I've often made the mistake of assuming a religious person was spiritual or a spiritual person was religious. It seems there is not much correlation. Maybe there is a negative correlation. Which is odd because TSCC has had Correlation for half a century.

Yep/ Way too many are "religious, but not spiritual."

Which sounds better?

Which would you rather be?


I'm thinking Religuals wouldn't eat meat and the Spiritous would drink a lot.

They'd both have a lot of sex, but the Religuals would do it in the dark.

Usually all it means to me is that the person doesn't go to church and isn't sure he should say so.

Even when I was in the church on Sunday's, I thought abstractly. I grew out of the Mormon Church because of this. No one can understand why I left.

Eventually, people forgot me. Here it is, 20 years have passed, and then I feel better being spiritual.

I just outgrew the Mormons, and all their ordinances.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/24/2023 12:04PM by lousyleper.

I once told my TBM brother that to me all the ritual and repetition in Mormon ordinances was boring. All he said was "You're lucky".
Whatever that means.

TBM's have no concept as to what they believe, because it always changes. Spirituality is completely awesome. I figure that I had my son's experience, with me being out. Spirituality may be in everyone's toolkit, but it isn't used a lot.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/24/2023 01:23PM by lousyleper.

Yup, dagny. That was me for a few years.

If someone claims to be religious, I nationally understand what they mean.

If someone says they're spiritual, I'm completely in the dark. I take them at their word, but I don't know what it means. It could be that they spend Saturday morning doing yoga, or it could mean that they cast spells on unruly children using chicken bones and bat wings. While doing yoga. I just don't know.

Drat. Notionally for nationally, please.

Humberto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If someone says they're spiritual . . . it could
> mean that they cast spells on unruly children
> using chicken bones and bat wings.

Lot's Wife awkwardly shuffles the papers on her desk.

I have some names to send your way.

You'll find my rates quite reasonable.

If you're asking whether I will, for a nominal fee of course, curse the dead, the answer is yes.

Look what I did to EOD.

...I am but a shadow of what I once was . . .

Perhaps just a moon shadow of man.

Is because after I finish my degree, I'd like to certify in Spain's region

Every woman I've ever met who claimed she was "spiritual but not religious" turned out to be a severe religious nutcase.

I had the same experience

after they knew my husband is gay and he had left several years before. My mother's response was "You've always been my most spiritual child. You don't have to be any religion." I never fit in in mormonism as hard as I tried.

Were going to rain down during my transition to the craziness of Mormonism



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/24/2023 05:42PM by lousyleper.

They're the same side of the coin. Religion has been struck giving it form. spiritual is just the surface on which religion forms.

I can do without either. They're too much the same thing.

Heard spiritual defined so many ways. Have defined spiritual so many ways myself. Defining spiritual is the next step up challenge after you finally succeed at nailing Jello to the wall.

What I have finally decided in my golden years is that claiming to be spiritual is a defense against those who see you being non-religious as a major fault. Then claiming being spiritual is superior to religion is the check-mate move. Clearly easy to make the case that rule following--aka religion--will kill spirituality as if it were RAID and De-Con mixed together.

In the end, just like everyone has their own recipe for the perfect martini or the perfect enchilada, everyone has their own definition of spirituality with their own secret ingredients. The less you think about it the more it thrives.

> The less you think about
> it the more it thrives.


This seems to be the road to perfection:  You think about it less and less ... until you NEVER think about it, and then things are perfect!

Can anyone really define Spiritual as it pertains to an agreed upon fact by all?

My question presents the notion that we cannot grasp, see, hold, or prove an absolute definition through empirical applications.

So what is "spiritual" that all can agree upon? I certainly do not know, and I am not sure that I really care. The only thing I really care about is jut being a more patient and caring person.

Religion you can define, but spiritual is elusive and sits in the realm of the the eye of the beholder concept. IMO I think they are of two different thought processes. One helps you grow and expand your humanity, while the other controls and stifles you.

I'd go further and suggest that even "religion" is difficult to define.

Is Confucianism a religion or a political ideology? Do we define religion in terms of worldview--God? doctrine? ethnicity?--or functionally, including community, submission, hierarchy, religious practices? If the latter, do profoundly emotive political movements like Nazism, Stalinism, or Chinese re-education processes count?

Words are like that. The interesting ones are not easily defined, which is the source of many a conflict.

"The interesting ones are not easily defined . . ."

I don't say this is a definition of anything but . . .

Ryuichi Sakamoto, composer, born 1952:

"I went to see one of those pianos drowned in tsunami water near Fukushima, and recorded it. Of course, it was totally out of tune, but I thought it was beautiful. I thought, 'Nature tuned it.'"

This came from a long list of artists who died this year with an accompanying quote from each. Most all were humble brags or bordering on it pretending great wisdom. Don't we all want to be seen that way? Can trip us up at times? Sakamoto seemed to be seeing beyond the expected, an observer, appreciative. Explorative even. Somehow a little Wabi-sabi which makes me think true spirituality is seeing the difference not the flaw.

> Somehow
> a little Wabi-sabi which makes me think true
> spirituality is seeing the difference not the
> flaw.

Plato: the only things that matter are the ideals as they exist in some heavenly realm. Humans should study what is around us to see what the "ideal" phenomena should be.

Aristotle: ignore what hypothetical "ideals" may be and focus on the details, since that's what we encounter in this world. Also, we can learn from the differences. Ultimately Aristotle provided the basis for empirical science.

So the focus on the "errors," the divergences from perfection, is both scientific and aesthetic. Wabi-sabi should not be underestimated.

I'm not sure how that rates with ghawd...


(And no, it wasn't me!  I was more the spiritual type.)

Thank you for yet another message from the piedmont of reason.

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-----------------------------------

> Thank you for yet another
> message from the piedmont
> of reason.



Doesn't it make sense that this is where we would start our upward journey!  

Onward and upward, Sr. Jesus H.