Talk:Spiritual but not religious

Types section
The first paragraph of the article abbreviates the concept to SBNR, most likely for ease of use in the article. Yet in the "Types" section, the phrases "SBNRs are made up of..." and "Linda A. Mercandante categorizes SBNRs into..." turns the concept into a personification. It would be better if the section could say that "People who identify as SBNR are a heterogenous group with differing beliefs." and "Linda... categorizes those who identify as SBNR into..." and similarly throughout the article, as well. --Eddylyons (talk) 21:38, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

similar terms
Some people are spiritual but non-religious, irreligious, anti-religious, joke religious, maybe other things.--dchmelik (t|c) 11:23, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

"Organized religion as the major enemy of authentic spirituality" - source?
The section "Characteristics of SBNR" includes the observation that "Many go as far to view organized religion as the major enemy of authentic spirituality."

This influential proposition, in various permutations, has been around for some time. But I have not found a credible attribution. Can someone please provide one?

Cteno (talk) 18:51, 27 June 2022 (UTC)


 * See Sufiism. - Tenebris 66.11.165.110 (talk) 04:00, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Limitations of the classification system
Mercadante is a theologian within a Judeo-Christian (monotheistic) tradition. She frames her definitions accordingly, and ignores any SBNRs who are not casual believers and who are not transitional to or from organized religion. In her view, these cannot exist -- and yet many of us know that they do exist. The journal reference I linked has an in-page free-to-download pdf where this is discussed in detail. (I linked the main journal page, not the pdf.) I also notice that the points mentioned in the "Criticism" section follow the same limited perspective. Possibly related is that this whole page has a distinct N. American slant, possibly because this is one of the few environments in which open declaration of such beliefs is possible, so the main classification of SBNR pulls from the environment in which it was first formally identified. - Tenebris 66.11.165.110 (talk) 03:58, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 22 February 2024

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 00:27, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Spiritual but not religious → Spiritual, but not religious – Grammar. 12u (talk) 23:32, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * comment an oxford comma isn't strictly grammatically necessary—blindlynx 00:03, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Not an Oxford comma actually, but you're right that it's not necessary. Either way I Oppose too because it's unnecessary and unjustified in the nom. Garnet Moss (talk) 01:41, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
 * you're right what i meant is a comma before a coordinating conjunction isn't strictly grammatically necessary... and oxford comma is a special case of that—blindlynx 17:17, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose. No reasoning is provided by the nominator. Additionally, the words "spiritual but not religious" do not need a comma to be deemed grammatical. Paintspot Infez (talk) 00:17, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose: The current title is grammatically correct.  Bait30   Talk 2 me pls? 02:04, 23 February 2024 (UTC)