Not Quite Mortal

Prothero's book on Religous Literacy is right on the mark. I think it is a must read book. How woefully uninformed many of us lay people are about our own, and other, religions. My only issue is with categorization of Protestant churches. Traditionally, they fall on denomintaional lines. However, it seems more meaningful to categorize Protestants as primarily fundamentalist, evangelical and ecumenical(as opposed to the tradiational monikor of mainline). While the evangelicals have done a farily good job defining themsleves, the mainstream Protestants have missed an opportunity to define themselves as ecumenical and fail to use the term that best describes their religious philosophy.

Prothero's book on Religous Literacy is right on the mark. I think it is a must read book. How woefully uninformed many of us lay people are about our own, and other, religions. My only issue is with categorization of Protestant churches. Traditionally, they fall on denomintaional lines. However, it seems more meaningful to categorize Protestants as primarily fundamentalist, evangelical and ecumenical(as opposed to the tradiational monikor of mainline). While the evangelicals have done a farily good job defining themsleves, the mainstream Protestants have missed an opportunity to define themselves as ecumenical and fail to use the term that best describes their religious philosophy.

It's a great achievement for Islamic leaders and scholars as well as Newsweek and the Washington post to present this imperative opportunity for inter cultural and global philosophical dialogue. What's important is that by exchanging our ideas and comments regarding inter religious relations and world events that affect our views of each other as fellow human beings. Since the advent of humanity, We strove to make sense of the world we live in and the lives we've experienced. Worldwide curiosities to learn the true nature of life and our universe is an exceptionally rare virtue upon life on Earth. In other words, we're the only known species on the planet who've pursued to unravel these great mysteries and developed written philosophies based upon our understanding of the world around us.
One such philosophy that lasted throughout the ages of humanity is commonly known as religion and spirituality. Ever since our early belief in the Sky God and the God Mother from ancient Pagan times, we vigorously pursued to unravel the truth about our most profound questions. As any educated person would know that religion and their core beliefs or faith have evolved over time. Paganism, Monotheism and Polytheism have been influenced by humanity as these great philosophies have influenced our perceptions and decisions in life over the ages. Over time humanity has embraced diverse religious faiths and spiritual convictions that continue to influence our behavior in our times and most likely beyond.
What's vital for humanity's progress and even survival is to know the true nature of faith itself. To understand the true origins of faith. But most of all, is to accept the truth for whatever it may be. Each one of us will learn the absolute truth once we die. But until that time comes for anyone of us to depart this world, we really don't know the answer to God's existence nor do we have the absolute truth in regards to the true nature of God. Besides if we did possess the truth, there would've been only one religion on Earth with no diversification of any way, shape of form. There would only be one holy scripture written throughout human history.
Considering one's religious faith to be absolute, while considering others to be false would be ethnocentric at best. While collectively searching to unravel the mysteries on nature, life and the universe through sincere reasoning and serious research would be enlightening at its worst. Most importantly, we must accept the fact is that none of us have conclusive evidence to confirm our core beliefs and there's always an immanent change that our most cherished beliefs could be wrong. Our greatest challenge would be to tolerate the truth no matter what it may ultimately be. With such an open mind, we would be able to overcome any future discovery that would contradict our faith regarding the true nature of life, spirituality and divinity.
Humanity does have the ability to achieve such a social achievement. However, it's solely up to humanity and not any other entity or groups of entities to decide our destinies. Each one of us has a choice to make; either hopelessly engaging into meaningless inter cultural conflicts or combine our scientific and cultural gifts to thrive into an enlightened global civilization that could ultimately expand beyond our solar system. The choice is yours, and the time to make it is now!

I find it helpful, Slewis,if maybe a little facile, to consider that the verb and noun 'Matter' share a derivation with Mater: Mother.

I'm not sure about your concerns here, or your appeals to 'Moderators,' but I do wonder how many of your concerns would be as problematic from a Mother's view. :)

As for you, Jacob, ...You keep throwing Mitt Romney into these things. Explain.

Moderators:

First: (e- favorite) You miss the intended context of my remarks re Prothero and his review of Hitchens "How Religion Poisons Everything." Hitchens has to be one of the most ubiquitous writers on the current American scene and he daily offers views re the arts, politics, war, secularism and religion. The fellow is not shy with his lively language or targets. My comment related to the fact that Prothero seemed motivated (and alive) when he wrote the review and that (in my view) it was fine that he knock "humpty dumpty" off the wall, for at least one day; the merits of Prothero or Hitchens private views aside.

if e-favorite or others have another view of the Prothero review; that's fine with me.

Second: The cogent query and theme offered by the On Faith Moderators though was on key, but still I wondered re the commentary of many of the panelists? Most or all are articulate and organized but what of the depth and nuance of their lines?

I offered the comment re Hitchens as an example of something I sensed was of keen "interest" to Prothero. He seeks to maintain his status as a religious theory commentator - that's important to him, that matters ( I guessed).

Once again, I compliment Prothero, the other panelists and the moderators. It's interesting
to hear their perspective - but in my case I wanted to hear more and have the authors probe deeper.

And Last: I've read many of (MD) Sherwin Nuland's books. In his text Art of Aging he sagely reports:

"Aging can be the gift that establishes the boundaries of our lives, which previously knew far fewer confines and brooked far fewer restrictions. Everything within those boundaries becomes thus more precious than it was before: love, learning, family, work, health and even the lessened time itself. The good is easier now to see; it is closer to the touch and the taking, if we are only willing to look truthfully at it there and gather it up from amid the cares that may surround it."

Moderators - Nuland would be a great panelist in your on faith series. Some (authors) panelists, better than others, offer a reasonsed recitation of relevant life themes.

end

Slewis - I thought Prothero's review of Hitchens' book was pouting and defensive. I thought he displayed the insecurity you might expect from a person who has dedicated his professional life to a field that, until now, has been unaccustomed to direct and intelligent criticism. I think Prothero is running scared, but if it's any consolation, I don’t think it’s necessary. I think prominent educators like Prothero can be a major force in the long-overdue religious re-education of Americans.

People who want to read the review to come to their own conclusions can do so here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/03/AR2007050301907_pf.html

Norrie has a point. Maybe the people here are atypical but I think there are many of us who haven't yet acquired the habit of looking back -- even though we may be well past the midpoint of a lifespan shorter than Methuselah's.
Perhaps we are the new avatars of Methuselah, or maybe we're just irretrievably immature. I don't know about feeling immortal, though. Because I am fundamentally lazy, I occasionally hope that my religious views will turn out to be wrong, and I'll be able to just go back to sleep.

Dr. Prothero

Mortality and (the metaphor) saling at sea, or
bartering with the (devil) Christopher Hitchens
as Prothero reviewed Hitchens book when that author renounced religion and all it's trappings; and then Prothero pounced back.
I sensed the professor was "so alive" in that review, but I imagine
he will be just as alive with family and in the wilds of nature.
And I also imagine that a more transparent view is that a
dynamic array of matters, (in this authors life) really matter.

Is it a moral compass, mentor or guide that instructs
re the fine line between (perceived) "im & mortality";
and the meaning and "matter" of life? Looking forward/back?;
Is that a perspective or rather an explanation?
Or is it (what matters) rather an internal instinct, culture, dna, spirit and family prodding that more likely offer the foundation and grounding that death is (not profoundly, but) simply part of life and that much can matter while we are living.

What do folk feel passionate about, what are their interests
and instincts and what's their view of the world (neighborhood)and themselves? So interesting to read the moderators - and guest commentators - comment on which facets of life give them spark. Most gravitate to speaking about or near to their academic/relgious profession and then slide most often to partner, spouse or family.

Prothero is a bright light in academic circles and I've so enjoyed his posts in the On Faith series. But as to the current question I wondered aloud - aside from the erudite response from this Boston academic - does his mind and heart differ so much from that of my deceased father, my living mother, my living siblings and myself and family? When we are alive we press on - that matters - and when we near or reach the end, we report, "Our get up and go has got up and gone.." Those with a driven purpose and hope in life have one view and others are guided by well, who knows what?

I deal daily with folk who are either wretchedly poor financially, beaten emotionally, or are reportedly fed up with their work,
status, spouse, family or health. What matters to these souls?
Well spin the dial? A debate with Hitchens or a student? A
launch out to sea or simply a warm meal, bed and bath? A job
tomorrow (?) and spouse and family that will be there when we
return home from work (or not)? What about health that is vital and strong, or not. (I know too many folk/friends that have died recently of cancer and/or that are wracked daily with pain.

I accept the scope and context of Prothero's remarks, I believe.
But it's his state in life, his intellectual prowess and assumed affluance that allows him to be at ease in his mortality stage play. Knock him off his health or status stool and the mattering will put him - just like the rest (or most) of us - in a different state and on a very different stage (I believe).
_________________

*I compliment you sir on your intellect, insight and civil style.
I saw other on faith reports, and then yours. I did not intend
or mean to be a contrarian; (On the whole - How could I do anything but applaud someone that so solidly put the omnipotent Hitchens in such a tiny "corner.")

Dr. Prothero

Mortality and (the metaphor) saling at sea, or
bartering with the (devil) Christopher Hitchens
as Prothero reviewed Hitchens book when that author renounced religion and all it's trappings; and then Prothero pounced back.
I sensed the professor was "so alive" in that review, but I imagine
he will be just as alive with family and in the wilds of nature.
And I also imagine that a more transparent view is that a
dynamic array of matters, (in this authors life) really matter.

Is it a moral compass, mentor or guide that instructs
re the fine line between (perceived) "im & mortality";
and the meaning and "matter" of life? Looking forward/back?;
Is that a perspective or rather an explanation?
Or is it (what matters) rather an internal instinct, culture, dna, spirit and family prodding that more likely offer the foundation and grounding that death is (not profoundly, but) simply part of life and that much can matter while we are living.

What do folk feel passionate about, what are their interests
and instincts and what's their view of the world (neighborhood)and themselves? So interesting to read the moderators - and guest commentators - comment on which facets of life give them spark. Most gravitate to speaking about or near to their academic/relgious profession and then slide most often to partner, spouse or family.

Prothero is a bright light in academic circles and I've so enjoyed his posts in the On Faith series. But as to the current question I wondered aloud - aside from the erudite response from this Boston academic - does his mind and heart differ so much from that of my deceased father, my living mother, my living siblings and myself and family? When we are alive we press on - that matters - and when we near or reach the end, we report, "Our get up and go has got up and gone.." Those with a driven purpose and hope in life have one view and others are guided by well, who knows what?

I deal daily with folk who are either wretchedly poor financially, beaten emotionally, or are reportedly fed up with their work,
status, spouse, family or health. What matters to these souls?
Well spin the dial? A debate with Hitchens or a student? A
launch out to sea or simply a warm meal, bed and bath? A job
tomorrow (?) and spouse and family that will be there when we
return home from work (or not)? What about health that is vital and strong, or not. (I know too many folk/friends that have died recently of cancer and/or that are wracked daily with pain.

I accept the scope and context of Prothero's remarks, I believe.
But it's his state in life, his intellectual prowess and assumed affluance that allows him to be at ease in his mortality stage play. Knock him off his health or status stool and the mattering will put him - just like the rest (or most) of us - in a different state and on a very different stage (I believe).
_________________

*I compliment you sir on your intellect, insight and civil style.
I saw other on faith reports, and then yours. I did not intend
or mean to be a contrarian; (On the whole - How could I do anything but applaud someone that so solidly put the omnipotent Hitchens in such a tiny "corner.")

I plan to live forever. So far, so good.

Anyone who thinks they are immortal in this world is more than naive, they are stupid. Do you really have a class where you ask people if they think they will live forever? BTW ... I read your book and it is excellent! A recommended read by anyone who is into this On Faith thing.

Professor Prothero,

I like your essay.

I'm old. I think your undertaker has his math wrong. I stopped looking forward when I was 68 years old. I doubt that 68 marks the midpoint of my life and that I'll live to 136.

I think Mr. Lynch is also wrong about what must necessarily happen when you stop looking forward. I've never looked back with longing for what might have been. That may be because, since my teens, I've always analyzed my life carefully as it happened. So I'm a realist, not an idealist, about my earlier years.

Interestingly, I had an old person's gravitas and introspection when I was very young. Then for decades I steadily grew younger as I aged.

Now in my old age, I look neither forward nor back. I live pretty much in the present moment, which my Buddhist reading tells me is the best place to be. Living in the present moment brings me great contentment.

And, if I were to believe orthodox Buddhist teachings (actually I'm agnostic as to them), I'd say that being fully present in the moment of death will make it easier for me to step off the train of this life and onto the train of the next.

What if you don't have talent to understand?

What if you don't have talent to understand?