The difference between religion and spirituality

[naomi24]

Leading on from Theland's question below, it seems to me that believers confuse man's innate spirituality with religion. Even the most ardent atheist is capable of experiencing spirituality, but he doesn't acquaint it with the God of the Arbrahamic faiths, so why do believers feel it necessary to do so? Is it simply that they have to justify it by putting a name to something they can't explain - regardless of the culprit's appalling demands, threats, and disgraceful track record?

[jno]

but I think that is still talking about something whose existence cannot be proved. Where is it? Where does it come from? Does everyone have it? Is it the same in everyone? These are in effect questions that could just as easily be asked about religion.

[Quinlad]

"I'm quite a spiritual person" is never a good conversation starter. I always find it quite unappealing when someone with no religious affiliation describes themselves as 'spiritual'. It's as if they feel the need to make it clear that they have depth of character or are a sensuous, deep thinker - and can't square that with a rational outlook.

[Theland1]

Quinlad - Spot on. I remember George Michael describing himself as deeply spiritual on the Parkinson show - just after he got arrested in the bogs!

[WaldoMcFroog]

You describe yourself as deeply spiritual, yet you're a failed suicide with a drink problem and (is this correct?) a failed marriage.

How come you get to be spiritual despite your problems but he doesn't?

[naomi24]

jno, there is nothing to prove.

Theland, that's my point, Why do you attribute everything to this God when all you have to encourage your belief is an ancient book of horrors full of superstition? As for George Michael, you're talking about your moral judgement of him - not his self proclaimed spirituality. (I think the clearing of the tumbleweed has been a joint effort, Theland. At least we've got the old place up and running again!).

Quinlad, it seems you too acquaint spirituality with religion.

[naomi24]

Old Geezer, //I suggest that religion is born out of spirituality, not vice versa.//

I think you could be right there.

[Old_Geezer]

A belief in the spiritual doesn't equate to being a saint on Earth.

I'm surprised some take against those who accept the possibility of a spiritual side to existence, yet do not wish to accept/join an existing religion. Didn't realise it was compulsory.

[Old_Geezer]

"I think you could be right there. "
I am glad we agree on something :-)
Although I think what you term "spirituality" I would term, perhaps, "wonderment" ? It seems to have a more "material" side to it.

[naomi24]

Old Geezer, but that's my point. If you experience things you can't explain, then why accept existing religious dogma rather than admit you don't know where they emanated from?

By the way, nothing is compulsory. This is simply debate and, as such, shouldn't be taken personally.

[Theland1]

Waldo - Regarding George Michael, you make a fair point.
Regarding me, almost correct. Still in the marriage, with problems.
What I was trying to say was mistakenly on my part too specific, whereas I believe he was echoing what Quinlad said about being more concerned with projecting his image.

[Theland1]

I think it fair to say that many people, perhaps the majority, at some time ask the three fundamental questions:-

1)Where did we come from? (Origin).
2)Why are we here? (Purpose / Reason).
3)Where are we going? (er .... can't think of the best word to use - any suggestions?)

Asking those questions is the beginning of the spiritual quest, and has nothing to do with materialism or religion - in my opinion.

[WaldoMcFroog]

Asking those questions is the beginning of a quest for knowledge, but I question your assumption that it's necessarily a spiritual one.

[naomi24]

...... added to which I question the conclusions you have reached - and your rationale in reaching those conclusions.

[Ankou]

1. where did we come from - primordial ooze
2. why are we here - there is no purpose, its like asking why "people" who have never been are not here.
3. where do we go - back to the primordial ooze

there is nothing spiritual about it.

[Theland1]

Waldo - I think those three questions <i>are</i> spiritual, and I would appeal to the other posters on here to agree with me before we move on.
(<b>VOTE FOR THELAND</b>)

[WaldoMcFroog]

Ankou - there can be a difference between the motivation for asking - which could be 'spiritual' and the actual answers arrived at, which might be - I agree with your view - more mundane and material.

[WaldoMcFroog]

I agree you think that, but I think you're wrong.

[Theland1]

(... out of practice with italics and bold - sorry)

[jno]

Waldo, I don't think bringing up other posters' private lives is legitimate. Drink problems can affect religious people, spiritual people and atheists alike; they do nothing to affect the sincerity, or the plausibility, of their beliefs..

naomi, isn't 'there is nothing to prove' what believers say when you invite them to demonstrate God's existence? Why should it be an adequate answer to a question about where spirit is to be found?

I am not questioning anyone's appreciation of beauty, I am just asking what makes it 'spiritual'.

[naomi24]

You're not out of practice, Theland - the bolds and italics don't work any more.

Got to go out now chaps - see you later. :o)