Hello everyone! Please go into the Spirituality site to read my second featured article:

"Spirituality and Religion - Is there a difference?"

Paying attention to what lies within will bring a realization that there are differences between spirituality and religion, even if aspects of each can be intertwined.

When I am done with training I will be able to link my articles to the forum so all you will have to do is click on the link to read them. In the meantime the site can be accessed from the Religion and Spirituality page here. Just click the link to the Spirituality site directly under the forum topic of Spirituality. The link to the site is also directly above the threads here on the Spirituality forum.

I appreciate any feedback you have. Thanks for reading!

Hi Debbie,

I love this article. Many wonder about the differences between spirituality and religion. Your expression of "free will" says it all.

Here is the link to Spirituality And Religion - Is There A Difference?

To all,
Spirituality has no dogmas, religions,do!

loong

Thanks for sharing this wonderful article Debbie. You have beautifully explained the difference between spirituality and religion.

Thank you for reading my article, and you are welcome

To Debbie ,

Just wikied Spirituality and here is part of what was written:

Those who speak of spirituality outside of religion often define themselves as "spiritual but not religious" and generally believe in the existence of different "spiritual paths," emphasizing the importance of finding one's own individual path to spirituality. According to one poll, about 24% of the United States population identifies itself as spiritual but not religious

In another part of the text it refers to some spiritualities
as asearch for a higher power/God.

So then Buddhism is not a spirituality,because ,we have no gods and not searching for one. Also no soul !

A different view!

loong

It is indeed a different view. Thank you for sharing it.

On a side note, the definition of Wikipedia is: the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.

I personally choose to look into other sources besides this one to learn more about whatever it is I am interested in, only because Wiki can change at any time with anyone's view. It does not mean the content it contains is always truth or fact, but it is the view of the writer.

As a matter of fact, my 14 year old nephew is told in school not to use Wikipedia as a source for any research projects he is doing because Wiki in a lot of cases is not necessarily factual, and it is contantly changing. Just an interesting bit of information I wanted to share.

Very well said, Debbie. When I first started using Wikipedia a few years ago, I thought everything written there was fact -- until I realized, as you say, that anyone can edit the articles. Now that is rather disconcerting, I think.

If I use Wikipedia now, I verify my interests by consulting other sources that are reliable.

Thanks for sharing this. I am sure many people did not realize the point you made here.

Dear Debbie and Phyllis.

I am more than surprised that 2 editors,are destroying the first
source of info on the web.This is a family oriented group ,always being positive.Google always refer them first!

If it was not for Wikipedia 90 % of my knowledge would be absent.
Debbie writes; it is I am interested in, only because Wiki can change at any time with anyone's view. It does not mean the content it contains is always truth or fact, but it is the view of the writer.

I being very polite,ask you to try to change one comma on Wikipedia.
I beleive you have not read the bottom of Wiki, to write that.

As far as being truthfull,everybook ever written,being written ,that will be written is supposed to contain the truth.

Well if I follow what you wrote none contain the truth ,because they were all written ,by MEN.
So there is no truth ,except the one you want to beleive.

With Compassion


loong