Home    Archive by Category "Entertainment"

Entertainment

‘Spiritual but not religious’: A Response

Entertainment, Philosophy, Practices, Relationships, Theology Comments are closed
Mind open, mind closed.

The real reason ‘spiritual but not religious’ is a cop-out
A guest post by Robert Kroese

Robert Kroese is the author of Mercury Falls, Mercury Rises, and many other engaging apocalyptic adventures!  This post was originally published on his blog at robertkroese.com, and was a thoughtful response to Alan Miller’s post.

—
Recently I ran across a blog post with the title My Take: “I’m spiritual but not religious” is a cop-out. I read the post with interest because I’ve often thought this very thing: that claiming to be “spiritual” isn’t an answer to a question about one’s religious beliefs, but rather a way to avoid the question while sounding like one has put some thought into it.

Sadly, the post almost immediately devolves into unverifiable, baseless generalizations. For example:

Those in the spiritual-but-not-religious camp are peddling the notion that by being independent – by choosing an “individual relationship” to some concept of “higher power”, energy, oneness or something-or-other – they are in a deeper, more profound relationship than one that is coerced via a large institution like a church.

Whoa, what now? That’s a bold statement. And it doesn’t appear at the end of a chain of rigorous reasoning or citation of studies about beliefs; it’s just thrown out there, as if it’s a brute fact of reality. The author follows this up with all manner of other vague and unsupported statements, somehow managing in an 800-word blog post to attack moral relativism, a culture centered on “feelings,” and megachurches — and going on to defend “old fashioned” values and the King James Bible (which has done all right for 400 years without his support, thank you very much).

Hidden in that rhetorical avalanche are two short paragraphs that I think actually come close to dealing with the matter at hand:

The trouble is that “spiritual but not religious” offers no positive exposition or understanding or explanation of a body of belief or set of principles of any kind.

What is it, this “spiritual” identity as such? What is practiced? What is believed?

The problem, as these paragraphs indicate, isn’t that “spiritual but not religious” is a bad answer to the question “what are your religious beliefs?” (as Miller seems to argue in the rest of the post) but rather that it’s a non-answer.

Imagine a group of plane crash survivors stranded on an island, debating the best way to get off the island. Some argue that the best way is to build a signal fire. Others argue that they should try to build a raft. Still others say that trying to get off the island is a waste of time; that they should focus their efforts on basic survival. Finally one person pipes up with, “Well, I don’t agree with any of you, but I definitely think we’re on an island.”

The man isn’t wrong, but his answer doesn’t get them anywhere. It doesn’t add anything to the discussion. It’s just an acknowledgement of the predicament. And worse, it’s an answer that seems calculated to put the speaker above or outside of the arena of discussion: “Have your petty disagreements amongst yourself; meanwhile I will sit here and contemplate the ocean surrounding us.”

Let me clarify that I’m not saying that the “spiritual but not religious” person is being intentionally smug or provocative, but that this is how is answer is going to be received by people who have been pulling their hair out trying to figure out a way off the island. It could be that he has already considered and rejected as wanting all possible attempts to get off the island and possesses some knowledge about the island that the other survivors aren’t privy to. But if so, then he’s doing a disservice to the other survivors by not sharing his knowledge. And if not, then he’s just wasting their time by pointing out the obvious.

The “spiritual but not religious” label points to three possibilities, as far as I can see:

1. The person has done a thorough study of the world’s religions, found them wanting, and took a different path.

2. The person is largely ignorant of religious beliefs but has been blessed with a mystical understanding that allows him or her to see the shortcomings of any “man-made” religion, and took a different path.

3. The person is largely ignorant of religious beliefs, has no real wisdom to offer, and is parroting an answer that he or she has heard various celebrities use in interviews with some success.

Without lapsing into pure cynicism, I’ll point out that (1) requires a lot of work, and (2) requires that the person be able to see a reality that is evidently hidden to most of the world’s traditional religious believers, whereas (3) requires only pure ignorance, which is in bountiful supply on this planet.

Of course, answering a question about religious beliefs by saying “I’m a Baptist,” “I’m Jewish,” or “I’m an atheist,” isn’t any more inherently difficult than saying “I’m spiritual but not religious.” In other words, there are lazy and ignorant Baptists, Jews and atheists as well as lazy and ignorant “spiritual-but-not-religious” people. Some Baptists have thought long and hard about what they believe and why. Others are just parroting answers they learned in Sunday school. But to their credit, at least they are answering the question.

Further, it seems odd to me that “spiritual but not religious” is such a common answer to the question about one’s religious beliefs. If you really want me to believe that you’ve made a deliberate choice to walk the road less traveled, then you might try giving a different answer to a question about your religious beliefs than that given by, say, Lady Gaga. Otherwise, aren’t you just a Gagaist? What’s the difference between you and every other “spiritual but not religious” person? If there is a difference, then tell me what it is. If there isn’t, then you’re just a member of another vaguely defined religion.

If you are asked about your religious and you don’t really have any religious beliefs, I suggest saying, “I don’t really have any religious beliefs.” If you have some vague belief that people have souls and that there are bad consequences to immoral behavior, say that. If you think that we’re all part of the Great Mystical Oneness, then say that. Saying that you’re “spiritual” doesn’t communicate anything. And saying that you’re “not religious” only communicates that while you may not know what the answer is, you suspect that most of the answers other people have come up with are wrong, or at least deficient.

You might have some really interesting thoughts about God, souls, sin, redemption, justice, forgiveness, love, purpose and oneness. But if you start out by saying that you’re “spiritual but not religious,” I’m going to seriously doubt it.

This post reflects the views of its author.

Wild Goose Recap!

Beer, Books, Church, Culture, Entertainment, Philosophy, Poetry, Practices, Pub Theology, Readings, Relationships, Theology, Travels, Worship Comments are closed

So, the family loaded in the van last week and headed for the hills (literally!) of North Carolina to attend the Wild Goose Festival.

What is the Wild Goose Festival?  New friend Milton described it this way:

“The festival [titled after a metaphor for Celtic Christianity] is self-described as one of spirituality, justice, music, and art. People came and camped in the woods and sang and talked and ate and looked for ways to connect. To me it felt like a cross between Woodstock and church youth camp. When I looked out over the field of participants, in most any direction I saw people who didn’t look like “church folks” who were lost in wonder, love, and grace. For these four days, they got to feel understood. “Normal.” None of us was asked to do more than be ourselves and welcome one another.

And it was good.”

Someone else called it: “A Sacred and Safe Space.”  I agree.  We arrived in Shakori Hills with a loaded up van, drove down a dusty road under a home-made banner with a  painted bird figure and the lettering for ‘Wild Goose’.

The welcome booth was a wooden shack with scenes from Where the Wild Things Are painted on it.

We set up our tent right in the center of activity – between a smaller tent venue labeled ‘Return’, and the main stage for the festival.  The theme of the festival was “Exile and Return”, so speaking/music event venues were named accordingly:  Shadow, Exile, Return, and so on.

We didn’t know what to expect, other than that we loved the concept, and were excited about some of the speakers and musicians slated to be there.

Let me tell you, this was a festival!

From the first talk we attended on Thursday afternoon — Tom Sine on co-living, intentional communities, and sustainability: “It is essential that we help people reimagine new ways to live. We need to discover creative, celebrative, simple ways of life that are more imaginative than the American Dream and cost less money.  And we need to do it together, in community” — to the final song by Gungor, “God makes beautiful things, he makes beautiful things out of dust.  God makes beautiful things, he makes beautiful things out of us,” we had an incredible time.  It was a time to imagine again what God longs for us and our world.

We met people from Pittsburgh, San Francisco, New York, Texas, Atlanta, Illinois, DC, and all over the country who are hungry for a new form of faith.

We heard Phyllis Tickle review the history of the church from Constantine and the fateful Edict of Milan to today, and the impact of the birth control pill on the future of the faith.  She noted that it is time to “return to the tent” — in other words, the place of the family and the home, where the stories of faith are told, shared, and lived out before the children and the next generation.  We heard Jim Wallis remind us that in the Capital power is the means and power is the ends, but that God’s way is powerlessness.  We heard Brian McLaren encourage us to engage those of other faiths while holding to our own with integrity (Pub Theology, anyone?).  We heard Dave Andrews, a community organizer from Australia encourage us to seek centered-set communities rather than closed-set communities.  He noted: “When we don’t trust the Spirit’s presence and leading, we create [unwittingly] all kinds of programs and plans and so on that actually become manipulative and oppressive.”  He reminded us that wherever we are going to serve and work we have to remember that God is already there — in that people we meet already are imbued with the image of God, and the Spirit is there ahead of us.  He also reminded that it is not so much we who bring Jesus, but that in fact, as we serve, we find that we are serving Jesus himself.

We heard great music from local artists as well as Over the Rhine, David Crowder, Gungor, Vince Anderson — Joey and the boys danced and played as the music filtered over us.

We wandered around and got to chat with Pete Rollins, Mark Scandrette, Phyllis Tickle, Lisa Sharon-Harper from Sojourners.  Had coffee with Brian McLaren and we mused together about our new adventure in Washington DC.  It really was as Frank Schaeffer noted in his own recap, Wild Goose Our Answer to Hate, in the Huffington Post:

“The names of the speakers  added up to a “draw” along with the big name musical performers. But the heart of the festival wasn’t in the events but in the conversations.

For me the highlight of the festival was the fact that there was no wall of separation between us speakers and performers and everyone there. I spent 4 days talking with lots of people from all over America and other places too, about ideas but also about very personal subjects. I met Ramona who was the cook at the Indian food stand and found she is ill and has no health insurance and I was able to connect her with a friend who knew a friend at the WG fest locally to help her get the full checkup she needs. I could do that because the festival was full of the sort of people who help, love and care so for once there was someone to call.”

The list of great things we experienced is hard for me to completely recall, there were so many things:

» Watched the first public reading of Pete Rollins’ new play before it shows in New York.

Drinking beer and discussing theology » Wild Goose Beer Tent

» Met a guy named Michael Camp, who just wrote a book about how his own faith and life was shaped by conversations at the pub: Confessions of a Bible Thumper: My Homebrewed Quest for a Reasoned Faith.  He was interested to hear about my own book on Pub Theology.

» Talked with Milton, a local UCC pastor who is teaching people about the importance of meal and eating together, and how all breaking of bread in some way embodies and reflects the meal we gather around as sacrament.

» Celebrated with friend Phil Snider, fellow Wipf and Stock author, over the publishing of our new books.  By the way, check his out: Preaching After God: Derrida, Caputo, and the Language of Postmodern Homiletics.

» Reconnected with friends met at the Church Planters Academy in Minneapolis: Mike Stavlund, Steve Knight, Susan Phillips, Victoria from Solomon’s Porch, and Rich McCullen, among others.

Was it all perfect?  No.  It was hot!  There were ticks.  There were a couple of long nights getting the kids to bed.  Some sessions didn’t connect like I had hoped.  But in all, it did not disappoint.

Those concerns were minor as we heartily sang hymns while sipping pints of local microbrew during a “Beer and Hymns” session, voices rising with verve (out of tune) with the accompaniment of a tattooed keyboardist.

I met Sean, the owner of Fullsteam Brewery in Durham, NC, after a session entitled: “The Theology of Beer,” which noted the importance of creation, place and celebration in a community, and how a good brewery can be at the heart of community life.  I shared our own experiences at Right Brain and he thought that was pretty cool.

The kids attended sessions where they made play-doh, created crafts, played games, and learned fun new songs: “I’m being eaten by a boa constrictor—and I don’t like it very much!”

We fell asleep each night, with our tent a stone’s throw from the main stage, to late night concerts and the sounds of celebration and conversation, music and singing.

In all, it was a total blast, and we imagined—as we joined the parade the final day, singing with faces painted, “When the Saints Go Marching In”—that when the Kingdom comes in its fullness, we’ve already had a taste.

A Tale of Three Beers

Beer, Culture, Entertainment, Pub Theology, Readings Comments are closed

An Irishman moves into a tiny hamlet in County Kerry, walks into the pub and promptly orders three beers.

The bartender raises his eyebrows, but serves the man three beers, which he drinks quietly at a table, alone.

An hour later, the man has finished the three beers and orders three more.

This happens yet again.

The next evening the man again orders and drinks three beers at a time, several times. Soon the entire town is whispering about the Man Who Orders Three Beers.

Finally, a week later, the bartender broaches the subject on behalf of the town. “I don’t mean to pry, but folks around here are wondering why you always order three beers?”

‘Tis odd, isn’t it?” the man replies, “You see, I have two brothers, one went to America, and the other to Australia. We promised each other that we would always order an

extra two beers whenever we drank as a way of keeping up the family bond.”

The bartender and the whole town was pleased with this answer, and soon the Man Who Orders Three Beers became a local celebrity and source of pride to the hamlet,

even to the extent that out-of-towners would come to watch him drink.

Then, one day, the man comes in and orders only two beers. The bartender pours them with a heavy heart. This continues for the rest of the evening – he orders only two beers.

The word flies around town. Prayers are offered for the soul of one of the brothers.

The next day, the bartender says to the man, “Folks around here, me first of all, want to offer condolences to you for the death of your brother. You know-the two beers

and all…”

The man ponders this for a moment, then replies, “You’ll be happy to hear that my two brothers are alive and well.

It’s just that I, myself, have decided to give up drinking for Lent.”

—

Delightful story, and fitting, as I have decided to give up beer for Lent.  Alas, if I could do it his way…!

Common Sense Jesus?

Culture, Economy, Entertainment, Politics, Pub Theology, The Text, Theology Comments are closed

Some fun in light of a recent politician’s statement about Jesus:

“For over 2,000 years the world has tried hard to erase the memory of the perfect conservative, and His principles of compassion, caring and common sense.”

What do you think?  Did Jesus have an uncommon amount of common sense?

Consider the following from the site Common Sense Jesus:

—
and finally:

What do you think?  Was Jesus all about ‘common sense’?

I tend to agree with this blogger:

I’m pretty sure Jesus’s principles were anything but common sense. In fact, in my recollection, they were the complete opposite. The story of the Gospel is Jesus openly challenging the prevailing norms, social structures, and power dynamics of his day and turning them on their heads with a radical message of humility, non-violence, selflessness and faith in the seemingly impossible.


But what do I know?  I have been accused of lacking common sense myself.

Post your thoughts below!

To See and Not to Inquire

Culture, Economy, Entertainment, Politics, Relationships Comments are closed

Came across this post today at darkhorse…  some raw potency at work here…
–
Mirari non rimari sapientia verum est
To see and not to inquire is true wisdom
–

Fleet Street sewer 1845I see the innocence of a suburban lawn mower, and the progress from pushing to riding, and I see the oil gushing from a hole in a pipe in the Gulf of Mexico, and I see that oil in the stay-cold Big Gulp the suburbanite is drinking as he mows and I see him drinking the oil, or is it Coke or is it corn syrup or is it oil does it matter, and I see a film in which the middle and upper classes eat and drink oil and shit beautiful gourmet meals into immaculate toilets and the rest of the world living in the sewers fighting over the bones and after the rest of the world eats the crumbs under the tables the rest of the worlds’ bones are compacted and crushed and become the next layer of oil or the fertilizer under a suburban lawnscape and by drives the happy sixteen year old on the cell phone so driven so successful so happy this is what everyone would do if they could isn’t it isn’t this what everyone wants why shouldn’t I enjoy it I do my service projects I go to church I am a good person I am nice and there she goes with her cell phone and her hideous grin is the innocence of every corporation licking its chops and innocence always drives consumption cause hey ya gotta eat and this country was never meant to lead we were only meant to develop the systems of satisfaction of efficiency we are proud of our breakfast cereals we are proud of our hard smooth roads we are proud of the effort we make for no return we make effort so the more effort we make the more pointless can be the reprieve, the more intense and stupid and stupefying the violence and I must go mad I would grow my own vegetables but I am too busy with fulfilling an academic resume for an academic status quo that now disappears into the trash can of neoliberal society and everyone buys the social sciences and everything is monetized sorry grandpa we can’t monetize your wisdom you are for the incinerator sorry New Orleans you already enjoyed yourself you accepted poverty that is your cardinal sin you are now punished for your hedonism and decadence we let you die a profound thesis is that there are no natural disasters anymore every disaster is a referendum on our values they only happen to those we don’t care about we don’t care about New Orleans we want it die we want the gulf to go away we only want the engine of work the technocratic machine and I see the confusion of the obese in my neighborhood they are thinking so hard, thinking about oil and guns and transactions, because these are swimming around in their cells, in their cancer, the cancer they are ingesting to become the research specimens of the petrochemical industry that makes the chips that makes the soda that makes the cure for cancer you are what you eat you eat what you are and there is no reprieve the system is itself a cancer that can only follow its own logic profit profit profit but why do you work for that which is not bread you cannot eat profit and profit does not make bread it only makes more profit the apocalypse is long, and excruciating, and slow torture, nothing happens in the blinking of an eye, every day is torture, and they don’t know it on 19th street but the decorated houses celebrating the prom king and queen will one day be against the law because poverty and happiness are oil and water they can’t mix but oh they can and the secret is we need nothing, we are sources not consumers we are creators not consumers we are suns and stars we explode at every moment with life.

To Kindle or not to Kindle

Culture, Entertainment, Readings, The Text, Theology Comments are closed

A review of the digital reader from Amazon.

Well, I am a reader.  You could say an avid reader.  It is, no doubt about it, one of my favorite activities in the world.  A good book, a reference book, a history book, and a cup of coffee and I am in my own world.  Diving into the knowledge, the stories, the history within two covers, printed on paper – a piece of life, captured in words – is a magical experience.  I love books.  But is it the book itself that I love, or the content for which the book is a vehicle?  In ancient times, before the printing press, knowledge and stories were shared orally, then initially printed in the form of cave drawings, early alphabetic attempts, etchings on stone, writing on skins and scrolls…

For the last several hundred years we’ve had books.  A big step forward.  Well now we have not just books, but devices that can contain thousands of ‘e-books’, and the ability to read them in a fashion somewhat similar to an actual book, thanks to e-readers, such as Amazon’s Kindle.  Will it catch on?

It seems at some level is already has.  Thousands of Kindles, Nooks, Sony and other e-readers have been selling.

Yet I resisted this digital phenomenon, citing my love for the book itself and the experience that came with it – it’s own history, former owners, dusty look, leather-bound cover, or crinkled paperback existence.  How could you replace the beauty of a worn-out spine or the smell of a printed page?

But after my recent move, and carry box after box after box of heavy books, and knowing that I would continue to add to this collection – I decided I had to at least give the e-book thing a try.

So about two months ago I broke down and bought a Kindle.  I was worried for the most part about the reading experience.  I knew it would be great to have access to so many books at once, and be able to carry them with me, and be able to highlight, take notes, find definitions of words in a second – but would I actually like to sit down with a digital device and read?  Could this experience really emulate reading an actual book?

KindleThe answer is decidedly yes.  The Kindle arrived, and I had bought the corresponding cover for it – which makes the whole thing look much like a book, and you have to open it like the cover of a book, so there are some nods to the traditional printed counterparts.  After charging it up, and loading a few free books, and buying a couple others, I started to use it.  And I found that not only is it acceptable – I love it!  It is actually easier to read than an actual book, because there are no pages turn.  This means I can read with one hand, or with no hands, I can read while eating and use the side of my hand to ‘turn a page’.  The digital ink technology mimics printed ink, and is no worse for the eyes than reading an actual book.   It turns out that I am more interested in the content of a book than I am in the book itself.  But don’t worry – I am not turning turning my back on my printed pieces.  In fact, I just had some built-in bookshelves put in at my house to house the collection my wife and I have, but the fact is that I can only take so many books with me at a time, and the Kindle ups that amount incredibly.

And of course the fact that there are millions of free e-books in the public domain, including tons of theological and historical texts – not to mention thousands of literary classics – and you really can’t go wrong.  At $139, my Kindle paid for itself an hour after I had it out of the box, downloading plenty of free material, as well as newer books at discounted prices.  I find myself reading more and more these days – and when I’m reading a real book, I actually get nostalgic for my Kindle.

So if you’re also a serious reader, you may want to give an e-reader a second look.  And for my part, the latest incarnation of the Kindle, the Kindle 3 – graphite with 6″ pearl e-ink display, a battery that lasts a month, the ability to hold 3,500 books – is the best of the bunch.

And now, of course, you can subscribe to Pub Theologian on your Kindle and read it anywhere, anytime!

See a review in the London Telegraph of the Kindle.


LOST: The Happy End

Culture, Entertainment, Theology Comments are closed

OK, I’ve come across many other theories/takes/reviews of the finale that are more hopeful than mine, so I’m going to repost my favorites here (so you’re not all depressed by reading mine):

———-
From Angela:

It seemed to me that the finale demonstrated that everything in Season’s 1-5 WAS incredibly important and REAL. (struggles with good and evil, faith and science, humanity vs the divine, mystery vs. fact)…. That there was huge significance to their actions and a greater purpose. I saw the sideways timeline or ‘hereafter’ as their ‘awakening’ persay… only in that could they finally grasp the fuller meaning of their journey , they got the impact of something bigger and insight into the significance of their actions… and in essence found peace and moved on. I also got the impression that the ‘moving on’ was just the start of another journey with greater dimension. I found it very hopeful. It seemed like only the characters ‘got it’ at the end… and appropriately… we won’t get it fully where we sit in time.

———-
From Andy:

The ending of Lost somewhat blew me away last night. What do you make of the show, and what does it all mean? Here’s my best theory.

Let’s say you could go back and try to live your life again with the knowledge you have now. Would you? Have you been face-to-face with your own brokenness, and would you re-do something if you could? I think we all have regrets- and the Losties have bigger regrets than many of us do. And when they set off a nuclear explosion to “reset” the clock of human history, they reset themselves (a kind of re-incarnation) with the wisdom gained on the island. Sawyer doesn’t turn to a life of crime, Ben Linus finds contentment in service, etc. But there is something missing. Love. None of them have the person they loved in the original timeline. And so Desmond is on a journey to reintroduce these characters to the love that they are missing.

And as Jack saves the island and leaves Hurley and Ben to run things (what a team!), the real story is how the characters have found love (and therefore some kind of redemption) and can break free from the cycles in which they have been trapped. That could explain why they go into a church with more symbols of Far Eastern religion than I have ever seen in a church. It’s because they are breaking the cycle and love truly is setting them free.

And that’s why Ben can’t go into the church. His love has always been for Alex, and she is not there yet. He is a person who has never really received love in his entire life, except from Hurley to some extent (being recruited). He still has to work out what love really means.

In short, the finale surprised the daylights out of me. But in the end, it went deeper than “what happens when the smoke monster dies?” and went to the very heart of being human – a longing to love and be loved. And so I might be in the minority, but I am gradually falling in love with the end of Lost.

———-
From Dennis:

You can interpret LOST to have some Christian themes – afterlife and redemption and ekklesia (community / needing others) and tons of subtext spirituality. But those themes are not exclusively Christian.

So, aside from the philosophical undertones and the ending that will leave everyone talking… what has been the writer’s underlining message?

For me, I believe the message is one of redemption – but I think it was encapsulated in the idea that we need help from others and we need to work through our issues within community. After watching the recap show and rewatching the Pilot, I see this theme developing. And from two generations that prize community SO much, while achieving so very little of it — the desire for community is a powerful one.

I think most poignantly was John Locke’s final words to Jack, “I hope somebody helps you as you have helped me”.

Live Together, Die Alone.  Namaste.

———-
From “The Guy Who Supposedly Worked at Bad Robot”:

Sideways world is where it gets really cool in terms of theology and metaphysical discussion (for me at least — because I love history/religion theories and loved all the talks in the writer’s room about it). Basically what the show is proposing is that we’re all linked to certain people during our lives. Call them soulmates (though it’s not exactly the best word). But these people we’re linked to are with us duing “the most important moments of our lives” as Christian said. These are the people we move through the universe with from lifetime to lifetime. It’s loosely based in Hinduisim with large doses of western religion thrown into the mix.

The conceit that the writers created, basing it off these religious philosophies, was that as a group, the Lostaways subconsciously created this “sideways” world where they exist in purgatory until they are “awakened” and find one another. Once they all find one another, they can then move on and move forward. In essence, this is the show’s concept of the afterlife. According to the show, everyone creates their own “Sideways” purgatory with their “soulmates” throughout their lives and exist there until they all move on together. That’s a beautiful notion. Even if you aren’t religious or even spirtual, the idea that we live AND die together is deeply profound and moving.

It’s a really cool and spirtual concept that fits the whole tone and subtext the show has had from the beginning. These people were SUPPOSED to be together on that plane. They were supposed to live through these events — not JUST because of Jacob. But because that’s what the universe or God (depending on how religious you wish to get) wanted to happen. The show was always about science vs faith — and it ultimately came down on the side of faith. It answered THE core question of the series. The one question that has been at the root of every island mystery, every character backstory, every plot twist. That, by itself, is quite an accomplishment.

How much you want to extrapolate from that is up to you as the viewer. Think about season 1 when we first found the Hatch. Everyone thought that’s THE answer! Whatever is down there is the answer! Then, as we discovered it was just one station of many. One link in a very long chain that kept revealing more, and more of a larger mosiac.

But the writer’s took it even further this season by contrasting this Sideways “purgatory” with the Island itself. Remember when Michael appeared to Hurley, he said he was not allowed to leave the Island. Just like the MIB. He wasn’t allowed into this sideways world and thus, was not afforded the opportunity to move on. Why? Because he had proven himself to be unworthy with his actions on the Island. He failed the test. The others, passed. They made it into Sideways world when they died — some before Jack, some years later. In Hurley’s case, maybe centuries later. They exist in this sideways world until they are “awakened” and they can only move on TOGETHER because they are linked. They are destined to be together for eternity. That was their destiny.

They were NOT linked to Anna Lucia, Daniel, Roussou, Alex, Miles, Lupidis, (and all the rest who weren’t in the chuch — basically everyone who wasn’t in season 1). Yet those people exist in Sideways world. Why? Well again, here’s where they leave it up to you to decide. The way I like to think about it, is that those people who were left behind in Sideways world have to find their own soulmates before they can wake up. It’s possible that those links aren’t people from the island but from their other life (Anna’s parnter, the guy she shot — Roussou’s husband, etc etc).

A lot of people have been talking about Ben and why he didn’t go into the Church. And if you think of Sideways world in this way, then it gives you the answer to that very question. Ben can’t move on yet because he hasn’t connected with the people he needs to. It’s going to be his job to awaken Roussou, Alex, Anna Lucia (maybe), Ethan, Goodspeed, his father and the rest. He has to attone for his sins more than he did by being Hurley’s number two. He has to do what Hurley and Desmond did for our Lostaways with his own people. He has to help them connect. And he can only move on when all the links in his chain are ready to. Same can be said for Faraday, Charlotte, Whidmore, Hawkins etc. It’s really a neat, and cool concept. At least to me.

————-
From Nikita:

I have to start by saying that I loved the ending, every bit of it and I don’t agree with the idea that i’m not critiquing the show logically. We’re dealing with a show that’s fundamentally about science vs faith and the reason why it became so famous is that every season finale gave people the opportunity to answer the questions, based on their own personal beliefs. If the writers had sat down and given us a detailed a=b and c=d finale, the basic appeal of the show is just “lost”. I hated the episodes about the temple as much as the next person, but the show started with these total strangers who we discovered were connected to each other and ended with them knowing how they were connected to each other….i can see why so many people would hate that, but you have to give the writers some points for being so poetic about it.

The numbers were around much before the Dharma initiative, which we know from the names in Jacob’s cave. My guess is, Jacob wrote a whole bunch of names with their respective numbers on the cave walls and the island, in all its mysterious glory, gave special importance to 4 8 15 16 23 and 42 coz those just happened to be the numbers of our beloved Losties.

And as far as why Aaron was still a baby in the Church is concerned, my only guess is that we have to try and understand what exactly Christian meant by “there is no now”. This limbo that the losties were in isn’t in any real time that we can identify or even comprehend. It’s completely a mystical/religious concept and even though I don’t have an exact answer to it, I only know that Aaron as a BABY was connected to these people and not Aaron as a grown up.

Loved the show, loved the finale, loved being lost (couldn’t resist the pun :D)


————-
And my favorite:

NEW YORK—Desperate fans of the recently concluded television series Lost are speculating that the program is continuing on in a parallel dimension somewhere, and that alternate versions of showrunners Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse are currently writing new episodes of the series. “It’s very possible that a sideways world running concurrent to our own exists, and that a facsimile of myself is happy, fulfilled, and already gearing up for the season seven premiere of Lost,” said 36-year-old Kevin Molinaro, who, along with more than 20 million other hopeless fans, has recently booked multiple roundtrip tickets from Los Angeles to Australia in hopes of traveling through a vortex in the space-time continuum. “I just have to find a way to get there. We all do.” According to data from Google analytics, searches for “How to build/detonate/use a hydrogen bomb to open up a multidimensional wormhole” have increased 10 millionfold since the episode aired.

—————-
And the last link I’ll put is an excellent review that is part critical, part hopeful, perhaps the best I’ve read, from Amy @ a chase after wind:
LOST: Time to Let Go

LOST: The Bitter End

Culture, Entertainment, Theology Comments are closed

a reflection on six years of island magic

As I was kayaking on the lake the other day, a large jet flew overhead in the blue skies, and I half-expected it to break in half, strewing itself along the lakeshore.  OK, someone has been a little *too* absorbed in a certain television show.  But I knew that was the sign I had to jump into the blogosphere about the ending of LOST.

The overwhelming response I’m seeing to the LOST finale is disappointment.  Yes, everyone is sad it is over, but many feel let down with how it ended.

Why all the fuss?

Well, the finale was going along smoothly until within the last half-hour, when we realize half of season 6 took place in some sort of purgatory or after-life.  So what is the problem with that?

A couple things.  One, the writers of the show said that we would not find out in the end that the whole thing was a dream or took place in purgatory or some sort of after-life.  (So technically they were true to their word, but they came really close to crossing the line).   Second, apparently most people share the broad assumption that what happens IN THIS LIFE is what counts, and anything after that doesn’t really matter.

Now, we are all of course a bit biased on this, as all any of us have ever experienced is this life, so that explains some of it.  But I think we have a deep-rooted resentment as a society to the religious panacea of ‘heaven’ as the answer to all our ills.

Struggling with depression? Believe in Jesus and you’ll go to heaven forever.  Who could be depressed knowing that?  (OK OK, stop raising your hands).

Arguing with your spouse? Believe in Jesus, and you’ll go to heaven forever.  (Where you can argue with him or her ad infinitum).

Want to know how to raise your kids? Believe in Jesus, and get them to believe in Jesus, that way, it won’t really matter how you raise them or whether they behave or not, because you’ll all be in heaven together in the end.

OK, you can see that we could play this game for awhile.  But the point is, far too many have had this kind of thinking presented to them one too many times.  We have been told that faith (of the Christian sort) really has more to do with what happens after this life than what is happening during this life.

Sounds appealing, right?  (NOT!)  Yet that is exactly the message that American evangelicalism has been peddling for years.  Now, once in a while, they’ll make a concession and come out with a statement about something that does matter right now, like:  “this war is God’s will” or “continue to abuse the environment, because, well, heaven is around the corner” or something else clearly useful and brilliant.

When this happens (the focus on heaven), the gospels are dissociated from this life and distilled to: “believe in the right thing or burn.”  After awhile, people start to ask questions.  Questions like, “Burn where?”  or “Does hell exist?” or “Who says?” and eventually, “Who cares?”  It begins to feel a lot like the kids in M.Night Shyamalan’s The Village who are told not to go in the woods because of “those we don’t speak of”, where the monsters are merely fictional control mechanisms.

Ironically, the more you explore the actual message of Jesus, you begin to realize that he – like us – was passionate most about what happens IN THIS LIFE.  Why else would he teach us to pray about God’s will happening “on earth” as it is in heaven?  Why not just pray for us all to go to heaven?  Why would he teach us to ask for bread, the daily physical nourishment we need to live?  The sooner we stop eating, the sooner we die and go to heaven, and that must be better than a good meal.  Why would he, in teaching after teaching, focus on things like hospitality to the marginalized, peace rather than violence, generosity with money, loving your enemies?  This sounds like nitty gritty, earthy stuff.  Not spiritual escapism…

My hunch is, even Jesus would be a tad disappointed with the LOST season finale.  “No, don’t you get it, it’s not all about heaven!”

It felt like the reverse of the Matrix, where for six glorious seasons we thought we were finally unplugged and alive and free.  Something new and unknown and unprecedented was happening.  But when it all came down to it, we got plugged right back into -you guessed it-  “heaven.”

The church, with such a message, is increasingly seen as irrelevant.  To have LOST end in a church, well, it couldn’t help but feel a little irrelevant.

Am I bitter about it?  Well, I had my doubts going into season six, after I felt season five had presented itself as a brilliant ending to the whole show, with jughead going off and the screen going to white.  Perfect.

That would have left us asking:

What happened? I don’t know, but anything is possible.

What did it all mean? I don’t know, but anything is possible.

I was never big on having all my questions answered with this show, and sometimes felt insulted when they were.  This season seemed to try too hard to make those connections, and sometimes it worked, other times, well, not so much.

But all that said, LOST was a great ride, and I actually really enjoyed the finale up until Christian Shepherd opened his mouth.

Perhaps my criticism is a bit unfair, as much of what drew me to the show were the rich philosophical and theological overtones. Yet by making such an explicit move, it felt like they went a bit too far.  But they had to end it some way, and really, there was just too much island folklore, crazy mythology and dharma secrets to make some grand unified theory that connected everything.  I’m OK with being left hanging, and even knowing that events on the island never really ended, as Hurley was appointed the new guardian, and life was going forward from that point.  So as far as how all that went – in this life – not so bad.

But the forces of good and evil, the seeming immortality of Jacob and the mysterious Man in Black, the “rules” that governed the island, the magnetic anomaly, time travel – all of that seems to have been for nought when we wind up in heaven after all.

Yes, what happens after we die is important, but every story ends there, and somehow we thought we were witnessing something original.  Ending in heaven?  That just made LOST seem ordinary.

In any case, LOST has ended.

I guess it’s our turn to leave.

–

–

–

—
(But don’t give up all hope, as word on the street is that Season 7 is still a possibility)
—
(Check out this more positive take on the finale: LOST Finale Explained Well, which I really do like and is supposedly by someone connected to the show)

Close