 |
|
|
|
October 2nd, 2012
04:04 PM ET
Your Take: Author who calls 'spiritual but not religious' a cop-out responds to comments
Editor’s note: Alan Miller is director of The New York Salon and co-founder of London's Old Truman Brewery. He is speaking at The Battle of Ideas at London's Barbican in October. By Alan Miller, Special to CNN I wrote a Belief Blog piece on Sunday called "My Take: 'I'm spiritual but not religious' is a cop-out," which has received more than 8,000 comments, many taking up key points I raised. My assessment is that the wider disorientation of Western society, the decreasing respect for many institutions and the disdain for humans alongside what Christopher Lasch has termed a "culture of narcissism" has played out both among the "spiritual but not religious" identifiers as well as among many "new atheists." Lots of the comments bear that out. Some commenters accused me of outdated and dangerous dogmatism in sticking up for traditional religion. A commenter whose handle is spectraprism spoke to this view:
I don't happen to believe in a religious "one true way" and in fact am not religious myself. My comments and observations are based on an increasingly common phenomenon in the past 20 years. Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter It is telling, though, that this and many other comments converge on dogmatism and extremism and juxtapose them with the notion that an individual choice is immune to any of that. These comments speak to my point that not wanting to be held accountable to any set of ideas or principles is a very popular position among the “spiritual but not religious." In recent decades, the demise of the notion that there can be universal truths and the ascendancy of relativism and the new preaching of "many truths" and the idea that "all truths are equally valid" has clearly had significant impact on that identity. The disenchantment with belief and a commitment to some wider authority has also had an impact on the self-described new atheists, who are furious that anyone could have the audacity to believe in something bigger than themselves. The end of the big ideas of liberalism and socialism left a vacuum in society. Atheism used to be a small component of bigger movements in society. Ironically, today what defines many new atheists is a shared outlook with “spiritual but not religious” views. CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories New atheists define themselves in negative terms, as not believing without any broader sense of a positive alternative, while those identifying with a "spiritual but not religious" outlook define themselves as not religious rather than according to the strong convictions that they do have. This commenter summarized the sentiments that lots of others express on my piece:
It is so interesting how so many people now use the therapeutic language of recovery - "recovering" from organized religion. The group American Atheists describes anguish and toil as the "first step" of "coming out," making the analogy with gays coming out the "closet," as though somehow atheists are oppressed today in America. The therapeutic outlook is of far more concern with regard to human autonomy and freedom than organized religion. The idea is that humans are all "damaged goods" and in need of constant counseling and instruction. These comments take off on that theme:
It is interesting how "spirituality" seems to be thought of as "clean" and unimpeded by problems. Dustin calls religion a "disease" - once again we see the therapeutic language. Striving for an understanding of the world is an important and essential human attribute, yet so many of the comments have reiterated a generality about "spiritualism" and "my choice" that it seems to endorse the point I made that what seems so paramount is in a determination not to be "labeled" or dictated to by an authority. So what is left? The superstition and mysticism of some "oneness" and often a therapeutic notion of being "spiritual." Here’s a comment from someone who identifies as 51yo:
The commenter 51y0 doesn't want to be tied to anyone else's "facts." While we all have to work out our things in life, I am interested to know what “spiritual but not religious" facts are. It can seem that on the one hand there's a reluctance to commit to advocating anything and also that words can end up losing any meaning if one simply says something to the affect of "spiritual means it's right for me." Nick says it can mean a lot of different things to people:
I’ll end with this comment:
This remark will chime with many – the new atheists among them - who believe that being "spiritual" means you don't want to be associated with all the "chaos and destruction." It strikes me that having an opt-out plan should have something more than simply a negative, whether it's a "spiritual" one or a "new atheist" negative. We live in an age where many are disillusioned with institutions and humans generally, yet not so evident is a positive alternative. Thank you for the comments. The event we held last night, "I'm Not Religious – I'm Spiritual" benefited from some of them. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Alan Miller. |
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
By Alan Miller, Special to CNN
,Religion is a manipulative business,easy to see why the church doesn't go along with spirituality,,they don't get any money.
Way of hindu Jew's, criminal self centered, deniers of truth absolute to make humanity their gentile, slaves, based not on truth absolute but hinduism, racism of Egypt and Persia.
nothing like stirring the god pot to bring out the opinions...
It's good for business.
Mr Miller, thank you for perfectly illustrating one of the primary problems with organized religion: You can't just let people believe what they want to believe; you have to argue about it, and try to convince them that their dissenting opinion is WRONG. You not only wrote a very one sided opinion piece, but you had to come back and rebut people's comments about it. Why? I offer that it's because your god will smite you if you don't fight to your dying death on behalf of your religion. Take "under God" out of the pledge of allegiance? NEVER. God will smite me. Allow heathens to believe what they want and not let them be "saved?" NEVER. God will smite me. Stop singing God Bless America at every ball game's 7th inning stretch? NEVER. God will smite me. There's a reason they call it "God fearing." Maybe the non-religious spiritual people want to feel a connection to something greater than themselves, but just don't want to be bullied over it.
*Standing Ovation.* Thank you!!! Straight to the point, I SURE he wont have a civil debate with you.
not only do we not want to not be bullied about things.
we not want to feel like we have to defend ourselves on a constant basis in order to worship or think as we please.
if there are things that need to be taken care of, then please let us know in a manner where we can understand completely that which there is to completely understand, before forcing a course of action on any and demanding complete compliance without understanding – we only learn to hate and disrespect and manipulate for non-understood reasons – not understand all there is to understand – and learn to better cope and to make better decisions to bring about most appropriate solutions, plans, and actions.
aperson
Religion is a tool of the devil! Just look at the war, death & violence it causes!
Ya of Lucifer, self centered also known as a Jew's, self centered. denier of truth absolute.
So religion is false but the devil is real.......you lost me there somewhere.
Absolute self religion Hindu, Jesus absolute potato!
Look, I can do it too!
@The Jackdaw
LOL ! 😀
Peace...
Exactly!
CNN must be hard up for content if you're giving this fool a second run at it....
Can't you see that he is just baiting all of us with his nonsense!!!
Just like a priest with a bowl of candy!
Hindu Mithra ism, savior ism, labeled as Christianity is not of truth absolute "HIM" but hinduism, corruption of truth absolute by hindu Jew's, criminal secular's, denires of truth absolute to divide humanity under cover of hinduism corruption of truth absolute labeled religion's, based not on truth absolute "HIM" but hinduism racism. a crime against "HIM" and his humanity, desire. for more visit limitisthetruth.com and click on word Choice on website to open file.
Nobody has any idea what you are trying to say, buddy. Either boil this prattle down to somethign that is not crazy sounding or stop posting. Thanks.
Visit limitisthetruth.com to understand what I am talking about.
Absolute self religion Hindu, Jesus absolute potato! Look, I can do it too!
Either take your meds or take your english lessons, but you don't make an iota of sense to anybody.
Some folks just don't think one has to chose a path (religion) to carry on a relationship the Great Spirit (God) for whatever reason.....it really is pretty simple so why do other folks try to make it so complicated?
Well said.
I agree. To me the bottom line is not which term is used, be it spiritual or religious; the bottom line is the results of our choice. I believe if we come to experience a peace that reaches beyond understanding, and a joy that is without bounds, and a love that is unconditional, our actions will be what is best for ourselves and others. Our actions and words will be without attack, without condemnation, without ego.
If following a religious creed brings us to that point in our life, or having a philosophy that is without a religious creed brings us to that point of loving others as ourselves, and to living a life without fear, then I believe we have achieved the ultimate expression of our highest potential. Does it really matter what we call the path that brings to enlightenment?
Religion is a man made concept. God existed before religion so spirituality should also be valid apart from religion. Religion is man doing things for God...which has worked out so well up to this point 🙂
God didn't exist until mankind created him.
This article comes off as very defensive and amateurish. You could probably randomly pick someone out of the comments section to write a better editorial.
I'll do it with you guys help.
I'll start:
Dear CNN and it's Readers and Corporate Leaders and all Excellencies and Mr. Miller,
What should we do now that all hell has broke lose in the civil hate crimes against religions and other minorities category of life on this dear planet earth, and you have just joined into the grand hate debate?
Dear CNN and it's Readers and Corporate Leaders and all Excellencies and Mr. Miller,
What should we do now that all hell has broke lose in the civil hate crimes against religions and other minorities category of life on this dear planet earth, and you have just joined into the grand hate debate?
We have heard the views and opinions, and witnessed the actions of many of you on this subject. We have observed religion and other minority issues being used as tools of violence, oppression, chaos, and manipulation, as well as understanding, compassion, and caring.
Many of the people of this world are in despair at what the world has and is witnessing in terms of political, economic, religious, governmental, and geographic weather related disasters and other issues, and destructive (and constructive) national building and attempts at advancement in one direction or another depending on power, money, corruption and greed as well as other factors that are both positive and negative. In other words, we have witnessed a scenario that is disturbing the ability for many to live a life free from fear, manipulation, and tyranny, and a move to resolve some of these issues for some of the people.
In this regard, we find that in some segments of the world there is a great outpouring of desire to be free from all these negative forces that continue to hold the human race back from achieving peace and well-being with opportunities for growth and advancement for all people. This includes freedom to believe or not believe in one specific religion as a basic premise of human rights for all people. Unfortunately, this is not the actual case in many parts of the world. Even though there have been major advancements in the area of civil rights for many people of the world, these advancements are still in their development phase for many who affect the lives of many others, as this has and is becoming a world where the connections between all peoples is more apparent than ever before. The need for respect of all peoples, although severely eroded in parts of the world for whatever reasons, is a basic tenet for the maintenance of a civilized societies. However, respect, as religion, is and can be defined and understood in many different ways and scales and degrees of tolerance and non-violent interpretation and attention.
Therefore:
"...atheists, who are furious that anyone could have the audacity to believe in something bigger than themselves."
This is an ignorant statement. When asked whether there is a God, a true atheist will answer "I don't know".
Phuck this guy and his god. As a matter of fact, phuck all gods and the sheep that blindly believe myth is reality.
Pleased to meet you.... hope you guess my name.
I thought you were supposed to be convincing us that you do not exist....
Mr. Miller if you're not religious or don't believe in "one true way" then what are you if not spiritual? If you're confident that saying, "I'm spiritual, not religious.." is a cop out, then what WOULD YOU say then?
I had a friend told me that everyone is trying to reach the same place but taking different paths.Religion has cause to much death by forcing people to believe a certain way.U can be spiritual by just listening to nature or watching a fire.Spiritual is a calming effect that u get from life and believing wht is in ur heart.Religion is just to entraping making u believe this way or else
It strikes me that what most seem to be discussing here when they define "spiritual without religion" is simply ethics.
Has the author (and the rest of us as a society) become so estranged from ethics that we don't even recognize the idea anymore unless it's directly tied to an organized religion?
Does the author truly believe that those individuals striving to live an ethical life outside of organized religion, or those uncomfortable with aspects of structured religion and actively exploring the meaning of that, are by definition somehow indecisive and attempting to "avoid being accountable to any set of principles"? My I infer that he might have categorized Greek philosophers as a localized trend of indecisive "religious slackers"?
I see an overall trend of people actively thinking and trying to define - to put a finger on - what they truly believe. Often, that process begins with first defining what they *don't* believe. We're simply witnessing the first stage of a longer process: the rejection stage. it includes things like "I don't believe that those who don't believe as I do should be murdered," or "I don't believe that a loving commitment between 2 men is any less sacred than an equally loving commitment between a man and a woman."
I'm encouraged by the idea that we may be seeing a genuine desire to return to beneficial ideas which do not require a distinct religious affiliation: ideas like ethics, philosophy, even civics have certainly had long traditions in society, and the author's failure to discuss this adequately is a major - and even questionable - omission.
I think the fact that he cherry-picked comments which were not thought out or written quite as well as yours is also telling (and even those he picked were more convincing than he is). His faith in the righteousness of his own thoughts and ideals is strong. Strange he's so quick to disagree with or attempt to invalidate the opinions of those who feel the same way. Must be a religious thing.
"These comments speak to my point that not wanting to be held accountable to any set of ideas or principles is a very popular position among the “spiritual but not religious.""
Held accountable? The problem with that statement is "who or what are we to be held accountable to?" The reality is that we are all accountable to two things, ourselves and our laws. Break a law, you get arrested.. other than that, religious organizations came up with accountability to keep people in line or to give them a "path" to live by. I am accountable only to myself as to whether I am a good person or not. I believe in treating others as I would treat myself.. I am only accountable to the standards I hold.
"I'm not religious, but I'm spiritual." I like to reply with "I'm not honest, but you're interesting !" – Daniel Tosh
Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world. - James 1:27.
To paraphrase: "God loves only those who keep their heads in the sand."
From God's mouth to James' - then passed down orally for a while, finally written on some scroll somewhere, translated (and miss translated) hundreds of times, and lastly to your ears.
Let's live our lives around this stuff! Sounds like a plan to me! 🙁
Hindu Mithra ism, savior ism, labeled as Christianity is not of truth absolute "HIM" but hinduism, corruption of truth absolute by hindu Jew's, criminal secular's to divide humanity under cover of hinduism corruption of truth absolute labeled religion's, based not on truth absolute "HIM" but hinduism racism. a crime against "HIM" and his humanity, desire. for more visit limitisthetruth.com and click on word Choice on website to open file.
Ah, if the world only understood this scripture. The word "religion" has come to mean an organized group of people who share the same beliefs. The Bible defines it as helping widows and orphans in need and keeping from being selfish. We should all be more religious!
OOO: "From God's mouth to James' – then passed down orally for a while"
Eww – so we know for sure that it has like cooties.
It's amusing and yet quite sad - pseudo historians with no knowledge of just how remarkably little the most ancient Biblical scriptures have changed throughout thousands of years.
They have understanding of how the first Canon compiling the Bible took place in 173 AD, using scriptures written by Christ's own disciples in their lifetimes.
Another example? Just compare the Dead Sea scrolls, written between 408 BC and 318 AD - almost to the word exactly as the their modern Old Testament counterparts today. The first “canon” was the Muratorian Canon, which was compiled in A.D. 170. The Muratorian Canon included all of the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, and 3 John. In A.D. 363, the Council of Laodicea stated that only the Old Testament (along with the Apocrypha) and the 27 books of the New Testament were to be read in the churches. The Council of Hippo (A.D. 393) and the Council of Carthage (A.D. 397) also affirmed the same 27 books as authoritative using the same strict criteria. 1) Was the author an apostle or have a close connection with an apostle? 2) Is the book being accepted by the body of Christ at large? 3) Did the book contain consistency of doctrine and orthodox teaching? 4) Did the book bear evidence of high moral and spiritual values that would reflect a work of the Holy Spirit?
Both Canons, more than 200 years ago, chose the same scriptures.
God is incredible and his message remains for us to learn the greatest wisdom ever offered to the world. Of course, for those perishing, they are blind to the truth. Only humility and a willingness to listen to God can change that.
I don't care what your bible says or how it has changed or remained the same, it is still fiction. And your make believe god is 1 of 2,800-some, nothing new there. I'll pass on the myth and stay focused on reality.
@Luke: Why the reference to fiction (James) following your comment?
all christards and believers are just lying to themselves
Do you really believe that?
I bet if I had a million dollar beach mansion, I could be "spiritual" too! People are ignorant twits. This planet needs more puppies and fewer humans.
I don't understand your comment, seeing as how I've long identified as "spiritual" and I live in a run-down rental in rural Kansas... Is spiritual-not-religious something only wealthy people are supposed to identify as?
No. All squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares. I argue that wealth leads to a pampered lifestyle that allows the luxury of indulging in self-soothing “spiritual” practices, such as meditating on your million dollar beach-side deck. Less financially impressive people indulge in spirituality as a means to come to terms with the fact that they do not have multimillion-million dollar beach-side mansions.
Look at her thumb and index finger in picture, making sign of truth absolute, 360*, but denying truth absolute GOD in word's, typical hindu Pharisee ism, criminal hypocrisy of hindu Jew's, criminal self centered, deniers of truth absolute. for more visit limitisthetruth.com and click on word Choice on website to open file.
hey dude stop. no one care for the non-sense you keep repeating.
Whoever is reading this, representing the people, has their own volition, will, and discretion in what they believe and why, but all that can be disclosed on that topic is but learned and defined by perception integrated with the common vernacular of universal translation in expressive codes of absolute reality. The underlying affinity, that is the intention of the greater good resonating with the energy harnessed by the steward I have cultivated myself to be through experience is what matters most. It is the affection, the love, the caring, that I have experienced... Having declared myself spiritual, before being made an example of by a corrupted planet, I was corrected on behalf of all, and am here to affirm what is good, healthy and righteous for all people indefinitely. This is the beginning of a new frontier for creation and we need to wake up, nation by nation to the goodness at hand. We must find the courage and humility to accept correction for ourselves and for the ways that we have been occupying ourselves in whatever contextual orientation with life we have endured, and without taking offense, be able to embrace a common destiny and make way for the priceless healing that has been the pursuit of humanity for thousands of years.
mind your business hindu, Atheist, denier of truth absolute, no one cares about your hindu Judaism, filthy self center ism, Atheism.
Absurdity of name thief stealing more longer name. Pagan. Thief keep dogs. NO DOGS.