Religion in Doctor Who

General / off topic
1

I’ll start by saying that this can be a very delicate subject to speak about, and I do not mean to cause any offence here. I’d like to remind everyone to be kind and respectful to people of all beliefs, and not make personal attacks here.

Ok here goes.

I was quite surprised by some of the reaction to the most recent Christmas Special. I know some people haven’t seen it yet so please blur spoilers, but it mostly involves a scene at the end where a character from the episode is responsible for something which, according to the Christian Bible, was something God did. (The star of Bethlehem).

I’ve also seen some people make comments that they aren’t happy with the representation of faiths - that it’s all Christian. I’ll deal with that one first - it’s a British show, and all the Christmas Specials are written by old, white, British men. I’m not sure RTD or Moffat are even Christians.

In England I think I’m right in saying that most people aren’t Christian anymore (recent census found that only 46% described themselves as Christian). We have Christmas Specials of all different TV shows in the UK, most are comedies and some are really rude (did anyone watch The Young Offenders?), they are more of a tradition and not really religious in my view.

So whilst I think it would be great to have more faiths represented, and more discussion and education about them, it’s just not realistic to ask for a special episode around a holiday that the UK TV stations don’t currently do. Doctor Who often leads the way with representation and things like that but they can’t determine how the entire TV landscape works.

So back to the show being insensitive to the Bible. I would like to hear more from people who feel this way.

From my point of view, it’s been established by many different writers that the Doctor is not Christian - I wouldn’t say he’s necessarily an atheist because I don’t think that’s been said, and he has said he has “faith” before, but it doesn’t make sense to call him a Christian, as he is not from Earth but from Gallifrey, where the Christian Bible does not apply.

Also, as a time-traveller with access to alien worlds, and there being many different forms of alien life and millions of different religions, which all contradict each other, I’d go so far as saying the entire premise of the show contradicts specific religions.

If you take the text of the Bible as literally true then the world was created in seven six days, and Adam and Eve were the start of mankind, so that throws out the existence of dinosaurs which have featured quite a lot in Doctor Who, it removes evolution which has featured in the Whoniverse, and there are other legends in the Bible which, if literally true, contradict episodes of the show. I won’t go into them all here.

So I guess I’m asking how you can be offended by what happens in one episode when it seems to me the entire premise of the show exists in a universe where it’s impossible for the Bible to be literally true? You must watch the whole thing with a suspension of disbelief anyway?

That’s just my understanding and I apologise if I have been insensitive here at all, I am just exploring this from an intellectual point of view and do not mean to cause any offense!

16 Likes
2

I’m not Christian so I can’t comment on Doctor Who contradicting the Bible (though I will correct you and say the world was created in six days, and God rested on the seventh, which is why we have weekeneds). However, I have had many discussions over he years about the concept of “secular Christmas” and the ubiquitous celebration thereof, mostly in the Star Trek fandom, where Spock is generally recognised to be heavily Jewish-coded, and as such many people take issue with fan depictions of him celebrating Christmas. I’ve seen arguments from both sides (Jews asking to just let us have this one, others claiming he’s a fictional alien so it doesn’t matter). I need to get my thoughts in order before I dive into this topic, because there is so much to say and it’s important to be sensitive about it. I am glad this topic exists, and hope we can all remain civil in our discussion.

13 Likes
3

Thank you for pointing that out, I’ve edited it.

8 Likes
4

I’m a priest’s son, but I’ve never been particularly Christian. So I’ve never watched Doctor Who from a religious angle and don’t generally have a problem with the show handling religious themes, as long as it does so relatively respectfully (to any and all religions). It’s a bit like with the political and social messages it sometimes deals with: if it’s done well and it fits organically within the story, I don’t have a problem with it.

As for Joy to the World specifically, I can’t comment on it yet because I haven’t seen it.

14 Likes
5

I don’t really want to get involved in religious arguments, and tend to steer clear of the subject, but I will say there are some ways to make the bible and science reconcile a bit.

One is simply that the bible is a collection of books that have been translated from language to language to language, and picked up errors and issues along the way. I think the word used for day in Genesis didn’t actually indicate a 24 hour period, rather a period of time, but it’s been a long time.

(That’s actually one reason why God’s actions seem rather… inconsistent in the bible, too. There were a bunch of different names for God, and God’s actions were more consistent based on the name used, but translation got rid of most of the different names.)

It’s also entirely possible to interpret things as god creating the universe and humans and such and using the big bang and evolution as tools to do this. Plenty of people don’t, of course, but that is one way to reconcile things.

The US does tend to be a good deal more religious, having been founded by several different groups of religious fanatics that left the UK…

14 Likes
6

On the topic of the premise of the show contradicting Christianity, I just thought I’d mention that in-universe, there are still obviously Christian major characters who are aware of alien life and civilizations.

The cleric soldiers and Torchwood One come to mind. These characters don’t really have their faith challenged on the basis that they are in a science-fiction universe. Not to mention fav character, but there’s that audio story where Ianto says he’s kinda Christian and the plot evolves around him defying scientific explanation via faith alone and then he is misinterpreted as an angel. And Yvonne saying she “only follows the word of God” was an absolute banger line ngl.

I think humanity would’ve re-interpreted religious texts as they have always done to apply it to their respective “modern day”.

So, in some way, even when N-Space tells these characters “your religion is wrong”, they still believe in their religions and are not challenged or criticized for that. Which imo is a good thing. You also have Rita in the ‘God Complex’ who personifies this trope amazingly.

I think if the show did ever seriously try to challenge these characters in a way that felt like the writer was trying to make a point about atheism being the true actual nature of our universe, then it’d be hella insensitive towards religious people and texts. But I think it hasn’t done that yet? I could be wrong though. =)

13 Likes
7

I hear that a lot but I do see it as a bit of a case of wanting to have cake and eat it too.

Evolution by process of natural selection is by definition completely random. Mutations occur randomly, and those that are beneficial to the reproduction of a species are passed on, those that are not are lost, unless they come along with beneficial adaptations.

So saying that God created man in his image by using the entirely random and unpredictable method of billions of years of natural selection is a bit like saying you can write a book exactly how you planned to write it by selecting Scrabble tiles randomly from a bag and putting them down.

Of course, if God is all powerful and can predict the future then it’s possible to do this, but what is the point? Why use a process that is entirely random, takes billions of years, trillions of deaths, and produces strange and unusual side effects like vestigial organs and animals that really are weird or horrible (like wasps that reproduce by laying eggs inside a living animal and then they burst out and kill it from the inside) - why would you do that if you could just snap your fingers and have what you wanted instantly?

Bit of a tangent but that’s how I feel on the idea of Theistic Evolution!

13 Likes
8

Coming from a Christian family, I can confidently say that believers do not typically believe in the literal text of the Old Testament. Most Christians that I’ve met believe in dinosaurs. I’ve also found that most Christians (in the UK at least) don’t take their religion into account when considering politics, or other areas of their life, it’s often more about community, spirituality, tradition, routine and belief in a higher power.

My mum, when challenged on people from different backgrounds / countries, having different religions, she says that all the gods are one god and all religions ultimately reconcile. So it’s often less about the specifics for many people and more about the vibe.

14 Likes
9

I am also finding it hard to understand why you would get upset by the ending of JttW. It was a cute moment that if something confirmed a Christian event rather than trying to disproof it.

But what do I know, I live in one of the least religious countries in the world and am not religious self. But we are somewhat cultural Christians by traditions.

12 Likes
10

It was also read by a significant number of people as an endorsement of Christianity.

10 Likes
11

I went to a Catholic college who did a lil survey and when religious students were asked whether they believed the literal interpretations of their personal holy books, the majority said that they didn’t.

Edit: my Pagan dad was very disappointed I even enrolled in that college but the religious participation was obviously all optional and out-of-hours.

11 Likes
12

ngl this is something I get really angry about so if you don’t want to read that, just don’t read this message - rant incoming.

I’ve said this before. I’ve said this about a thousand times before, I’ve given presentations about this, I’ve interviewed people who study and give lectures about this for a living - so, got a lot to say here. Look. Doctor Who is, at it’s heart, a Jewish show. It was created by Jewish people (Verity Lambert and Sidney Newman) with the first companion played by a Jewish actress (Carol Ann Ford), Jewish values as it’s very core (tikkun olam, the idea of the Wanderer in relation to the diaspora, the focus on names, Cybermen as Qlippoth…) Doctor Who is at it’s core, Jewish.

During the Wilderness Years, we saw this aspect of the show embraced more, such as in the EDA ‘Seeing I’. It must have felt, for Jewish fans of the show at the time, like it was returning to it’s roots. And then RTD coalmes in and he brings the show back to life, which is fantastic, but he uses Jesus as inspiration for the 9th Doctor, he introduces Christmas specials, he has all this religious imagery - which I have no problem with, really, I think it is a wonderful thing to be able to explore your identity through writing a show you love like that, but these themes seem to have overwritten the Jewish qualities of Who.

TLDR: Doctor Who is a Jewish show and nuwho writers have erased that fundemental part of it’s identity with things like christmas specials. Doesn’t mean it isn’t good TV or wonderfully written or shouldn’t be in the show, just that Doctor Who needs Jewish storylines, too! We should not be so quick to abandon our roots.

18 Likes
13

Coming in on this very interesting topic with a fun evolution fact!

So, this isn’t exactly true: traits caused by mutations are passed on if they are beneficial to the individual, not the species. It’s a small distinction but it means that traits can be passed down and grow in frequency even if they’re detrimental to the species as a whole– so long as they increase an individual organism’s chance of survival to reproduction.

Similarly, sexual selection traits that increase one’s chance of finding a mate and reproducing, like fancy colourful displays in birds, can actually decrease an organism’s physical efficiency– because energy that is spent on producing a fancy display to find a mate is energy not spent on procuring food and surviving.

Something about evolution I find really interesting :slight_smile:

17 Likes
14

How does believing in a six-day creation and that Adam and Eve were the first humans throw out the existence of dinosaurs? We have their fossil skeletons and sometimes other things, they clearly existed. I firmly believe in a literal bible (I will admit that some of the prophecy is a little nebulous), a six-day creation and a young earth. I believe that aquatic “prehistoric” species such as Ichthyosaurs, Mosasaurs and Plesiosaurs; and flying “prehistoric” species such as Pterosaurs were created by God on the fifth day of creation. (Genesis 1:21 - So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.) I also believe that dinosaurs and other extinct “prehistoric” land creatures were created on the sixth day of creation. (Genesis 1:25 - God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.)

As I said back in the Audio Club discussion of Gallifrey: Spirit, while I firmly believe in a literal six-day creation, a young earth, and do not believe in monkey-to-man/dinosaur-to-bird/fish-to-amphibian macro-evolution, I do recognize that micro-evolution within a species or kind exists. I can see micro-evolution in domestic animal breeding and breeding heartier varieties of fruit. What I don’t believe in is the kind of evolution that posits the creation of a new kind of animal from another. I believe that dinosaurs were one kind (or group of kinds) and that birds are a separate kind.

As for dinosaur extinction, I believe that most were destroyed along with everything else in Noah’s flood. Yes, dinosaurs were present on the ark. However, before you ask how you would get huge dinosaurs on an ark, I believe that not every species was put on the ark. I believe that it was a kind by kind basis as Genesis 7 states “every kind” three times and finishes verse 3 with …to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth. So, you only had to have one breeding pair of each kind (i.e. Stegosaurs, ceratopsians, tryannosaurs, hadrosaurs, abelisaurids, etc.), and there are plenty of smaller species to choose from. After the flood, dinosaurs might have flourished for a time, or might have been edged out by other species. We do have dragon legends and other mythical creatures that are thought to have been based on dinosaurs (prevailing secular wisdom says based on fossils while I think the earlier legends were based on living specimens). And, with us humans being a rather violent lot, we hunted them to extinction. If dragons/dinosaurs were rarer in a post-flood world and hunting dragons was a rite-of-passage or just pure sport, then it’s entirely feasible that humans hunted whatever dinosaurs survived on the ark into extinction. It definitely wouldn’t be the last time we hunted a species to extinction.

2 Likes
15

I think it’s telling that people have taken issue with the episode being ‘anti-Christian’ and ‘overly-Christian’.

18 Likes
16

I do have opinions on this but probably on less firm ground than other posters so far. This will require a bit of thought to comment on some of the viewpoints here (on both sides of the debate).

12 Likes
17

I haven’t seen the special yet so I don’t know the specifics but as someone who’s from a Christian family and not sure if I believe in it, as long as it’s handled correctly and not being offensive it’s fine.

10 Likes
18

Because dinosaur skeletons are millions of years old. Science proves this. If you don’t believe in carbon dating, there’s a whole list of other science you can’t believe in, so any serious physics doesn’t make sense with a ‘young Earth’.

But modern genetics shows they share the same ancestor, as do we with apes. If you don’t believe in genetics then you also have to throw out loads of science which created many modern medicines and other DNA and genetics discoveries. No serious scientist can say that gene theory is completely wrong.

How big was this arc? How did they stop the T-Rex from eating everything else? This is beyond credulity.

Populations of species simply cannot exist with only one breeding pair. Ask any conservationist trying to save near-extinct animals like white rhinos.

to avoid inbreeding depression(the loss of “fitness” due to genetic problems), an effective population size of at least 50 individuals in a population is required.
To avoid eroding evolutionary potential (the ability of a population to evolve to cope with future environmental changes), an effective population of at least 500 is required.
Source

Sorry I’m not trying to pick everything you said apart, just pointing out things which do not make sense to me. I respect your views, I just don’t understand how they can be consistent with the rest of science. I think it’s best to see the Bible as a text written by some devout Christians and their view of the world as they saw it 2000 years ago, not as a science textbook.

15 Likes
19

I understand. And while I know there are answers to at least some of your questions out there, I don’t know the answers, or at least not well enough to offer rebuttals. I do plan on getting back to this at some point though.

6 Likes
20

And, for some of it, I take it on faith. All that said, some of this boils down to semantics. In the end, the most important thing that all Christians must agree on is that Jesus is the son of God, died on the cross for the sins of the world, and then rose again in three days. Theological differences beyond that aren’t as important as the very basics of the faith. Whether a christian goes straight to heaven when they die or whether they sleep in the ground until Christ returns isn’t as important as whether a christian believes that Christ died and rose again. There are a lot theological details that I can agree to disagree over and still welcome someone as a brother or sister in Christ.

Getting into Creation vs Evolution and what counts as scientific fact versus what can only ever be theory is a bit of tricky subject. I don’t mind getting into it, but I also don’t have all the arguements and proofs sitting on the top of my head.

5 Likes