Comments on: Religion: Spirituality vs. religion

By: phantomforever9

phantomforever9 — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 01:15:27 +0000

Thanks for the information on religion.

We recently wrote an article on religion at Brain Blogger. How do we really view religion? Could it be the very source of belief comes from our brain?

We would like to read your comments on our article. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Kelly

Report comment to moderator

By: Joel Mark

Joel Mark — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 22:02:57 +0000

#8, Fair enough, Mac. Perhaps the comments of Ken at #9 serve to reconcile the apparent semantic difference we had.

Report comment to moderator

By: Roger

Roger — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 21:42:52 +0000

Kristin,

I disagree with Robert’s assertion that Spirituality focuses on feelings. I believe the Biblical view of spirituality is defined better as “what the Spirit does in the life of the believer.” Feelings may be a part of our inner life of subjectivity, but so are thoughts, memories, desires, wishes, hopes, dreams, commitments, and worldview — all under the purview of the Holy Spirit.

I’m encouraged by Robert’s use of the term religion, which seems to go beyond the commonly understood use of the term religion: the rites and rituals of the praxis. I like his definition of religion.

My argument is with his use of the term “spirituality” which he sees as the empowerment of self. Self empowerment is the farthest thing from Biblical spirituality, which is described as an opening of the eyes and a softening of the heart (the center of the will, not the center of the emotions.) It’s not so much the ability to do good but the willingness to accept the truth, my truth, i.e. I am a creature before God and you are no more and no less worthy of my love than I am of yours.

Biblical spirituality is to have a righteous subjectivity — a right attitude toward God, righteousness, goodness and truth. Far from being apart from our behavior, the work of the spirit in our lives becomes the basis for right action — mercy, generosity, humility, goodness, and kindness being fruits of the Spirit. In effect, to the extent that I am being led of the Spirit, I will commit myself to something beyond myself.

Report comment to moderator

By: krm

krm — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 13:44:29 +0000

In popular usage today, people say they are “spiritual” to mean that they like the feeling of having a religion but don’t want to deal with any sort of the doctrine that might require them to change any of theor ideas or behaviors.

Report comment to moderator

By: Ken

Ken — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 00:20:17 +0000

I think Chell’s understanding fits the definitions of the terms as they are popularly used today. How often do you hear the vapid claim that someone is spiritual but not a believer in any particular creed or even God?
Etymologically we can make the case that spiritual should be tightly coupled with Christian. It is still important to understand how people use and define the words today if we want to communicate with them.

Report comment to moderator

By: mac

mac — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 19:55:25 +0000

Joel: I wasn’t the one setting up the dichotomy between religion and spirituality. Spirituality is the outworking of the Holy Spirit within the framework of religion (creeds, confessions, and dogma). Spirituality is primarily a Christian term that has been co-opted by other religions. I thinks Chell’s definition of spirituality is wrong.

In days past, Chell describes nominal Christianity or Religion without spirituality. My point is that Pentecost defines the Church. The religion of the Church can only be lived out in spiritual people…but perhaps your dance is the same idea.

Report comment to moderator

By: Joel Mark

Joel Mark — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 17:55:42 +0000

The word “spirituality” is extremely popular in today’s culture. I think this is because current cultural trends are pushing faith into private realms and defining it more in terms of our feelings than our convictions and actions.

But just because the current popularity of the woed “spirituality” in today’s superficial culture has diminished some expressions of it, that does not mean that word has any less value from a biblical standpoint.

Report comment to moderator

By: Joel Mark

Joel Mark — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 17:47:55 +0000

I would quibble with Chell when he writes; “We define our own spirituality; religion defines us.”

Actually, the Holy Spirit should define both. That said, Chell’s points are very well made and taken.

Report comment to moderator

By: Joel Mark

Joel Mark — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 17:42:36 +0000

Robert Chell states it well. I agree with it, but would add that religion and spirituality are both diminished by the absense or the neglect of the other. They need to embrace in a mutually complimentary dance of understainding and practice.

Each word can also be debased by the flawed actions of those who abuse those words too. So we must not compare the abuses of ’spirituality’ with the glorious ideal of ‘religion’ (or vica versa).

The Holy Spirit’s presence MUST animate our understanding and our practice of BOTH terms. Thus, I respectfully disagree with Mac’s take on this topic.

Report comment to moderator

By: keith

keith — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 14:11:59 +0000

Coupling what Mac said with what Chell said, it reminds me of what Francis Schaeffer exposed in How Should We Then Live? In the irrationality and death-throes of humanism, they seek to find a happy place even clinging to religious words to find some hope or some meaning. The problem: for the humanist (as for many Christians today), the words are contentless, they have been stripped and are bereft of any meaning.

This is why it is so important that Christians always head back to our sure foundation, the Word of Truth, to discern meaning and intent.

Report comment to moderator