted, homophobes. better move to a red state.

you know, i checked the bible and "america" is not mentioned in there. neither is "germany", "belgium", "holland", "england" or really any recognizable. i did see "epheseus", "smyrna", "pergamas", "thyatira", "sardis", "philadelphia", and "laodiceans". i think he meant a different "philadelphia", but i'll stay out of pennsylvania just in case. looking at the place names in the bible it seems like the only people who have to worry are those within a few hundred miles of jerusalem.

but seriously, why do think he's coming back? i mean, read my post below (the post second of this thread). jesus thought the apacalypse was going to happen a LONG time ago.

" "Live long, and prosper" America. "

That is after stupidity in America and around the world is extinguished.

It is called Doomsday because of the magnitude of destruction. The most powerful bombs during WW2 was the one dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. There were only two A-bombs and both were used. Their total destructive power is equivalent to about 30 kilotons of TNT.

Today we have billions, if not trillions, of kilotons of TNT in store. Just one bomb is equivalent to millions of tons and not just in small thousands.

It is possible that some countries or states would be erased from the face of the earth.

What are these countries? If your country or state believes in Humanism, Darwinian evolution, gay marriage, etc, chances are it will be doomed.

I don't think I have the permission to name the specific countries. Read the Bible. The clues are all there.

But I always say in this forum that the liberal evolutionist gay marrying Democrat coastal states in America will be doomed.

Whoever caused them to be doomed will also be doomed. It will be an all-out nuclear war.

America's power is in its Air Force. Why does it share its aircraft technology to other countries and scale down its missile defense sheild? It's all for the purpose of setting itself up to be doomed. This a a classic example of how stupidity set itself up for destruction.

Why does stupid nations hate a country that has the largest stockpile of nukes? Still it's how stupidity works. You can't easily punch a lion and go away unsacthed.

one more thing, then i'll wait for spidermean2 (and hopefully others) to comment. to tie this evolution discussion back to the original thread, i would bet, though this is pure speculation on my part, that there are more "trekies" among the steves than among the dissenters.

spidermean2, you said,
"You guys make this wold unsafe because of your stupidity. The Bible has already named the countries to be destroyed in the coming doomsday. They wre written in metaphors which the idIots can't understand."
____________________________________

i must have planks in my eyes or something. please help me, if you're allowed to reveal it to an atheist, which are the countries to be destroyed?

that's really quaint that they read from genesis on apollo. genesis is an artifact of our cultural heritage, deeply ingrained in our history. you can't read old western literature or appreciate pre-impressionist art without knowing the biblical stories. but all that doesn't make the ancient mesopotamian cosmology true - except possibly in the most "figurative" sense.

the God-Our-Designer hypothesis ("intelligent design") MAY be true. for it to be true it would have to somehow incorporate evolution. for instance, maybe god designed dna, or maybe he has intervened periodically (over the last few billion years) to guide genetic mutations, or maybe he sent the asteroid that hit earth 65 million years ago that cleared the way for mammals the humans to come to prominence. it's possible, and it's not ruled out by "darwinism" (as you guys like to say), but it's not a SCIENTIFIC hypothesis.

of course another silly theory is that god just made it look like evolution happened to fool us. this god-the-prankster idea is kind of insulting to god imho.

spidermean2,
i would distinguish between "scientist" and "engineer". there are plenty of PhD(well, a few anyway) engineers, chemists, computer "scientists" and mathematicians who question the validity of the theory of evolution. in fact, michael behe's "discovery institute" (of kitzmiller v dover fame) began a list of dissenting scientists. i think the "list" is up to maybe 800 or so! for instance, see here:

http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/

that's a lot of dissent! right?

in response, the NSCE began "project steve". to get on this list, you have to have a PhD, "believe in" evolution and be named "steve".

http://ncseweb.org/taking-action/list-steves

it's so funny. the list is BIGGER than the "dissent" list! and there are plenty of BIOLOGISTS - people who study life. of course lists don't "prove" the content of scientist's "beliefs". but let's look closer at the lists. for one thing, there are no atheists on the "dissenters" list. don't you think if the evidence were unconvincing there would be ONE atheist out there who would dissent? (we love dissenting, you know...) the scientist who could convince other scientists that evolution is wrong would be the most famous scientists since einstein, or maybe...darwin.

the "dissenter" statement does not specifically say what a better explanation of how we got here is. there could be many other "natural" explanations for the diversity of life and the fossil record and dna. another funny thing about the dissenter list is you'll see many PhDs theologians, teachers at seminaries and so on.

though dissent seems to be ENTIRELY theistic, evolution is not inherently atheistic. looking at the steves, you'll find many professed "believers". there are steves who are christian, jewish (i don't think many muslims...), hindu, buddhist, wiccan(?), and yes, atheists.

Apollo 8, the first manned mission to the Moon, entered lunar orbit on Christmas Eve, December 24, 1968. That evening, the astronauts; Commander Frank Borman, Command Module Pilot Jim Lovell, and Lunar Module Pilot William Anders did a live television broadcast from lunar orbit, in which they showed pictures of the Earth and Moon seen from Apollo 8. Lovell said, "The vast loneliness is awe-inspiring and it makes you realize just what you have back there on Earth." They ended the broadcast with the crew taking turns reading from the book of Genesis.

William Anders:

"For all the people on Earth the crew of Apollo 8 has a message we would like to send you".

"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.
And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness."

Borman then added, "And from the crew of Apollo 8, we close with good night, good luck, a Merry Christmas, and God bless all of you - all of you on the good Earth."

Iam an engineer and I understand what is science and what is stupidity. Nobody yet understands how DNA works and it remains a mystery. Unless that mystery is solved, nobody can categorically say that it evolved or not.

IDIOTS think that it evolved. Ask them how. You'll get a blank stare as if they have an empty head.

Do you have an empty head or is it just that you are not capable of thinking? God said that those who don't believe in Him are fools. What an accurate description.

And by the way, science blossomed at the time when the Bible became accessible to the masses. Great scientists all came from Christian nations. Even the first message from Apollo 9 was a Bible verse.

You guys make this wold unsafe because of your stupidity. The Bible has already named the countries to be destroyed in the coming doomsday. They wre written in metaphors which the idIots can't understand.

It is a sad thing that stupidity is self destructive. The destruction is so great as the stupidity is also great. I can't understand what made all these people become sooo DUMB.

spidermean2,
i blame people like you for america's declining position as the leader in scientific research. judeochrislamic fundamentalists (mostly christian in the u.s.) have "dumbed down" scientific education in the u.s. to such an extent that we can discuss "intelligent design" as if it's a scientific proposition.

evolution is the guiding principle of all life sciences, yet fundamentalists reject it in favor of an ancient mesopotamian cosmology. it's embarrassing.

i call "intelligent design" the "G.O.D. hypothesis" for "God Our Designer". it is really just an argument from ignorance (and hubris and incuriosity). michael behe, G.O.D.'s cheif advocate, is a real biochemist who has published real scientific papers in real peer-reviewed scientific journals - just NOT about G.O.D.. his "arguments" in favor of G.O.D. boil down to "i can't figure out how bacterial flagella [or insert a currently unexplained biological feature/process here] could have evolved." having apparently considered all present and future ideas of science, behe has determined that they cannot have evolved. it is physically impossible. it’s a dead end – there’s nothing left to learn about bacterial flagella. let’s move on. all he can say is, “G.O.D. did it.” thank god all scientists don’t have that attitude or we’d still have polio and horse-drawn carriages.

This is wishful thinking. Armageddon is man's destiny coz Humanism and Darwin's evolution theory made billions of people insane.

How is it possible that the seeds of trees can produce edible fruits while man with brains cannot duplicate the feat. It's called INTELLIGENT DESIGN and yet the idiots can't see intelligence behind it.

The biggest so called "christian church", (the Catholic Church) dismisses ID and side themselves with the Darwin's Stupidity Design.

46 percent of Californians support legalization of pot. That signifies millions of stupid people too.

This world is doomed and there's no doubt about it.

THE BIBLE IS NEVER WRONG. IT HAD SEEN THE FUTURE LONG BEFORE all these stupidity is overtaking us.

Doomsday is coming.

The future is bright after Doomsday. That is the prophecy.

My favorite Startrek episode, scene as a re-run, starred Frank Gorshin, He represented a people whose face was black in one profile, white in the other, they in eternal battle against an enemy who looked exactly the same as they. (Physical appearance was always distinctive in Star Trek)

At all events, I don't recall the details as well as I'd like, but at or toward the end, Kirk expressed his bemusement, asking what distinguished the two "nations" visibly.

"Isn't it obvious?" replied the Gorshin character. "He's black on the right side, while I'm black on the left."

Hi, Lep, Athena, Paganplace,

Well, by damn, I'm a Trekkie too! I am old enough to remember well the original series. My son and I went to the new movie, and both had a grand time. I raised him right!

And, oh yeah, Walter in Falls Church - thanks for the laughs! Indeed, watch out for religious comments around Farnaz - she will soon bring in her 'allies' - minions? - and possibly hijack this thread, as they have done with Susan Jacoby's.

Athena: Ah... Star Trek. My OTHER religion, and what influenced me more than Catholicism in my formative years.

Me too. I discovered the syndicated reruns when I was in junior high (back when they still called it junior high). I was already quite disillusioned with my parents' Christianity, even though they continued to drag me to Sunday School and church.
The first episode I ever saw was "Devil in the Dark." Perhaps it was while watching Spock mind-meld with the Horta and learn that she was not some mindless berserker that must be destroyed to make the mines safe for humans, but an intelligent being with a highly developed sense of ethics, and a mother defending her children from a home invasion, that the first tiny seeds of my eventual Paganism were planted.

Ah... Star Trek. My OTHER religion, and what influenced me more than Catholicism in my formative years.

Why "Star Trek" continues to live after 40+ years is that it poses a POSITIVE view of humanity. We can work past all of our differences, and branch out to the stars. There is no apocalypse or "end of the world" judgement day. The future is what we make it - unless you happen to be wearing a red shirt, and go on an away team mission with Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. :D

One particularly interesting story I've heard was from an award-winner at the 40th Anniversary Star Trek convention a few years ago. This guy was a civil engineer from Beirut, Lebanon, who was working to rebuild his country after the devastating civil war. When he was a kid, the neighborhoods were strictly divided between Christian, Jewish, Sunni Moslem, Shia Moslem, etc. There was very little interaction between them - except for Wednesday nights. That's when several families of all stripes would come over to this guy's house, because his parents had one of the few TVs in the neighborhood, and they would watch "Star Trek" and talk about it afterwards. Those Wednesday night showings inspired this kid to become an engineer, like Scotty, and help solve his country's problems.

And that, my friends, is why I'm proud to be a Trekkie. Or Trekker. (A Trekker is a Star Trek fan. A Trekkie is someone that insists that you call them a Trekker.)Because I believe in the ability of humans to work together to overcome our differences.

gosh farnaz,
i guess you're so knowledgeable about the differences between the abrahamic religions you just can't see the similarities anymore.

No.1!!! I thought this was an A.P. "Course". :)Considering it's a free service!, I shouldn't complain about the Quality!

2. Chekov is en able Navigator... Sulu could "drive the enemy before you" with tactics and skill!

3. It's wise not to underestimate the ability of "Nero's" Vessel. Designed to operate in a self sufficent environment,able to adapt, improvise. Even at the deepest depths of Space.

4.I'm guessing Nero's parents disavow his existance! hence his behavior.

As Always, It's a pleasure Post-ing

James David Whitall II

PaganPlace:

"Beehive hairdoes and velour and all..
Let's pretend, shall we?"

Okay, by me, assuming we get to wear beehive hairdos and velour.:-)

I'm not confused by it, not at all, Walter, merely, knowledgeable. There's a difference, yunno.

Into precision, moi. Into distinguishing a bull from a ferris wheel. Not uncommon, I find.

Actually, one of the most interesting things about the original Star Trek, is: it was the early Sixties, ... you've got two Jewish guys playing the All-American guy from Iowa and the logical atheistic alien, respectively, two Irishmen playing Scots, a gay guy playing a romantic kind of hunk, a Ukranian playing a Russkie, and all of it somehow representing our best hopes for Earth somehow, still. Even today. Beehive hairdoes and velour and all..

Let's pretend, shall we?

I dunno, Walter, Farnazz.... what would Kirk say if he met you two? :)

it's so weird... i've NEVER been accused of being catholic. bizarre, farnaz, bizarre.

anybody else out there confused by the term "abrahamic"? it seems so simple to me, but, you know, me don't think too goodly.

Walter,

Let me put it another way. You are more than free to be Vatican-centric. Just don't so obviously cloak your true perspective in universalist, hegemonic terms. If you do, some will think sophistic--at best! Maybe more than a few.

Walter in Falls Church,

As I've told you, I have no problem with your adhering to the proclamations of the former Pope, he who in one breadth declared three racically different religions "Abrahamic," and in the next all those who didn't accept the divinity of Christ in grave danger.

Sensible declaration to some followers of Popes, I'm sure, but not to anyone else.

I have explained some of the distinctions to you several times. I mean no disrespect, but if you're a Papist, a Catholic, whatever, simply say so, and be done with it, instead of posting from a Christian hegemonic perspective and proclaiming yourself an atheist.

There is no such thing as an "Abrahamic" religion, except in the minds of the Feel Goods, the inept, would-be polemicists.

There are ways to make points based on evidence.

Abrahamicize away, Walter--You've made your religious perspective clear. Don't mind me. I seek precision, reasoned arguments. I know such tendencies annoy some people.

No offense.

Farnaz

I guess, speaking of 'strange new worlds' ...I find it funny how book-worshippers, 'literalists' all end up *so alike,* however wound up you may get about differences in your words. Really have no more interest in one set of words than another...

Seems the most frightened elements in the both of youse are all after the Sufis.

Make fun of dervishes, if not make claims of soom regarding them.

Heh. It's one of the only things in all the practices about your God that * *get.* :)

If I saw the universe you guys seem intent on fighting over as you do, *that's* probaboy what I'd be doing.

Don't happen to see things that way, but I get it.

The stuff the lot of you are in my face with every day.. Not so much.

Funny, that. :)

" the "bad" verses in the NT are very mild compared to the ones in the koran. the ones in the koran are also much more numerous."

Frankly, dude if book-worshippers are looking for an excuse, it only takes one. Doesn't even have to be translated right.

"i believe sufis use the koran (as well as other texts)."

Yes, but at their best, they *use* it. Rather than being used *by* it.

"paganplace,
be careful about saying "abrahamic" around farnaz..."

I assure you, my theology or sense of history does *not* revolve around what Farnaz might think.

"i just say "mesopotamian" to mean the culture in/from which yahwehism sprang. those conceptions (creation story w/a snowglobe earth, a garden, snake, flood and so on) didn't grow in a vacuum. the hebrews MAY have been enlightened for 3000 years ago, but let's move on."

Frankly, what the Hebrews took out of there was mostly turned backwards... the whole 'Genesis' story was really about very different things, originally: the Hebrews basically over time turned 'Prometheus' into a bad guy... while writing their own context around those stories and a reversal of them. If you really look at it objectively, if you believe their story as history, they were an immigrant labor class, sometimes enslaved, who often took an inversion of the local myths for their own story.

They weren't actually so 'monotheist' as made out to be, for much of their history, either.

That stuff comes much later than most Abrahamics think.

paganplace,
be careful about saying "abrahamic" around farnaz...

i just say "mesopotamian" to mean the culture in/from which yahwehism sprang. those conceptions (creation story w/a snowglobe earth, a garden, snake, flood and so on) didn't grow in a vacuum. the hebrews MAY have been enlightened for 3000 years ago, but let's move on.

indeed, these were superstitious men trying to make sense of an incomprehensible world. i really do think the koran is a step backwards morally. the "bad" verses in the NT are very mild compared to the ones in the koran. the ones in the koran are also much more numerous.

i believe sufis use the koran (as well as other texts).

Heh, Walter... You blame 'mesopotamian' civilization for, apparently, Abrahamic civilizations getting it *backwards.* (Not that it was terribly snuggly, but this unfortunately ain't been about Inanna in any moralistic way in a long time. :) ) ...Except for Muslims.. They're very bad. Right.

Strictly speaking, Mesoptamian cosmology had more room for other places and peoples existing in the universe than ever did Abrahamic tribal-cenricism.

(Also the Egyptian stuff that made some popular 'Stargate' sci-fi has more room in it than does what the Hebrews took out of there, ....even if it basically totally left out Isis Nuit, and Ma'at: actually, I think people find the idea that the ancients knew of, if they weren't themselves, 'ancient astronauts' may in fact come from people hanging onto a sense that the universe is more wondrous and ...cool and interactive, than being about an 'Ultimate judge' foremost concerned with reproductive plumbing. )

I really wouldn't say 'The Koran is a giant step backwards.' ..Seems some Christians have enough abusive crap in their own Bible to be going on with, even if they just pick a teeny passage and beat it to death.

The way *I* see all this monotheist stuff is basically about some folks trying to figure out civilization, ...maybe hung up somewhere, but if I needed a book... Well, I'd probably be a Sufi. :)

well, i'm pretty sure there's other life out there. i mean, if the mesopotamian creation story is true then, well, the entire rest of the universe is a gigantic waste of time and space...

i love the good, solid morality portrayed in star trek and other science fictions shows. they kind of portray an evolved society. certainly light years ahead of ancient mesopotamian morality. you'd never see holy wars or stoning or racism, sexism and exceptionalism portryed in a positive light in star trek, but that's practically all the old testament is. the new testament's a better - but still bears the marks of OUR evolving morality. the koran is just a giant step backwards.

Eh, the last line in the below is a stray one from something about 'literary and cultural importance' that I didn't write. :)

Well, Walter, actually I think there's a lot to be learned about the dominant culture, particularly with regard to such matters as the fanciful literature, and horror: usually these conservative strains try to blame the usual displays of horror, despair, and even torture, as being part of a 'decadent materialist culture,' but the way I see it, they're actually about the very same unresolved religious-based fears: there's very little uplifting or enlightening or ennobling to be found in a lot of it.

War often gets quite sanitized, but the message of a lot out there is, I guess, that people and the universe are essentially-horrible: I don't know how people can watch so much of that stuff.

I, personally, have heard enough of screaming in my life, and we need to be looking to speculative fiction for more than that.

It's been in my thoughts and prayers and meditations a lot lately, actually, how I can have seen and known so much about 'man's inhumanity to man' and still be so darn sure such things really *aren't* our nature.

Maybe it's cause I know how much it hurts us... maybe it's cause these views of 'fallen man' bound for cruelty and religious war, have, and offer, no future.

The thing about Star Trek is, well, most of the aliens aren't really 'aliens,' ...they're mostly, slight variations on humans. Different cultures, certainly. Star Trek's universe is just *teeming* with aliens more like us, by any objective standard, than different: (stands to reason that of all possibilities, in a highly-populated universe, we'd have the most interaction and even conflict with beings much like ourselves: I think it's likely that what we'd actually encounter would be a lot of creatures so alien we might just pass like literal ships in the night... maybe just *looking* at each other without necessarily having any idea what to make of each other. :)

Kind of a more 'intelligently-designed' universe, Trek, in a way: in fact, ancient races having deliberately spread our sort of life around has often turned up as an explanation for why there are in that narrative world so many similar beings.

It kind of puts forth as our noblest human characteristics, though, our curiosity, our giving, our desire to know and explore and share... these are wonderful things that grow from the roots of where and how we come from: tool-using social primates... this *all* comes together in everything we are: we even, at our best, treat 'God' in that manner.

Being of a shamanic bent, myself, I often see 'space' as very like the spirit world... wonder how much we'd change if we left our world, which is more than just the geology...

It's kind of a premise, though, in Trek, that if we can get over our differences *here,* we can be a positive force *in the galaxy.*

Gods, yaknow? I think *that*'s worth a try. :)

Trek's really more important

susan, you said,
"for the last couple of decades, the human imagination has been locked in a frightening "end of days" projection of the human, planetary, and religious future . Armageddeon, the idea that the end of history is imminent and will come about through cataclysmic war, perhaps even nuclear war, has dominated."

indeed. i would say people have been waiting for armageddon for 2000 years - and with "good" reason. in the new testament, jesus was clear that it is coming SOON:

the fact that jesus (as portrayed in the NT) was plainly wrong about the impending apocalypse has generated a whole genre of interpretive gymnastics: eschatology – which roughly translates as “what the hell was jesus talking about when he promised the end times to people standing right in front of him.” jesus spent a lot of time on this and used it as reason to believe in him. numerous times he said, “repent, for the kingdom of god is at hand.” he said there will be “signs.” there will be “wars, famines, plagues and earthquakes.” the “sun will be darkened,” the “stars will fall” and the “heavens will be shaken.” he told his disciples when they “see these things,” they are to “look up” – for they will see him “returning in glory” “on a cloud” with “angels” and “trumpets” in “judgment” to “redeem” the faithful and cast the wicked into hell. there will be “wailing and gnashing of teeth” for unbelievers and “eternal life” for believers. (mt10:23, mt16:28, mt23:36, mt24:29-35, mk9:1, mk13:24-31, lu9:27, lu21:25-33)

Ha. Here's a favorite topic of mine. :)

A very lovable movie, despite my thinking they actually may have gone rather a bit overboard with the destruction, despite the general hopeful themes: I suppose by your notion of a theme of the younger folks facing that kind of thing *down,* it still fits. :)

I think Star Trek really is our American utopian myth... and definitely a more hopeful future than the apocalyptic themes that seem to be such a major current in recent decades.

I noticed the trailers, too... I find the thinly-veiled apocalyptic stories... wearying, at this point, really.

The Trek film really was just pretty delightful, though: I think it really substituted a bit of over-the-topness for really having an interesting *villain,* but it was too much fun to really mind.

Gods, where did they *find* that McCoy? :)

"Dammit, Jim, if I'm like this at thirty five, I don't know how I'll be able to stand myself later!" :)