Religious vs Spiritual

  • Thread starter Thread starter phil19034
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

phil19034

Guest
A few years ago, my father converted from the Catholic Church to being a protestant fundamentalist.

He (another others) are always saying religion is bad, it’s best to have a relationship with Jesus without the religion.

I know this is a ridiculous statement because Christianity is the religion, so if you throw our the religion you throw out the Bible, Jesus, etc. Simply being spiritual is really being agnostic.

Have any of you had success discussing this with the spiritual but not religious crowd to help them slowly realize the importance of Dogma, Doctrine & Discipline?

Thank you, Happy Easter, & God Bless
 
phil19034 said:
He (another others) are always saying religion is bad, it’s best to have a relationship with Jesus without the religion.
Click to expand...
The word “religion” can apply to a spectrum of concepts. In this case I believe he is referring to organized religion, rituals and procedures. So I believe he is saying he wants a relationship with Jesus without engaging in the practices of an organized group.
Simply being spiritual is really being agnostic.
Click to expand...
…I don’t think so. Such a person may still affirm God and Jesus exists. That’s not agnostic. But it does fall in the realm of the “nones.”.
 
There is absolutely no difference between religion and spirituality. That whole notion of, “I’m spiritual but not religious” is a complete falsehood.
 
ThinkingSapien said:
The word “religion” can apply to a spectrum of concepts. In this case I believe he is referring to organized religion, rituals and procedures. So I believe he is saying he wants a relationship with Jesus without engaging in the practices of an organized group.

…I don’t think so. Such a person may still affirm God and Jesus exists. That’s not agnostic. But it does fall in the realm of the “nones.”.
Click to expand...
Fastest growing religious segment in the west those “nones” or “nothing in particulars.”
 
Exiled_Child said:
There is absolutely no difference between religion and spirituality. That whole notion of, “I’m spiritual but not religious” is a complete falsehood.
Click to expand...
Take it as an idiom. I don’t think that taking it as a false statement will contribute to persuading someone into a different stance. It may come across as questioning the sincerity of ones stance and drive a wedge.
 
thephilosopher6 said:
I hate that stupid 21st century millennial phrase.
Click to expand...
You’re gonna love the names of the Generation after the Millennials.

Generation Z, iGen, Post Millennials, Centennials, or Plurals are the names being thrown around for the next generation.
 
Exiled_Child said:
There is absolutely no difference between religion and spirituality. That whole notion of, “I’m spiritual but not religious” is a complete falsehood.
Click to expand...
Not quite true.
Religion - religare - to be bound.

The angels are pure spirit, thus they are ‘spiritual’, but not bound, thus they are not religious.

As an additional fyi, Satan, to is ‘spiritual’,
 
Brendan said:
Not quite true.
Religion - religare - to be bound.
Click to expand...
Bound to a what or a who?
And how sure are we that “religion” is derived solely from “religare” anyways?

Its a very open question.
Cicero opined it comes from the word relegere (to treat carefully).

In any case, who says it means today what some Latin or Greek meant 1000s of years ago :eek:.
Same with “spiritual”.
 
phil19034 said:
A few years ago, my father converted from the Catholic Church to being a protestant fundamentalist.

He (another others) are always saying religion is bad, it’s best to have a relationship with Jesus without the religion.

I know this is a ridiculous statement because Christianity is the religion, so if you throw our the religion you throw out the Bible, Jesus, etc. Simply being spiritual is really being agnostic.

Have any of you had success discussing this with the spiritual but not religious crowd to help them slowly realize the importance of Dogma, Doctrine & Discipline?

Thank you, Happy Easter, & God Bless
Click to expand...
Perhaps your dad is agreeing with Thomas Aquinas: “The end of my labors has come. All that I have written appears to be as so much straw after the things that have been revealed to me.”

Which I think was not to say that his writing was in any way wrong, but that he now had something which was worth far more to him, as in Philippians 3: “But whatever were gains to me I now consider loss for the sake of Christ. What is more, I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith.”

All I once held dear - youtube.com/watch?v=oxpPIa-BskY
 
Exiled_Child said:
There is absolutely no difference between religion and spirituality. That whole notion of, “I’m spiritual but not religious” is a complete falsehood.
Click to expand...
I’d say religion is a subset of spirituality, and the two are not synonymous. While pinning down a definition of religion is difficult, and will never be entirely satisfactory, in general it involves some sort of creed or set of beliefs, some sort of a system of beliefs. Ritual also plays a part in religion, though again ritual can likely exist outside of any formalized belief system.
 
inocente said:
Perhaps your dad is agreeing with Thomas Aquinas: “The end of my labors has come. All that I have written appears to be as so much straw after the things that have been revealed to me.”

Which I think was not to say that his writing was in any way wrong, but that he now had something which was worth far more to him, as in Philippians 3: “But whatever were gains to me I now consider loss for the sake of Christ. What is more, I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith.”

All I once held dear - youtube.com/watch?v=oxpPIa-BskY
Click to expand...
What you say here doesn’t make sense to me. If you are not religious, then you are not going to care what it says in Philippians or anything else in the Bible. The Bible is a core pillar of the Christian religion.

Being spiritual bunot religious is saying “I’m not a murder so I can get into Heaven. God just cares that people love each other, same sex marriage is good because they love each other… God likes these things”

Those are not religious statements. Quoting the Bible, reading the Bible, etc are religious acts. Even if they are not as Ritualistic as the Mass.
 
phil19034 said:
What you say here doesn’t make sense to me. If you are not religious, then you are not going to care what it says in Philippians or anything else in the Bible. The Bible is a core pillar of the Christian religion.

Being spiritual bunot religious is saying “I’m not a murder so I can get into Heaven. God just cares that people love each other, same sex marriage is good because they love each other… God likes these things”

Those are not religious statements. Quoting the Bible, reading the Bible, etc are religious acts. Even if they are not as Ritualistic as the Mass.
Click to expand...
In the OP you claim that religion is about the bible plus dogma, doctrine and discipline. That may be true for your religion, but, for instance, mine has no dogma or doctrines, just a few principles based on soul competency (Please read that short article before continuing).

The OED defines religion as:-

*1 The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods

1.1 A particular system of faith and worship: the world’s great religions

1.2 A pursuit or interest followed with great devotion*

Your dad is presumably saying that he instead now has a spiritual relationship with Christ, as in 1.1 of the OED definition of spiritual:-

*1. Relating to or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things

1.1 Having a relationship based on a profound level of mental or emotional communion

1.2 (Of a person) not concerned with material values or pursuits.

2 Relating to religion or religious belief: the country’s spiritual leader*

I’ve seen people argue your dad’s position before, and from their point of view they are born again and will just point to 1 Cor 1:18-31 - the world may see it as religion (“a particular system of faith and worship”), but the world is foolishness.

In terms of soul competency, you might decide Exodus 20:12 also applies here :).
 
phil19034 said:
What you say here doesn’t make sense to me. If you are not religious, then you are not going to care what it says in Philippians or anything else in the Bible. The Bible is a core pillar of the Christian religion.

Being spiritual bunot religious is saying “I’m not a murder so I can get into Heaven. God just cares that people love each other, same sex marriage is good because they love each other… God likes these things”

Those are not religious statements. Quoting the Bible, reading the Bible, etc are religious acts. Even if they are not as Ritualistic as the Mass.
Click to expand...
The crusades was a religious act, so too was killing Jesus and Muslim suicide bombers.
So “religion” is usually understood to refer to a universal human sociological phenomenon that really has little to do with the true “God” but a lot to do with justifying social groups and their goals by means of an “invented” “god” and ritual and somewhat arbitrary beliefs.

A personal spirituality based on a relationship with a true God and universal virtue cannot survive unless it uses “religion” as a vehicle to perpetuate it.

Then it becomes a “true religion” and its beliefs become more objective and less arbitrary.
However no religion, no matter how spiritual, is totally pure or true in practise.
As the story of the wheat and the darnel demonstrates.
 
Blue_Horizon said:
The crusades was a religious act, so too was killing Jesus and Muslim suicide bombers.
Click to expand...
These were/are not religious acts. You could argue that they were done based on religious beliefs or for religious purposes, but they are not religious acts.

War, execution, assignations, etc are “religious acts.” People might be motivated to commit sins and or engage in just war due to religious beliefs, etc. But they are not religious acts in themselves.
 
inocente said:
In the OP you claim that religion is about the bible plus dogma, doctrine and discipline. That may be true for your religion, but, for instance, mine has no dogma or doctrines, just a few principles based on soul competency (Please read that short article before continuing).

The OED defines religion as:-

*1 The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods

1.1 A particular system of faith and worship: the world’s great religions

1.2 A pursuit or interest followed with great devotion*

Your dad is presumably saying that he instead now has a spiritual relationship with Christ, as in 1.1 of the OED definition of spiritual:-

*1. Relating to or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things

1.1 Having a relationship based on a profound level of mental or emotional communion

1.2 (Of a person) not concerned with material values or pursuits.

2 Relating to religion or religious belief: the country’s spiritual leader*

I’ve seen people argue your dad’s position before, and from their point of view they are born again and will just point to 1 Cor 1:18-31 - the world may see it as religion (“a particular system of faith and worship”), but the world is foolishness.

In terms of soul competency, you might decide Exodus 20:12 also applies here :).
Click to expand...
Thank you. However, with all due respect, Soul Competency is a “doctrine.” It’s not Catholic doctrine, but it is a religious doctrine. Furthermore, all Baptists do accept some dogma as truth. For example, all Baptists believe in the dogma of the Blessed Trinity newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm

Doctrine/Dogma are accepted, shared beliefs that a particular religion or sect have in common with one another. They can be as organized as Catholic & Orthodox dogma & doctrine, or they can be loose like Baptist, etc.
 
phil19034 said:
These were/are not religious acts. You could argue that they were done based on religious beliefs or for religious purposes, but they are not religious acts.

War, execution, assignations, etc are “religious acts.” People might be motivated to commit sins and or engage in just war due to religious beliefs, etc. But they are not religious acts in themselves.
Click to expand...
The crusaders themselves would disagree with you.
As would Muslim suicide bombers.

Its all about semantics isn’t it!
 
Blue_Horizon said:
The crusades was a religious act, so too was killing Jesus and Muslim suicide bombers.
So “religion” is usually understood to refer to a universal human sociological phenomenon that really has little to do with the true “God” but a lot to do with justifying social groups and their goals by means of an “invented” “god” and ritual and somewhat arbitrary beliefs.

A personal spirituality based on a relationship with a true God and universal virtue cannot survive unless it uses “religion” as a vehicle to perpetuate it.

Then it becomes a “true religion” and its beliefs become more objective and less arbitrary.
However no religion, no matter how spiritual, is totally pure or true in practise.
As the story of the wheat and the darnel demonstrates.
Click to expand...
That is an extremely well-worded explanation of the difference, IMHO.

John
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top