When I hear this phrase, I hear a description I might've used for myself at a point in my youth when a better description would've been "intellectually lazy." At that time, I did not subscribe to any particular set of religious beliefs, but I did believe (or maybe just wanted to believe) in a benevolent force/"energy" that had created the universe and perhaps intervened in human affairs, as well as the possibility of an afterlife. I had yet to go through the process of forcing myself to evaluate whether those beliefs really made sense.
The phrase "spiritual but not religious" also seems to sometimes connote a belief in certain "New Age-y" concepts that are just as insupportable as a belief in a god.
In short, I usually find this phrase really annoying. That said, I realize it might have a different meaning to other people. What do you hear when a person uses this phrase to describe himself?
I think it if is used appropriately then it has the practical purpose of quickly pointing out that someone doesn't follow an organized religion. However, there are a lot of Christians who tend to call themselves spiritual but not religious but that's just silly as if they were not religious they wouldn't believe in Jesus. I've also come across a very small handful of "spiritual atheists" online...they didn't believe in a god but thought there may be something supernatural going on.
"I think I'm interesting and smart, but I actually just don't really think about things in any depth."
Wow, I think I'm feeling snarky this morning!
Quote from: Ali on January 29, 2012, 03:39:44 PM
"I think I'm interesting and smart, but I actually just don't really think about things in any depth."
Wow, I think I'm feeling snarky this morning!
LOL! Yeah, me too. As much as I try not to have a knee-jerk reaction to the phrase, it does seem to instantly bring out the snark. :)
Quote from: Anne D. on January 29, 2012, 03:33:20 PM
The phrase "spiritual but not religious" also seems to sometimes connote a belief in certain "New Age-y" concepts that are just as insupportable as a belief in a god.
New Age-y is how I tend to think of it, but I suppose it might also apply to pantheists.
As pointed out, I think it all boils down to organised superstition vs. personal superstition.
So, "spiritual but not religious" is pretty much "superstitious, but not in a union"
Quote from: Asmodean on January 29, 2012, 06:26:40 PM
As pointed out, I think it all boils down to organised superstition vs. personal superstition.
So, "spiritual but not religious" is pretty much "superstitious, but not in a union"
This is a great line.
Quote from: Anne D. on January 29, 2012, 06:37:04 PM
Quote from: Asmodean on January 29, 2012, 06:26:40 PM
As pointed out, I think it all boils down to organised superstition vs. personal superstition.
So, "spiritual but not religious" is pretty much "superstitious, but not in a union"
This is a great line.
Don't forget we now have a Members Quotation thread! Hint Hint!
Hint taken :)
...And The Asmo's ego sores a quote in the quote thread ;D
I guess this is maybe another angle I've heard the 'spiritual but not religious' line coming from:
People who are theists say this to indicate that while they're open to the concept of God, they reject and/or resent having to follow what they see as lists of meaningless rules, commandments, etc. In Christianity, "I'm spiritual but not religious" is generally used perjoratively against organized churches, such as the Catholic church. I've talked to plenty of Protestants who scoff at Catholic "religiousity" (while the whole time they're wearing a cross around their own neck, a WWJD bracelet, and carrying a bible in an expensive case to show off their own holiness :D). In theism generally, I've always just understood it to mean that they don't belong to a specific church, sect, or group.... but I've never associated it directly with new agey type beliefs. Deism, if anything, unless of course they specify what they mean by the word 'spiritual'.
It kinda reminds me of that video, 'I love Jesus but I hate religion' that's gone viral on Youtube. People want to associate themselves with an idea, without also identifying with an institution. I can understand that desire, but the problem is, it's kind of like saying "I work as a programmer at X company, but I'm not really part of X or anything, I just happen to work there." Well, if you collect your pay from them, go to the staff meetings, sign the work contracts... guess what? You're a part of X whether you like it or not. :P
I don't use the phrase myself.
aesthete: One who professes great sensitivity to the beauty of art and nature.
If I experience a state of bliss in a perfect place on a perfect day, I don't ascribe a supernatural reason or try to explain it away with science. Not that I think scientific explanations diminish experience. Spiritual as the experience of being intensely alive or having a connection with nature isn't objectionable to me.
My girlfriend is guilty of saying that phrase. I never know how to respond to it. She says she doesn't believe in god, but keeps her mind open to super natural things as well. I'm just like "ok, as long as church and prayer aren't involved , I dont mind." :)
Quote from: Sweetdeath on January 30, 2012, 04:25:20 AM
My girlfriend is guilty of saying that phrase. I never know how to respond to it. She says she doesn't believe in god, but keeps her mind open to super natural things as well. I'm just like "ok, as long as church and prayer aren't involved , I dont mind." :)
Church I understand. But if she got involved in something that resembled prayer, would that be the end for you?
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on January 30, 2012, 04:36:10 AM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on January 30, 2012, 04:25:20 AM
My girlfriend is guilty of saying that phrase. I never know how to respond to it. She says she doesn't believe in god, but keeps her mind open to super natural things as well. I'm just like "ok, as long as church and prayer aren't involved , I dont mind." :)
Church I understand. But if she got involved in something that resembled prayer, would that be the end for you?
Yes. That would lower my opinion of her intelligence (which is what attracted me to her in the fist place) very much. It is a meaningless gesture.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on January 30, 2012, 04:42:29 AM
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on January 30, 2012, 04:36:10 AM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on January 30, 2012, 04:25:20 AM
My girlfriend is guilty of saying that phrase. I never know how to respond to it. She says she doesn't believe in god, but keeps her mind open to super natural things as well. I'm just like "ok, as long as church and prayer aren't involved , I dont mind." :)
Church I understand. But if she got involved in something that resembled prayer, would that be the end for you?
Yes. That would lower my opinion of her intelligence (which is what attracted me to her in the fist place) very much. It is a meaningless gesture.
Hmm. Maybe I'm confused :) but if you're OK with her keeping her mind open to supernatural things, why wouldn't you be OK with her wanting to try to communicate with them? Basically, I guess it just struck me as odd that a general 'keeping your mind open' would be OK, but any attempts to make contact with something supernatural wouldn't be OK. It seems maybe... hmm.. limiting. Kind of like saying 'I know there's a store around the corner I wouldn't mind checking out', and someone else responding with 'OK with me if you check it out, as long as you don't walk through the front door.' :)
I dunno. Don't mind me. I'm biased. My girlfriend's a fairly liberal Anglican, so I guess I'm just used to her saying prayers around me. It doesn't bother me. From where I stand, she's still one of the smartest people I know, and she shows that every single day. We've just agreed to disagree on the supernatural aspect of her life, but we still discuss it fairly often. I'm just always curious to see where and why people draw a line in the sand... so don't take my questions as criticism. I'm only interested in how relationships work between people with different spiritual beliefs. :)
One of my friends has her religion listed as "Spiritual/Catholic" on Facebook.
I've always found that a bit strange.
I keep my mind open to reason and logic. Supernatural is okay. Maybe ghosts exists (i do read about a lot of sightings in Japan.)
But there is something about prayer or praying that is completely pointless to me. It just seems prayer is something only people with no basic understanding do.
Like I mentioned in the door preachers thread, only her mother is religious. That's ok, cuz i'm not dating her.
Quote from: Amicale on January 30, 2012, 06:54:09 AM
I'm just always curious to see where and why people draw a line in the sand... so don't take my questions as criticism. I'm only interested in how relationships work between people with different spiritual beliefs. :)
My girlfriend is also religious in a very liberal way and prayer is part of that. To me, it's just a form of meditation and, to be honest, I think it's kind of cute tho I'd never say so because that's no end of condescending. Now if she started going in for exorcism, that'd be my line in the sand.
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on January 30, 2012, 03:46:56 PM
Quote from: Amicale on January 30, 2012, 06:54:09 AM
I'm just always curious to see where and why people draw a line in the sand... so don't take my questions as criticism. I'm only interested in how relationships work between people with different spiritual beliefs. :)
My girlfriend is also religious in a very liberal way and prayer is part of that. To me, it's just a form of meditation and, to be honest, I think it's kind of cute tho I'd never say so because that's no end of condescending. Now if she started going in for exorcism, that'd be my line in the sand.
Does she pray out loud? I think that would be hard for me to deal with, just because I would feel kind of awkward and embarrassed the whole time (like I do when my parents say grace.)
Quote from: Amicale on January 30, 2012, 01:00:19 AM
In theism generally, I've always just understood it to mean that they don't belong to a specific church, sect, or group....
Yeah, this is my interpretation too. The few people I've met who say this were a bit new-agey though, so I do personally associate it with that stereotype as well. But I'm not surprised that not everyone does.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on January 30, 2012, 02:15:51 PM
I keep my mind open to reason and logic. Supernatural is okay. Maybe ghosts exists (i do read about a lot of sightings in Japan.)
But there is something about prayer or praying that is completely pointless to me. It just seems prayer is something only people with no basic understanding do.
If I was in a situation like that, here's what would bother me. I don't believe in god or gods or anything supernatural, but I'm open to the possibility that there's something higher out there which we don't know about. So the term "spiritual" by itself is something I could probably live with, to some extent. But once you start praying to something, it indicates you think you have some idea of what it is based on absolutely no evidence, and that you can talk to that supernatural being, based purely on feeling. And this "feeling" is often what organized religion uses to convince people of the existence of god.
Is that what bothers you too? Or is it something else?
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on January 30, 2012, 03:46:56 PM
Quote from: Amicale on January 30, 2012, 06:54:09 AM
I'm just always curious to see where and why people draw a line in the sand... so don't take my questions as criticism. I'm only interested in how relationships work between people with different spiritual beliefs. :)
My girlfriend is also religious in a very liberal way and prayer is part of that. To me, it's just a form of meditation and, to be honest, I think it's kind of cute tho I'd never say so because that's no end of condescending. Now if she started going in for exorcism, that'd be my line in the sand.
Word for word, I agree with you... except if mine started going in for exorcism, I'd seriously insist she get a check-up from the neck up, as they say. Pronto. That wouldn't be my line in the sand unless she refused... in which it would be. But let's just say it doesn't freak me out, when someone sees or hears stuff they're not really seeing or hearing. To me that just means they probably need some help. That or they have a damned good imagination. :P Either way, I don't generally think 'whacked out religious nut', I think 'something's off, medically speaking'... so it would always bear at least checking out before I tossed in the towel on a relationship, but that's just me.
Firebird:
Yes, prayer gives the delusion that you KNOW there is a higher being without proof. And totally disregarding the people who suffer emersely in this world, especially places like MidEast and Africa.
Like I said, my gf does neither. I couldnt date someone religious AT ALL.
I always associated the phrase "spiritual, not religious" with a person who may believe in a higher power, but doesn't have their mind made up either way and doesn't participate in organized religion. I'm okay with this. I don't think it's a mark of intellectual laziness, more so an acknowledgement that the world is always changing and our knowledge of it changes, too. Maybe a little New Age-y, but I don't think it's always a bad thing. I've met people for whom all that meant was they believed nature was a "higher power", not in the sense that it was holy or sacred, but that it had power over humans by virtue of how awesome and/or destructive it can be and because we can't harness that power. These people just seemed to have more reverence and regard for the earth and the environment, were more careful about littering, etc... I don't know that I'd lump those folks in with the pantheists though because none that I met ever equated nature and God as being the same kind of force or entity. They just felt we should be respectful of the earth because it's where we all live and obviously keeping it in good condition is beneficial to everyone.
Quote from: philosoraptor on January 30, 2012, 07:07:52 PM
"spiritual, not religious" ....I'm okay with this. I don't think it's a mark of intellectual laziness, more so an acknowledgement that the world is always changing and our knowledge of it changes, too. Maybe a little New Age-y, nature was a "higher power", have more reverence and regard for the earth and the environment, were more careful about littering, etc... felt we should be respectful of the earth because it's where we all live and obviously keeping it in good condition is beneficial to everyone.
I corroborate the observation and agree.
if spirit is -as I think- neuro-electromagentic nebulae of pure biologic origin, sure we are all spiritual!
they tend to strive for the moral and pious and sincere, and some actually are..
I am convinced a subconcious knowledge of the fear of death drives "spirituality" with or without the farse of "supernatural" in individuals with heightened empathy
I just want to drop in my 2 cents here and stress that supernatural means outside or beyond nature. Therefore holding any "logical" reservation in your mind about the possibility of anything residing beyond nature is not conducive to logical discourse about nature. Ghosts are the same as gods, are the same as magic, are the same as fairies; when viewed as supernatural. The allowance of any supernatural cause or effect in the natural world means that you do not believe that nature is responsible all phenomena which then means that you are by definition agnostic. In my opinion in order to view the world form a naturalist perspective you have to be prepared to seek scientific cause and effect for all phenomena. If someone reports seeing a ghost it is in the naturalists best interest not to concede to the possibility of ghosts but to explore all possible natural phenomena that could lead to a perceived ghost or that would cause the observer to believe that they had seen a ghost. Psychology, physics and or biology would be the tools in deciphering ghost sightings, yielding to the possibility of ghosts or anything akin to ghosts is equally irrational as believing in gods. As far as spirituality is concerned you have to observe the phenomena of spirituality from a naturalist perspective. You need not ask yourself why did human beings evolve the propensity to assume supernatural cause for natural phenomena, and why and how did evolution select for the false perception of a second self, a perceived higher self or a detached self. Why did the evolution of consciousness by default elect the option of dualism rather than monism in the way the it evolved our brains to experience self. These are the naturalists questions to the idea of spirituality. The perception of spirit was never selected out of the way that we perceive self and at some point having the ability and propensity to perceive our own consciousness as separate from the body made evolutionary sense. The how and why are mysteries that natural historians have yet to solve exactly but if it exists in you today it had to have been successful to a certain degree for your ancestors yesterday.
Quote from: Ali on January 30, 2012, 04:08:17 PM
Does she pray out loud? I think that would be hard for me to deal with, just because I would feel kind of awkward and embarrassed the whole time (like I do when my parents say grace.)
Sometimes, on ritual occasions such as holiday dinner with her family over or when she just feels "moved" to it but for her it's usually a private thing (you know, like Jesus said to do), and it's hardly like she's shouting them out. People praying never bothered me anyway:
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7008%2F6793360001_57c06b8e90.jpg&hash=d38798bf4bd130e7b51d7c3abab856a4fad34911)
Quote from: Amicale on January 30, 2012, 06:15:11 PM
Word for word, I agree with you... except if mine started going in for exorcism, I'd seriously insist she get a check-up from the neck up, as they say. Pronto. That wouldn't be my line in the sand unless she refused... in which it would be.
I'm assuming before she got to the exocism stage there'd be plenty of other red flags going up to act on so that exocism would be the "out of here" point for me. Just like, for instance, if I claimed to have been abducted by aliens it would be the end of a long road of growing weirdness for her.
Sigh :-\. I feel so out of place in these forums, lol. I wonder if there is a forum somewhere for someone that is on the path to atheism...
Anyway.
I used to say that I was "Spiritual, but not Religious" for some time. It's been only about a year where I've been growing away from that and calling myself Agnostic. Basically when I said it, I meant that yes, I believed in a God, but I thought that religion was BS. For me, it seemed reasonable to call myself that, growing up in a family of Christians, but never identifying with Christianity or any of the other religions that I did explore. What else could I call myself? Religious didn't fit at all, but spiritual certainly did.
Furthermore, I've always had some reason to believe in ghosts, whether you want to call that spirituality or not. The house that I lived in when I was in High School had some strange occurrences happen. Probably, the occurrences could be explained away with some deeper investigation, but it still remains a mystery. Not only that, but a friend of mine, who is intelligent & an atheist herself (not that it really matters) just told me that the house that she bought is haunted. Pictures in her home started flying off the wall, loud crashes, lights turn on and off and strange noises. I've never known her to lie or exaggerate, so that has me flabbergasted.
I tell ya, it's really hard to make toward atheism, when that seems the only road that makes sense, when I have all this spiritual stuff that still weighs on my mind.
Quote from: orangemoon on January 31, 2012, 12:02:23 PM
I tell ya, it's really hard to make toward atheism, when that seems the only road that makes sense, when I have all this spiritual stuff that still weighs on my mind.
Take your time, we have no quota to fill.
Don't even have anyone to set a quota.
I kind of believe in ghosts (my childhood home seemed to have one lurking about) but I assume that the explanation behind ghosts and ghost sightings is not "supernatural" but rather has a scientific explanation that we just don't really understand yet. Hence, an atheist who believes in ghosts.
Quote from: Twentythree on January 30, 2012, 10:27:34 PM
The allowance of any supernatural cause or effect in the natural world means that..
1) you suppose more than you know, the definition of a fool, a mental retard in some minute quarter of behaviours
2) you discredit to a generalised contempt of nature, your body , this life and the emancipation towards your rightful position among your fellow beings, the definition of an egopathic dissocial and heavily perplexed asshole
3) you are a plain nutter, no further specifications required
Quote from: Ali on January 31, 2012, 02:22:15 PM
I kind of believe in ghosts (my childhood home seemed to have one lurking about) but I assume that the explanation behind ghosts and ghost sightings is not "supernatural" but rather has a scientific explanation that we just don't really understand yet. Hence, an atheist who believes in ghosts.
I've seen things twice that answer the classic description of ghosts, and it pretty much convinced me of their unreality (sort of "seeing is disbelieving"), the whole business just seemed so silly. So I'm thinking that, yes, there's some natural, scientific explanation that we don't understand yet for what does seem to be a very common human experience. Or even common non-human experience, given stories of other animals reacting to "ghosts".
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on January 31, 2012, 03:44:31 PM
Quote from: Ali on January 31, 2012, 02:22:15 PM
I kind of believe in ghosts (my childhood home seemed to have one lurking about) but I assume that the explanation behind ghosts and ghost sightings is not "supernatural" but rather has a scientific explanation that we just don't really understand yet. Hence, an atheist who believes in ghosts.
I've seen things twice that answer the classic description of ghosts, and it pretty much convinced me of their unreality (sort of "seeing is disbelieving"), the whole business just seemed so silly. So I'm thinking that, yes, there's some natural, scientific explanation that we don't understand yet for what does seem to be a very common human experience. Or even common non-human experience, given stories of other animals reacting to "ghosts".
Yes. I guess I should clarify that I believe that the phenomenon that people call "ghosts" actually sometimes happens. I don't think it's "spirits of the dead" or anything. I'm sure there is a natural explanation for why people have that experience.
Quote from: pytheas on January 31, 2012, 03:32:02 PM
Quote from: Twentythree on January 30, 2012, 10:27:34 PM
The allowance of any supernatural cause or effect in the natural world means that..
1) you suppose more than you know, the definition of a fool, a mental retard in some minute quarter of behaviours
2) you discredit to a generalised contempt of nature, your body , this life and the emancipation towards your rightful position among your fellow beings, the definition of an egopathic dissocial and heavily perplexed asshole
3) you are a plain nutter, no further specifications required
Wow, this seems unnecessarily hostile for what my post was about. Especially referring to me as "fool", "mental retard" and "heavily perplexed asshole"
#1 I don't suppose more than I know, I know that a true naturalist does not concede to explaining any natural phenomena with the supernatural.
Supernatural forces, if they exist, cannot be observed, measured, or recorded by the procedures of science - that's simply what the word "supernatural" means. There can be no limit to the kinds and shapes of supernatural forces and forms the human mind is capable of conjuring up from "nowhere."
Scientists therefore have no alternative but to ignore "claims" of the existence of supernatural forces and causes. This exclusion is a basic position that must be stoutly adhered to by scientists or their entire system of processing information will collapse. To put it another way, if science must include a supernatural realm, it will be forced into a game where there are no rules. Without rules, no scientific observation, explanation, or prediction can enjoy a high probability of being a correct picture of the real world.[1]
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mark_vuletic/ntse.html
#2 I don't think I am egopathic. I understand that my place in the larger continuum of life and geological time is ridiculously small. Any opinions I have will be extremely short lived and what small amount of knowledge I am able to pass on to the next generation will be my only lasting legacy and that will probably only retain any relevance for perhaps a generation or two. So maybe denial of egopathy is a condition of egopathy but based on the definitions I found I'm not sure if it applies to me.
#3 I am not a plain nutter I am a nutter butter and for those of us who know anything about sweet treats...they are quite good.
(https://encrypted-tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ9KGgR4yG87Z9ZVxPZizZYNXPSbSyEVzBO_LuXHHMhQbY6duQC)
Those cookies are yummy!!
My best friend of over ten years lives in her grandma's house. After her grandma died, faucets turn themselves on, and you can hear voices in the bathroom.
We havent SEEN anything, but man that is I creepy! I don't know HOW to explain it. We're BOTH atheists btw. :)
Count me also in the group of atheists who've had weird, seemingly supernatural experiences before-a whole bunch of them, even. For which I'm sure there's some kind of explanation, though I have yet to figure it out. It's also possible that I'm an asshole and a nutter though, so take that with a grain of salt, I guess.
Quote from: philosoraptor on January 31, 2012, 06:46:16 PM
Count me also in the group of atheists who've had weird, seemingly supernatural experiences before-a whole bunch of them, even. For which I'm sure there's some kind of explanation, though I have yet to figure it out. It's also possible that I'm an asshole and a nutter though, so take that with a grain of salt, I guess.
:D Hey, no need to be an asshole in order to be a nutter, trust me on that one. *grin*
I don't think I've had genuinely verifiable supernatural experiences (ie, someone else in the same room would notice it too), but I've spoken with friends and family members who certainly HAVE seen and heard very odd things that just shouldn't have been there. My general theory (I'm sure I'm probably wrong) goes something like this. If people see/hear/sense the 'ghosts' or 'spirits' of loved ones, especially recently after a loved one's death, it's probably just our mind working through some very strong grief as we miss them, so we "see them everywhere". If on the other hand people see/hear/sense ghosts or spirits they have no knowledge of... well... there's a scientific explanation for it that we just don't understand yet. Maybe something along the lines of 'energy is neither creater nor destroyed' -- in other words, maybe in some sense, it CAN stick around in some way, who knows. *shrug*
Some of the people I know who call themselves 'spiritual' call themselves that because they're solely interested in what we'd call the paranormal. I wouldn't personally get too involved in 'paranormal' studies myself. Either the energy in our body does, or doesn't, somehow stick around when we die. If it does, well -- that may be the beginnings of some scientific idea of why some people sense 'spirits/ghosts'. If it doesn't, then we've just got damned good imaginations. :)
I tend to think of it as some sort of "stuck" energy too. Or when I'm feeling really out there, I think about string theory, imagining that all moments are happening all at once in slightly different dimensions - what if sometimes those dimensions get sort of blurred somehow, like you are experiencing something that actually happened in a different moment of time. Okay, now I really sound like a nutter. LOL
Twenty-three, maybe I'm totally misreading, but I thought Pytheas was agreeing with you and that the three things described those who did believe in the supernatural.
Quote from: Twentythree on January 31, 2012, 05:53:00 PM
Quote from: pytheas on January 31, 2012, 03:32:02 PM
Quote from: Twentythree on January 30, 2012, 10:27:34 PM
The allowance of any supernatural cause or effect in the natural world means that..
1) you suppose more than you know, the definition of a fool, a mental retard in some minute quarter of behaviours
2) you discredit to a generalised contempt of nature, your body , this life and the emancipation towards your rightful position among your fellow beings, the definition of an egopathic dissocial and heavily perplexed asshole
3) you are a plain nutter, no further specifications required
Wow, this seems unnecessarily hostile for what my post was about. Especially referring to me as "fool", "mental retard" and "heavily perplexed asshole"
You don't really think Pytheas was calling you a fool etc do you?
I thought it was aimed at people in general.
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on February 01, 2012, 12:52:31 AM
Quote from: Twentythree on January 31, 2012, 05:53:00 PM
Quote from: pytheas on January 31, 2012, 03:32:02 PM
Quote from: Twentythree on January 30, 2012, 10:27:34 PM
The allowance of any supernatural cause or effect in the natural world means that..
1) you suppose more than you know, the definition of a fool, a mental retard in some minute quarter of behaviours
2) you discredit to a generalised contempt of nature, your body , this life and the emancipation towards your rightful position among your fellow beings, the definition of an egopathic dissocial and heavily perplexed asshole
3) you are a plain nutter, no further specifications required
Wow, this seems unnecessarily hostile for what my post was about. Especially referring to me as "fool", "mental retard" and "heavily perplexed asshole"
You don't really think Pytheas was calling you a fool etc do you?
I thought it was aimed at people in general.
I read it that way (that Pytheas was basically calling Twentythree a "retard") the first time I read it. And thought "geez, hostile." But in re-reading it, I agree with you and Anne D, I think Pytheas was saying that people who believe in the supernatural are 1, 2, & 3.
Quote from: Anne D.In short, I usually find this phrase really annoying. That said, I realize it might have a different meaning to other people. What do you hear when a person uses this phrase to describe himself?
I take it to mean that while they don't believe in god, gods, pixies, unicorns, vampires or fairies, they aren't particularly fond of scientific rationalism either. Either they don't think it can account for everything, or they just find it aesthetically unpleasing. So, assuming that the only alternative to Newtonian thinking is a kind of vague, awkward pseudo-religiousness, they pin that label to themselves for want of anything better. Watch their expressions as they say it - it even makes
them uncomfortable.
Quote from: Twentythree on January 31, 2012, 05:53:00 PM
#3 I am not a plain nutter I am a nutter butter and for those of us who know anything about sweet treats...they are quite good.
(https://encrypted-tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ9KGgR4yG87Z9ZVxPZizZYNXPSbSyEVzBO_LuXHHMhQbY6duQC)
One of civilization's better inventions.
The Air Force has a different way to define spiritual. They acknowledge that in some cases spiritual health comes from a higher power, however, this is not necessary. Spiritual health, by the Air Force definition, is about having an inner drive, a strong sense of self, or whatever it is that is intangible that drives an individual. While I still sort of smile sideways at this, I understand what someone was trying to do with spiritual health to keep it as a viable survey topic.
Part of what bugs me about the phrase "spiritual but not religious" is that it's so overused and also, seemingly—from the variety of meanings ascribed to it, somewhat inadequate in actually describing a person's beliefs. I guess it's useful in polling situations.
Also, I feel like this phrase is sometimes used with an almost pretentious tone, like, "I'm much too enlightened to be considered religious."
Re: the ghosties:
I gave up the ghosts when I gave up the God (bad pun intended :) ). Have only ever really observed something that might be described as ghostlike once, and, like others here have noted, I'm sure there's a natural explanation for it. I don't see how a belief in anything supernatural is compatible with atheism.
Aargh--was typing away and then got involved with something away from the computer and came back--sorry if this doesn't jibe w/ the last few posts/flow of the conversation.
Quote from: Anne D.Also, I feel like this phrase is sometimes used with an almost pretentious tone, like, "I'm much too enlightened to be considered religious."
You'd probably love this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNOuVhn_yRw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNOuVhn_yRw) Two "spiritual" people walk into a church...
Quote from: Sweetdeath on January 30, 2012, 04:42:29 AM
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on January 30, 2012, 04:36:10 AM
Church I understand. But if she got involved in something that resembled prayer, would that be the end for you?
Yes. That would lower my opinion of her intelligence (which is what attracted me to her in the fist place) very much. It is a meaningless gesture.
What about meditation would that be such a deal breaker?
Meditation is just a series of breathing exercises, which helps release stress. Unless you're chanting or trying to reach Nirvana, I could care less.
Quote from: Melmoth on February 01, 2012, 07:34:48 PM
Quote from: Anne D.Also, I feel like this phrase is sometimes used with an almost pretentious tone, like, "I'm much too enlightened to be considered religious."
You'd probably love this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNOuVhn_yRw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNOuVhn_yRw) Two "spiritual" people walk into a church...
Pretty damn hilarious :D As is this of yours from earlier:
QuoteI take it to mean that while they don't believe in god, gods, pixies, unicorns, vampires or fairies, they aren't particularly fond of scientific rationalism either. Either they don't think it can account for everything, or they just find it aesthetically unpleasing. So, assuming that the only alternative to Newtonian thinking is a kind of vague, awkward pseudo-religiousness, they pin that label to themselves for want of anything better. Watch their expressions as they say it - it even makes them uncomfortable.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on February 02, 2012, 12:00:27 AM
Meditation is just a series of breathing exercises, which helps release stress. Unless you're chanting or trying to reach Nirvana, I could care less.
Mindfulness goes much further than this but doesn't entail any beliefs in the supernatural.
Quote from: Anne D. on January 29, 2012, 03:33:20 PM
When I hear this phrase, I hear a description I might've used for myself at a point in my youth when a better description would've been "intellectually lazy." At that time, I did not subscribe to any particular set of religious beliefs, but I did believe (or maybe just wanted to believe) in a benevolent force/"energy" that had created the universe and perhaps intervened in human affairs, as well as the possibility of an afterlife. I had yet to go through the process of forcing myself to evaluate whether those beliefs really made sense.
The phrase "spiritual but not religious" also seems to sometimes connote a belief in certain "New Age-y" concepts that are just as insupportable as a belief in a god.
In short, I usually find this phrase really annoying. That said, I realize it might have a different meaning to other people. What do you hear when a person uses this phrase to describe himself?
Something along the lines of, "I want to believe there's an afterlife, but I don't really want to have to work to get the good stuff"
Quote from: Reprobate on February 14, 2012, 02:38:16 AM
Quote from: Anne D. on January 29, 2012, 03:33:20 PM
When I hear this phrase, I hear a description I might've used for myself at a point in my youth when a better description would've been "intellectually lazy." At that time, I did not subscribe to any particular set of religious beliefs, but I did believe (or maybe just wanted to believe) in a benevolent force/"energy" that had created the universe and perhaps intervened in human affairs, as well as the possibility of an afterlife. I had yet to go through the process of forcing myself to evaluate whether those beliefs really made sense.
The phrase "spiritual but not religious" also seems to sometimes connote a belief in certain "New Age-y" concepts that are just as insupportable as a belief in a god.
In short, I usually find this phrase really annoying. That said, I realize it might have a different meaning to other people. What do you hear when a person uses this phrase to describe himself?
Something along the lines of, "I want to believe there's an afterlife, but I don't really want to have to work to get the good stuff"
LOL
There was actually an excellent UU sermon on this given by Rev. Lillian Daniel, my favorite part of which was the line "Thank you for sharing, spiritual but not religious...person. You are now comfortably in the norm for self-centered American culture, right smack in the bland majority of people who find ancient religions dull but find themselves uniquely fascinating."
Quote from: statichaos on February 19, 2012, 11:07:55 PM
There was actually an excellent UU sermon on this given by Rev. Lillian Daniel, my favorite part of which was the line "Thank you for sharing, spiritual but not religious...person. You are now comfortably in the norm for self-centered American culture, right smack in the bland majority of people who find ancient religions dull but find themselves uniquely fascinating."
Oh, snap!
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on February 19, 2012, 11:09:35 PM
Quote from: statichaos on February 19, 2012, 11:07:55 PM
There was actually an excellent UU sermon on this given by Rev. Lillian Daniel, my favorite part of which was the line "Thank you for sharing, spiritual but not religious...person. You are now comfortably in the norm for self-centered American culture, right smack in the bland majority of people who find ancient religions dull but find themselves uniquely fascinating."
Oh, snap!
Oh, snap, indeed. What a great line.
Quote from: Anne D. on February 20, 2012, 02:55:40 PM
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on February 19, 2012, 11:09:35 PM
Quote from: statichaos on February 19, 2012, 11:07:55 PM
There was actually an excellent UU sermon on this given by Rev. Lillian Daniel, my favorite part of which was the line "Thank you for sharing, spiritual but not religious...person. You are now comfortably in the norm for self-centered American culture, right smack in the bland majority of people who find ancient religions dull but find themselves uniquely fascinating."
Oh, snap!
Oh, snap, indeed. What a great line.
Why is that such a great line? A theist putting down someone rejecting ancient crap.
Finding yourself uniquely fascinating, hmm, must be wrong, distracts from the worshipping of god.
I understand the reproach of self centred, human to human. If god is supposed to be the centre, well you know what you can do with that.
I find it to be a great response to someone who claims belief in god but can't be bothered with what others have had to say on the subject.
Quote from: Anne D. on February 20, 2012, 04:15:24 PM
I find it to be a great response to someone who claims belief in god but can't be bothered with what others have had to say on the subject.
I saw "Thank you for sharing, spiritual but not religious...person"
Why does a modern practitioner of lunacy have to pay credence to prior loons?
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on February 20, 2012, 04:30:17 PM
Quote from: Anne D. on February 20, 2012, 04:15:24 PM
I find it to be a great response to someone who claims belief in god but can't be bothered with what others have had to say on the subject.
I saw "Thank you for sharing, spiritual but not religious...person"
Why does a modern practitioner of lunacy have to pay credence to prior loons?
Maybe you're right that it should be no more annoying to interact with a spiritual-but-not-religious practitioner of a mini "religion" of me than it is to deal with believers who subscribe to a particular religious tradition. But somehow to me it is. The former just screams, "Yes, but I'm 'special'!"
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on February 20, 2012, 04:30:17 PM
Quote from: Anne D. on February 20, 2012, 04:15:24 PM
I find it to be a great response to someone who claims belief in god but can't be bothered with what others have had to say on the subject.
I saw "Thank you for sharing, spiritual but not religious...person"
Why does a modern practitioner of lunacy have to pay credence to prior loons?
Well, first off, she's a UU, so her theism or lack thereof can't be established as a certainty. But that's beside the point. I'll let you know that she is, and post the entire passage, not as a method of preaching, but to let her words speak for themselves.
QuoteOn airplanes, I dread the conversation with the person who finds out I am a minister and wants to use the flight time to explain to me that he is "spiritual but not religious." Such a person will always share this as if it is some kind of daring insight, unique to him, bold in its rebellion against the religious status quo.
Next thing you know, he's telling me that he finds God in the sunsets. These people always find God in the sunsets. And in walks on the beach. Sometimes I think these people never leave the beach or the mountains, what with all the communing with God they do on hilltops, hiking trails and . . . did I mention the beach at sunset yet?
Like people who go to church don't see God in the sunset! Like we are these monastic little hermits who never leave the church building. How lucky we are to have these geniuses inform us that God is in nature. As if we don't hear that in the psalms, the creation stories and throughout our deep tradition.
Being privately spiritual but not religious just doesn't interest me. There is nothing challenging about having deep thoughts all by oneself. What is interesting is doing this work in community, where other people might call you on stuff, or heaven forbid, disagree with you. Where life with God gets rich and provocative is when you dig deeply into a tradition that you did not invent all for yourself.
Thank you for sharing, spiritual but not religious sunset person. You are now comfortably in the norm for self-centered American culture, right smack in the bland majority of people who find ancient religions dull but find themselves uniquely fascinating. Can I switch seats now and sit next to someone who has been shaped by a mighty cloud of witnesses instead? Can I spend my time talking to someone brave enough to encounter God in a real human community? Because when this flight gets choppy, that's who I want by my side, holding my hand, saying a prayer and simply putting up with me, just like we try to do in church.
Bolding mine. And, yes, she's a theist. From what I can say, she's disdaining the popular idea of spirituality somehow being separate and distinct from community. Not that it can't happen, but that it misses the whole point, which is to (in the words of John Winthrop in his famed "City Upon A Hill" sermon) "We must delight in each other; make others' conditions our own; rejoice together, mourn together, labor and suffer together, always having before our eyes our commission and community in the work, as members of the same body." She's speaking towards a sense of community and togetherness, one for which belief in a specific deity is not necessary (As stated: Unitarian Universalist), but without which this "spirituality" can come across as empty and self-indulgent.
Quote from: statichaos on February 20, 2012, 06:53:35 PM
From what I can say, she's disdaining the popular idea of spirituality somehow being separate and distinct from community. Not that it can't happen, but that it misses the whole point, which is to (in the words of John Winthrop in his famed "City Upon A Hill" sermon) "We must delight in each other; make others' conditions our own; rejoice together, mourn together, labor and suffer together, always having before our eyes our commission and community in the work, as members of the same body." She's speaking towards a sense of community and togetherness, one for which belief in a specific deity is not necessary (As stated: Unitarian Universalist), but without which this "spirituality" can come across as empty and self-indulgent.
That's close to what I thought she was saying -- to me, it sounded like she was calling out people who wanted the warm, fuzzy benefit of community approval for being spiritual without the annoyance of doing the work of being part of the community (religious).
Quote from: statichaos on February 20, 2012, 06:53:35 PM
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on February 20, 2012, 04:30:17 PM
Quote from: Anne D. on February 20, 2012, 04:15:24 PM
I find it to be a great response to someone who claims belief in god but can't be bothered with what others have had to say on the subject.
I saw "Thank you for sharing, spiritual but not religious...person"
Why does a modern practitioner of lunacy have to pay credence to prior loons?
Well, first off, she's a UU, so her theism or lack thereof can't be established as a certainty. But that's beside the point. I'll let you know that she is, and post the entire passage, not as a method of preaching, but to let her words speak for themselves.
I assumed she was a theist, she was expressing disdain for a person practicing spirituality light, someone who can't take the hard stuff, an inferior. People arguing others are less because they don't believe properly doesn't impress me.
QuoteOn airplanes, I dread the conversation with the person who finds out I am a minister and wants to use the flight time to explain to me that he is "spiritual but not religious." Such a person will always share this as if it is some kind of daring insight, unique to him, bold in its rebellion against the religious status quo.
Next thing you know, he's telling me that he finds God in the sunsets. These people always find God in the sunsets. And in walks on the beach. Sometimes I think these people never leave the beach or the mountains, what with all the communing with God they do on hilltops, hiking trails and . . . did I mention the beach at sunset yet?
Like people who go to church don't see God in the sunset! Like we are these monastic little hermits who never leave the church building. How lucky we are to have these geniuses inform us that God is in nature. As if we don't hear that in the psalms, the creation stories and throughout our deep tradition.
Intolerance of another's harmless world view, charming.
Quote
Being privately spiritual but not religious just doesn't interest me. There is nothing challenging about having deep thoughts all by oneself. What is interesting is doing this work in community, where other people might call you on stuff, or heaven forbid, disagree with you. Where life with God gets rich and provocative is when you dig deeply into a tradition that you did not invent all for yourself.
Criticising someone for avoiding a challenge whilst bemoaning being challenged and lacking the energy to push back. No save it for later and discuss it with people who believe as you do.
QuoteThank you for sharing, spiritual but not religious sunset person. You are now comfortably in the norm for self-centered American culture, right smack in the bland majority of people who find ancient religions dull but find themselves uniquely fascinating. Can I switch seats now and sit next to someone who has been shaped by a mighty cloud of witnesses instead? Can I spend my time talking to someone brave enough to encounter God in a real human community? Because when this flight gets choppy, that's who I want by my side, holding my hand, saying a prayer and simply putting up with me, just like we try to do in church.
This person wants to be with her own kind and put down others, that's natural I suppose, but all the god bothering sure hasn't given her much respect for other humans, not ones outside her comfortable little in group. How does she know these people don't have a community? Does she imagine people haven't heard the Jesus story, or seen how his followers behave?
Quote from: statichaosShe's speaking towards a sense of community and togetherness, one for which belief in a specific deity is not necessary (As stated: Unitarian Universalist), but without which this "spirituality" can come across as empty and self-indulgent.
I don't see this, she talks of "psalms, the creation stories and throughout our deep tradition."
I agree with TMP. This person is assuming that a non believer in god/doesn't go to church automatically means they aren't charitable or selfless.
Whatever, but I can't expect much from a pastor.
I'm sure you folks know this already, but it bears repeating just in case: the UU church is made up of so many different people from differing religious backgrounds and traditions. There are different speakers on different days, and they're usually intentionally slotted in so as to mix up the discussion and dialogue. That's what's unique about a sermon like hers -- you're asked to discuss it afterwards, generally. You can disagree, agree, critique, etc. And you'll be doing so with people across at least a few different religious/secular lines. I think that's pretty cool. It reminds me a little of a multi-faith webforum, really. :D
Quote from: Amicale on February 21, 2012, 06:31:26 PM
I'm sure you folks know this already, but it bears repeating just in case: the UU church is made up of so many different people from differing religious backgrounds and traditions. There are different speakers on different days, and they're usually intentionally slotted in so as to mix up the discussion and dialogue. That's what's unique about a sermon like hers -- you're asked to discuss it afterwards, generally. You can disagree, agree, critique, etc. And you'll be doing so with people across at least a few different religious/secular lines. I think that's pretty cool. It reminds me a little of a multi-faith webforum, really. :D
So different people from different backgrounds all believing in nonsense? Okay. :\
UU "churches" are generally a safe place for free thinkers looking for community. I've known agnostics and atheists who went to UU churches, not because they necessarily believed in anything, but more for that sense of community with other people who were willing to have reasoned, rational, philosophical conversations without proselytizing or preaching. Everyone is welcomed in UU churches, so it's actually kind of a nice thing, I suppose. Probably the perfect place for someone who describes themselves as "spiritual, not religious", because there really aren't any rituals and traditions associated with being UU, and I think the ritualism is what many of those people object to.
I guess I see the point that pastor was trying to make, but yeah, it does kind of read as a little intolerant. Even as a Methodist, I was raised being told that your relationship with god was between you and him. She needs to tone it down a little.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on February 21, 2012, 07:15:40 PM
Quote from: Amicale on February 21, 2012, 06:31:26 PM
I'm sure you folks know this already, but it bears repeating just in case: the UU church is made up of so many different people from differing religious backgrounds and traditions. There are different speakers on different days, and they're usually intentionally slotted in so as to mix up the discussion and dialogue. That's what's unique about a sermon like hers -- you're asked to discuss it afterwards, generally. You can disagree, agree, critique, etc. And you'll be doing so with people across at least a few different religious/secular lines. I think that's pretty cool. It reminds me a little of a multi-faith webforum, really. :D
So different people from different backgrounds all believing in nonsense? Okay. :\
What nonsense are you referring to, specifically? As someone who identifies as U.U., I'd like to respond to this characterization, but find it to be a bit vague. I'm going to refer to the guiding principles of the Unitarian Universalist church (http://uua.org/beliefs/principles/index.shtml), but with a disclaimer that this is only for the sake of clarification, and not an attempt to convert anyone or preach in any manner.
Proselytizing goes against U.U. ideals anyway, as referred to in the old joke "What do you get when you cross a U.U. with a Jehovah's Witness? Someone who knocks on your door for no apparent reason."
At any rate, here they are:
QuoteThere are seven principles which Unitarian Universalist congregations affirm and promote:
The inherent worth and dignity of every person;
Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;
The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;
The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;
Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.
Now there are also sources of inspiration for the church that draw from many different belief systems. However, belief in the literal truth of any or all of them is not required, and in fact literalism tends to be met with heavy skepticism within the larger U.U. community.
QuoteDirect experience of that transcending mystery and wonder, affirmed in all cultures, which moves us to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the forces which create and uphold life;
Words and deeds of prophetic women and men which challenge us to confront powers and structures of evil with justice, compassion, and the transforming power of love;
Wisdom from the world's religions which inspires us in our ethical and spiritual life;
Jewish and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God's love by loving our neighbors as ourselves;
Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit;
Spiritual teachings of earth-centered traditions which celebrate the sacred circle of life and instruct us to live in harmony with the rhythms of nature.
Some of it is a bit new-agey to me, but I can see value in being inspired by how people have come to terms with their struggles to comprehend the mysteries of existence.
TMP, although I don't know if I'll come to see things as you do, thank you for the food for thought.
Quote from: statichaos on February 21, 2012, 09:33:51 PM
Proselytizing goes against U.U. ideals anyway, as referred to in the old joke "What do you get when you cross a U.U. with a Jehovah's Witness? Someone who knocks on your door for no apparent reason."
I saw a bumper sticker once that described what I like so much about the UUs: "Unitarian Universalism: where all your answers are questioned."
Quote from: philosoraptor on February 21, 2012, 08:18:08 PM
Probably the perfect place for someone who describes themselves as "spiritual, not religious", because there really aren't any rituals and traditions associated with being UU, and I think the ritualism is what many of those people object to.
Not to nitpick (well, not more than a little) but what I object to is insistence on supernaturalism without any good reason why I should consider it. There's more than a few people who subscribe to the supernatural in my local UU, but it rarely comes up except in private conversation. This church is mainly concerned with social justice and protecting the environment.
They do have some rituals (which may be the Pagan influence in the congregation) which I find lovely and would probably participate in if I were a member of the church rather than an occasional visitor.
QuoteI guess I see the point that pastor was trying to make, but yeah, it does kind of read as a little intolerant. Even as a Methodist, I was raised being told that your relationship with god was between you and him. She needs to tone it down a little.
I would agree if this was her general tone and attitude, but if it was a one-time blow off of steam about something that annoyed her, I tend to shrug it off -- I think everybody's allowed the occasional outburst.
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on February 22, 2012, 02:12:20 AM
I would agree if this was her general tone and attitude, but if it was a one-time blow off of steam about something that annoyed her, I tend to shrug it off -- I think everybody's allowed the occasional outburst.
That's what I got from it, at least. I didn't see the idea of a personal spirituality as being annoying to her (all spirituality is personal in the first place, in my opinion), but rather the seeming dismissal of the challenges, companionship, and growth that can come from being part of a larger community. As it's her life's work to guide such a community, I can understand the frustrations.
I mean, I can also understand the issues of having some sort of spiritual life, but not wishing to be bound by specific dogma. However, most people on spiritual paths do end up building some sort of structures and practices around their beliefs, even if they aren't especially dogmatic in nature. I consider those who follow a path due to their spiritual insight that consists of practices, works, and rituals (even if it's just fifteen minutes of meditation in the morning) to be religious in a sense, though they may never set foot in a church, temple, or shul.
Quote from: statichaos on February 22, 2012, 07:03:38 PM
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on February 22, 2012, 02:12:20 AM
I would agree if this was her general tone and attitude, but if it was a one-time blow off of steam about something that annoyed her, I tend to shrug it off -- I think everybody's allowed the occasional outburst.
That's what I got from it, at least. I didn't see the idea of a personal spirituality as being annoying to her (all spirituality is personal in the first place, in my opinion), but rather the seeming dismissal of the challenges, companionship, and growth that can come from being part of a larger community. As it's her life's work to guide such a community, I can understand the frustrations.
I mean, I can also understand the issues of having some sort of spiritual life, but not wishing to be bound by specific dogma. However, most people on spiritual paths do end up building some sort of structures and practices around their beliefs, even if they aren't especially dogmatic in nature. I consider those who follow a path due to their spiritual insight that consists of practices, works, and rituals (even if it's just fifteen minutes of meditation in the morning) to be religious in a sense, though they may never set foot in a church, temple, or shul.
I try to be as honest with myself as I can be, and although I am not religious and I'd describe myself as agnostic, I DO understand people who wish to have some sense of spirituality in their life, especially those who equate 'spirituality' with 'feeling like part of a greater whole' or the experience of wonder. I've had several moments in my life where I witnessed extreme beauty, was touched by a strong sense of love, or felt like I was part of something much greater than myself. Although I'd hesitate to call it a 'spiritual experience', and I'm fine with simply calling it an emotional one... those moments have a lot of value to me. I definitely understand people when they say that meditation, watching a sunset, or feeling part of a great community gives them a glimpse of something really special. It's not that moments like that feed my soul, but they do feed my heart and my brain. :)
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on February 21, 2012, 01:53:45 AM
Quote from: statichaos on February 20, 2012, 06:53:35 PM
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on February 20, 2012, 04:30:17 PM
Quote from: Anne D. on February 20, 2012, 04:15:24 PM
I find it to be a great response to someone who claims belief in god but can't be bothered with what others have had to say on the subject.
I saw "Thank you for sharing, spiritual but not religious...person"
Why does a modern practitioner of lunacy have to pay credence to prior loons?
Well, first off, she's a UU, so her theism or lack thereof can't be established as a certainty. But that's beside the point. I'll let you know that she is, and post the entire passage, not as a method of preaching, but to let her words speak for themselves.
I assumed she was a theist, she was expressing disdain for a person practicing spirituality light, someone who can't take the hard stuff, an inferior. People arguing others are less because they don't believe properly doesn't impress me.
QuoteOn airplanes, I dread the conversation with the person who finds out I am a minister and wants to use the flight time to explain to me that he is "spiritual but not religious." Such a person will always share this as if it is some kind of daring insight, unique to him, bold in its rebellion against the religious status quo.
Next thing you know, he's telling me that he finds God in the sunsets. These people always find God in the sunsets. And in walks on the beach. Sometimes I think these people never leave the beach or the mountains, what with all the communing with God they do on hilltops, hiking trails and . . . did I mention the beach at sunset yet?
Like people who go to church don't see God in the sunset! Like we are these monastic little hermits who never leave the church building. How lucky we are to have these geniuses inform us that God is in nature. As if we don't hear that in the psalms, the creation stories and throughout our deep tradition.
Intolerance of another's harmless world view, charming.
Quote
Being privately spiritual but not religious just doesn't interest me. There is nothing challenging about having deep thoughts all by oneself. What is interesting is doing this work in community, where other people might call you on stuff, or heaven forbid, disagree with you. Where life with God gets rich and provocative is when you dig deeply into a tradition that you did not invent all for yourself.
Criticising someone for avoiding a challenge whilst bemoaning being challenged and lacking the energy to push back. No save it for later and discuss it with people who believe as you do.
QuoteThank you for sharing, spiritual but not religious sunset person. You are now comfortably in the norm for self-centered American culture, right smack in the bland majority of people who find ancient religions dull but find themselves uniquely fascinating. Can I switch seats now and sit next to someone who has been shaped by a mighty cloud of witnesses instead? Can I spend my time talking to someone brave enough to encounter God in a real human community? Because when this flight gets choppy, that's who I want by my side, holding my hand, saying a prayer and simply putting up with me, just like we try to do in church.
This person wants to be with her own kind and put down others, that's natural I suppose, but all the god bothering sure hasn't given her much respect for other humans, not ones outside her comfortable little in group. How does she know these people don't have a community? Does she imagine people haven't heard the Jesus story, or seen how his followers behave?
Quote from: statichaosShe's speaking towards a sense of community and togetherness, one for which belief in a specific deity is not necessary (As stated: Unitarian Universalist), but without which this "spirituality" can come across as empty and self-indulgent.
I don't see this, she talks of "psalms, the creation stories and throughout our deep tradition."
Having given this some thought, I still can't muster any outrage at a religious theist (UU or otherwise) making contemptuous (but witty) remarks about a "spiritual" theist in response to the "spiritual" theist's contempt (how quaint that you're a minister in a religious denomination; I'm well beyond that). I see the contempt as originating with the "spiritual but not religious" person.
Having given it some more thought and reread the minister's sermon as well as others' posts, I'm still thinking the minister's remarks are, for the most part (first three graphs and first two sentences of last graph), a fitting response to what I think she perceived (and I think probably correctly) as at worst smug condescension and at best dismissiveness. (Your defined beliefs are somehow less sophisticated than my vague beliefs.)
I can see, though, how it could come across as unnecessarily hostile to someone who uses the phrase "spiritual but not religious" simply to try to to describe where they are beliefwise, without the condescension thrown in.