Spiritual but not religious?

Somewhat interesting article that touches on several points surrounding faith and community.  Might be interesting for some. 

http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/personal/06/03/spiritual.but.not.religious/index.html?hpt=C1

 

(disclaimer: I haven't read the link) It is possible to be spiritual without being religious. Spirituality could just be defined to mean "finding significance in ordinary experiences", this could be applied to listening to music (that moves you emotionally, plenty of threads on that on these forums) or gazing up at the stars and being impressed by the physics that go into star formation.

=F=

Falx wrote: (disclaimer: I haven't read the link) It is possible to be spiritual without being religious. Spirituality could just be defined to mean "finding significance in ordinary experiences", this could be applied to listening to music (that moves you emotionally, plenty of threads on that on these forums) or gazing up at the stars and being impressed by the physics that go into star formation. =F=

But by this logic I would be spiritual too 

Spiritual but not religious?

Right here!


EDIT: Well, at least I consider myself so. After all, it's all a personal thing. Whether you're christian, jewish, muslim, atheist, worship the sun, hail satan. Just keep it to yourself is all I ask for!


Edited by JJLehto - June 06 2010 at 01:23

Very interesting Robert, and I understand what you are saying.  Convenience.  Even within churches, you see them "evolving" to make them more comfortable to the modern culture of the people going there.  That does strike me as pretty silly.  I'm not religious (anymore) but if I decide to return to the church, I want it to mean something, rather than be some watered down sing-along pandering to the whims of the parishioners and their media-correct culture. 

OTOH, the quoted parable is very interesting and thought-provoking as well.  Was this from the bible?  What do you make of it?

"God and the devil were walking down a path one day when God spotted something sparkling by the side of the path. He picked it up and held it in the palm of his hand.

"Ah, Truth," he said.

"Here, give it to me," the devil said. "I'll organize it."

So, you're saying the Bible is going the way of the Constitution?     Where our justices are selected not to uphold it, but rather to dissect it and make it palatable and "relevant to the lives of Americans?"  The self-help church thing sounds like the thinking in the schools, in the public square.  Where every sharp corner must be wrapped in bubble wrap so that no group of people are put off by traditional thinking. 

Very interesting.  I've seen the same flyers come to our house too.  "Come to service Sunday and feel the experience!"  Crap like that.  Basically, making Church into a social call. 

If I ever do return to the church, I want the authentic experience, the history and the ritual is a part of the beauty.  Maybe we don't live up to all of the ideals of the Church (I was a catholic), but, the answer would be for me to try harder, not for the church to move the bar down to my own comfort level. 

But for now, I remain in religious rebellion.  To be completely honest, I don't have a firm belief....the only honest answer I have for the spiritual question is....I don't know.   Maybe someday I will find it again, maybe not. 

 

I don't feel that way Robert!  I feel like an idiot most of the time to be honest, when all of you smart guys are talking philosophy and physics, some of you guys amaze me.  It becomes clear to me when I watch some of these long philosophical debates in other threads that perhaps I should have paid more attention to education. 

But I do know the Golden rule, and as Slarty says below, I try to practice it. 

And I had phenomenal parents, which helps. 


Edited by Finnforest - June 06 2010 at 10:04

stonebeard wrote: Here's my two offensive cents: Believing in religious dogma is delusional and nonsensical, but if delusions make you happy then fine, be delusional. Nevertheless, it would be better if we all had as few delusions as possible; they're all dangerous in varying degrees. Religion is volatile; spirituality is volatile, but less so. Besides the so-called "SBNR" people are a lot more likely to want to listen to Enya and buy small trickling water fountains for serenity, rather than kill a Dutchman when he offends their sky daddy. So kudos to them. Now take the next step and believe in none of that nonsense.

JJLehto wrote: Like I said, keep it to thine self, that's all I want.

I don't see how this is helpful at all (and would inevitably mean the end of traditional religion- maybe that's your point).

A genuine Christian will share the gospel with others (Acts 1:8 isn't a command from Jesus- it's a declarative statement).

The biblical model for sharing the gospel, however, isn't persistence with the same people.  You throw the seed liberally and freely, and some of the crops with grow (Mark 4:1-20).  If people don't respond or care, you move on.  The concept of "Bible-thumping" and browbeating nonbelievers is unbiblical (and rude).

I'm with Sam Harris on this one: Explore your own self through meditation and introspection. The results will be highly subjective and entirely non-religious - except when you decide to write down your experiences and conclusions and try to teach them to others. Which is how all the major (and minor) religions started - although for most of them you'll also have to add a bit of criminal energy and some ulterior motives.

I guess you can call me a spiritual person in that I think a lot about the world and it's beauty as well as its horrors, I ponder the cosmos and whether there's something beyond the things we today know. But despite all that, I'm still 100% atheist. Which means that I will not believe any religious concept without evidence. This rules out pretty much every concept of spirituality that the proverbial man on the street is familiar with. Even Buddhism and Taoism are ultimately tainted by dogma.


Edited by Mr ProgFreak - June 06 2010 at 13:57