Why shouldn’t they “dabble”? No single religion has ALL the answers, so exploring and adopting a mixture is a good way to do things.

Learning something from other great religious traditions is one thing, but “dabbling” in New Age hogwash is another thing entirely. The New Age movement has nothing of value to offer anyone, Christians included.

Perhaps you think it is “hogwash”, Nate, but it is obvious some find value in it. What’s the harm?

Spiritual sappiness. Finding value in what is shallow only makes one a shallow person.

I think it is unfortunate that people feel the need to “dabble”. I used to do the same thing, was afraid to die and didn’t really know what my purpose for living was. I was hopelessly addicted to drugs and toxic relationships. I played in some very good rock bands, recorded in some of the top studios in the world with some of the finest musicians out there but STILL had an emptiness that I couldn’t fill. Once I trusted in God and realised that I was here for a reason that I don’t/didn’t understand fully it starts to become much more clear. The rest of the so called “religions” are just something to do until you find the one true God. The funniest thing is God has made the path to salvation so simple and easy that we seem to feel that there MUST be more to it and so onward we search because often we are just too smart to see the truth that is right in front of our eyes all along. Jesus came in human form, He came to die for us because THAT was the ONLY way to redeem us from sin and ourselves.So simple but so many feel there has got to be more and it just can’t be so simple! It is, because He loves us so much and we were created by Him to be with Him for eternity. I pray that those still searching find God and come to find the rest and peace we are ALL supposed to have. It is there for the asking people. He loves you..
Glenn

I’m trying to picture a “great religious tradition”. By definition they all encourage people to believe in things for which no proof seems to exist. That kind of denial of logic and reason is no sign of greatness.
And I see a difference in complexity of structure and in some cases age of some form of the belief, but I see no difference in shallowness.

What some might call “great religious traditions” are probably old and large (or were large or at least fairly large) and with a complex organizational structure. Let’s examine what those things mean a bit.
Large religions such as Catholicism and Islam and Lutheranism (in its various parts) got that way because their adherents at some time in the past controlled a lot of territory and forced the people living there to adhere to that religion. In the case of Islam, at least, it’s still going on in places. I won’t speak about other large religions like Hinduism and Buddhism because I’m not that familiar with them and not inclined to research it at this time of night, but I don’t doubt the same is true of them.
Now being large because people’s ancestors were forced into a religion is not something to be proud of, so I’d say no religion gets positive credits for size unless all their adherents are and were voluntary.
As for a complex organizational structure, another word for that is bureaucracy and bureaucracies can be good or bad but in any case they provide a lot of people employment. In the case of the RCC recently in at least the US and Ireland and the Vatican they’ve provided employment to child molesters and their protectors.
Again I would not give credit to a religion for employing a lot of people. That’s just a tax on believers and a jungle where some really bad behavior can get covered up. I admit some good scholarship has been done by a few of those people and will give credit for scholarship that’s not just exercises in justifying the unjustifiable.
Now as far as astrology and reincarnation I’m not aware of any convincing evidence to support them any more than e.g. Christianity or Islam or Judaism. But I’m not aware they’ve been used as an excuse for war or stealing other people’s land either. So they have that to say for them, anyway.
As for “spiritual energy” if you mean an actual “spiritual entity” I think the evidence is just as nonexistent. If you mean the effect in people’s minds that may be just as real as the effects of the various traditional religions seem to be. But, again, I’m not aware of it having used to get people to go to war or steal people’s land or such.
On balance it’s positive that so many people are broadening their horizons in such ways though I’d much rather see them move toward rationality.

Speaking of old religions, I don’t often recommend David Brooks, but he’s got an interesting article about Hanukkah’s back story in the NYT.

Best to keep your thinking skills working no matter what religion you are dabbling in, old or new.
And if you were brought up in a religion, even the more reason to question it’s validity, and hope that the bias in your environment is justified by sound reason and logic.

nnmns wrote: “By definition they all encourage people to believe in things for which no proof seems to exist. That kind of denial of logic and reason is no sign of greatness.”
There are many aspects of human life which are not amenable to proof and logic, especially when it comes to our selves, others, and how we interrelate. One example is the concept of free will, which some scientists and philosophers would assure us is only an illusion, yet it is one of the most fundamental beliefs that virtually everyone holds, at least implicitly. In fact, I’m not sure a human being could function without that particular ‘illusion’. I don’t believe free will is an illusion, and I think it demonstrates very well the limits of proof and logic in dealing with some of the biggest questions of human exisitence.
The problem I have with some New Age beliefs is that they tend to cover themselves with a veneer of pseudo-science, using terms like ‘dimension’, ‘vibration’, ‘resonance’, ‘vortex’ etc. I think its good to look for consistency between ones religious and scientific
beliefs, but I think it’s a mistake, even dangerous, to confuse the two.

The above “Your Name” post is mine.
Apparently, if you take too long to post and have to ‘refresh the captcha’, you also have to re-enter your name.

WT interesting point about free will. So if we don’t believe in free will we’ll act differently (thus demonstrating the existence of free will, I guess). That aside I agree life would be quite different if I didn’t believe in it. Somewhat related to fatalism I suppose. I’m picturing a person who does not believe in free will never bothering to decide what to do (what would be the point?) and always being surprised at what he/she does.
But in any case belief in free will is not imposed on people to get power over them and money from them.

Anyone who worships physical objects, speaks with the dead, believes in reincarnation or consults astrology is no believer in Jesus. They may claim to be Christians, but are not. They don’t understand Scripture or the power of God.
Matthew 15:8 (New American Standard Bible)
‘THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS,
BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME.

Why should some Christians worry about what other Christians do? Religion is personal, and all have differnt views of the same thing, which makes life interesting.

surveys and polls are a sucker’s bait.