Roddenberry on Heaven and the Afterlife
July 9th, 2011
“It seems to me — it’s likely that heaven’s here right now. If you could take life with its pain and misery, where you fail and you sometimes win, and if you package it into a game, people would pay a fortune to have this game. And I don’t know that I’d want it to be resolved so peacefully that the game would be all over.” –Gene Roddenberry
In doing some further research on the beliefs and worldview of Gene Roddenbery, I ran across this quote from his wonderful interview in the book God & by Terrence Sweeney. I thought it was interesting in light of my previous post, wherein I discussed Shatner’s questions about the afterlife.
“For all Star Trek’s anti-religious foundations,” I wrote, “its unwavering optimism about the destiny of humanity ultimately demands that the human journey resolve in understanding and fulfillment.” While this is true of Roddenberry’s vision of the overall journey of the human race, according to the above quote, it seems as though it would not express his beliefs about the end of the life of an individual. He appears here to espouse no belief in any kind of afterlife.
At the same time, though, Roddenberry biographer Joel Engel notes the Trekpatriarch’s statements of belief in reincarnation. Because of these statements, according to Engel, Roddenberry’s secretary/assistant Susan Sackett once asked him what exactly he believed about reincarnation. In her paraphrase of his words, he replied, “I believe that we continue, but you don’t come back with all of your thoughts intact. You’re not the same being. You become one with the All.” Engel notes, however, that Roddenberry’s “references to reincarnation sometimes contradicted themselves.”
This is no surprise, as Roddenberry seemed somewhat torn between the kind of ultimate enlightenment I described in my previous post and an unending journey of discovery. Regarding the ultimate maturity of the human race, Roddenberry told Sweeney, “That’s–I was going to say that’s the one thing, but I have to correct myself–that’s one of many things I haven’t been able to resolve.”
“In an adult stage,” he continued, “will we achieve, or have trust upon us, a oneness in which we are all cells in a great organism and a great mind, a great organism which is lofty and mature and wise and never does anything wrong? I’m afraid that might be rather dull.”
Indeed, as I mention in my paper in the forthcoming book Light Shining in a Dark Place: Discovering Theology Through Film, Roddenberry’s insistence upon a utopian ideal for humankind in Star Trek was sometimes at odds with the conflict necessary to create drama in storytelling. “In a perfect world,” I conclude, “nothing interesting ever happens.”
Roddenberry admits as much to Sweeney when he says, “So I can see us moving toward that infinite oneness which is full of wisdom and peace and so on. And I find myself drawing back and saying, ‘Better we should have the loveliness of disagreeing.’” It’s hard to discern whether Roddenberry intends these statements about an “adult stage” to refer to the same state as the aforementioned afterlife of oneness with “the All” or a separate condition that is the result of a completed evolution of the human race, but this back and forth between ultimate revelation and continuing struggle peppers much of Roddenberry’s language.
The Gospel concept, however, of ultimate redemption and consummation and the foundation of a new Heaven and a new Earth offers, I believe, a resolution to this problem. While knowing fully even as we are fully known, it seems, human beings will find contentment in Creation as it was intended. Will we be relieved of our need for challenge and discovery? Perhaps. I prefer to deduce, however, that our curiosity will be continually finding new questions to ask and we will continually find new answers and new adventures. Imagine how many lifetimes one person could spend exploring the Earth in its present, fallen state. In a perfected state, its richness and openness will be ever more full and provide endless opportunities for discovery.
Roddenberry’s vision of hopeful humanism does, it seems, demand a final resolution of peace, wisdom and knowledge and he seemed most often prone to promote that idea. His dilemma regarding the afterlife, though, reflects a universal human paradox of a love for this life and a desire for something more, combined with a wish to have neither completely cancel the other out.
This longing is addressed, I believe, by the picture of ultimate reality we find in the Scriptures. Would Roddenberry have found satisfaction in this concept? I would hope so. Unfortunately, his exposure to the limited, popular notion of a disembodied afterlife in Heaven too often preached as Christian doctrine and his haste to reject Christianity wholesale seem to have gotten in the way of his discovering the fullness of that reality.
In doing some further research on the beliefs and worldview of Gene Roddenbery, I ran across this quote from his wonderful interview in the book God & by Terrence Sweeney. I thought it was interesting in light of my previous post, wherein I discussed Shatner’s questions about the afterlife.
“For all Star Trek’s anti-religious foundations,” I wrote, “its unwavering optimism about the destiny of humanity ultimately demands that the human journey resolve in understanding and fulfillment.” While this is true of Roddenberry’s vision of the overall journey of the human race, according to the above quote, it seems as though it would not express his beliefs about the end of the life of an individual. He appears here to espouse no belief in any kind of afterlife.
At the same time, though, Roddenberry biographer Joel Engel notes the Trekpatriarch’s statements of belief in reincarnation. Because of these statements, according to Engel, Roddenberry’s secretary/assistant Susan Sackett once asked him what exactly he believed about reincarnation. In her paraphrase of his words, he replied, “I believe that we continue, but you don’t come back with all of your thoughts intact. You’re not the same being. You become one with the All.” Engel notes, however, that Roddenberry’s “references to reincarnation sometimes contradicted themselves.”
This is no surprise, as Roddenberry seemed somewhat torn between the kind of ultimate enlightenment I described in my previous post and an unending journey of discovery. Regarding the ultimate maturity of the human race, Roddenberry told Sweeney, “That’s–I was going to say that’s the one thing, but I have to correct myself–that’s one of many things I haven’t been able to resolve.”
“In an adult stage,” he continued, “will we achieve, or have trust upon us, a oneness in which we are all cells in a great organism and a great mind, a great organism which is lofty and mature and wise and never does anything wrong? I’m afraid that might be rather dull.”
Indeed, as I mention in my paper in the forthcoming book Light Shining in a Dark Place: Discovering Theology Through Film, Roddenberry’s insistence upon a utopian ideal for humankind in Star Trek was sometimes at odds with the conflict necessary to create drama in storytelling. “In a perfect world,” I conclude, “nothing interesting ever happens.”
Roddenberry admits as much to Sweeney when he says, “So I can see us moving toward that infinite oneness which is full of wisdom and peace and so on. And I find myself drawing back and saying, ‘Better we should have the loveliness of disagreeing.’” It’s hard to discern whether Roddenberry intends these statements about an “adult stage” to refer to the same state as the aforementioned afterlife of oneness with “the All” or a separate condition that is the result of a completed evolution of the human race, but this back and forth between ultimate revelation and continuing struggle peppers much of Roddenberry’s language.
The Gospel concept, however, of ultimate redemption and consummation and the foundation of a new Heaven and a new Earth offers, I believe, a resolution to this problem. While knowing fully even as we are fully known, it seems, human beings will find contentment in Creation as it was intended. Will we be relieved of our need for challenge and discovery? Perhaps. I prefer to deduce, however, that our curiosity will be continually finding new questions to ask and we will continually find new answers and new adventures. Imagine how many lifetimes one person could spend exploring the Earth in its present, fallen state. In a perfected state, its richness and openness will be ever more full and provide endless opportunities for discovery.
Roddenberry’s vision of hopeful humanism does, it seems, demand a final resolution of peace, wisdom and knowledge and he seemed most often prone to promote that idea. His dilemma regarding the afterlife, though, reflects a universal human paradox of a love for this life and a desire for something more, combined with a wish to have neither completely cancel the other out.
This longing is addressed, I believe, by the picture of ultimate reality we find in the Scriptures. Would Roddenberry have found satisfaction in this concept? I would hope so. Unfortunately, his exposure to the limited, popular notion of a disembodied afterlife in Heaven too often preached as Christian doctrine and his haste to reject Christianity wholesale seem to have gotten in the way of his discovering the fullness of that reality.
Comments (Closed in Archive)
- David Naugle says:
July 10, 2011 at 3:48 AM
Great article,Kev! Great theology, too!!!- Kevin C. Neece says:
July 10, 2011 at 8:05 AM
Thank you very much, sir! Coming from my theological mentor, that means a great deal. I don’t know if you remember it, but you actually brought up this issue of contentment in the new Earth at lunch once when I said, “in a perfect world, nothing interesting ever happens.” I think it was at the Paideia conference and I never got to give you a good reply. So, I had you in mind as I wrote this!
- Kevin C. Neece says:
- Mark Boone says:
August 12, 2011 at 3:57 PM
Naugle’s right, Kevin! This is a great piece with good theology.
As I recall, the same issue appears when Kirk encounters a paradise planet inThe Original Series. When he is told that the paradise planet has everything humans want, he barks: “Except a challenge!”
Thus Roddenberry’s tension between perfect happiness and adventure. Thus Nietzsche’s hatred for heaven as he had heard of it. Thus, I like to think, Huck Finn’s motive for telling Widow Douglass he’d rather go to hell.
But the truth is that the Garden of Eden was not dull in the beginning. And without the Fall, life would still have been interesting. Somewhere between near-certain and absolutely certain lie the odds that heaven will be a great adventure, as Lewis portrays it in The Last Battle.- Kevin C. Neece says:
August 15, 2011 at 10:31 PM
Thank you, sir. I appreciate the kind words.
The episode you’re referring to is “This Side of Paradise,” your mention of which has just inspired a new blog post! Writing now, publishing shortly.
- Kevin C. Neece says:
