Spiritual vs Religious
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
No. You haven't read the thread if you disagree. Many different people said that, and there was a post showing polling shows people who call themselves "spiritual" is increasing, and those callimng themselves just religious is declining. |
Anonymous
This is a simple fact. I don't see how it is even controversial. https://lifewayresearch.com/2018/01/26/americans-say-theyre-spiritual-not-religious/ |
Anonymous
|
Within the Jewish world, this is something that has existed in a slightly different way forever. You get people who call themselves cultural Jews or "food" Jews or holiday Jews, etc. They identify as part of the Jewish people but they make it clear that they are carving out a place for themselves that is outside the framework of traditional religious observance and all that entails. And in my experience it's a very fluid thing, that people move in and out of different categories throughout their lives, including choosing to engage in traditional religious practice. But that key component, identifying as a member of the Jewish people, holds firm no matter what else they tack on afterwards.
I feel like spiritual vs. religious is a lot like this. People aren't rejecting the idea of something bigger than themselves but they want to step outside a prescriptive framework and find their own space. And I don't think it always has a negative connotation attached, I think for lots of people there is a genuine respect for prescribed religious practice even if it's not the path they choose for themselves. |
Anonymous
+1 |
Anonymous
You’re totally confused. You’re referring to people who have left their religion of birth but still think there’s something out there, maybe in nature or crystals or a sense of a higher power, and that’s why they call themselves “spiritual.” The debate you’re trying to force on everyone is about how people who are actually practicing a religion refer to themselves |
Anonymous
|
From the link above: people who call themselves “spiritual but not religious” are less likely to attend services. “Only 17 percent attend weekly, while 32 percent attend monthly or yearly and half (49 percent) attend seldom or never.”
So pp who is obsessing about the “coolness” or “social acceptability” or whatever of religion is mistakenly trying to prove her point with data about people who don’t actually practice their religion but call themselves “spiritual.” Apples and oranges. |
Anonymous
|
Are deists spiritual but not religious?
|
Anonymous
Deists are simply people who believe in God - "deo." They can belong to a religion or not. |
Anonymous
No, that's a theist. de·ism noun belief in the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator who does not intervene in the universe. The term is used chiefly of an intellectual movement of the 17th and 18th centuries that accepted the existence of a creator on the basis of reason but rejected belief in a supernatural deity who interacts with humankind. Much more specific. So is someone who believes the above spiritual but not religious? |
Anonymous
|
spiritual:
spĭr′ĭ-choo͞-əl adjective Of, relating to, consisting of, or having the nature of spirit; not material; supernatural. Of, concerned with, or affecting the soul. Not concerned with material or worldly things. A deist might be spiritual, but most likely they are not. Jefferson, of course, was a famous Deist. |
Anonymous
| Spiritual is getting to be the new religious. In that poll, 75% of the respondents said they were spiritual, or spiritual and religious, -- but only 6% said they were religious only. Not saying which is right or wrong, it's just the way things are going these days. The "religious only" people continue to lose ground. |
Anonymous
No - a theist is someone who practices a theology, i.e., a religion. |
Anonymous
No. A theist is someone who believes in the existence of God. period. |
Anonymous
|
Anonymous
| Being spiritual is wanting the benefits of religion without having to do the work |