Star Trek V and the Atheist’s Strawman

I recently watched Star Trek V: The Final Frontier for the first time. There has been plenty of ink spilled over the philosophy of Star Trek (especially, no doubt, in blogs). I’d like to do a different take on it. I think that this particular Star Trek movie showed clearly the god of popular atheism. What I mean is it showed the god that many atheists reject. It is not though, the God Christians actually believe in.

The plot of Star Trek V is fairly straight forward (I apologize for spoilers). A Vulcan mystic named Sybok has had a vision from god. God wants him to come to him beyond the great barrier at the center of the galaxy where no ship or probe has ever returned from. This place is known has Eden to us terrans and a bunch of different names depending on whatever alien species you happen to be talking to. Sybok, Kirk, Spock, and McCoy eventually land on the planet where they meet god. The emotion and tone is one of great discovery, reverence, and general profoundness of the situation.

God has a small request. He needs a starship. Sybok is ready to give it him. Kirk, on the other hand, asks a question: “What does God need with a starship?” God gets a little upset. Sybok explains that Kirk is not totally on board with the mysticism. Finally, god starts smiting Kirk et al for doubting him. God never answers the question.



Whether it was intended or not, this image of man encountering god is something that is told by “atheist folklore.” It would not be hard to put Christopher Hitchens or Dawkins in Kirk’s place (or maybe they wouldn’t have come for the ride. Who knows?), or any atheist who might describe god as a “cosmic ego maniac” or something similar. God, so presented, can be found on just about any atheist website or in the stinkpile of non-theist vs theist forums on the internet. The belief is that if you question god, he will kick your ass. So theists worship him because they’re either too dumb to ask questions or so scared that they’re groveling all the time.

The problem is that this simply isn’t the God Christians believe in. I can’t think of any Christian thinker (at least no credible one) that has taught that if you ask God questions, or doubt him, God will smite you. In fact, anyone familiar with Abraham’s, or even Moses’ dialogues with YHWH we can get a clear idea that God doesn’t smite people for “doubting” him.

Now, it is true, that God isn’t obligated explain himself. This is something else that atheists may not seem to get about the Christian God. We can ask God all we want, but we may not always get an answer. If God does not answer, then this is no fault of him. This is the important point that Abraham seemed to understand when he questioned God. He did not ask presumptuously or as if he had authority to take God to court. Yet even if people shake their fists at the God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, that he is not likely to smite them as the big scary blue god did in Star Trek V.

Next time I run into an atheist who denies the existence of god, maybe I should ask what “god” he rejects in the first place. I think that might clear up a lot arguments. By clear up, I of course mean “avoid.”

Thanks for reading.

Star Trek: The Apocryphal Movie

Last night, I went to see the latest Star Trek movie. Did I like it? Mostly. I thought it was a good movie, though not without its problems for sure. Overall, I liked it in a similar way I liked the Smashing Pumpkins’ “Adore” album. That album was pretty good, but it was not really the Smashing Pumpkins sound I grew to like. So this movie was a well done, but it did not feel like Star Trek.

There were a lot of things that I liked. I loved young Kirk for instance. From the opening scene to the end of the movie, I thought he was well done. I find it totally believable that he would do stunts like steal the car, get into a fight at the bar, make out with the green alien girl, and other fun romps of a brash young military cadet. Little Spock was well done too. I liked the Vulcan academy of his childhood, how different both his parent’s were, and especially his refusal to enter into the Vulcan science academy. Seeing the characters as youngsters I think was a bold move. Overall it was successful. Additionally, as I will explain later, it was also a great selling point.

The interaction between these two characters was also true to the original series.
I only watched “Search for Spock” a few years ago. The friendship between the two men in this movie and that movie seemed pretty accurate to me.

I can’t complain about the special effects either. They were well executed without being gratuitous. The excitement of the chase scenes and the starship design was eye-catching enough to be a point in the movie’s favor. It was not, for instance, Star Wars episode I, in which special effects were simply a long video-game/demo reel. No, in this movie the CGI served its purpose. It helped create a convincing illusion of life in space. Although I admit, I totally expected young Kirk to meet Luke Skywalker when he ran into that ice cave. Live long and prosper my young padawan!

There were, however, some major plot-hole/logic problems with the movie. First, what’s up with the Romulans? The last Romulans I remember seeing were the Deep Space Nine Romulans in which they were all so bad-ass, cultured, and refined that they knew they earned the right to be a little smug around say –the Klingons. Yet these Romulans were basically a band of pirate-thugs that had lost any sense of refinement from the Romulan Empire. Maybe that was the point. After all, they did get their planet destroyed. It wasn’t made clear in the movie that this was the case though.

Another problem I had was with Sovereign, -I mean the Romulan pirate/mining ship. Why is it so decked out with weapons? According to the movie, this ship followed future Spock into the black hole immediately, so it is not as if they could’ve retro-fitted it. I can’t think of any sci-fi canon in which cargo ships are built for war. What’s with the size? It dwarfed the federation flagship. Does this ship do its mining by hauling entire moons to Romulus or something? It simply didn’t make any sense to me. Sorry!

The larger questions I have with the movie have to do with the overall plot of the movie. Think of all the things that made the movie good. Are these the things we expect from a Star Trek movie? Star Trek movies normally have overtones of politics, philosophy, and even (in DS9) religion. This movie was reduced to action/adventure. I am fairly certain that this could’ve been a random sci-fi movie with different characters and names and it would’ve been just as fine.

This leads me to my final point. This movie cannot be canonical. For if it is, everything from the inception of the original series must be changed. I think what this movie was a concession that Star Trek is a dead franchise.* The movie was an attempt to re-package the old canon for a newer generation of sci-fi kids. This is why we have young Kirk and young Spock. They’re as hip as the cast of Hereos and Lost! Someone high up there must’ve said, “awww fuck it. We can’t move foreward with the canon anymore. Let’s just make a lot of money. Do you think Nimoy will go for it?”

So there it is. Star Trek: The Apocyrpha. Good movie. Fun to watch and well worth seeing in theaters. But if you are old enough to remember movies like “Star Trek VI” or even “First Contact” for that matter, do not expect to see a “Star Trek” movie.

Thanks for reading.

---------------
*In my humble opinion, I think there is still room to make Star Trek within the canon. Deep Space Nine left the creators a lot of options, but I personally couldn’t see anything centered on the federation anymore. Could we still have Star Trek centered on other strange new worlds and new civilizations?