What is your religion? And why do you believe in your religion?

[Matrim Fox Cauthon]

Living now in Sweden, I need to endure the moment in the service where everybody the congregation shakes hands with their neighbours, mumbles some words, and looks them in the eye with a smile. I dread that.

I much prefer the tradition I’m used to, where you’re completely anonymous and don’t interact with anybody at all. (Except for the formalised settings of singing hymns together and Communion from the vicar.

The "passing of the peace," or however it's called where you are, is meant to serve as the symbolic/liturgical dictate to reconcile with one's neighbors before receiving the Communion. Many people seem to use it as a worship break or a time to make quick idle chat. What was your religious tradition you are used to?

Each time someone here describes themselves as SBNR i have a harder time keeping track of what "spiritual" means.

Could someone define it?

"Spiritual" usually refers to a fullness or abundance of life, either in terms attuning with a transcendent whatever or becoming animated with a sort of vivacious energy. In SBNR, I would say that it's an declaration in being more concerned about private sacredness over the public or institutionalized sacredness.

One of those meaningless terms whose definition seems to vary between each person who personally identifies with it. You can tell a term isn't very useful when someone needs to clarify it 100% of the time they use it to describe themselves for anyone to extract any actual meaning from the word.

This is incidentally why the biblical doctoral students at my school do not get, and subsequently do not particularly care about, the Christian spirituality doctoral students. We have asked and asked what's involved in that program, but we get what it's supposed to be about.

[Happy Ent]

The "passing of the peace," or however it's called where you are, is meant to serve as the symbolic/liturgical dictate to reconcile with one's neighbors before receiving the Communion. Many people seem to use it as a worship break or a time to make quick idle chat. What was your religious tradition you are used to?

That’s the one.

I’m used to the Danish tradition (which would be Lutheran from where you’re standing). It‘s completely fixed, word for word.

4th psalm.

Priest reads some stuff (“Raise your hearts to the Lord! Let us praise Nis name! Lord we thank you … sing your praise”

Congregation answers (“Holy, holy, holy is the Lord, … in the highest.”)

Priest: “Praise be unto Him who will come, in the name of the Lord.”

Cong.: “Hosianna in the highest.”

Psalm 439 vers 1. (Agnus Dei in Danish)

Priest: (fixed description of Holy Communion, interrupted by “Amen” from cong., bread and wine are held up.)

everybody walks up to altar and receives Communion.

[Happy Ent]

Addendum: I read up on this now. Apparently, in Danish liturgy, this is the call-and-response part:

P: “Fred være med jer.” (Peace be unto you, sung)

C: “Og med din ånd.” (And with your spirit)

Apparently an orthodox tradition(?)

I can’t find a reference to a handshake in German protestant liturgy either, nor can I remember such a thing happening.

Anybody who knows more, please tell me.

[Gears of the Beast]

Addendum: I read up on this now. Apparently, in Danish liturgy, this is the call-and-response part:

P: “Fred være med jer.” (Peace be unto you, sung)

C: “Og med din ånd.” (And with your spirit)

Apparently an orthodox tradition(?)

I can’t find a reference to a handshake in German protestant liturgy either, nor can I remember such a thing happening.

Anybody who knows more, please tell me.

Happens in Catholic mass here in Australia. Pretty much the exact same thing.

[Wicked Woodpecker of West]

Hate those shakehand orgies. I always try to limit my peace sign to three short bows.

[Castel]

Hate those shakehand orgies. I always try to limit my peace sign to three short bows.

Heh. I preferred this type of handshake: no eye contact and as short as possible.

[Eponine]

Before I accepted being simply non-spiritually, non-religiously atheist, I looked into being religious but not spiritual. (SBNR wasn't ever a real option since generating spiritual sensibilities appears to be beyond my natural abilities).

I visited the following denominations: Methodist, Lutheran, Presb. USA, Catholic. It wasn't unpleasant or even all that triggering. I just didn't have any reason at all to keep going or to spend my time that way, no ties. Not beliefs or traditions, I don't love that kind of fellowship or ritual for its own sake, I'm not a singer or a huge appreciator of religious music. But as I said way up thread when we were still answering the original question, I can easily imagine being RBNS had I been born the American Millennial WASP that stereotypes my cultural demographic. Being deprived of a tidy childhood culture though, I can't find the desire to create one retrospectively.

[Wise Fool]

That image is even funnier if you know what I look like. I'm a fairly short and scrawny guy.

Again, you asked for my reasons why I personally dislike SBNR, and those very real reasons were my personal experiences with people who identify as SBNR.

No, those reasons were your irrational tendency to generalize, to extrapolate onto the whole your statistically irrelevant encounters.

It's very much like a guy who hates women because he's had a couple of bad dating experiences, and then goes on about how all women are lying sluts or whatever.

That he might or might not qualify his insulting generalizations as you did with "seems" would not change the fact that he is being irrational, immature, and insufferable. And he'd get eaten alive in any discussion here - and rightly so. You won't, of course, because some forms of irrational bigotry are trendier than others. Hooray.

1. As a whole, these people tend to have uniformed opinions on matters of institutionalized religion,

2. bizarre aversions to making any positive claims in what they believe apart from the vagueries of "something more,"

3. and often misappropriate other religions and cultures.

4. (It doesn't help that so many SBNR tend to be privileged middle-to-upper class white people.)

5. In short, SBNR offers nothing of substance or novelty to religious discourse. People being dissatisfied with institutionalized religion is nothing new. Christian monks and nuns were highly spiritual people who sought a spiritual life as opposed to strictly religious clerical life of the priesthood.

6. Less critically, SBNR are the hipsters of the religious world.

1-4 literally none of these statements is true. And they're not falsifiable either. So you get to believe them wholeheartedly without ever having to examine them, question them, and no new information will change your opinion here. How convenient!

5. Being spiritual but not religious is not supposed to offer something of substance and novelty to religious discourse. It's just a category. It's not a philosophy. It's just some people aren't religious but aren't materialist atheists either.

6. And hipsters suck, lol! Wow, you're contributing so much of substance and novelty to the religious discourse.

In short, sure, your opinion is your own, and it doesn't have to be based in anything even remotely related to reality. You have a right to your wrong, stupid opinion.

[Sci-2]

I agree, to an extent, with Wise Fool but I do think some criticism MFC mentioned do map to large subsets of the SBNR crowd.

I don't think the appropriation bothers me that much, so long as it isn't a negative misrepresentation. And we already have Western misunderstandings of what Nirvana is for that.

As for the usefulness of the term SBNR, I think the usefulness is basically obvious. It is likely invaluable to those who take on the term for themselves. That it encompasses a large swath of possible beliefs seems more to its advantage, given this seems to be where the future of faith is moving.

[Matrim Fox Cauthon]

No, those reasons were your irrational tendency to generalize, to extrapolate onto the whole your statistically irrelevant encounters.

It's very much like a guy who hates women because he's had a couple of bad dating experiences, and then goes on about how all women are lying sluts or whatever.

That he might or might not qualify his insulting generalizations as you did with "seems" would not change the fact that he is being irrational, immature, and insufferable. And he'd get eaten alive in any discussion here - and rightly so. You won't, of course, because some forms of irrational bigotry are trendier than others. Hooray.

Thanks for comparing me to a misogynist. That's fair and polite netiquette. SBNR does not have a fixed dogma, religious texts, or public institution by which we can point to facts or very particular arguments espoused by a large group of people. My "statistically irrelevant encounters" have formed my opinions about this label and people who identify as such, and it would be just as silly to pretend to exist that somehow these encounters are irrelevant to my reasons.

1-4 literally none of these statements is true. And they're not falsifiable either. So you get to believe them wholeheartedly without ever having to examine them, question them, and no new information will change your opinion here. How convenient!

Literally? How so? Do you have counter-examples? Do you exist as the counter-example? Perhaps some demographic and sociological studies?

5. Being spiritual but not religious is not supposed to offer something of substance and novelty to religious discourse.

I'm not sure if SBNR people would necessarily agree your own generalization that you have provided.

t's just a category. It's not a philosophy. It's just some people aren't religious but aren't materialist atheists either.

We have existing categories already for people who aren't inherently religious but aren't materialists or atheists, such as theist, pantheist, panentheist, etc. So what does SBNR offer in way of a new category?

6. And hipsters suck, lol! Wow, you're contributing so much of substance and novelty to the religious discourse.

I'm not attempting to offer anything new in this regard, nor would I expect anyone to take that comment serious after I prefaced it with "less critically." I thought that was kind of a dead giveaway. Apparently not. <_< I'm not sure why you feel the need for glib.

In short, sure, your opinion is your own, and it doesn't have to be based in anything even remotely related to reality. You have a right to your wrong, stupid opinion.

In short, I have not pretended that my opinion on the matter of SBNR was anything other than my opinion, but you have yet to demonstrate how my opinion is actually a "wrong, stupid opinion" apart from expressing the fact that opinion is not fact and showing disdain of the fact that I hold such an opinion.

I don't think the appropriation bothers me that much, so long as it isn't a negative misrepresentation.

I'm not a fan of appropriation, as it's frequently done by a hegemonic power with minority religions (within the context of the hegemonic power).

As for the usefulness of the term SBNR, I think the usefulness is basically obvious. It is likely invaluable to those who take on the term for themselves. That it encompasses a large swath of possible beliefs seems more to its advantage, given this seems to be where the future of faith is moving.

Faith without religion has little chance to sustain itself in the long-term. Religion exists as a mechanism by which the faith meme propagates.

[Sci-2]

I'm not a fan of appropriation, as it's frequently done by a hegemonic power with minority religions (within the context of the hegemonic power).

Right, but as someone raised Hindu in Taiwan who sees all sorts of Hindu/Taoist/Buddhist ideas appropriated I'm not sure it's a completely bad thing. Some of the ideas, like raising up the value of Shakti as a feminine force might be good for India and its treatment of women.

Beyond that, I think when it comes to belief all religions seem to overall have equal validity [which may be none in terms of what's Real] in terms of stemming from personal gnosis, at least when they don't run directly counter to what we know from science & history.

So is a self-made buffet of beliefs borrowed from other faiths really troubling? I guess to me it'd be different if it was more about picking at cultural aspects rather than finding Truths buried in Eastern mythology. As an example, I actually liked Gabriel D. Roberts' story of how he met Tara during an LSD trip.

Faith without religion has little chance to sustain itself in the long-term. Religion exists as a mechanism by which the faith meme propagates.

I'm not sure that is something to be concerned about? I rather like the idea of people seeking out ideas rather than getting too buried down in dogma. It definitely helps the progressive cause if people are abandoning reactionary theologies.

Whether this faith gets passed down to succeeding generations...is that important for those of us on the outside looking in?

[Gears of the Beast]

Right, but as someone raised Hindu in Taiwan who sees all sorts of Hindu/Taoist/Buddhist ideas appropriated I'm not sure it's a completely bad thing. Some of the ideas, like raising up the value of Shakti as a feminine force might be good for India and its treatment of women.

You don't see the problem with using a magical 'cosmic energy' as a reason to treat people right? How about treating people right because it's the right thing to do? Believing in Jesus doesn't stop Christians doing horrible thing to people. Immoral pieces of shit are immoral pieces of shit regardless of what mythical beliefs they happen to adhere to.

"appropriating" is the intellectual equivalent to saying "I don't care whether or not my beliefs are true, I just believe in whatever I'd like to be true". That is very troubling, at least a member of a religion can tell that belief in their religion is mutually exclusive to belief in another religion (I hope...)

[Castel]

You don't see the problem with using a magical 'cosmic energy' as a reason to treat people right? How about treating people right because it's the right thing to do? Believing in Jesus doesn't stop Christians doing horrible thing to people. Immoral pieces of shit are immoral pieces of shit regardless of what mythical beliefs they happen to adhere to.

Unfortunately the reality is that it matters. People care. I mean,a lot of people don't abandon Christianity to support gay rights, they have to come at it from a more liberal yet still religious perspective. You're going to get much farther trying to reconcile your political goals with the religions of a region than just ignoring them altogether.

"appropriating" is the intellectual equivalent to saying "I don't care whether or not my beliefs are true, I just believe in whatever I'd like to be true". That is very troubling, at least a member of a religion can tell that belief in their religion is mutually exclusive to belief in another religion (I hope...)

Depends on what they want to be true right? I have a certain amount of respect for people willing to go full crazy and do whatever they think their religion demands regardless of how others feel but this rarely ends well.

[Sci-2]

What Castel said. Not to mention the AFAIK debunked "rape module" talk in India that suggested it was the sexual repression of men that made them rapists.

=-=-=

So Wolfram, of Mathematica fame, feels that math is invented rather than discovered. Just wanted to note a counterargument to the points previously mentioned regarding my personal leanings toward Mathematical Platonism.

Though this idea that our logic is one of many possible formal systems only confuses me more...

Here's some stuff about Modern Cross Cultural Initiations. (as always, safety first if someone chooses to deal with psychedelics. Despite my increased interest in studying the science & culture I don't plan to partake any time soon.)

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

Have there been any major Protestant denominations that have renounced the Chalcedonian Creed or other major theological positions of Orthodox and Catholic Christianity (other than obvious ones like supremacy of the Pope) or is it not really a big deal to them?

[Gears of the Beast]

Unfortunately the reality is that it matters. People care. I mean,a lot of people don't abandon Christianity to support gay rights, they have to come at it from a more liberal yet still religious perspective. You're going to get much farther trying to reconcile your political goals with the religions of a region than just ignoring them altogether.

I'm aware that a lot of progress has been made by dragging Christianity kicking and screaming into the 21st century. That's completely different to looking for the value in certain spiritual beliefs and pretending like some esoteric cosmic energy is gonna make people more moral. I'm not even sure what you said is relevant to what I said.

[Matrim Fox Cauthon]

Right, but as someone raised Hindu in Taiwan who sees all sorts of Hindu/Taoist/Buddhist ideas appropriated I'm not sure it's a completely bad thing. Some of the ideas, like raising up the value of Shakti as a feminine force might be good for India and its treatment of women.

Beyond that, I think when it comes to belief all religions seem to overall have equal validity [which may be none in terms of what's Real] in terms of stemming from personal gnosis, at least when they don't run directly counter to what we know from science & history.

So is a self-made buffet of beliefs borrowed from other faiths really troubling? I guess to me it'd be different if it was more about picking at cultural aspects rather than finding Truths buried in Eastern mythology. As an example, I actually liked Gabriel D. Roberts' story of how he met Tara during an LSD trip.

The supermajority of SBNR Americans are white (somewhere in the ballpark of 70 percent), and that's where the cultural and religious appropriation of non-Judeo-Christian religions becomes discomforting or potentially problematic.

I'm not sure that is something to be concerned about? I rather like the idea of people seeking out ideas rather than getting too buried down in dogma. It definitely helps the progressive cause if people are abandoning reactionary theologies.

Dogmas change even within religions as people from within religion also seek out ideas and expand or reevaluate old ideas.

Whether this faith gets passed down to succeeding generations...is that important for those of us on the outside looking in?

Possibly.

[Summah]

I went to college in a town with a lot SBNR people and in that town at least many of them claimed to Buddhist without knowing even the basics (4 noble truths, 8 fold path etc) and that colored my view of SBNRs and I didn't have a lot of respect for their views because of that.

[Sci-2]

The supermajority of SBNR Americans are white (somewhere in the ballpark of 70 percent), and that's where the cultural and religious appropriation of non-Judeo-Christian religions becomes discomforting or potentially problematic.

Dogmas change even within religions as people from within religion also seek out ideas and expand or reevaluate old ideas.

Possibly.

If we're worried about white hegemony then Christianity seems to take the cake? Not that I'm convinced white people doing something is an automatically bad thing, though I do see where religious appropriation can lead to massive misunderstands in what cultures are like.

On mash-ups and poor understandings -

Perhaps all the religions of the African Diaspora are formed around mash-ups of different theologies.

One might argue that modern Hinduism is based on misunderstandings or at least revisions of original Vedic texts. The Judeo-Christian tradition might spring from appropriations of previous faiths like Zoroastrianism and other mythologies.

It just seems to me that mash-ups of the old to figure out the new is how religions work. What started off as disconnected SBNR seems to be congealing into counterculture ideas about DMT Hyperspace, "Electric Jesus", and so on.

I went to college in a town with a lot SBNR people and in that town at least many of them claimed to Buddhist without knowing even the basics (4 noble truths, 8 fold path etc) and that colored my view of SBNRs and I didn't have a lot of respect for their views because of that.

Heck, I'm betting many Buddhists couldn't tell you the 4 noble truths or the 8th fold path. I know many Hindus don't know anything about the faith but the basics you can get from Wikipedia.

A lot of what Westerners think of as Buddhism is based on misunderstandings of Nirvana - possibly due to equating it with ideas of certain philosophers in vogue at a particular time? So anyone reading anything about Buddhism in the West has a good chance of fucking it up even at the academic level. C.S. Lewis, in explaining why he chose Christianity over the Eastern religion, does this.

But given how it leads to progressive thought, seems to me SBNR is an improvement over most retrograde religions. If it helps people be charitable and nice to one another all the better. Has the added advantage of not thinking billions are going to suffer in Yaweh's eternal concentration camp.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

But given how it leads to progressive thought, seems to me SBNR is an improvement over most retrograde religions. If it helps people be charitable and nice to one another all the better. Has the added advantage of not thinking billions are going to suffer in Yaweh's eternal concentration camp.

Does it? My impression is that it's typically the other way around.

Slightly off topic: I don't really get the objections to cultural appropriation as long as it's genuine and respectful (i.e. not a bunch of people playing sacred drums and flutes while they get high). I tell some people I'm a Buddhist because that usually generates less negative responses than if I told them I was an atheist. Most progressives wouldn't consider that cultural appropriation because I'm ethnically Chinese. Sorry about the rambling, but isn't cultural appropriation how religions and ideas spread? Isn't it a good thing if people incorporate what they consider to be good ideas from other cultures into their own. Aren't the most succesful cultures the ones that manage to do this?