Posted by on July 31, 2011 at 20:35:59
In Reply to: Re: To clariy, the Oxford Group had 4 practices, not 12 Steps. posted by MG on July 28, 2011 at 16:56:32:
With careful “respect for [your] ideas, feelings, beliefs, and opinions”, researched the following IN RESPONSE TO what you posted, with no intention of “following [you] around whenever and wherever [you]post, with no intention of “over-familiarity with [you]to the point of talking about [you] instead of the subject matter being discussed“, “insisting on contact[ing you] even when it is unwelcome” (since you posted to me, and we have an open exchange of ideas), or of “going beyond the boards to encroach on the private lives of other board users’ (? I certainly have not done that), I respectfully wanted to respond to your last post:
I find it interesting that you write “…IF you study the history of the Oxford Group…” That is a little insulting; don’t you think; MG? You’re inferring that I am a phony and a liar; aren’t you? Hmm.
Technically, you are partially right, about the Oxford Group ORIGINALLY not having just 12 steps—they had different counts at different times; not just the four “Practices” you listed, plus the “Five C’s”.
I (also) went to Wikipedia (Wikipedia isn't really a fact-checking mechanism so much as a voting mechanism—it can, and frequently does, therefore, HIGHLY reflect politically correct opinions).
It looks like you used Wikipedia for Oxford Group/AA information (see ). I also used ask.com, bing, and Google, as well as other more sophisticated search engines (supplied by some intelligent Christian friends I go to church with, who are professionally involved in FBI-type profiling psychology, predictive psychology tests used in the corporate world, and so on—they “unfairly”—semi-legally—vet out chemical/behavioral addicts who cost big companies too much money—I don’t necessarily agree with them, although they do use accurate/reliable predictive data, but their search engines themselves are very cool, and relevant).
I read extensively for several hours (and “much study is a weariness of the flesh”! Whew! I do hope I didn’t waste a Sunday afternoon).
If you, or friends and/or loved ones of yours have gotten sober through AA, please believe that I am not diminishing anyone’s success in sobering up, even temporarily, through AA. Neither would I diminish ANY reason for leaving TF permanently (It’s a START!), although many more very important things must follow. I am dedicated to that—otherwise I’d stop reading or posting here permanently.
Yes, I have been banned in the past.
I also learned recently that I was falsely diagnosed back in October of 2007, following a suicide attempt with a .38 to my heart (I slipped, and didn’t try a second pull on the trigger) over my second marriage breakup, and was prescribed Depakote, which accumulated for 4 years as a psychoactive poison, and whose side-effects closely mimicked Bipolar Disorder, till it started causing wild hallucinations (sleeping AND waking—TERRIFYING!), and my psychiatrist took me off of it and admitted my strictly suicide attempt-related problem was isolated trauma alone.
I do apologize, to all, for any problems I caused during that time, either intentional, and my fault, as well as any other purely medication-induced paranoia, too-quick anger, and aggression. People on some side-effect-causing medications can easily have typical problems, as can abusers of, say, crystal meth, Ecstasy, and even (very predictably) high-THC-containing marijuana, plus many other substances of abuse, including good ole legal ethanol—all the street drugs, AND alcohol, always cause the abuser to BS themselves, and others, to a very high degree—take it from a professional; MG.
But I have also seen COMPLETE healing from addictions of various kinds in individuals (like a teen member of the Mexican Mafia, left to rot in jail. He had a COMPLETE and instant, recovery, and never returned to drugs; just from calling out with all his heart to Jesus—I personally know the guy). That’s not just an isolated event, either.
TF was, and still is, under a curse because of their practices, IMHO (and I am not the only exer who strongly believes this), and it became the opposite of a good place to learn to expect real miracles from God; much less an environment that pleases Him. I’m not surprised that many exers neither experienced anything to cause them to expect miracles inside the group, OR out—I’ve certainly had my own struggles, MG. I believe that sometimes God wants people to “tough it out”, and definitely go through ANY 12-Step program; depending on their circumstances and history—we DON’T disagree on that.
Some Christians in recovery DO experience complete and permanent freedom, MG; despite what you alege.
You wrote: “But the majority of alcoholics and drug addicts in the world today are not Christian believers. Most probably don't believe in anything, or they're agnostic, or Muslim, or Hindu, or Jewish and etc. It's a fact that the 12 Step program which uses terms like "higher power", or "God as I/you understand him" makes recovery accessible to many more millions who'd don't respond to 12 Step programs that are purely Christian Bible based.”
Those are very sweeping statements, MG. What is your dependable source for the successes of these programs? Sounds like a “worldwide” allegation, kind of like TF’s “worldwide claims” about things patently untrue. There are MANY dependable sources of still-Christian-based programs—like TONS. Like I said, there has been a BIG resurgence, at least here in the States.
There is also a current record of large numbers of Muslims, as well as Jews coming to Christ in the “10’40” window”—more than ever before in history.
I’m not saying as I already wrote, that NON-Christian 12-step programs can’t or don’t work—you’re definitely missing, or purposely avoiding my point, if you think I am not—they can, and do. My opinion is that it is because a real, un-made-up God exists, and mercifully allows it, but He has MUCH more for people; that’s all.
My own little sister HAS made a “politically correct” religion out of purely anti-theist 12-Step, and after many, many long conversations with her and her husband, also a recovering multiple addict, over many years, I see that she is typically, one who habitually “outsmarts” the program(s), and returns inevitably to abuse—you just can’t lie and allege wholesale success for the secular version, MG—it’s just not true, statistically.
I am just trying to truthfully UNTANGLE politically correct-based confusion about the topic, because of things YOU first alleged. I’m not “dogging” you on the subject—this will be my last comment on the subject; just do not dishonestly disparage my research, OK?
But let’s separate purely secular 12-Step “beliefs” from publically-available statistics and facts; shall we?
I’ve already mentioned the involvement of some of my family members with 12-Step programs, like AA and NA, and so on. I’ve just observed, professionally as well as on a familial basis, some of the massive failures and recidivism associated with the secular versions (already an indisputable matter of record, and NOT just my opinion). My only motive is to reach and help others, not to come to disagreements over trivialities.
One NON-triviality is insisting on ONLY secular approaches, BECAUSE of proven results; I’m afraid..
There are several researchers of the topic we’re touching on, MG. Your one response, if true, would make me look quite foolish, if what you alleged were true; but it is not. I did a LOT of research—I intend to use it to try and reach my own sister, as an ongoing project of love, not just for readers here on ExFamily.org.
Actually, according to other Oxford Group/AA researchers, such as a “Dick B.” who evidently chose anonymity, according to AA practice (see ), there were far more than just a mere four “practices”, such as any loose adherence to a generalized non-God “ Absolute Honesty”, “Absolute Purity”, “Absolute Unselfishness”, and “Absolute Love”—there were at least 28 “ideas” in the first Oxford Group, such as these eight out of twenty-eight (check the above URL—I don’t want to just cut-and-paste), and they are ALL Scripture-based; research definitely shows. Other pre-1939 (the year AA STARTED) Books on the subject show titles like the following annotation: Benson, Clarence Irving. The Eight Points of the Oxford Group. London: Oxford University Press, 1936.
From the next URL, , also come the following excerpts (and the last quote includes 7 steps):
“You won’t spend much time digging in our early "Program" without realizing that, at its peak percentage of success period which commenced in 1935, there were no Steps. No steps? No steps!" For that point, let’s look at the record:
"Dr. Bob, noting that there were no Twelve Steps at the time and that ‘our stories didn’t amount to anything to speak of,’ later said they were convinced that the answer to their problems was in the Good Book" (DR BOB and the Good Oldtimers, p. 96).
"As Dr. Bob recalled: ‘I didn’t write the Twelve Steps. I had nothing to do with the writing of them. . . . We already had the basic ideas, though not in terse and tangible form. We got them. . . as a result of our study of the Good Book’." (DR. BOB and the Good Oldtimers, p. 97).
"Dorothy [S. M.] recalled the 1937 meetings when ‘the men would all disappear upstairs. . . After about half an hour or so, down would come the new man, shaking, white, serious, and grim. And all the people who were already in A.A. would come trooping down after him. They were pretty reluctant to talk about what had happened, but after a while, they would tell us they had had a real surrender. I often wonder how many people that come in now would survive an experience like that–a regular old fashioned prayer meeting’." (DR. BOB and the Good Oldtimers, p. 101).
"But Bill did get to see John D. Rockefeller, Jr., who dispatched Frank Amos out to Akron to investigate what was going on. Mr. Amos, who was soon to become one of A.A.’s first non-alcoholic trustees, did a thorough job of investigating what he referred to as the ‘self-styled Alcoholic Group of Akron, Ohio.’ He called on Dr. Bob and attended meetings. He questioned members and nonmembers, including professional associates of Dr. Bob. . . . In his report to MR. Rockefeller in February, 1938, Mr. Amos said. . . . ‘they [the stories of the men, their wives, and in some cases there mothers]. . . were all remarkably alike in ‘the technique used and the system followed.’ He described the ‘Program’ as follows: ‘1. An alcoholic must realize that he is an alcoholic, incurable from a medical standpoint, and that he must never again drink anything with alcohol in it. 2. He must surrender himself absolutely to God, realizing that in himself there is no hope. 3. Not only must he want to stop drinking permanently, he must remove from his life other sins such as hatred, adultery, and others which frequently accompany alcoholism. Unless he will do this absolutely, Dr. Bob and his associates refuse to work with him. 4. He must have devotions every morning–a ‘quiet time’ of prayer and some reading from the Bible and other religious literature. Unless this is faithfully followed, there is grave danger of backsliding. 5. He must be willing to help other alcoholics get straightened out. This throws up a protective barrier and strengthens his own willpower and convictions. 6. It is important, but not vital, that he meet frequently with other reformed alcoholics and form both a social and religious comradeship. 7. Important, but not vital, that he attend some religious service at least once weekly’." (DR. BOB and the Good Oldtimers, pp. 128-31).”
I’ve got to go, for now.
Replies to this Post:
Post a Reply