Left to my own devices

I was struck by a passage from a recent online post by Jerry Coyne, wherein he discusses religion, evolution, God, and finding meaning in life (among other things). The passage in question is as follows: "As for the 'ultimate' meaning, well, that's a notion that's intimately connected God, and so the questions answers itself - and wrong. With no evidence of a God, there's no use asking for an ultimate meaning and purpose. All we can do is answer that for ourselves but not for others." It is the last sentence that resonated with me so deeply. Indeed, one of the aspects of religiosity that has concerned me is when people will talk about "meaning" or "purpose." When broached in the context of God, what one really refers to is destiny . We are, I believe, capable of having purpose and meaning without the existence of a god-life entity, and it is up to us as individuals to discover and work on what that is.

Every week, sometimes more than once a week, billions of people go to their chosen places of worship and praise their creator. The god they believe in typically follows a fairly familiar template: He (or she) is omniscient, loving, wrathful, a whiz at creating -- and destroying -- things, and almost always eternal. It has been this way as long as human kind has had the ability to develop thought regarding where it came from and why it is here. I have always struggled with understanding the aforementioned concept. At the very least, I have questions. Those questions have prohibited me from being a person of faith, though I wouldn't go so far as to say I'm a complete atheist. That would require the same level of assuredness that non-believers mock the religious for having. Still, until answers are forthcoming, I am agnostic, at best. And, for me, thinking about the questions is more fun, anyway.

David Allred has written a " faith column " for Oak Ridge Today , in which he takes umbrage with the late Roger Ebert's musings on death . In particular, Allred would seem to dislike the term "nothing" being ascribed to the state of what happens to us after we die. Allred appears to believe in an afterlife and, it seems, a god. Following is a passage from Ebert's essay-in-question: I know it is coming, and I do not fear it, because I believe there is nothing on the other side of death to fear. I hope to be spared as much pain as possible on the approach path. I was perfectly content before I was born, and I think of death as the same state. I am grateful for the gifts of intelligence, love, wonder and laughter. You can’t say it wasn’t interesting. Adding to Allred's distress over Ebert's beliefs (or lack thereof) is the mass sharing of the late film critic's essay that has occurred since his passing earlier this month. From Allred: ...

I just had to respond to this commentary by Rabbi Boteach that was on Huffington Post a couple of days ago. The premise is that "godlessness" is causing Great Britain to go down the tubes (only 35% of the country's population believes in God, compared to 92% in the US). Basically, the rabbi wants to tie religiosity to success. Fair enough. In certain situations, no doubt one's religious convictions can help them to better themselves and society. But the opposite is also true. So religion is often a zero sum game in this regard. Just as importantly, so, too, is atheism. Someone who doesn't believe in a god, or a religious faith, is not necessarily better or worse than someone who does. Human beings are human beings.