Tonight I was drawn somehow to Roger Ebert's blog—which I had bookmarked long ago, but I couldn't possibly give you any idea when I last visited—and I find that occasionally he has been delving into some weighty topics, ones which I too find of great interest even if the pondering is not likely to yield any meaningful answers, either personally or universally.
Specifically, I was interested most in the following two entries (of which I quote very brief, but significant—I think—excerpts, the second of which succinctly expands upon the first)...
How I believe in God (April 17)
Catholicism made me a humanist before I knew the word. When people rail against "secular humanism," I want to ask them if humanism itself would be okay with them. Over the high school years, my belief in the likelihood of a God continued to lessen. I kept this to myself. I never discussed it with my parents....
Did I start calling myself an agnostic or an atheist? No, and I still don't. I avoid that because I don't want to provide a category for people to apply to me. I would not want my convictions reduced to a word.
. . . .
At the "quantum level," and I don't know what that means and cannot visualize it, everything that there is may be actually or theoretically linked. All is one. Sun, moon, stars, rain, you, me, everything. All one. If this is so, then Buddhism must have been a quantum theory all along. No, I am not a Buddhist. I am not a believer, not an atheist, not an agnostic. I am still awake at night, asking how? I am more content with the question than I would be with an answer.
Go gentle into that good night (May 2)
I was told that I was an atheist. Or an agnostic. Or a deist. I refused all labels. It is too easy for others to pin one on me, and believe they understand me. I am still working on understanding myself.
Feedburner
No comments:
Post a Comment