Ex-Church of Christ Support Board

I fell in love with this the very first time I ran across it on FaceBook.



To me it symbolizes one of the most serious shortcomings of the CoC...fixating on the institutionalism aspects of religion while pretty much completely ignoring the spirituality side of things.

The token reference given by rote during baptisms is really the only time I remember hearing the words "Holy Spirit" uttered during services...no sermons I can recall and certainly never in Bible classes as a topic of study. Nothing ever about what was spirituality, nor how to develop it either. It was almost as if that word was seen as a first step to having a Ouija board on the communion table. It was as if all you needed to know about religion were "the rules" and the "official" interpretation of whatever chapter and verse of the week was being talked about.

I was always impressed by Billy Graham. He never once, to my knowledge, brought up his Baptist denomination (or any other) during his revivals, but instead stressed very heavily that the key was "having a personal relationship with Christ." I see that as making religion come alive by rooting it in spirituality as opposed to having your salvation dependent on an attendance book and anchored by fear.

Good point I think they were afraid of tongues. I am not an expert on that subject but the church I sometimes go to is a community church with an Assembly of God base. You will not see tongues in the main service. The people that are minded this way have their own meetings. On the other hand the people are warm, loving and friendly. After the CoC this is a real shock. I have even purchased a hamburger between classes in a commons area. This church is huge like thousands. It has multiple services some Christian or Spanish Rock. My wife attends the tradional services. This church is active vibrant and helping a lot a people. As one pastor put you are either a country club for saints or a hospital for sinners. I consider the CoC a country club for saints. This church is busy helping people.
.

.

.

(found someplace)

"Spirituality is a continuing personal relationship with the divine.

Religion is crowd control."

Mind you, there is nothing WRONG with 'crowd control', but when it mistakes its mission for the purpose of the exercise entirely, it loses its path.

the problem in my opinion with 'spirituality' is that it LACKS 'crowd control': spirituality on its own cannot persist long term because it has no structure. But the structure can't and shouldn't exist without the spirituality aspect, either.

Coc is all about the structure and is suspicious about, or ignorant totally of, the spirituality.

agricola wrote:Coc is all about the structure and is suspicious about, or ignorant totally of, the spirituality.

I liked your input Agri. I know this much that spirituality is a spontaneous response to God's grace. It has an emotional component but is not just emotion. You can feel it. It has an imagination component but it is not imagination. Ironically the guy with the best handle on it is Wayne Dyer. His TV presentation of Wishes Fulfilled is excellent. Record it. I still have trouble with it but I am a cripple in the area of spirituality and I am impatient. God of the otherhand is in no big hurry. Great when you stand a sinner. We all need some time. I suspect this is a major problem for exers.

I've continued in my Christian faith after leaving the COC, rather than leaving the COC and Christianity altogether. Because of this, I prefer Tim Keller's distinction between Gospel and Religion to the more popular distinction between Spirituality and Religion. The term spirituality, to me, conjures ideas of an anything-goes, Westernized mysticism that combines various parts of (usually whitewashed) Native American beliefs, Tibetan Buddhism, Rastafarianism, and socially-constructed appreciations of 'nature.' Keller, in my opinion, is able to point out the negative aspects of organized Christianity (many of which apply to the COC) while maintaining the significance of the gospel. It's really well done. Here's a brief table that explains the differences, in Keller's words:

h**p://toddrhoades.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/gospelreligion.png

Lev

**Note: I just Googled some Keller-related terms and came up with that chart. I have no idea who Todd Rhoades is, nor have I taken the time to look over his website.

Along the lines of what Agricola was saying...there is religion with spirituality. Just because one is religious does not mean one is or must be devoid of spirituality.
And for many persons, it is hard to develop or maintain their spirituality when they are not connecting in some way with other spiritual/religious persons. Like athletes, many find it difficult to develop completely on their own. Guidance is usually needed in some form. Encouragement, coaching, fellowship, etc. Being human means, for the most part, being a social creature. And that's pretty true for most if not all aspects of our lives. Even hermits come out to be with others if only for a short time.

But I do agree that religion should include fostering one's spiritual growth. And that there is no one-size-fits all when it comes to religious/spiritual practice.

Starr wrote:Along the lines of what Agricola was saying...there is religion with spirituality. Just because one is religious does not mean one is or must be devoid of spirituality.
And for many persons, it is hard to develop or maintain their spirituality when they are not connecting in some way with other spiritual/religious persons. Like athletes, many find it difficult to develop completely on their own. Guidance is usually needed in some form. Encouragement, coaching, fellowship, etc. Being human means, for the most part, being a social creature. And that's pretty true for most if not all aspects of our lives. Even hermits come out to be with others if only for a short time.

But I do agree that religion should include fostering one's spiritual growth. And that there is no one-size-fits all when it comes to religious/spiritual practice.

Exactly!

And like the comments about the semantics of spirituality/religion, the OP Indian on a horse poster has to do with the definition of "Hell". If Hell is defined as a place of eternal everlasting punishment then one can't have been "through it" and it is only reasonable to be afraid of such a thing. I get the pithy phrase, but it is nonsense to suggest that people in the CofC have not experienced and endured personal sufferings...as if they have all lived a charmed life of no grief. And now it comes down to arguing about who has suffered more.

So IMO, it is a clever little saying that, based on how the terms are defined, resonates and makes a point to some people. I have seen some where this sort of thinking is used it seems to justify or excuse their opting out of what they call "religion" by taking a higher path. This higher path sort argument implies that since my suffering was greater and therefore must be wiser or more enlightened...it is a judgmental and competing sort of saying as it discounts some and elevates others. But yes, there are people who have not thought through legalism or CofC-ism, and it is about the process of religion.