It's the "Not a religion, it's a relationship" bs.

There is still lots to learn and unlearn.

Excellent question. I was raised a Christian but after talking with many different denominations have concluded, finite man can not understand infinite. Religion is history but written by the victors. Rational, logical science with replicated, peer reviewed experimentation is an obvious choice. But, we are still ignorant to so much therefore God is still not disproven. 8)

I think they're just as whacked out as the religious ones.

Its just fucking stupid

I suspect that this condition is no different from, say, evangelical christianity where the individual has dillusions about what the 'faith' tells them and a huge diversion when it comes to their actual activities in daily life.

I’m an alcoholic but I only drink beer so it’s fine, right?

There have been times when religion was thought to be an affliction of some sort. Someone who was called "religious" was someone who ranted and raved and never shut up about Jesus. This viewpoint was held by people who generally believed in God, but weren't religious about it. Hence, you might overhear a conversation along these lines:

"What happened to Fred? How come he doesn't come drinking with the rest of us anymore?"

"Oh, Fred got religion, and he hasn't been the same since."

"Poor fella. I hope he recovers soon."

"Amen to that."

So, in that sense, I think there are lots of believers who are not religious.

No I honestly don't think I ever met anyone like this but England is a very godless island.

Weird! Its a contradiction in terms -- I can get the one about maybe a guy called Jesus lived -not about him having been the son of god unless its a metaphor; The origin of the word sin comes from ,sine, meaning without love, so that one might have legs -Don't think heaven is real.

No I definitely don't think you can believe and not be religious

Haha ya the "not practicing " but still believe in the invisible man in the sky.

These people are confused....the ones who don't go to church but still believe are hypocrites.

I could be convinced that a god or gods exist, but I will never see organized or unorganized religions as anything other than a criminal enterprise.

Yes, if being "religious" means belonging to an organized religion or church. There are a lot of free-floating theists out there. Such people often describe themselves as spiritual, but not religious.

I believe in God but am not in an organized religion.

As they are both man made constructs I stopped giving this much thought a long time ago.

Why not. Some folks don’t care for the organized kind of thing whose hands reach into their pockets while spouting hypocrisy. I can see people believing without being religulous. However, at that point, why bother? Know thy self.

In my reading of the NT I see a man who preaches a more loving aspect of god than that which was orthodox at the time. When I look at modern day day religions which are supposed to follow the teachings of this man, I see deviations from his teachings, and bits and pieces added on.
So if I were to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ to the letter, I could still call myself a Christian, but would find it hard to identify with any religion. I would be able to call myself a believer but claim not to be religious. I would be interested to know if anyone knows of a religion, cult etc that could truly call themselves Christian.

I do chuckle at those people who say "I'm not religious, I just have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ."

I know a few people who fit into this category. They never go to church and don't believe in most of the magical things that religion teaches, but they say they believe in a creator. They are more like Deists, like many of the founder fathers of the USA.

I would say that’s more being spiritual. I know a few people that say they believe in a higher power but not what they preach in church

I don't believe in God but I still fantasize that I will see my grandma again.If there were a heaven she would be there.

I thought I rejected all forms of magical thinking at the age of 15 but I caught myself at the age of 45 thinking that good or bad luck was a thing. I didn't believe in talismans or black cats or broken mirrors. I just thought that luck was something like a force of the universe. That it affected my life in ways. I wonder if today, at sixty, I still have something of that sort that I'm not aware of. Looking back, as innocuous as it seems, believing in luck was somewhat limiting. Realizing that made me more vigilant towards myself and others. I'm a physics enthusiast and, since I'm an amateur, I have to rely on the experts when I read about it. I'm constantly on the lookout for biases. Obviously we all have them, the best scientists have them too. I'm ok with those arising from different interpretation of evidence. I'm not ok with those having to do with our inherently superstitious human nature.

Too me religion is a construct created by people for control. Now control like all things has a wide expanse of intent and result. Not all bad. Humans need controls to exist in a healthy way. Automatic controls like breathing, metabolism etc. Voluntary controls like not attacking people, social mores to allow for positive interactions and protection for the least among us. Too me religion has two sides; community and exclusion. The first is good but the second that is were it all goes wrong. Humans need contrast to find meaning and the most vile form of contrast is the various ways we alter our perception of other humans as non or less then human. Right now in America many of us have chosen to do this in relation to immigrants from various Central American nations. Some use religion as a justification, other Nationalism. Can you believe in a God, Jesus, Buddah, Allah and not be religious? For me the more accurate question is can you believe in such things and not require others to share your belief? I think yes. Many ground level believers use it as a personal way to find meaning in a world that for the most part does not care about them. Religion requires a community of like minded people. Belief can and is quite often personal and exclusive to a person. Interestingly I have encountered what to me is the same level of contempt from both the religious and the anti-religious in relation to a singular believer. One insists their belief trumps yours, the other insists their reality does the same. Both I feel are wrong. Too me the real question is the result of ones belief. If you use it too inflict pain and seek control over others for personal gain then I think that is wrong. If you use it to construct a mental state to deal in a positive way with the world and ones self then I think it can be positive. A woman asked me if I believed in God and I replied, Who's? At the end of the day what you do matters. Why you do it is quite often very personal and if its based on belief in a God/Goddess etc. more power to you if you act with reason, thought and care and accomplish positive things. Saying you cannot believe without being dogmatic is like saying you cannot be proud of ones Nation without being a fascist or rabid Nationalist. Or you cannot take pride in ones heritage without being racist.

There's a great essay called, "Kurt Vonnegut, Christ-Loving Atheist," that I was going to link, but it's behind a paywall now so I didn't bother.