I think the author's intent is to point out the tendency we have to
rationalize our spiritual laziness. In that respect he's got a point.
Spirituality without any form of sacrifice or willingness to stand up with
others who believe likewise is a cop-out. It really is meaningless and phony,
because when really pressed, there's nothing to it, and whatever's
convenient next week will likely supplant whatever spiritual compunctions that
occurred the week prior. That said, people should be free to
associate their religious beliefs (that they hold and defend) regardless of
formal affiliation with an organized religion, as long as they do not impinge
upon the basic rights of others. People should be free to believe what they
believe and live by them.
I'm not sure what the problem is with someone being spiritual but not
believing any church/religion around is the "true" church/religion. A
young Joseph Smith would've fallen in this category.
@sharrona"*This passage contradicts the concept of a flesh and
bone Heavenly Mother who gives birth to heavenly spirit babies."So what's right then? The Bible or the LDS concept?
RE: Craig Clark, Doesn"t (True) spirituality precede religion, "That
which is born of the* flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the *spirit is
spirit."- John 3:6.Verse 7 “ Marvel not that I said unto thee,
Ye must be born again”.(anothen born from above)God must regenerate ones
heart.*This passage contradicts the concept of a flesh and bone
Heavenly Mother who gives birth to heavenly spirit babies.
Organized religion inhibits true spirituality. Turning your minds over to
someone else, letting them think for you, precludes your own spiritual
growth.Organized religion has devolved into a money making
enterprise. Christ threw the money changers out of the temple but they've
managed to worm their way back in and they've taken over.
Cant one have a profound belief in a higher being and not attend a church?Isn't religion man made?There are lots of religions and
either one or none have it right.They all profess to have the truth.
They all have their differences, but somehow manage to weave power,
money and control into their dogma.
There are many today who have no problem believing in God but who have a real
problem with institutional religion. I take strong exception to the article when
Alan Miller writes, "Being spiritual but not religious avoids having to
think too hard about having to decide,"Really? Doesn"t
spirituality precede religion? Miller's words in the extreme disqualify
from consideration the thought of Moses, Jesus, Paul, Augustine, Francis of
Assisi, Aquinas, Joseph Smith, and many others who came along with something
effusive to breathe new life into old remains. The spiritual can flourish
without religion but religion without the spiritual is a lamp without a
flame."That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which
is born of the spirit is spirit."- John 3:6
Isn't being spiritual the goal of all religions? Teach your members to be
good spiritual people and do good in life...... Why should it be any more
complicated than that? If you are required to sit in a church every sunday in
order to be saved, then you should look elsewhere because you are being taught
false doctorin! I will take spirituality over religion any day!
"It seems that just being a part of a religious institution is nowadays
associated negatively, with everything from the Religious Right to child abuse,
back to the Crusades and of course with terrorism today."Let's not forget racism and homophobia that perpetuates (or perpetuated)
some religious institutes. As knowledge and education increases in Western
societies .... secularism is taking hold.
Suggesting the assertion that 'spiritual but not religious' is one of
the most retrogressive aspects in contemporary society is a bit too much in the
hubris department. On the contrary, I believe it is positive. It's great
that people are spiritual; it suggests a personal relationship with god, as they
see god to be. Religion is just the veneer of ceremony and group think that
detract from that relationship, and serve to divide us into groups apart from