Originally Posted by
RecklessEric 
Yes. But all this debating about language and phrasing; about technique and method does sound to me like interpretation of guidance. And so, if we are investing our emotional and physical energy into interpreting guidance, surely there is an element of faith in this guidance.
Otherwise why would we do it?
Who is "we"? I wasn't trying to debate anything at all. I was merely hoping to point out the simplicity of deciding to never drink again.
I put zero energy into the concept. It was the finality of simply stating, "I will never drink again and never change my mind." No ambiguity in this nor is faith involved.
This is a stretch for an analogy, but if someone told you if you never put your hand on the hot stove caldron you will not burn you hand on it, does it require faith to believe that? Will you question if that is a technique or method? No, it is simply a suggestion (statement of fact) that if you follow will be proven true. If you want to put your hand on the stove again to see if still burns, go for it. I know what will happen to me if I drink again. But I can only speak for myself when it comes to my experience with alcohol. No more testing required.
The idea of making a decision and abiding by that decision is entirely a personal choice. You either do or you don't. It is a commitment that does not require faith, for me anyway. It's black and white to use an expression. If one cannot see it as black and white ( gray) then one is looking for a way around it, holes.
As for technique or methodology, however one wishes to approach this can be entirely a personal choice. But the simplicity of it boils down to a battle of wills - I think. The "beast" or whatever you want to call it, our "addiction"?, is a very real thing. It is a matter of recognizing that "our addiction" still wants alcohol, our "self" does not. It is up to our "self" to deny our "addiction".