"Spiritual but not religious" CNN belief blog post

[RedFury]

@PandaBear77

IME “spiritual but not religious” generally means “ok with any diety but Jesus.”

Ha! May I suggest the nearest AA meeting? Not for the bad coffee or cigs, not even for addiction problems, but for the “sheer spirituality” of it all. And bucketfuls of Jesus.

[monavis]

@Steken

I’m not seeing it.

Five minutes of googling shows that he chided the Pharisees for grabbing “the best seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets”, all the while “devour[ing] widows’ property”, and of making long prayers “as a show” (Mark 12:38-40). He accused them of being a corrupting force, for making converts “twice as much a child of hell as yourselves” (Matt 23:15).

He called them “serpents” and “generation of vipers” (Matt 23:33), he called them “sons of those who murdered the prophets” (Matt 23:31-33), he called them “blind leaders of the blind” (Matt 15:14), and railed against them for “transgress[ing] the commandment of God” (Matt 15:1-3), for not practicing what they preach (“they say, and do not do” - Matt 23:3) and for being “hypocrites” who “shut up the kingdom of heaven against men” (Matt 23:13).

He accused them as being “like whitewashed tombs which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but inside are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness”, in that “even so you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness” (Matt 23:27-29), and he turned the words of Isaiah against them: “This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.” (Mark 7:6-7)

But did he ever accuse them of being “religious”, while considering himself “spiritual”? Nope. He didn’t use either term.

But I have a feelings you’ll come back and say “but that’s exactly what ‘religious’ means!” And then I’ll angrily mumble something about how this whole discussion would really benefit from more precisely well-defined terms, and then someone will crack open a dictionary and then it’ll be on, man, it’ll be on.

The implcation was that they were being religious not spritual. Jesus said to them you keep the letter of the law but not the spirit. and he used a non Jew to make his point!

[monavis]

Maybe it is just me, but most of the people I have met that say they are spiritual, not religious are more intrested in their own improvement, and not having people need to believe the same and act the same as they do. The one’s who say they are spiritual not religious tend to be more caring, understanding, and less critical they leave others up to the God they believe in, and worry about their own lives and making them better instead of being like the Pharisee who stood in the front of the temple thanking God that he wasn’t like the Publican who stood in the back of the temple asking God for forgiveness. Jesus said the publican’s prayer was heard, not the Pharisee’s.

[Aeris]

@Roderick_Femm

I tend to agree with Mr. Miller that ‘S-not-R’ is a sort of lazy unwillingness to take a hard look at the real alternatives (what I will term “rational atheism” vs. “faith-based beliefs”, with my obvious bias showing). At least that seems to be part of what he is saying.

So ‘S-not-R’ isn’t really a stand on the existence of any deity or accuracy of any religious tenets, it’s not really a stand on anything, it seems to be a vague “There’s something bigger than me out there, I don’t know what it is, but I believe in it” approach. I, too, have little respect for this flabby set of views, they seem to me to be a big cop-out.

But Mr. Miller makes much too big a deal of it. I really doubt that it is much more prevalent in the past 20 years than it was in, say, the 60’s and 70’s, that were rife with that sort of counter-cultural clap-trap.

To Mr. Miller I would say: Don’t get your knickers in such a twist about this, you’re making way too much out of it.
Roddy

p.s. to the OP, I am not understanding why these posts make you so angry. Please explain.

Well because I don’t think saying you are SBNR is a cop out. Of course, spiritual can mean many things. To me, spiritual is saying that I am part of something bigger than myself, I’m not saying I think there is a god or gods, but just the world or the universe. It’s humbling to think about. I don’t feel like saying “Hey you know what, I don’t know.” is a cop out. I think it’s admirable in some situations. I think it’s also, for lack of a better word, brave to admit that you’re not sure. Why do I have to say one way or the other? Can’t I just live my life and learn lessons based on the experiences I have with the people around me? Through these experiences I build my own values and morals and that’s my spirituality. I learn lessons from atheists and I learn lessons from religious people. My main thing I wish people would understand is that people who belong to an organized religion do not have a monopoly on morality.

Anywho, this post was rushed and I’m rather tired so I hope it made at least a tiny bit of sense. I just wanted to respond since you had addressed that question to me. Thanks for all the discussion.

[Steken]

@monavis

The implcation was that they were being religious not spritual.

Hmmm. This whole discussion would really benefit from more precisely well-defined terms.

[Learjeff]

I’m in the minority “spiritual but not supernatural” crowd. I find it amusing that so many people feel they have to believe in some supernatural something to give value to life.

I believe it’s up to us to create value in our lives. Spirituality is important, but doesn’t require any hocus-pocus or man behind the curtain. JMHO, of course.

I admit I’m taking liberties with the term “spirit”, but I do believe that consciousness creates something transcendent (without violating any physical laws, or enabling any kind of super powers or ESP or anything). Perhaps “emergent” is a better term than “transcendent”.

@Mgtman

When 90%+ of a species shares a trait that trait must be considered either adaptive or linked with an adaptive trait.

Well, I’d say we should suspect an adaptive aspect. But it might also be a typical property of self awareness or a rational mind that seeks to explain everything. In other words, the adaptive aspect is a reasonable hypothesis, but not a valid conclusion.

[monavis]

@Steken

Hmmm. This whole discussion would really benefit from more precisely well-defined terms.

Perhaps the meaning could be that religions are started by humans, Spriitual is just a part of being human, coming from one’s own mind?

[Skammer]

I think it’s hard to make any blanket statement about s-not-r people, or about religious people. You’re talking about millions - even billions - of people. “Spiritual” often means lazily superstitous; but it may refer to a more rigorous but individual belief system.

I speak as someone spiritual and religious.

[monavis]

@Skammer

I think it’s hard to make any blanket statement about s-not-r people, or about religious people. You’re talking about millions - even billions - of people. “Spiritual” often means lazily superstitous; but it may refer to a more rigorous but individual belief system.

I speak as someone spiritual and religious.

I think it could mean: Religious could mean following a common belief with others. Spriritual could mean just a personal way of thinking, not using an unknown being as their inspiration or belief?