aa Spoken Here Community Group
Fellowship Where you can share your thoughts, feelings, stories and get support to gain and continue sobriety.
I was just reading an article about interpreting the bible and how important it is to consider the time and place the writing was done in order to put it into context.
I believe the same is true when reading the big book. We pretty quickly get used to the fact that the people who wrote the book were men and most alcoholics they were associated with were men and therefore the use of "he" is pretty universal. We dont assume now that the book doesnt have equal relevance for women. We understand the context of the writing and can easily widen the concepts to include"she" .
What about the fact that the book was written in the 1930's in White, Christian America. The men who wrote it were generally exposed to the cultural Christianity and specifically exposed to Christianity again when they sought out spiritual programs. Not suprising then that in writing about spirituality they wrote about the only thing they knew - a broadly christion concept including a deity called god. They couldnt write about anything else as they didnt know about anything else.
What if the synchronicity of events that lead to the writing of the big book and the establishment of the AA fellowship had occured somewhere else. Say Thailand - would it have been written from a buddhsit point of view? Say Pakistan - would it have used Allah instead of god to denote the deity?
The good news is that spiritual principles are pretty universal so the same message about a spiritual way of life would have been included wherever the book was written. But if we find ourselves being closed minded about concepts of higher power and belief in god maybe it is woth remembering the time, place and prevailing religion when the book was written.
I am an athiest and thus dont believe in god. I have frequently been told that whatever small loopholes the writers put in they meant GOD and nothing else as a higher power. So how come the steps have worked so far for me. I think it is because I can look at the book in context and then widen it out to cover many other forms of spirituality and belief.
Anyone agree or do you think that god means god and anything else is not true to the spirituality of the programme?
I believe the same is true when reading the big book. We pretty quickly get used to the fact that the people who wrote the book were men and most alcoholics they were associated with were men and therefore the use of "he" is pretty universal. We dont assume now that the book doesnt have equal relevance for women. We understand the context of the writing and can easily widen the concepts to include"she" .
What about the fact that the book was written in the 1930's in White, Christian America. The men who wrote it were generally exposed to the cultural Christianity and specifically exposed to Christianity again when they sought out spiritual programs. Not suprising then that in writing about spirituality they wrote about the only thing they knew - a broadly christion concept including a deity called god. They couldnt write about anything else as they didnt know about anything else.
What if the synchronicity of events that lead to the writing of the big book and the establishment of the AA fellowship had occured somewhere else. Say Thailand - would it have been written from a buddhsit point of view? Say Pakistan - would it have used Allah instead of god to denote the deity?
The good news is that spiritual principles are pretty universal so the same message about a spiritual way of life would have been included wherever the book was written. But if we find ourselves being closed minded about concepts of higher power and belief in god maybe it is woth remembering the time, place and prevailing religion when the book was written.
I am an athiest and thus dont believe in god. I have frequently been told that whatever small loopholes the writers put in they meant GOD and nothing else as a higher power. So how come the steps have worked so far for me. I think it is because I can look at the book in context and then widen it out to cover many other forms of spirituality and belief.
Anyone agree or do you think that god means god and anything else is not true to the spirituality of the programme?
"Anything that a man might say about God is incorrect, even calling Him by the name of God. God is "superessential nothingness" and "transcendent Being"..."beyond all words and beyond all understanding. The best a man can do is remain silent, because anytime he prates on about God, he is committing the sin of lying. The true master knows that if he had a God he could understand, He would never hold Him to be God."
- Meister Eckhart
I understand Wendy. All I am saying is that maybe those of us who have gotten past either of those barriers ought to be able to lay aside personal prejudices and put the 10th Tradition into action so that any alcoholic, regardless of religious belief or lack of can have the same shot at this deal as we did.
@1in20:
I had that Meister Eckhart in mind when I posted that.