I’ve been atheist my whole life and I am past 65 years old.
What I did not know where that my body felt religious all the time.
But the cognitive dissonance made it impossible for me to admit this.

My wild guess is that organized religion exploit and abuse natural feelings.

Compare with music. I trust that music is a natural way to express feelings.
But such music can be made commercial and regulated and exploited.
Somebody “own” the music and forbid others to play it unless they pay.

Religions are a bit like that in that they own their God and you can not
just start to express religious feelings and refer to God without them
saying it is a false god or a ersatz religion. Them want to own the expression.

Now compare with music. Independent music scene try to express
and distribute music outside of commercial corporations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_music

Independent music (often shortened to indie music or indie)
is music produced independently from major commercial record labels
or their subsidiaries, a process that may include an autonomous,
Do-It-Yourself approach to recording and publishing.

So it would be possible to have religious expression that would be
independent of Churches and known religious traditions.

Instead of saying that one express religious feelings one could
name them natural feelings of awe and wonder about the Universe
and a need to care about all of Humanity and express this individually
or in like-minded groups.

Compare with computer and software industry. You have independent
distribution of Linux Operating System. Each developer make their own
version of Linux. Only the Kernel is same. And as long as they don’t steal
from each other but refer to where they got inspired they are allowed
to share their distribution and cooperate with like-minded for to improve it.

I’m not good at explaing this but ask if anything is not clear?
So what I maybe talk about is an art form more than religion?

An expression of natural feelings that reminds of religion but are an art performance?

Edit. Suppose I fail to realize these to not be independent
but individualistic expressions within a particular religious tradition?

One could name it non-affiliated religious expressions
to promise that one really are independent seems to claim too much?

Inter-dependent religious expressions? Sounds almost subjectively correct?

I think what you’re getting at is “spiritual feeling”.  Many people say they’re spiritual but not religious. Religious people and religion tends to think they’re synonymous but they’re not.  And because of this I think alot of atheists and humanists kind of lump the word “spiritual” under the god-talk category. And that makes it feel wrong.

Much appreciated that you cared to reply.
Very few people care about such things
so I am very happy that you did.

Yes very many atheists that see themselves as Atheistic Buddhists
do say things like I am spiritual not religious. Also a lot of New Age
would express it that way. And the surprising thing is that even
such extreme religious people like Pentecostal them say they
are not religious but that they have a live relation to the Holy Spirit
or Holy Ghost or personal relation to Jesus.

So few would want to be religious obviously. And some years ago
I made google search on the usage of the word religion in University
conferences on Religious Study and the fun thing is that some 300
different definition has been presented on conferences and in
such University magazines over the years. To decide on what is
a religion or not is very complex it seems.

The problem with the word spiritual is that Tom Flynn of CFI mag FI
Free Inquiry he wrote that atheist should stop using it because
there are some 99 alternative good words to use instead of spirit

Sadly that text where only published in the paper version and not on internet.
A friendly Teacher that had FI lend it to me but I forgot to take a xerox on it.
This where way back in 2000 or so.

Okay. Obviously I should not use the word religion. That makes everybody
think of supernatural things and not spiritual because that makes them
think of Buddhism, New Age, Shamanism, Spiritualism, Channeling the voices
of dead and so on.

So I would prefer that it is okay to say it is natural feelings. Evolution gave them
to us. I trust that they are as natural as the melodies we have when we talk.
From that we created music.

And from these natural feelings of awe we created fear for spirits and gods (God. )

So is it not very logical to crate absolutely independent ways to express these feelings.
A kind of art performances acting out the feelings free from any religious or spiritual
or ideological or political bias. Like music that can be independent of such too?

‘Spiritual’ isn’t the greatest word because of the root word, but until something better pops up in common usage, that’s what we’ve got.

To me, bring spiritual has nothing at all to do with spirits; it has to do with making an emotional connection with the world around me. Usually, a positive emotion like being awestruck. Some people, perhaps, get that confused.

TromboneAndrew - 01 November 2012 02:12 PM

‘Spiritual’ isn’t the greatest word because of the root word, but until something better pops up in common usage, that’s what we’ve got.

To me, bring spiritual has nothing at all to do with spirits; it has to do with making an emotional connection with the world around me. Usually, a positive emotion like being awestruck. Some people, perhaps, get that confused.

Grokking?

Yes I know it is rather many that feel that way
but I am more of a Tom Flynn kind of person.

I rather say that I feel religious than spiritual.
to me spiritual are too close to what NewAge
and Esoteric persons do when they talk to dead
“spirits” and Magick and Woodoo and such “work”.

these people really take it as real.

I’m more into natural science explanation and not
into literature words like “spirituality” like Buddhists do.

Now I am bad at using words but is it not okay to say
that it is natural human feelings of awe and wonder?

FredW - 02 November 2012 12:07 AM

Yes I know it is rather many that feel that way
but I am more of a Tom Flynn kind of person.

I rather say that I feel religious than spiritual.
to me spiritual are too close to what NewAge
and Esoteric persons do when they talk to dead
“spirits” and Magick and Woodoo and such “work”.

these people really take it as real.

I’m more into natural science explanation and not
into literature words like “spirituality” like Buddhists do.

Now I am bad at using words but is it not okay to say
that it is natural human feelings of awe and wonder?

It is excellent to have human feelings of awe and wonder. All scientists have that feeling.

But I don’t see how a New Ager who believes in Magick and Woodoo is any different than a person who believes in a supernatural god who performs magic and voodoo.

I dearly hope I did not say that. I took a stance against all those.
I want humanists to care about the natural human feelings
without giving them supernatural attributes or to dismiss them.

That one can meet and express them as the natural human feelings them are.

FredW - 02 November 2012 06:01 AM

I dearly hope I did not say that. I took a stance against all those.
I want humanists to care about the natural human feelings
without giving them supernatural attributes or to dismiss them.

That one can meet and express them as the natural human feelings them are.

I agree, this is why places such as CFI are so valuable.