ho.fo@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Apr 23, 7:52 pm, Ken <nob...@nospam.com> wrote:
>> Mark T,
>>
>> You are making a valid point. While AA sprang from the Oxford Group
>> which in many ways acted Christian, perhaps because that was the only
>> way to win converts in a country that was strongly Christian at the
>> time, AA itself, except for old language from the Big Book which was
>> written as a piece of Oxford Group literature before there ever was an AA.
>>
>> AA is very clear than one can _call_ their "higher power" whatever they
>> want to. It never comes out and says that AA's rescuing deity is a
>> Christian God or the God of any other modern monotheistic religion.
>>
>> Many things about AA are decidedly non-Christian. For example, the whole
>> idea of "allergy to alcohol" and "loss of control" is hardly consistent
>> with Christian Communion. Neither was Bill Wilson's supposedly
>> channeling some guy named Boniface who had been dead for hundreds of
>> years to help write the Steps.
>>
>> One can _call_ their higher power Jesus, but the AA God is not quite
>> like the Christian God, at least not the Christian God in most if not
>> all Christian denominations prior to the 1900s.
>>
>> The AA God will spare the wretched sinner ("alcoholic") only "one day at
>> a time" and this requires steady morbid introspection ("daily
>> inventory"), confession of sins ("admission of defects of character")
>> and work to convert others ("carrying the message"). The Christian God
>> generally is recognized as capable of curing anything, even raising the
>> dead and has not near the requirements to do so as the Step group's God
>> does.
>>
>> Ken Raggehttp://www.morerevealed.com/library.jsp
>>
>>
>>
>> Mark T wrote:
>>> Sorry, but I have to comment.
>>> That is one of the most rediculous statements I have read in some
>>> time. I have been to thousands of AA meetings and heard pratically
>>> nothing about "Christian". No where in the Program (what they did 70
>>> years ago) does it say anything about being Christian. I, for one, am
>>> certainly NOT Christian and have been sober almost 7-1/2 years by
>>> doing what they did.- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> i agree with you totally and was a bit suprised to even see this
> written here, i have just joined this site and am not sure what to do
> or say , seeing your reply is the one i totally relate to i figure go
> ahead and see if maybe you can enlighten me on this whole site. i too
> have been to many many meetings and have never heard anything about
> this, seeing relgion is an outside issue and was told that many times
> durning my 10 years of sobriety. Sorry to pick on you but here's
> hoping you can show me the way sort to speak...lol..Holly
>

To get a bit of insight as to what AA is today, it might help to see
where AA came from. There is a brief and very kind-and-gentle chapter
on the history of AA at:
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp .

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/

On Sun, 06 May 2007 22:43:32 -0700, Ken wrote:

>
> To get a bit of insight as to what AA is today, it might help to see
> where AA came from. There is a brief and very kind-and-gentle chapter
> on the history of AA at:

LOL Bro Ken would never let facts mar the composition of a kind-and-gentle
fable.

--
Bob.

"I don't believe in evil, I believe in right and wrong, and very often
they are the same thing" ... Paul Theroux - "Milroy The Magician"

Robert McGregor wrote:
> On Sun, 06 May 2007 22:43:32 -0700, Ken wrote:
>
>> To get a bit of insight as to what AA is today, it might help to see
>> where AA came from. There is a brief and very kind-and-gentle chapter
>> on the history of AA at:
>
> LOL Bro Ken would never let facts mar the composition of a kind-and-gentle
> fable.
>

Robert,

Would you care to "share" with us where the chapter on history (
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp ) is incorrect? Most
certainly, sticking to Oxford Group and AA historical sources, it was
kind and gentle. If I had gone outside those two sources (e.g. like
Orange Papers) or had pointed out more of the obvious, it would not have
been so kind and gentle.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com

P.S. If anyone wants to read a criticism of the Oxford Group written by
Episcopal church lady Marjorie Harrison in the 1930s when all who were
later called the first AAs went by the name Oxford Group it is on line
at: http://www.morerevealed.com/library/saints/saints.jsp .

Forgetting the group names, it reads extremely well as a very polite
criticism of AA -- it was written by a church lady.

On Mon, 07 May 2007 10:24:01 -0700, Ken wrote:

> Robert McGregor wrote:
>> On Sun, 06 May 2007 22:43:32 -0700, Ken wrote:
>>
>>> To get a bit of insight as to what AA is today, it might help to see
>>> where AA came from. There is a brief and very kind-and-gentle chapter
>>> on the history of AA at:
>>
>> LOL Bro Ken would never let facts mar the composition of a kind-and-gentle
>> fable.
>>
>
> Robert,
>
> Would you care to "share" with us where the chapter on history (
> http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp ) is incorrect? Most
> certainly, sticking to Oxford Group and AA historical sources, it was
> kind and gentle. If I had gone outside those two sources (e.g. like
> Orange Papers) or had pointed out more of the obvious, it would not have
> been so kind and gentle.


Ken, I'll gladly leave the pleasure of debating the integrity of your
selective "research" to the hordes of new onlookers as I'm far too
humble to monopolise *all* the podium here. Besides, our dual on this
topic is already archived on google, more than once.


--
Bob.

"I don't believe in evil, I believe in right and wrong, and very often
they are the same thing" ... Paul Theroux - "Milroy The Magician"

Robert McGregor wrote:
> On Mon, 07 May 2007 10:24:01 -0700, Ken wrote:
>
>> Robert McGregor wrote:
>>> On Sun, 06 May 2007 22:43:32 -0700, Ken wrote:
>>>
>>>> To get a bit of insight as to what AA is today, it might help to see
>>>> where AA came from. There is a brief and very kind-and-gentle chapter
>>>> on the history of AA at:
>>> LOL Bro Ken would never let facts mar the composition of a kind-and-gentle
>>> fable.
>>>
>> Robert,
>>
>> Would you care to "share" with us where the chapter on history (
>> http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp ) is incorrect? Most
>> certainly, sticking to Oxford Group and AA historical sources, it was
>> kind and gentle. If I had gone outside those two sources (e.g. like
>> Orange Papers) or had pointed out more of the obvious, it would not have
>> been so kind and gentle.
>
>
> Ken, I'll gladly leave the pleasure of debating the integrity of your
> selective "research" to the hordes of new onlookers as I'm far too
> humble to monopolise *all* the podium here. Besides, our dual on this
> topic is already archived on google, more than once.
>

Robert,

You do have a point saying selective research, although I'm not sure
what you use the quotes for. I was very selective and for the most part
only looked at AA an Oxford Group materials for the history chapter.

As far as "our dual on this topic [being] already archived on google,"
the last I remember was you apparently taking lessons from Virt rather
than directly dealing with anything from the AA and OG literature that
puts AA in a bad light.

Of course, it is understandable why you wouldn't want to deal with what
was actually written. It is hard to say that AA was lying about itself
when they tell of doing dishonest things, misrepresenting themselves, to
win new members. (e.g. the first page of the book where I tell the story
of Morgan most tellingly in a direct quote from AA Comes of Age at
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp ).


Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/

On Tue, 08 May 2007 20:01:04 -0700, Ken wrote:

> Robert McGregor wrote:
>> On Mon, 07 May 2007 10:24:01 -0700, Ken wrote:
>>
>>> Robert McGregor wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 06 May 2007 22:43:32 -0700, Ken wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> To get a bit of insight as to what AA is today, it might help to see
>>>>> where AA came from. There is a brief and very kind-and-gentle chapter
>>>>> on the history of AA at:
>>>> LOL Bro Ken would never let facts mar the composition of a kind-and-gentle
>>>> fable.
>>>>
>>> Robert,
>>>
>>> Would you care to "share" with us where the chapter on history (
>>> http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp ) is incorrect? Most
>>> certainly, sticking to Oxford Group and AA historical sources, it was
>>> kind and gentle. If I had gone outside those two sources (e.g. like
>>> Orange Papers) or had pointed out more of the obvious, it would not have
>>> been so kind and gentle.
>>
>>
>> Ken, I'll gladly leave the pleasure of debating the integrity of your
>> selective "research" to the hordes of new onlookers as I'm far too
>> humble to monopolise *all* the podium here. Besides, our dual on this
>> topic is already archived on google, more than once.
>>
>
> Robert,
>
> You do have a point saying selective research, although I'm not sure
> what you use the quotes for. I was very selective and for the most part
> only looked at AA an Oxford Group materials for the history chapter.
>
>

Ken, as has been discussed almost to infinity, your research was selective
in that you ignored documentation that exposed your mythology, while
selecting documentation that suited your purpose.

Bye


--
Bob.

"I don't believe in evil, I believe in right and wrong, and very often
they are the same thing" ... Paul Theroux - "Milroy The Magician"

Robert McGregor wrote:
> On Tue, 08 May 2007 20:01:04 -0700, Ken wrote:
>
>> Robert McGregor wrote:
>>> On Mon, 07 May 2007 10:24:01 -0700, Ken wrote:
>>>
>>>> Robert McGregor wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 06 May 2007 22:43:32 -0700, Ken wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> To get a bit of insight as to what AA is today, it might help to see
>>>>>> where AA came from. There is a brief and very kind-and-gentle chapter
>>>>>> on the history of AA at:
>>>>> LOL Bro Ken would never let facts mar the composition of a kind-and-gentle
>>>>> fable.
>>>>>
>>>> Robert,
>>>>
>>>> Would you care to "share" with us where the chapter on history (
>>>> http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp ) is incorrect? Most
>>>> certainly, sticking to Oxford Group and AA historical sources, it was
>>>> kind and gentle. If I had gone outside those two sources (e.g. like
>>>> Orange Papers) or had pointed out more of the obvious, it would not have
>>>> been so kind and gentle.
>>>
>>> Ken, I'll gladly leave the pleasure of debating the integrity of your
>>> selective "research" to the hordes of new onlookers as I'm far too
>>> humble to monopolise *all* the podium here. Besides, our dual on this
>>> topic is already archived on google, more than once.
>>>
>> Robert,
>>
>> You do have a point saying selective research, although I'm not sure
>> what you use the quotes for. I was very selective and for the most part
>> only looked at AA an Oxford Group materials for the history chapter.
>>
>>
>
> Ken, as has been discussed almost to infinity, your research was selective
> in that you ignored documentation that exposed your mythology, while
> selecting documentation that suited your purpose.
>
> Bye
>

Robert,

Then I'm sure you will have no trouble pointing out something written in
the 1930s that is inconsistent with what I wrote about the founding of AA.

Put me to shame.

LOL!

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/

On Wed, 09 May 2007 00:13:48 -0700, Ken wrote:

> Robert McGregor wrote:
>> On Tue, 08 May 2007 20:01:04 -0700, Ken wrote:
>>
>>> Robert McGregor wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 07 May 2007 10:24:01 -0700, Ken wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Robert McGregor wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 06 May 2007 22:43:32 -0700, Ken wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To get a bit of insight as to what AA is today, it might help to
>>>>>>> see where AA came from. There is a brief and very kind-and-gentle
>>>>>>> chapter on the history of AA at:
>>>>>> LOL Bro Ken would never let facts mar the composition of a
>>>>>> kind-and-gentle fable.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Robert,
>>>>>
>>>>> Would you care to "share" with us where the chapter on history (
>>>>> http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp ) is incorrect?
>>>>> Most certainly, sticking to Oxford Group and AA historical sources,
>>>>> it was kind and gentle. If I had gone outside those two sources
>>>>> (e.g. like Orange Papers) or had pointed out more of the obvious, it
>>>>> would not have been so kind and gentle.
>>>>
>>>> Ken, I'll gladly leave the pleasure of debating the integrity of
>>>> your selective "research" to the hordes of new onlookers as I'm far
>>>> too humble to monopolise *all* the podium here. Besides, our dual on
>>>> this topic is already archived on google, more than once.
>>>>
>>> Robert,
>>>
>>> You do have a point saying selective research, although I'm not sure
>>> what you use the quotes for. I was very selective and for the most
>>> part only looked at AA an Oxford Group materials for the history
>>> chapter.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Ken, as has been discussed almost to infinity, your research was
>> selective in that you ignored documentation that exposed your
>> mythology, while selecting documentation that suited your purpose.
>>
>> Bye
>>
>>
> Robert,
>
> Then I'm sure you will have no trouble pointing out something written in
> the 1930s that is inconsistent with what I wrote about the founding of
> AA.

lol Thank you, no, for as I said above, I've done that here before, ...
plus, ... I've had elegant sufficiency of ancient history amongst the
faithful next door.

If you want to learn a little about *contemporary* AAspeak, check out the
tangles in this (relatively) short thread:-
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2nhw6c

--
Bob.

"I don't believe in evil, I believe in right and wrong, and very often
they are the same thing" ... Paul Theroux - "Milroy The Magician"