In Reply to: Re: Actually, I didn't get you yet!! posted by mark on February 02, 2007 at 11:58:49:
So true. It may be semantics, but I like to make a distinction between religion and spirituality for that reason. That's why I have trouble with the idea that spirituality ultimately leads to religion. According to my definitions, I would certainly hope not. Spirituality to me is something that people take on by themselves, like you say, an internal force, and far supercedes religion, which to me is something people can be born into, like being born into a Catholic family. Spirituality may supercede religion in my book, but it doesn't rule out religion. A religious person may or may not be spiritual, and a spiritual person may or may not be religious.
Although I believe in a Creator and understand the distinction between creation and Creator, I expand spirituality to include people who don't believe in God, but are in awe of nature and have great respect for its higher schemes, who function on more than their own baser instincts. I might not consider a Darwinist a spiritual person, if they only subscribe to a baser belief in survival of the fittest, and will selfishly do whatever it takes to get ahead for themselves.
If however someone believes in the higher functions of nature, finds the universe a wonderous place, has respect for the earth, cares for fellow humans, believes in caring for the weak, has a conscience, has belief in some kind of karma, is open to learning about new and deeper meaning of life, then I'd call them spiritual.