Spiritual vs Religious

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we're all in agreement then? It's more socially acceptable these days to say you are "spiritual"? I like to say I'm a "seeker." That seems to satisfy everyone, and they usually don't try to pin me down on what I mean by that.

OP here. Where are you seeing "agreement" in this post that using "spiritual" is about being socially acceptable? Certainly some people have suggested that, but plenty of others have said they see them as different things:
that being spiritual is personal, while being religious is communal;
that spirituality is a belief in something bigger but undefined, while religion is formal and dogmatic;
that being religious is about valuing the framework and order of religion, while being spiritual is about belief in God/angels/spirits;
that spiritual is about the supernatural or New Age beliefs

When you say you're a "seeker" what are you seeking?

Umm.. the answers to life's big questions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m an ordained minister. I am very spiritual. I despise religion. Pretty sure Jesus did as well. Spirituality comes from within. From your own inner knowing. Religion is a bunch of mad made rules used mostly for control, money, and power.

Thank you reverend. I think Buddha would agree with that too.
Einstein and Spinoza were both spiritual but thought the idea of a deity that got personally involved in our lives was childish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are many definitions and nobody has a lock on what “religious” means. From Dictionary.com….

Religious as an adjective:
1. of, relating to, or concerned with religion:
a religious holiday.
2. imbued with or exhibiting religion; pious; devout; godly:
a religious man.
3. scrupulously faithful; conscientious:
4. religious care.
5. pertaining to or connected with a monastic or religious order.
appropriate to religion or to sacred rites or observances.

Religion as a noun:
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

2. A specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:
the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.

5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

So, minister pp is certainly welcome to her view that the word “religion” means man-made rules, corruption and control. But that’s not a widely-shared linguistic understanding and conflicts with other views on this thread.

The pp who keeps claiming the word religion is “uncool” is speaking from his pov as an atheist. Cultural appropriation aside, he can’t speak for people who call themselves “religious” and who may mean any of the other definitions above.

? Where was this? I haven't seen anyone say that on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many definitions and nobody has a lock on what “religious” means. From Dictionary.com….

Religious as an adjective:
1. of, relating to, or concerned with religion:
a religious holiday.
2. imbued with or exhibiting religion; pious; devout; godly:
a religious man.
3. scrupulously faithful; conscientious:
4. religious care.
5. pertaining to or connected with a monastic or religious order.
appropriate to religion or to sacred rites or observances.

Religion as a noun:
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

2. A specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:
the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.

5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

So, minister pp is certainly welcome to her view that the word “religion” means man-made rules, corruption and control. But that’s not a widely-shared linguistic understanding and conflicts with other views on this thread.

The pp who keeps claiming the word religion is “uncool” is speaking from his pov as an atheist. Cultural appropriation aside, he can’t speak for people who call themselves “religious” and who may mean any of the other definitions above.

? Where was this? I haven't seen anyone say that on this thread.

A poster on this thread spent several pages trying to claim people called themselves “spiritual” but not “religious” because everybody (in her world at least) knows “religious” is “uncool”:

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/90/1031403.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many definitions and nobody has a lock on what “religious” means. From Dictionary.com….

Religious as an adjective:
1. of, relating to, or concerned with religion:
a religious holiday.
2. imbued with or exhibiting religion; pious; devout; godly:
a religious man.
3. scrupulously faithful; conscientious:
4. religious care.
5. pertaining to or connected with a monastic or religious order.
appropriate to religion or to sacred rites or observances.

Religion as a noun:
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

2. A specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:
the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.

5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

So, minister pp is certainly welcome to her view that the word “religion” means man-made rules, corruption and control. But that’s not a widely-shared linguistic understanding and conflicts with other views on this thread.

The pp who keeps claiming the word religion is “uncool” is speaking from his pov as an atheist. Cultural appropriation aside, he can’t speak for people who call themselves “religious” and who may mean any of the other definitions above.

? Where was this? I haven't seen anyone say that on this thread.

A poster on this thread spent several pages trying to claim people called themselves “spiritual” but not “religious” because everybody (in her world at least) knows “religious” is “uncool”:

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/90/1031403.page

Coolness poster is at 1/28 9:09 on that thread. “Very great question. It sounds like vague enough to be very cool, but not "religious" which isn't seen as cool.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an ordained minister. I am very spiritual. I despise religion. Pretty sure Jesus did as well. Spirituality comes from within. From your own inner knowing. Religion is a bunch of mad made rules used mostly for control, money, and power.

Thank you reverend. I think Buddha would agree with that too.
Einstein and Spinoza were both spiritual but thought the idea of a deity that got personally involved in our lives was childish.

Sorry, but you have no clue what Buddha, Spinoza or Einstein would think. And the reverend seems to have confused the Pharisees with the ordinary religious Jews.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many definitions and nobody has a lock on what “religious” means. From Dictionary.com….

Religious as an adjective:
1. of, relating to, or concerned with religion:
a religious holiday.
2. imbued with or exhibiting religion; pious; devout; godly:
a religious man.
3. scrupulously faithful; conscientious:
4. religious care.
5. pertaining to or connected with a monastic or religious order.
appropriate to religion or to sacred rites or observances.

Religion as a noun:
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

2. A specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:
the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.

5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

So, minister pp is certainly welcome to her view that the word “religion” means man-made rules, corruption and control. But that’s not a widely-shared linguistic understanding and conflicts with other views on this thread.

The pp who keeps claiming the word religion is “uncool” is speaking from his pov as an atheist. Cultural appropriation aside, he can’t speak for people who call themselves “religious” and who may mean any of the other definitions above.

? Where was this? I haven't seen anyone say that on this thread.

A poster on this thread spent several pages trying to claim people called themselves “spiritual” but not “religious” because everybody (in her world at least) knows “religious” is “uncool”:

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/90/1031403.page

Oh, you got that from a different thread. I was just wondering because I didn't see anybody say that here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many definitions and nobody has a lock on what “religious” means. From Dictionary.com….

Religious as an adjective:
1. of, relating to, or concerned with religion:
a religious holiday.
2. imbued with or exhibiting religion; pious; devout; godly:
a religious man.
3. scrupulously faithful; conscientious:
4. religious care.
5. pertaining to or connected with a monastic or religious order.
appropriate to religion or to sacred rites or observances.

Religion as a noun:
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

2. A specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:
the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.

5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

So, minister pp is certainly welcome to her view that the word “religion” means man-made rules, corruption and control. But that’s not a widely-shared linguistic understanding and conflicts with other views on this thread.

The pp who keeps claiming the word religion is “uncool” is speaking from his pov as an atheist. Cultural appropriation aside, he can’t speak for people who call themselves “religious” and who may mean any of the other definitions above.

? Where was this? I haven't seen anyone say that on this thread.

A poster on this thread spent several pages trying to claim people called themselves “spiritual” but not “religious” because everybody (in her world at least) knows “religious” is “uncool”:

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/90/1031403.page

Oh, you got that from a different thread. I was just wondering because I didn't see anybody say that here.

Weirdly, that pp came onto this thread to beat his same drum about “So we're all in agreement then? It's more socially acceptable these days to say you are "spiritual"? (@ 11:35 on the previous page of this thread). Swap out “cool” for “socially acceptable” and you’ve got the same linguistic and point of view problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many definitions and nobody has a lock on what “religious” means. From Dictionary.com….

Religious as an adjective:
1. of, relating to, or concerned with religion:
a religious holiday.
2. imbued with or exhibiting religion; pious; devout; godly:
a religious man.
3. scrupulously faithful; conscientious:
4. religious care.
5. pertaining to or connected with a monastic or religious order.
appropriate to religion or to sacred rites or observances.

Religion as a noun:
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

2. A specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:
the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.

5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

So, minister pp is certainly welcome to her view that the word “religion” means man-made rules, corruption and control. But that’s not a widely-shared linguistic understanding and conflicts with other views on this thread.

The pp who keeps claiming the word religion is “uncool” is speaking from his pov as an atheist. Cultural appropriation aside, he can’t speak for people who call themselves “religious” and who may mean any of the other definitions above.

? Where was this? I haven't seen anyone say that on this thread.

A poster on this thread spent several pages trying to claim people called themselves “spiritual” but not “religious” because everybody (in her world at least) knows “religious” is “uncool”:

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/90/1031403.page

Oh, you got that from a different thread. I was just wondering because I didn't see anybody say that here.

Weirdly, that pp came onto this thread to beat his same drum about “So we're all in agreement then? It's more socially acceptable these days to say you are "spiritual"? (@ 11:35 on the previous page of this thread). Swap out “cool” for “socially acceptable” and you’ve got the same linguistic and point of view problems.

Ah -- the DCUM religion forum mind reader is back!

Actually, there's no way of knowing if the posters are one and the same -- and so what if they are?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we're all in agreement then? It's more socially acceptable these days to say you are "spiritual"? I like to say I'm a "seeker." That seems to satisfy everyone, and they usually don't try to pin me down on what I mean by that.

The discussion here has covered a lot of ground, but it hasn’t addressed the “social acceptability” of various words. So no, you can’t draw broad conclusions about things we haven’t discussed.

Also, I don’t agree with your premise. You’re coming at this as an atheist, and from a subset of atheists who think the words “religion” and “religious” are bad. Religious people obviously think differently and most probably wouldn’t agree with you that being “religious” is “uncool” (to borrow from your posts on another thread).

Who said that? I've never heard anyone say the words “religion” and “religious” are bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we're all in agreement then? It's more socially acceptable these days to say you are "spiritual"? I like to say I'm a "seeker." That seems to satisfy everyone, and they usually don't try to pin me down on what I mean by that.

The discussion here has covered a lot of ground, but it hasn’t addressed the “social acceptability” of various words. So no, you can’t draw broad conclusions about things we haven’t discussed.

Also, I don’t agree with your premise. You’re coming at this as an atheist, and from a subset of atheists who think the words “religion” and “religious” are bad. Religious people obviously think differently and most probably wouldn’t agree with you that being “religious” is “uncool” (to borrow from your posts on another thread).

Who said that? I've never heard anyone say the words “religion” and “religious” are bad.

You know “bad” was just shorthand for “uncool” or “socially unacceptable,” don’t play coy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we're all in agreement then? It's more socially acceptable these days to say you are "spiritual"? I like to say I'm a "seeker." That seems to satisfy everyone, and they usually don't try to pin me down on what I mean by that.

The discussion here has covered a lot of ground, but it hasn’t addressed the “social acceptability” of various words. So no, you can’t draw broad conclusions about things we haven’t discussed.

Also, I don’t agree with your premise. You’re coming at this as an atheist, and from a subset of atheists who think the words “religion” and “religious” are bad. Religious people obviously think differently and most probably wouldn’t agree with you that being “religious” is “uncool” (to borrow from your posts on another thread).

Who said that? I've never heard anyone say the words “religion” and “religious” are bad.

You know “bad” was just shorthand for “uncool” or “socially unacceptable,” don’t play coy.

No - Don't know that. Good bye

[Anonymous]

Well I do think more and more educated, urban people are describing themselves as "spiritual." For some reason. I just think "religious" has taken a hit what with the Catholic church scandals, and negative perception of certain high profile megachurch pastors who are getting very rich.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we're all in agreement then? It's more socially acceptable these days to say you are "spiritual"? I like to say I'm a "seeker." That seems to satisfy everyone, and they usually don't try to pin me down on what I mean by that.

The discussion here has covered a lot of ground, but it hasn’t addressed the “social acceptability” of various words. So no, you can’t draw broad conclusions about things we haven’t discussed.

Also, I don’t agree with your premise. You’re coming at this as an atheist, and from a subset of atheists who think the words “religion” and “religious” are bad. Religious people obviously think differently and most probably wouldn’t agree with you that being “religious” is “uncool” (to borrow from your posts on another thread).

Who said that? I've never heard anyone say the words “religion” and “religious” are bad.

You know “bad” was just shorthand for “uncool” or “socially unacceptable,” don’t play coy.

Being spiritual is seen more and more as being more socially acceptable. Just read this thread. Unless you live in the Bible belt or somewhere like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we're all in agreement then? It's more socially acceptable these days to say you are "spiritual"? I like to say I'm a "seeker." That seems to satisfy everyone, and they usually don't try to pin me down on what I mean by that.

The discussion here has covered a lot of ground, but it hasn’t addressed the “social acceptability” of various words. So no, you can’t draw broad conclusions about things we haven’t discussed.

Also, I don’t agree with your premise. You’re coming at this as an atheist, and from a subset of atheists who think the words “religion” and “religious” are bad. Religious people obviously think differently and most probably wouldn’t agree with you that being “religious” is “uncool” (to borrow from your posts on another thread).

Who said that? I've never heard anyone say the words “religion” and “religious” are bad.

You know “bad” was just shorthand for “uncool” or “socially unacceptable,” don’t play coy.

Being spiritual is seen more and more as being more socially acceptable. Just read this thread. Unless you live in the Bible belt or somewhere like that.

Thank you for your thoughts. I’ve read this thread, and I’ve read the previous thread, and many people here and on the previous thread, as well as the dictionary, disagree with you. Your conclusions are coming from your anti-religion bias, and they’re not representative of anything but your opinions.