I couldn't. But many agnostics and atheists seem to have found a work around they are comfortable with. Personally, I feel the 12-Steps as written in the Big Book require a definite believe in a monotheistic, supernatural entity. IMO the chapter We Agnostics essentially tells members to not be an agonistic.

We don't usually open forums for things that are impossible, guys :)

A number of people wanted a space like this where they could discuss working 12 steps outside a monotheistic JudeoChristian point of view.

Paulmh was one of the first members here:
http://www.soberrecovery.com/forums/...theist-aa.html

If you can't understand it, thats fine - you don't need to :)

D

Ah, somehow I missed posts 5, 6 & 8 (above) before. Got it. Thanks all.

Looking back to post #3... Sounds good to me. Whatever works.

I understand it, I just don't agree with it.

Most of my recovered friends, in AA, are atheists. What exactly is it with which you disagree....? ......that they could have worked AA's steps as atheists, or that they are sober.......?

(o:
NoelleR

I disagree that the steps as laid out in the big book are compatible with a secular world view. Elements of them can be, but as a whole they are not. Don't get me wrong, I like the steps because they provide a sound moral framework for people who might need a little rehabilitation in that area. But as a whole they exist to bring someone to a god of their understanding. Secularists tend not to be too keen on that. Maybe a moral philosophy or world view of my understanding, but not a supernatural being. You might as well tell me I should find a hobbit of my understanding or a Klingon warlord of my understanding. It carries the same connotation for me...fantasy thinking.

That hung me up for a long, long, very painful time. Please see:

http://www.soberrecovery.com/forums/...where-god.html

I don't care what you call it: God, Good, Higher Power, Hare Krishna, it don't matter. I found my God in my heart... nothing supernatural about it.

I'm glad I did. I might not be here right now typing this if I hadn't.

A) Taoism

The Tao that can be talked about is not the true “Tao”. Tao can not be represented as a particular entity, thing or image. Tao is not directly translatable to “God”. Any word we can define is not the Tao. The concept of a personified deity is foreign to a Taoist, as is the concept of the creation of the universe. Time is cyclical, not linear as in Western thinking. Tao is unknowable in “essence” but observable in “manifestations”. The Tao belongs neither to knowing or not knowing. It is paradoxically “nothing”, yet it is “in everything”. :a213:

Hmm... I don't know much about Taoism, yet, but it sounds interesting.

Your tagline I have a little trouble with though, even it is from the Big Book. Spiritualism makes perfect sense to me now.

A.A. Recovery - The Missing Piece: The Spiritual Malady

......and these are your understandings of AA and the AA Program (and what secularists believe), but they're not everybody's. When I was new to recovery and AA, I was informed that nobody was allowed to force their understandings of the program on me; they didn't get to define it, or tell me how it worked, or tell me how I needed to work the steps; this was left up to me.

...and because of this, I'm still sober (continuosly) some 20+ years later.

(o:
NoelleR

Perhaps with your secular world view, but I don't think you speak for all people with a secular viewpoint.

I have found that most folks with a so called "secular world view" are materialists. For the most part, they have a Newtonian view of reality. For them space and time are fixed quantities, and particles of matter cannot exist in two places at the same time. To even suggest these things implies reference to the "supernatural".

The trouble is, modern physics has shown us that these beliefs are, in fact, reality. Modern science has shown us that the mere the act of observing matter can, and does, change the properties of matter itself.

This sounds supernatural, even to me, but it's far from fantasy.

Been watching The Big Bang Theory much awuh1? :bigok:

I'm referring almost exclusively to belief in a god, praying to this god, and evangelizing this god to others as a means of recovering from alcoholism and overcoming moral failings. This goes contrary to secular thinking because it appeals to the supernatural. It has nothing to do with physics or materialism.

At the end of the day, Alcohol does not discriminate.
:a213:

....and thankfully, neither does recovery..........

(o:
NoelleR

Johnston, What you may not understand about AA is that there are likely as many conceptions of God within AA, as there are AA members. Before AA even began, someone suggested to it's first founder that he should choose his own conception of God. Thus began a long tradition of tolerance for an incredibly wide range of beliefs.

Many people think of “God” simply as a power greater than themselves. God for some means “Group Of Drunks” and for others it's “Good Orderly Direction”. Many of these conceptions are distinctly secular. Its all good as far as a vast majority of people in AA are concerned.

There is no 'my God against your God' sort of talk. There is no evangelizing. There is no need. IMO the only thing that seems to be absolutely necessary is an open mind.

Maybe even as many as there are people on this planet. This is how/where I found mine:

http://www.soberrecovery.com/forums/...where-god.html

I have no problem with this. As a secularist however, I rely on my gut (instincts), common sense (intellect), and life experiences (maturity). I can't pray to these things. I might reflect on them, maybe even meditate on them...but I would essentially be deifying myself if I asked myself for a knowledge of my will for me and the power to carry it out. The same goes for a "group of drunks". I might appreciate their input, but I can't deify them either.

For me, it's actually more forthcoming when AA members state point blank that an actual deity, outside of oneself, needs to be tapped into in order to fulfill the intent of the 12 steps. This "any higher power" has an air of bait and switch to it that I am very wary of. It speaks to a peculiarly American brand of evangelicalism that is part marketing, part giddy optimism, and part intellectual laziness. All covered with a veneer of what seems to pass for Christianity in this country nowadays.

It would seem that you have decided on the motives and intent of AA members regardless of what they say. If some AA members state that they believe “an actual deity, outside of oneself, needs to be tapped into” then they are the ones who are “actually more forthcoming”, while those who don’t have “bait and switch” motivations. I think that this may be an example of when other “life experiences” might be getting in the way of seeing the truth. You seem intent on finding an evangelical motivation regardless of what is actually stated.

BTW, I don’t think there is anything is wrong with “relying on gut (instincts), common sense (intellect), and life experiences (maturity)”. But don’t limit yourself to that. There was a time a few hundred years ago when instinct, intellect and life experience made it clear to nearly everyone, the world over, that the world was flat that and the sun, moon and stars circle us.