May I ask you a question?

Old 07-04-2007, 01:20 PM
  # 41 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 58
oh and i know i dont have to explain, but when i say the Jesus i know.....what my emphasis was on is that my truth is a non-conformist one; my spirituality will have none of that.....and it is ok and even praised to 'question authority'. this is nott he HP or God ive seen many people think they they 'know'. the one they know seems to like control, being served, and training robots who question little and play follow the leader. to me that 'truth' is nothing short of being imprisoned to your own conscience's guilt. JMO.
Melanchonika is offline  
Old 07-04-2007, 02:51 PM
  # 42 (permalink)  
AcceptingChange's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 525
thanks for understanding, Melanchonika.

You're right, it is easy to see from
your previous posts that you meant just
the opposite of "my truth, right or wrong."
And after i posted, i realized i said the same
thing you did, just in different words.
Thanks for being tolerant.

I remember when the astronomers decided to hold
a meeting on whether pluto would remain a planet,
or get demoted to orbiting rock status. and I
pointed the article out to my son. And I asked him
"Imagine you're a PhD in astronomy. And you have to go to a conference
with other smart people. The topic is 'What label do
we put on this rock orbiting the sun?' How would you feel
about that?" I know i was laughing inside, thinking
of this conference room with PhD's having a heated
debate on this topic. One angry physicist declaring
with unwavering conviction "Pluto is NOT a planet!" and a different
physicist taking the opposite opinion with the same determination.
And i tried to figure out the political motivations that would
drive these physicists to hold such a strong opinion on the labeling
of this rock. And these political motivations would be masked with
scientific 'reasons'. And the 'reasons' held by the opposing
viewpoint holder would be dismissed as irrelevant.
I know I'd be in the back of the room, not really caring,
yet having to seem like I care, cuz it's my job.
And wondering how all the difficult studies in physics had come down
to topics so childish.

And I remember when the catholic pope declared the
catholic idea of 'limbo' to be reversed.
Limbo is where non-baptized infants go, like a waiting room
for heaven. Since only baptized people go to heaven,
the thought-leaders had to create something to appease the faithful
who miscarried.
Well, the pope has decided that this idea, created 1500 years ago,
is now incorrect.

I was curious, how did he come to that conclusion?
What evidence did he use?
Or does he feel the whole concept of limbo is silly,
and he just used his power position to reverse the concept.
And how did he convince the other senior people of the catholic
church to accept his idea?

And since he did decide that a church 'truth' is now incorrect,
does he feel that ALL catholic doctrine, even christian doctrine,
exists as states of belief that can be changed as new individuals see fit?
I'm sure he remembers the 15th century pope declaring that
the earth revolves around the sun, and burning heretics who
challenged the earth-is-the-center idea.
An idea that is now accepted as true by the church.

I see the meeting of strong-willed individuals who pursued
astronomy as their career the same as the strong-willed
priests who pursued catholicism.
Both are just groups of people, fighting over concepts.
Unprovable concepts.

thanks for tolerating my rant :-)
AcceptingChange is offline  
Old 07-29-2007, 05:44 PM
  # 43 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 9

Thanks everyone, I've really enjoyed reading this thread. And AcceptingChange, I've heard (and used) the blind men and the elephant parable before, but never in poem form. Loved it. Thank you.

I've been hanging out in the secular forum because I don't identify with the "traditional" AA view of god that I hear in meetings. Particularly the concept that "god" has a "will" for me, a "plan" that I should follow. A little too close to the fundamentalists I grew up with. Not interested in returning to a fear-based version of god. So I like being with other people can ask the question and not get criticized for not buying into the "traditional" viewpoint.

The irony is that at a different level, I can see that my genetic map is both a limitation on what I can do and be, and an open door. It's a sort of plan. (I'm not talking about the narrow issue of whether alcohol dependence/addiction is inherited, I think the jury is still out on that one). I'm thinking big picture -- that when I act contrary to the "map" (or plan) that is me, things get whacked out.

I do have a spiritual experience of the world without having a rigid theological belief to go with. But I have rejected certain theological beliefs as inconsistent with my experience -- I don't believe there is a "higher power" in control of what happens. Others on this thread have said it better -- but basically, I can't reconcile Daufaur and Aschwitz (sorry for spelling) with what a privileged life I've had. Why them and not me? And on the flip side -- why did I have a raging violent man for a father? Where was god in that decision? So the whole "control" aspect just doesn't work for me.

I share at AA that the third step does NOT say "turn my will over to god's will" --- it talks about turning my will over to the "care" of god as I understand god. "Care" being the operative word. And that feels ok for me. My conception of god is closer to the idea that I am never really alone, even when it seems I am. Others still care, including an underlying power, a source of comfort, that is always accessible.

Thanks for letting me share, and thanks for being here.

CJ-50 is offline  
Old 08-24-2007, 04:50 PM
  # 44 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: on a mote of dust, suspended in a sunbeam
Posts: 8
"how is it that you (operative) don't believe in any sort of higher power?"

I try and make sure there is reasonable evidence for the things I believe in. This is the best way I know of to have an accurate view of the world. To date I have not found this reasonable evidence for a deity.

Of course, in light of new evidence my beliefs are always open to change.
Easy Tiger is offline  
Old 09-12-2007, 01:18 PM
  # 45 (permalink)  
Silly Rabbit
Thread Starter
Emimily's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 956
Blog Entries: 6
the reason i started this thread was to try to cultivate openness about both secular and non-secular recovery programs. i don't think AA's a cult, but that's me. i know a lot of kids who claim to be open-minded in secularism that are very judgemental, but again... not my side of the street.

it's good to hear from y'all. thank you for sharing with me, and with everyone.
Emimily is offline  

Currently Active Users Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:59 PM.