Responding to “Spiritual but Not Religious” Christians

http://www.jonsorensen.net ^ | July 22, 2014 | Jon Sorensen

[NKP_Vet]

Over the last several years I have encountered a fair number of Christians who claim they are “spiritual but not religious.” In other words, they do not identify with a particular Christian denomination, using the Bible alone to guide their faith. It’s an ideology that says religious institutions are outdated and unnecessary.

People may reach this conclusion for a multitude of reasons. Some are disillusioned by what they perceive to be corruption and hypocrisy in religious institutions. Others may feel like they are not being “fed.” Others yet may feel that these intuitions teach something contrary to their beliefs regarding political and social issues.

Whatever the reason may be, we must reach out to these people and take their concerns seriously.

Jesus started a religion

Most dictionaries define religion as “the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.” It is abundantly obvious from Scripture that Christians are called to worship the one true God (cf. Matthew 4:9, Mark 5:6, Luke 4:8, John 4:23). I’m sure most “spiritual but not religious” Christians will agree with this.

The issue is whether or not one can do this privately, reading only Scripture and coming to their own conclusions on theological matters, or whether one must submit to some authority outside of themselves.

Jesus started a Church

In Matthew 16:18, Jesus says to the apostle Peter, “you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church.” Catholics believe that in this verse Jesus is bestowing on Peter a position of authority from which the office of the pope is derived. But even if the “spiritual” Christian has problems with this belief, there is no escaping the fact that Christ intended his Church to be both visible and authoritative.

In Matthew 18, Jesus says to his disciples:

If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector (15-17).

If Jesus did not intend his Church to be authoritative and visible, then what Church is he talking about in this verse? It’s clear in the text that this Church is communal.

It is also evident from Scripture that Jesus intended this community to gather regularly for worship:

Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching (Heb. 10:25).

This verse indicates that, even in the first century, there were Christians who did not think it was necessary to gather for worship. This runs contrary to the idea that one can be a church unto himself as long as he has accepted Jesus as his personal Lord and Savior. The Lord intended his Church to be a community.

Is the Bible all you need?

On his way from Jerusalem to Gaza, Phillip the Evangelist encounters a eunuch reading the Book of Isaiah:

So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet, and asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him(Acts 8:27-31).

The point of this passage is that the clear meaning of Scripture is not always evident. This is reinforced again in 2 Peter 1:20:

First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation,

And yet again in 2 Peter 3:15-16:

So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures.

Clearly, just picking up the Bible and interpreting it for your self is not recommended. A teacher is necessary; preferably an authoritative one.

What about scandals in the Church?

As my colleague Tim Staples is fond of saying, “You don’t leave Peter because of Judas.” From a Catholic perspective this means you don’t leave the Church because someone didn’t live up to its teaching.

I came into the Church during the height of the priest abuse scandal. I was certainly concerned about it (as most Catholic laypeople were), but ultimately the number of people out in the world doing good work far outweighs the number of people who have abused their positions. For more on this I recommend reading our special report, A Crisis of Saints.

Many “spiritual but not religious” Christians have also expressed concerns about events in history. It’s true that Christians throughout time have acted contrary to the faith, but like the abuse scandal, it should be remembered that history is filled with good and holy missionaries.

It’s also worth pointing out that many of the events in history have been blown way out of proportion in the popular imagination. Catholic Answers has dozens of great articles about this available at this link.

Get back to where you belong

It’s clear from the Bible that Jesus did not intend Christians to live out their spiritual lives in a vacuum. He founded a Church, gave it authority in the areas of faith and morals, and guards it from teaching error (Mt 18:17-18).

At Catholic Answers, we have a mountain of great resources making the case that the Church Jesus founded is the Catholic Church. If you or someone you know is “spiritual but not religious,” please consider reading what we have to offer.

[MamaB]

Thanks for setting the record straight. I think some on here are trying to lead people to their church instead of to Christ. Tis a shame they care more about a church than Jesus.

[daniel1212]

The pretense here is people are using ONLY “their own” authority and are not listening to any authority outside their own....l the writer is really complaining about is the non-denominational are not listening to some “authority” he approves of.

Though the article may attempt to use "spiritual but not religious" in order to escape the charge of elitism, it is obvious what his premise is..

In fact, in the area of human guidance non-demominational Christians can be following a number of human “authorities”

To which the RC will reply than an ultimate supreme infallible authority is necessary, but which is nowhere promised shown as necessary (despite RC extrapolative attempts), but instead God often provided and preserved Truth by raising up men from without the magisterium to correct it. And thus the church began and faith has been preserved.

Moreover, RCs no more have an infallible interpretation for their supreme infallible authority than evangelicals do for theirs, and Catholicism exists in schism and sects, abounding in variant interpretations

In addition, Caths whom Rome treats as members in life and in death overall are less unified than evangelicals , and as what an entity really believes is shown by what it does and effects, (Mt. 7:20; Ja. 2:18) so this constitutes much what Rome really believes.

[af_vet_1981]

Yet I can easily say that is just your private interpretation thus why should I consider it?

You may consider it and not be bound by it. That is my point; our personal interpretations are not binding or loosening, but rather those interpreted by the LORD, the prophets, and the apostles are binding. It is the calling of the holy catholic apostolic church to rightly interpret and teach scripture.

[af_vet_1981]

I would like to explore your point. Will you comment on the Greek word for interpretation first, and then we can continue. I totally understand about time.

[circlecity]

"It is the calling of the holy catholic apostolic church to rightly interpret and teach scripture."

Sez who?

[aMorePerfectUnion]

“Jesus started a religion “

Lie. But it reveals the falseness that justifies the incorporation of pagan religion into Roman traditions and practices... none of which Christ commanded, nor which the Apostles taught.

[Springfield Reformer]

Sure, later this evening. Peace ...

[daniel1212]

The point is that private interpretation spawns false heresy which leads believers to fall away and be lost.

That is not the point, and your private interpretation which is not even official exegesis, wrests texts to teach 2Pt. 1:20 is about interpretation of Scripture apart from an supreme infallible magisterium, when it is actually is setting forth Scripture as the standard , and makes you a false teacher!

The context of 1Pt. 1:20 is clearly that of Divinely inspired prophecy , which is not a result of mans interpretive wisdom, but instead such were found "Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow." (1 Peter 1:11)

In contrast to the product of man's wisdom and false prophets and teachers, Peter tells us, "We have also a more sure word of prophecy," "for the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." (2 Peter 119,:21)

This sets forth Scripture as the supreme authority, not the assuredly infallible magisterium of Rome, which like false teachers, takes the danger of individual private interpretation to the corporate level, claiming to be teaching Divinely revealed truths but which are not taught in Scripture. Such as perpetual papal infallibility (which is the epitome of individual interpretation) and that of the magisterium when speaking in accordance with her infallibly defined formula, with the veracity of which resting upon that premise.

But the teaches of which yet can require varying degree of interpretation, even as to what level each teaching falls under, and thus what level of assent is required. Which basically ends up meaning implicit assent should be given to all. Which is cultic, not Christian.

[daniel1212]

Yet I can easily say that is just your private interpretation thus why should I consider it?

Because according to her interpretation (for she indeed fallibly engaged in such in deciding to submit to Rome), only Rome's interpretation can be correct in any conflict, as Rome has interpreted herself as being infallible.

Want to try it?

[daniel1212]

Thanks for setting the record straight. I think some on here are trying to lead people to their church instead of to Christ. Tis a shame they care more about a church than Jesus.

It is their security, like as in cults, and thus the reaction is similar..

[circlecity]

"Want to try it?"

Try what?

[Resettozero]

Good work, LC! That would persuade me...if I weren’t previously persuaded. Hope all doubters will take time to read through the Scripture you posted and give serious prayerful consideration. It’s very important.

R2z

[Resettozero]

Been there. Still doing that.

[af_vet_1981]

Sez who?

Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted. And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.

Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

[circlecity]

I see nothing in that quote which makes the Roman Catholic church the sole interpreter of scripture or even mentions the Roman Catholic church at all. That’s the best you’ve got? The Comforter (The Holy Spirit) indwells all Christians.

[CynicalBear]

Once again, Well Done!!

[Elsie]

That is my point; our personal interpretations are not binding or loosening, but rather those interpreted by the LORD, the prophets, and the apostles are binding.

We hear ya on that BINDIUNG thing.

What has your chosen religion LOOSED lately?

[af_vet_1981]

... wrests texts to teach 2Pt. 1:20 is about interpretation of Scripture...

I read your response and am not persuaded. I also note scripture in the follow up epistle by the same author dealing with those who wrest the Scriptures to their own destruction. I compare and contrast this with the case if what heresies could infect the churches of the holy catholic apostolic church that Jesus build on the apostles and prophets, himself being the chief cornerstone. How could sheep follow a wolf in sheep's clothing unless said wolf was misinterpreting the scriptures to lead them astray. With the thousands of denominations, sects, and even virtual websites that cloak the background and ordination of the teachers, I can see how sheep are led astray by false teachers who misinterpret the scripture, Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

14Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Te therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.

[Karl Spooner]

It doesn’t look the poster knows what they post. It is contrary to their own arguments.

[af_vet_1981]

“Te” should read “Ye”; smart phone spell checkers misinterpret and change text they don’t understand.