Post Reply
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
2 years ago  ::  Apr 15, 2012 - 11:33PM #11
slu_magoo
Posts: 997

I don't really like the phrase 'spiritual but not religious,' but I do understand the sentiment.  I know a number of people who readily use this phrase to describe their personal spirituality/faith.  The folks I know who use this phrase tend to believe in God and have some sort of relationship with God.  They do not, however, go to church or participate in organized religion.


More power to them.  In fact, I would probably count myself among this group but for my occasional visit to church.  I absolutely, wholeheartedly disagree that some intermediary is necessary for one to have a meaningful relationship with God.


Of course, I'm admittedly a postmodernist, not a positivist who demands that 'authority' be followed, so 'SBNR' is right up my alley.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 16, 2012 - 10:12AM #12
JimRigas
Posts: 2,950

Apr 15, 2012 -- 1:42PM, Nino0814 wrote:


Apr 14, 2012 -- 10:30PM, JimRigas wrote:


Although I never use this expression I can understand it.  To me spiritual means believing that there exists a spirit out there which cares for me, and also that there is a spirit in me in addition to all the material stuff doctors examine.  Religious means (to me) believing in the things presented in the holy books (in the case of Christians the Bible) and practicing the orders of an established religious organization.   




Jim,  What is a "spirit" that care for us, and how can one know anything about it apart from religious holy books and doctrines of established religious organizations?


IMO this ideas is not self evident and it is not experiential. It requires one to make certain assumptions about something [spirit] that can animate the material world.  Therefore a "spirit" and anything about it, can only be apprehended via religious teaching.




I have no knowledge or way of knowing what "the spirit that cares for us" is.  But I concluded that it exists because of my own personal experiences that I judged to have been originated intentionally rather than accidentally. 


Religious holy books have been written by unholy though perhaps saintly and inspired humans.  As such they are not certain to contain any objective Truth.  Similarly religious organizations are formed of humans, all of who suffer(ed) from human inadequacies and errors of judgment.


In my opinion the existence of a spiritual world can only be determined by each individual through his own personal observations and thus remains subjective and unprovable.  Disbeliving outsiders can always attribute such observations to either chance (however remote) or personal confusion.    

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 17, 2012 - 2:43PM #13
JimRigas
Posts: 2,950

Nino,


I find it strange that one would place a greater value, or accuracy, on the written thoughts of others than on his own experiences.  The decision of a number of persons (however great) to get together and decide to agree on  the accuracy or insight of some ancient writings does not render these writings "objective";  just agreed upon.   I find unacceptable your suggestion that we should close our eyes so that we do not see for ourselves and become deluded, and that we will not be deceived if we accept what some majority maintains.  Admittedly the decision to think for oneself instead of unquestionably accepting somebody else's propositions will involve one's personal knowledge and prejudices.  But the reverse would involve seeing things through someone else's knowledge and prejudices.


Jim

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 17, 2012 - 9:06PM #14
slu_magoo
Posts: 997

Apr 17, 2012 -- 2:43PM, JimRigas wrote:


Nino,


I find it strange that one would place a greater value, or accuracy, on the written thoughts of others than on his own experiences.  The decision of a number of persons (however great) to get together and decide to agree on  the accuracy or insight of some ancient writings does not render these writings "objective";  just agreed upon.   I find unacceptable your suggestion that we should close our eyes so that we do not see for ourselves and become deluded, and that we will not be deceived if we accept what some majority maintains.  Admittedly the decision to think for oneself instead of unquestionably accepting somebody else's propositions will involve one's personal knowledge and prejudices.  But the reverse would involve seeing things through someone else's knowledge and prejudices.


Jim




Jim --


Excellent post. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 18, 2012 - 8:37AM #15
Dutch777
Posts: 9,113

"Do not believe anything because you have heard it, because it is spoken or rumored by many, or written in your religious books, or is upon the authority of your teachers or elders.  Do not believe in traditions because they are handed down for generations.


But, after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is good & beneficial for one and all, then accept it and live up to it."


Gautama Buddha

The Path
To Moon Lake
Doesn't Go
There.

So Walk
Your own Dharma*Path
And Be
Mindful

Dutch
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 18, 2012 - 11:15AM #16
Jupiter6208
Posts: 2,363

Apr 18, 2012 -- 8:37AM, Dutch777 wrote:


"Do not believe anything because you have heard it, because it is spoken or rumored by many, or written in your religious books, or is upon the authority of your teachers or elders.  Do not believe in traditions because they are handed down for generations.


But, after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is good & beneficial for one and all, then accept it and live up to it."


Gautama Buddha




One of my favorite sayings from Lord Buddha.  that's why they call it Faith....

"A person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person."  Dave Berry



You will not be punished for your anger, you will be punished by your anger. Buddha.

What the heart loves, the will chooses, and the mind justifies.”


― Thomas Cranmer
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 18, 2012 - 8:50PM #17
slu_magoo
Posts: 997

Apr 18, 2012 -- 8:37AM, Dutch777 wrote:


"Do not believe anything because you have heard it, because it is spoken or rumored by many, or written in your religious books, or is upon the authority of your teachers or elders.  Do not believe in traditions because they are handed down for generations.


But, after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is good & beneficial for one and all, then accept it and live up to it."


Gautama Buddha




I think that quote is perfectly compatible with 'spiritual but not religious.' 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 19, 2012 - 5:19AM #18
BBarton
Posts: 1,670

JimRigas' post 17 and Dutch's 20 are my favs on this.


As Jesus never expressed the goal of starting a new religion; which has subdivided into how many?  I don't think religion is near as important as relationship.  Sometimes those within a religion can help open hearts to a personal relationship with the Lord, and other times the religion can replace the relationship.  What's the difference?  Man's added rules to Christ's. 


I participate in religion, but it's the relationship with All that I seek.  As for checking my brain at the door, that would be ingracious at being given one.

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook