Editing Talk:God (RDM)/Archive 1

It always seemed to me that "God" is the Cylon central computer (or equivalent). My hypothesis is that the "re-imagined" Count Iblis will be the God.[[User:Kuralyov|Kuralyov]] 20:21, 21 May 2005 (EDT)

== from the author ==

Do you like this style of this God page that I wrote? I personally think the quotes are too numerous. I'll probably delete some quotes, but it's hard to know which might prove important. For example, Adama's speaking of God may be significant. I would love to have such quotes about other topics on other Wiki pages, as it's easier to do unbiased research this way.

Regarding your theory of the Cylon God being Iblis, although there probably is a head Cylon like that, their religion seems more abstract: "We are all God, all of us. I see the love that binds all living things together."

Should we include deleted scenes on Wiki pages? There is an important bit of dialog in KLG 1 about the legend of a jealous god who tried to elevate himself above the rest. Internal Six replies something like, "Blasphemy! There has only ever been one God."

I need help for the original series section of this God page. I haven't watched the original series since the late 70's! Feel free to do whatever you want with that section.

-[[User:MHall|MHall]]

I don't think we should include colonial expressions of "God", as I'm pretty sure they're just accidentals from the actors. - Chris

:The "… play God …" quote in particular needn't be considered monotheistic. A polytheist can easily refer to a singular god, and not mean the only God. "play god" can just as easily mean "play at being a god" as "play at being God himself".

:I would recommend removing that one at the very least from the monotheist list.
:--[[User:Brons|Brons]] 08:37, 3 December 2006 (CST)
:In complete agreement, I have removed that sentence. Even a polytheistic religion can refer to one god like this. --[[User:Talos|Talos]] 11:57, 3 December 2006 (CST)

== about that "Jesus" thing ==

I've seen the original US release of the miniseries once, but what I've watched the most is the UK DVD. And I can't recall Tigh saying "Jesus". Wasn't that dubbed over with something else? I vaguely recall reading something about that --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 08:02, 13 September 2006 (CDT)
:It's in both of my copies of the miniseries (the pre-season one release and the season one boxed set.) The Lord appears in mysterious dialogue. :P --[[User:Slander|Slander]] 15:16, 24 April 2007 (CDT)
::It's when Adama shows Tigh the really old picture. --[[User:BklynBruzer|BklynBruzer]] 15:18, 24 April 2007 (CDT)
::Yeah, I found it by now. It's really under the breath, which is why I missed it. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 15:24, 24 April 2007 (CDT)
Should that even be mentioned in the article? I thought that was just a mistake made by the actor. --[[User:R.Adair|R.Adair]]
:It's mentioned on the general gaffe article and some other places. But yeah, it's relevance here is somewhat doubtful. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 13:59, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

==pockets of Monotheism in the colonies?==

Ok this is a small matter but from the mini did anyone get the feeling that the worship of one single god wasn't completely unheard of in the colonies? Six's comments about God are mocked by Baltar but he isn't shocked by the notion of one god. Basically what I'm getting at is that in the real world we have people who claim to have gone back to pagan religions and they worship multiple gods...could the opposite have been true in the colonies. That a monotheistic religion was something some colonists adapted as a way to be contrary or as even an actual alternative to the kobolian faith? I'm not saying it was widespread or even a major issue within the colonies. Basically there were colonists who wanted to be different and were mocked for having what other colonists percieved as a wacky religion. --[[User:Meteor|Meteor]] 02 February 2007.
: Gaeta makes comments that seem to support this in "Kobol's Last Gleaming, Part I" when Adama reviews the texts regarding Kobol. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 22:11, 2 February 2007 (CST)
::Caprica casting info confirms it, so I added a bit about it, with the part directly connected with Caprica plot hidden as a spoiler. [[User:Ausir|Ausir]] 18:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

=="Scientific Explanation" Section==
Perhaps it's me, but I feel that this section is mainly theoretical and as such should not really be there. --[[User:Sauron18|Sauron18]] 16:38, 18 June 2007 (CDT)
:Erm, never mind ;) --[[User:Sauron18|Sauron18]] 16:39, 18 June 2007 (CDT)
:I really like it, and vaguely thought of something similar once (not in such detail, but that god is a real construct). It also reminds me of the Ultimate Intelligence in Dan Simmon's ''[[w:Hyperion Cantos|Hyperion Cantos]]'' which I read recently. But as you say, unfortunately it's way to speculative for this place. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 16:42, 18 June 2007 (CDT)
::It's not in the series and has no sources and is wholly fanwank. I've rolled it back and await any sources. I can say that the Cylons are actually part of the ancient Matrix, but that doesn't make it true. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 16:45, 18 June 2007 (CDT)
:::I'm well aware of that and said that it has no place here. I just think it's interesting nonetheless. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 16:48, 18 June 2007 (CDT)
::::Sorry, didn't mean to sound at all snappy there. I'm feeling a bit [[w:birthday|"''get off my lawn you crazy kids''"]] today and probably tomorrow. 8/ --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 19:50, 18 June 2007 (CDT)
:::::Hello, I am the one who wrote the original article.  As for the information, I got the quoted portions from the wiki on the subject http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity, which has multiple links to respected sources, especially http://www.kurzweilai.net/index.html?flash=1, which was where I first heard about the idea.  If there is a specific way to write an article that includes respected sources, please let me know and I will consider writing one.  As for it being "mainly theoretical" and "speculative," I would argue the "Background to FTL in the Re-imagined Series" article is just as speculative as no one in the series mentions the physics behind it.  However, it did not stop someone on committing how FTL is scientifically plausible, thus showing how true to reality the show can be.  I check this sight frequently and I am always disappointed that no one wrote about how the cylon "god" (or any "god") is scientifically plausible.  In keeping with how true to reality the show can be, I thought it was appropriate to comment on how a "god" could actually exist in nBSG without relying on a supernatural basis or aliens.--[[User:DuMan|DuMan]] 22:01, 21 June 2007 (CDT)
::::::For what it's worth, there was some concern about the FTL article as well, regarding its validity to the show. At least as far as the scientific speculation is concerned. And some articles are indeed more speculative than others, making some case-by-case decisions necessary. Unfortunately, it doesn't matter how well you source your information here, as the problem is its connection to the show itself.
::::::I understand that you put some effort into this, and even basically agree with it, or appreciate it. But aside from a minimal note like "It's hasn't been established whether this God is supernatural or can be explained with scientific means", I don't see how we can use any of this. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 01:21, 22 June 2007 (CDT)
:::::::On the first point, philosophically, I do appreciate the FTL article and any article that adds more information to the show even if the show does not explicitly say it, so long as that information has a ''strong scientific'' backing.  As the show holds so strongly to a tenant of expressing realism, I am sure its creators would incorporate any strong scientific concepts into their verse as they have with networking, nuclear arms, and AI, provided they had time to mention it.
:::::::As I read through the adjacent article on cylon religion, I was unable to find the source of your quotes, but regardless most of the articles on this site imply that the cylon god is a supernatural being.  This article refers to the god as a "deity" and the article on cylon religion refers to it as a "metaphysical being."  The latter term does support other definitions of the cylon’s god being more of an abstract concept or an idea rather than supernatural entity, but it still does not address the actual scientific plausibility of a "god" existing.  Without a possible scientific explanation, readers will always walk away with the one-sided idea that the cylon god is and can only be a supernatural being, rather than something scientifically plausible as AI.
:::::::As for my intentions, I thought my writing was bad and wrote most of it off the cuff, thus I was not particularly proud of it.  My main intention was to generate discussion on this topic and have its possibility mentioned in the article.  ''Given the cylon's are strongly rooted in the topic of AI and the idea of a technological singularity branches off of that topic, I believe it is more than reasonable to at least mention it in this article''.
:::::::On a side note, please let me know if I should take my defenses personally to each member that criticizes my contributions rather than posting them here, as this page might become quite lengthy.  And again, if you just demand better writing or sourcing, tell me exactly how (or refer me to the relevant section in the FAQ) and I will consider writing the article myself.--[[User:DuMan|DuMan]] 19:21, 22 June 2007 (CDT)
::::::::It's not the sourcing to external sites that's the problem, but the sourcing with the show. See what Spence wrote below. If you can back it up with some references to the episodes and quotes, though they will probably be somewhat indirect, good. I'd suggest that you don't worry about style for now, but produce a bullet point list of references from the show itself. Put it on your user page or maybe your talk page. Then we can see if we can really use it. If not, then we can always put in a small note without the speculation attached.
::::::::While lengthy talk pages are problematic too, splitting over discussion in several talk is really confusing. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 04:52, 23 June 2007 (CDT)

:I'd write it up as a separate article, and attach the following template: <nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:Plausible speculation|Plausible speculation]]<nowiki>}}</nowiki>,<strike>  <nowiki>{{Essay}}</nowiki></strike>. There is precedent; see [[Cyrannus (system)]]. It is an example of plausible, researched, cited speculation, clearly marked as such, and is worthwhile. Failing that, there is always your User space. [[User:JubalHarshaw|JubalHarshaw]] 19:11, 22 June 2007 (CDT)
::I agree. The debate on Cyrannus is as close to the edge of fandom-derived speculation that I'd care to see on the wiki. DuMan's research may be enlightening. A few points: Yes, please do use the {{tl|plausible speculation}} tag on such an article. Also, in keeping with the wiki's mission, making this an essay is not recommended. But, using links and citations from the episodes, DuMan and others can add plausible support for the theories he expressed earlier, discarding or disputing what does not agree with the Cylons as portrayed. The FTL article, by the way (and in my opinion) is supported by the principles ''displayed'' in the episodes. While not explained, the process of moving from the place to place (without change in relative velocity before or after) screams "wormhole" and is supported by Ron Moore's [[naturalistic science fiction]] guideline, "no moving violations" on true-faster-than-light travel. I think DuMan has his work cut out for him in linking episode events that connect his research with the show, but it will fun to see him try, and should make for a very interesting article once it's ready. The links ''have'' to be there for this to be an acceptable article per the wiki's canonical or licensed product mission, IMO. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 22:53, 22 June 2007 (CDT)
::That might work, if there can be a few references to back it up somewhat. We could also put it in [[Cylon Religion]]. That one talks more about religion in general and does already have an analysis section. This speculation might be more justifiable there than here. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 04:52, 23 June 2007 (CDT)


==Image==
I was wondering if perhaps we should change what could be considered the "main image" for the promotional picutre in which Gaius is shown looking religious with Number Six at his back. 
[[File:Cylon God.jpg|thumb|250px]]
I feel like this might best represent the article, given the association both characters have with the Cylon God and the specific representation in the picture. --[[User:Sauron18|Sauron18]] 23:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
:Or Baltar praying from [[He That Believeth In Me]]? {{unsigned|OTW}}
:The picture at the top, is a reference to god though. The promo picture, while nice, is more about religion in general. But we could put it further down, and replace the "crucified Baltar" one with it. -- [[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 07:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

== "Daybreak" retconning the entire series ==

Since we discovered in "[[Daybreak, Part II]]" that God was indeed behind all of the show's mysteries, shouldn't individual articles be updated to reflect God's ultimate control over all events and people that we've seen throughout the entire series? Since God was aware of the [[Battle of the Colony]] as least as far back as the time of the Final Five (which is why [[the Music]]/Coordinates were programmed into Sam back then), then God would have been strictly controlling all events and people up until the Battle so that Kara could punch in the numbers. Therefore, it should be noted that no characters had any free will or choice; everything they did was determined and controlled by God. (For a list that explains this in more detail, I refer you to [http://ideas.4brad.com/battlestar/story-bsg-god-gog Brad Templeton's blog].)

This could also affect ''Caprica'', but it's possible (albeit ''very'' remotely) that the new show will explain what God actually is.

What do you think?

-- [[User:Liquidcross|Liquidcross]] 16:59, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I would probably say no myself, and its because I think that that theory overstates how much control that the 'God' entity has in the BSG universe. For one thing, its never stated that 'God' controls everything or that he has the power or ability to do things on a large scale (besides of course, bringing the dead back to life). 

Maybe your right, maybe it was 'God's' will that made it all happen but I think that it was the character's experiences that was set up by the entity that called itself 'God' which helped them make the decisions that they did and we don't know enough about the entity to make these kinds of rationalisations.

-- [[User:These|These]]  18:19, 27 February 2010 UTC

:Yeah, that way overstates God's control over things. It may have used The Music as a clue, but Starbuck chose to follow it. If it hadn't been possible for Baltar and Six to fail in their part of the plan, there would be no need to send the messengers to them, and the fact that Head Six changed her tune from time to time indicates improvisation. Etc. -- [[User:Noneofyourbusiness|Noneofyourbusiness]] 00:42, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
@@ Line 81: / Line 81: @@
 -- [[User:These|These]]  18:19, 27 February 2010 UTC
-:Yeah, that way overstates God's control over things. It may have used The Music as a clue, but Starbuck chose to follow it. If it hadn't been possible for Baltar and Six to fail in their part of the plan, there would be no need to send the messengers to them, and the fact that Head Six changed her tune from time to time indicates improvisation. Etc. We can't say that God set up the timing of every one of the events you mention in that list without direct statements to that effect either onscreen or from the producers. Otherwise we veer into speculation territory. -- [[User:Noneofyourbusiness|Noneofyourbusiness]] 00:42, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
+:Yeah, that way overstates God's control over things. It may have used The Music as a clue, but Starbuck chose to follow it. If it hadn't been possible for Baltar and Six to fail in their part of the plan, there would be no need to send the messengers to them, and the fact that Head Six changed her tune from time to time indicates improvisation. Etc. -- [[User:Noneofyourbusiness|Noneofyourbusiness]] 00:42, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
-::I wondered about the "influence" thing, too, until I read [http://ideas.4brad.com/battlestar/can-you-be-merely-influenced-god this]. Oh, and just to make it clear...I'm ''not'' trying to rain on anyone's parade here. I'm just wondering exactly what I can and cannot writer before I make any edits to real articles instead of just talk pages! :) -- [[User:Liquidcross|Liquidcross]] 05:22, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
-:::But there's no concrete proof that the angels' boss is the orchestrator of all the coincidences and not as much a part of the pattern as everyone else. There's also at least one case of Baltar not managing what Six wanted him to do: in Downloaded. I think this is a plan that looks more inevitable than it is to an outsider. No changes to articles are called for by this; it's already noted that the meeting at the Algae Planet and the survival of all the Final Five are seemingly in defiance of the odds because the characters remark on that. We can't say exactly how it happened because we don't have an overt proof to that effect. -- [[User:Noneofyourbusiness|Noneofyourbusiness]] 15:21, 28 February 2010 (UTC)