Chapter 75

There is a point in time when parents and family must intervene in an addict’s life to interrupt the destructive behaviors and patterns of addiction, so I shall rather proceed at once to describe a brief arrangement of the categories to become consciously aware of. Almost all forms of addiction (drugs, alcohol, cigarettes) begin when kids are the most impressionable and vulnerable in the early teen years, which consequently ought to be looked upon as the best time to intervene. (In consideration of the abundance of knowledge against the abuse of drugs and alcohol, what grown adult would pick up and start using an addictive substance?) If you ask ANYONE in recovery when they started using, you will find that each one admits their first use around age 14 or 15 (sometimes even earlier). It is difficult for a parent to stage an intervention at such an early age, but it could save a lot of trouble later down the road. This however is an issue I wish to touch upon only in passing, for with causality and prevention, at present, I have nothing to offer. I prefer to focus more on the matter of expiation.

Many parents think if they ignore the problem it will go away, or maybe it’s just a stage that they’ll grow out of, or worst of all they may think “it can’t happen to my kid.” I can think of nothing more that opposes the absence of ignorance than this. The irony here is that the kid also thinks “it can’t happen to me.” ‘Denial’ is the single greatest ally of addiction through every progressive stage, and there are moments when boundaries seem to have no limitations. As an addict is descending deeper into hell, he eagerly notices people around him that are worse off than he is and then uses this as an excuse to keep using. The minute you hear an addict say “At least I haven’t done that yet,” or “At least I’m not as bad as that person,” then you know his fate is sealed. We call this way of thinking “minimizing,” which is actually extremely common among addicts and the families that enable them. An addict is completely blinded to his own condition and cannot heal when worrying about someone or something else, for it is well known that strong desire can easily deceive people. This way of thinking MUST be undone before a process of recovery can begin.

After treatment, the family wants to believe things are fixed and they may revert back to the same interactive behaviors that existed before treatment. This is a big mistake. Parents will start to overlook problem signs again, the addict will lie and manipulate again, and everyone will ignore their gut-feeling message (which is their conscience begging for notice). A strong cloud of delusion will envelop everyone as ‘denial’ once again rears its ugly head. The denial here is that everyone thinks after treatment that all is well, and they no longer look at behaviors as symptoms of an illness. If the addict begins to return to isolation, pulls away from the family, or starts to blame others for his life problems, you can be sure that relapse is on the way. But this time the grief is much more intense and unbearable because of the loss of hope that was built up during treatment. And this is especially true if the addict has been through many treatment attempts and failed; for this is when a sense of hopelessness overwhelms everyone involved. The addict will become frustrated, blame the programs, blame God, blame the devil, blame the families, blame the law, or blame everyone on earth –but himself and his self-inflicted disease. It would be quite erroneous to give up here though.

You must never forget that addiction is a disease that wants to kill; there is no cure, and it will only appear to decrease and gradually disappear. The ONLY thing an addict in recovery will ever have in the form of a ‘cure’ is a daily reprieve contingent upon the persistent maintenance of spiritual principles reinforced by regular support-group meetings. Here is a simple analogy that might help you understand: The life of an addict is like an escalator going down when the person needs to go up; if he stands still or walks backwards, he will reach bottom (again). There is no standing still in recovery; he must continually walk up the escalator even though he’ll never reach the top floor. No matter what though, as long as a person still has a pulse, there is hope. It is promising if an addict learns that his complex behaviors and attitudes are only a camouflage for the disease of addiction. All of these glaring character defects must be carefully unlearned over time with spiritual help.

Chapter 74

As previously discussed, the development of leadership skills plays an important role in a successful program of long-term recovery. To exercise influence, a leader must have power and authority, which is the potential or ability to influence decisions and control others in a positive and constructive way. I would like to examine the mechanics of acquiring power and temporarily suspend the idea of abusing it.

The lawful right to make a decision and expect compliance is called legitimate power. The authority to give followers rewards for compliance is referred to as reward power. Coercive power is the capability to punish for non-compliance; and it is based on fear. We usually find that coercive power is limited, in that punishment and fear achieve mixed results; and as a consequence they are unpredictable as motivators. Therefore, in one sense, no duty is left for it except for that of exposing ideologically the mere form of raw manipulation.

Information power stems from the formal control over information people need to accomplish what needs to be done, and it follows that this principle can have nothing else for its aim other than uniting the conditions of empirical cognition. Referent power is the ability to influence others through one’s desirable traits and characteristics, and this is commonly also attributed to those with a charismatic style of leadership; though it does not for that reason lose its legitimacy or certitude. Expert power is the ability to influence others through specialized knowledge, skills, or abilities; and this develops as a rather continuous transition from the former state into a new specialized practice of uniformity. Prestige power stems from one’s status and reputation, and this usually has a foundation in verifiable integrity.

These variances again may be divided as merely objects of perception, and may not posses immediate evidence other than through conceptual observation. On the same token, for the most part people tend to only give familiar customs the right to occupy space in their heads and thereby resist leadership and fear change. If you fear change, you might remain the same. Always remember, in order to be an effective leader you need to find ways to inspire people to change and grow and in so doing, you yourself will grow.

Chapter 73

I would like to consider the question of whether or not AA and NA promote quasi-theological positions, and whether or not I believe AA to be a benign cult (I have actually heard this bogus accusation before). I would first like to delicately point out the subtle but EXTREMELY important difference between “God, as you understand him” and “A god of your understanding.” One pathway of belief can lead a simple person to genuine faith in God, while the other pathway can clearly lead to blatant idolatry. How you react to this issue decides whether or not your own concept of God qualifies as “cultish.”

Ignorance is when we don’t know; denial is when we do know, but don’t want to know. A role children often play is to test the limits and boundaries of adults and the general rules of normal society. Similarly, addicts and alcoholics, like children, often test the limits of formal religious theology and even sometimes belligerently (or even accidentally) promote a brand of their own mystical spirituality. This is a seductive line of thought, but it seems to me mistaken. It is at this point we must be careful.

Here are a few questions to consider: Is it wrong to believe in a god who is like a genie-in-a-bottle that only has an interest in helping addicts resist their self-induced drug cravings, but desires nothing from us in return? Is there a god who wills for us nothing beyond the cessation of sticking our face in a fan? Is it wrong to believe that everything is about us? Is god made in our image to serve our purposes, or is it the other way around?

Kids will mirror what they see in their parents and in adult society. In AA, a newcomer mirrors the beliefs and behaviors of his sponsor or other people in the program. Does this encourage a higher standard of belief and conduct from regular attendees? Is there any excuse for someone who has been sober and working a spiritual program of recovery for several years to still have the same kindergarten level theology that he had when he first came in? Is correct theology really that intellectually inaccessible, or is it just difficult to live by and convenient to disregard? Can we discover the true nature and character of God as revealed to us in the Bible? Is the truth so unassailable that nobody can understand?

Now on the other side of the coin, it is painfully obvious that an addict or alcoholic cannot learn spirituality under the conditions normally present at many churches which include judgementalism, ostracism, isolation, or sometimes even outright banishment. I have noticed that AA picks up the slack where many churches lack, and that is in patient discipleship, gentle tolerance, warm inclusivity, and loving acceptance. Sometimes churches have a tendency to shoot their wounded, whereas AA has a tendency to hug and hold their wounded until they are well again. So all in all, though AA and NA meetings are a little kooky at times when discussing matters of spirituality, they are doing a fantastic job of carrying the message of hope and deliverance through faith in God. And for that reason, I am a very happy and proud member of both groups.

For the sake of casual simplicity, here are some “theological” thoughts I think are important in recovery… If you think of your life as driving a car, one idea to keep in mind is: You cannot drive a parked car. Faith requires action and movement. God is not interested in part-time obedience. God honors and rewards faith, obedience, and action. We find an important message in Hebrews 11:6 that says, “And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.” (NIV) Isn’t that great?

Chapter 72

Some cynics argue the only way belief can be established is by saying “seeing is believing.” Obviously this thinking is insufficient because there is a great deal in which we claim to know and yet have never seen. Many examples can prove that senses are deceptive, and it is wiser to not trust entirely any one thing by which we have once been deceived.

It may be well to confess that there is nothing in all that I formerly believed to be true, of which I cannot in some measure doubt occasionally from time to time for significant reasons which are credibly persuasive and quite compelling. Keeping that in mind, I would like to henceforth carefully refrain from granting too much weight to opinions other than those which are manifestly false if I wish to arrive at any new certainties. To live is to grow.

I do seek balance; but at present, I cannot yield too much to self-distrust without weakening my resolve. I would like to blend my former prejudices with my new opinions in some way without diverting my final and formal judgments away from the right knowledge of truth. No matter what though, I do recognize that my conceptions and understandings will always fall exceedingly short of the vast extent of spiritual reality, but I shall yet have cause enough to glorify God for that proportion and degree of knowledge that he has imparted on me, limited as it may be. God is great, I am small, I may not understand, but I love nonetheless.

Here is a little random brain candy: Is it possible to be doubtful and at the same time believe in something highly probable? What if there is a lot more reason to believe in something than deny it? Is it wrong to pretend to believe in something before you actually do? I will not offer answers to these arbitrary questions, but I ask my readers to ponder them.

Chapter 71

The man who finds no pleasure in a new theory of knowledge is one who fears his own word might not be law. Granted, philosophy is unable to tell us with certainty what the true answer to the intermittent doubts are it raises, but it is rather able to suggest many possibilities which enlarge our thoughts and free our minds. Philosophy is the eternal search for truth and contemplative knowledge (as far as it is possible for man to attain); a search which inevitably fails but yet is never defeated; which continually eludes us, but which always steers us. If we lessen our natural dogmatic assertion which closes the mind against intellectual speculation, certainly we can think more clearly.

If one derives satisfaction from helping others, does it make one selfish? Occasionally there is confusion between selfishness and self-interest. (In ethical philosophy academia, this is known as rational egoism, which basically states that it is only rational for a person to act if it increases self-interest.) It is interesting that our ordinary thinking about decency and morality is full of assumptions that we almost never question. In thinking about human conduct though, the first application of the understanding is commonly held in a passive relation to us, and it would be nice if there were some simple formula that would unite the diverse phenomena of human behavior under a single explanatory principle. But we find this not to be the case. To defend one position is not to defend the other. We may assume quite properly, if my analysis has been correct, that the virtue of beneficence (performing acts of kindness and charity) does, and indeed should occupy an important place in life and should always be encouraged even if selfishly motivated. At present, I am not interested in considering the question of action, but only of knowledge.

Here is a thought floating around inside my head: If one becomes aware of an unbridled falsehood circulating with happy and gleeful ignorance, should one say something to correct it? With so many problems surfacing, at times my mind is filled with so many inconsistent doubts that it is easy to forget my responsibility to refute foolishness and folly; yet still I do not see in what manner I can fully resolve every issue. There are limits to what can be accomplished by argument though, so I shall now proceed to consider a few ideas in the order in which they stand.

If we were reflecting on the disparity between good and evil, for example, evils do not cease to be evils regardless of the amount of rationalization used to purify it. And in that same tone, truth is truth; and this is true despite continued assertions by those who somehow remain seriously and wholeheartedly committed to the propagation of falsities. Tragedy, though truly tragic, may nonetheless be turned from a cause of despair into a state of fulfillment. The exercise of exposing falsehood is a not always a resultant measure of the psychological weakness of self-centeredness, and I notice that insupportable arguments are the ones most often advanced in favor of this view. This really is not a radically new doctrine, so let us consider an analogy of selfishness (the only use of examples is to sharpen the use of judgment): Suppose I have an urge to set fire to some public building (say, a big store) just for the fascination of watching the brilliant blaze. The fact that several people might be burned to death provides no reason whatever why I should not do it; after all, this only concerns the welfare of others, not my own. And according to the egocentric (or self-centered) person, the only person I need think of is me. Some might deny that the ethics of self-centered people has any such monstrous consequences, but does it? In the end, I can live a happy and secure life by acting kindly toward others and correcting wrongs. In so doing I would merely be doing my part to create and maintain the sort of society in which it is to my advantage to have. And this, we find, is living in self-interest, not selfishness.

Chapter 70

I have been asked to provide more insight into understanding the religion of atheism. You may ask why I call it a religion, and the simple answer lies within the actual definition of the word which is: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with passion and faith. As discussed in previous chapters, the question of origins requires faith; therefore, you are required to believe that either the universe created itself or God created it… it’s really that simple.

If you venture into sci-fi territory and talk about life being created elsewhere and sent to Earth via transplanted panspermia (which was a quack theory first mockingly and whimsically proposed by Francis Crick that states the “seeds of life” originated elsewhere and were sent to flourish on Earth like a zoo); or if you believe in the multi-verse theory (which states our universe originated as one among many that expands, contracts, and explodes every so often)… you are STILL left with the fundamental question that any 3 year old child recognizes which is: “Well, where did that come from?” As I have stated before, the only way to philosophically escape an endless regress of causes is to have an original, uncreated cause which we call GOD. The skeptical atheist is required to proclaim proof of the non-existence of God, and as such, stops nothing short of deliberately espousing a kind of intellectual pessimism. He is bereft of any dogmatic proof of course, just a wad of convoluted and pointless theories on how matter somehow self-creates and guides itself upward by some apparent mystical life-force (sounds like a kooky religion to me).

Some skeptics argue that they can statistically prove religious people are unintelligent, uneducated, hypocritical, deceitful, insincere, or phony; and of course because of this, they have yet another excuse to refuse belief in God. This red herring argument (which means it is a deliberate attempt to divert attention) is remarkably weak and ill-contrived, but let's take a look at it anyway.

Let us consider for a moment this simple analogy: If a father tells his son, “Do not eat the blue tablets that I placed on the counter, because if you do you will die.” ‘But why?’ asks the little boy, ‘it is not poisonous’. The father replies, “How do you know it is not poisonous?” ‘Because’, says the little boy, ‘when you smash them on the floor you don’t find blue monsters inside of them’. Clearly when this little boy thought of poison he thought of blue monsters that would kill him; and to that extent he was mistaken. But this does not mean that everything the little boy thought or said about poison was therefore nonsensical and false. The little boy knew perfectly well that poison was something that would kill you if you ate it, and he knew to some extent that some of the pills lying on the counter were harmful. If a visitor came into the house and the little boy warned him, “Don’t eat any blue pills you find around the house because my Dad says they will kill you,” the visitor would be quite foolish to ignore the warning based on the fact that ‘this little boy has an unintelligent, primitive idea of what poison is, he thinks it is blue monsters that will kill you, which my adult scientific knowledge has long since repudiated’.

The Bible verse that comes to mind is in Romans 3:4 which says, “…Let God be true, and every man a liar.” (NIV) Never allow another man's misunderstanding or misconception of Christianity keep you from personally examining the claims of Jesus Christ. You must make the choice for yourself and decide how you are going to respond to God, for in the end, you alone are responsible for how your life turns out. The great Apostle Paul said it best in Romans 1:18-20 which says, “The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities –his eternal power and divine nature –have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.” (NIV)

Chapter 69

The question may be argued, “Does God test me?” The answer is, of course, YES. The argument against this truth is so bad that it would not deserve to be taken seriously except for the fact that so many otherwise intelligent people have been duped by it. This is a common question often asked by new Christians though, and as such it deserves a gentle, loving answer. The first thing to notice is: There is a critical (and even subtle) distinction between being tested and being tempted; though they sometimes appear to us similar in nature, they are quite different. God does NOT tempt, but He DOES test. And for a more specific explanation, we’ll need to take a quick tour of all 66 books in the Bible in which we are told literally hundreds of times that we will be tested.

Temptations (or invitations) to commit evil are in their nature nearly infinite (from our point of view), and so in one sense there are many different ways of going wrong. But there is only one possible way of going right. It is easy to miss the mark but difficult to hit it. On such a subject, it may be unwise to pronounce dogmatically that the man who has no hint of correct philosophy goes through life imprisoned by the prejudices derived from common sense, from the habitual beliefs of his culture, or from the convictions which have grown up in his mind without cooperation or consent from his deliberate reason. To such a man, unfamiliar possibilities are usually contemptuously rejected anyway. But nonetheless here it is, a person’s religious beliefs are derived from either: 1. Something they read. 2. Something they heard. or 3. Something they made up. Though obviously sometimes there is a combination of all of the above. The best source of our beliefs should come from what we read in the Bible for ourselves… so that being said, let’s get started.

The first instance of testing that we find begins with Adam and Eve; their faithful, willing obedience was tested –and, they failed. The next instance is with Abraham and his son Isaac in Genesis 22:11 which says, “Some time later God tested Abraham.” (NIV) Another reminder of Abraham’s testing is found in Hebrews 11:17 where it says, “By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice.” (NIV) In Exodus 15:25, when talking about the wandering Israelites it says, “…There the Lord made a decree and a law for them, and there He tested them.” (NIV) In Deuteronomy 8:16 it says, “…to humble and to test you so that in the end it might go well with you.” (NIV) In Deuteronomy 13:3 it says, “…The Lord your God is testing you to find out whether you love Him with all your heart and with all your soul.” (NIV) In Judges 3:4 it says, “They were left to test the Israelites to see whether they would obey the Lord’s commands…” (NIV) In 2 Chronicles 32:31, when talking about Hezekiah it says, “…God left him to test him and to know everything that was in his heart.” (NIV) In Psalms 66:10 it says, “For You, O God, tested us; you refined us like silver.” (NIV) In Proverbs 17:3 it says, “…the Lord tests the heart.” (NIV) In Job 7:18 it says, “You examine us every morning and test us every moment.” (NIV) In Job 23:10 it says, “But He knows the way that I take; when He has tested me, I will come forth as gold.” (NIV) In Isaiah 48:10 it says, “…I have tested you in the furnace of affliction.” (NIV) In Jeremiah 11:20 it says, “But O Lord Almighty, you who judge righteously and test the heart and mind…” (NIV) In Ezekiel 21:13 it says, “…Testing will surely come.” (NIV) In Luke 8:13 it says, “…They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away.” (NIV) In 1 Thessalonians 2:4 it says, “…We are not trying to please men, but God, who tests our hearts.” (NIV) In James 1:3 it says “…because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance.” (NIV) In James 1:12 it says, “Blessed is the man who perseveres under trial, because when he has stood the test, he will receive the crown of life that God has promised to those who love Him.” (NIV)

Now here is the other side of the coin, God does NOT tempt us. In James 1:13 it says, “When tempted no one should say, God is tempting me. For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He tempt anyone; but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed.” (NIV) In Luke 22:46 it says, “…Get up and pray so that you will not fall into temptation.” (NIV) In Hebrews 2:18, when talking about the temptation of Jesus and His suffering it says, “Because He himself suffered when He was tempted, He is able to help those who are being tempted.” (NIV) In 1 Corinthians 10:13 it says, “No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; He will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, He will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it.” (NIV)

So this is what we find: Temptation comes from the devil, and he tempts us to kill, steal, and destroy. Testing comes from God, and He tests us so that our faith will mature, so that we can be purified, and so that our trust and dependence on Him will grow. God tests what is in our heart, to find out our true motives and agendas; he tests our character and integrity to see if we will lovingly obey him; and the results from our tests reflect what is in our hearts –both good and bad. Here is a simple analogy: At the end of the semester, a tempter will try to get you to give up, cheat, lie, and/or abandon all hope; whereas, a teacher will test you to see how you’re doing and help you sharpen your skills. If we use this analogy to understand God’s mercy, we should be appreciative that His testing of us is an open book test (so to speak)… our trusty little Bible has everything in it we need to know if we just know where to look. Here is another simple analogy to help us understand how God works with us: It is like a mother’s gentle, guiding hand over a child’s hand as she teaches him how to hold his crayon correctly and form the letters of the alphabet. The child will sometimes get impatient and scream and yell, squirm in the chair, then yank the crayon away and scribble all over the page (this is what addicts do), but thankfully God is rich in mercy and patience and slow to anger. In Exodus 34:6 we find this teaching from God, “…I am the Lord. The Lord is a God who shows mercy, who is kind, who doesn’t become angry quickly, who has great love and faithfulness…” (NCV)

In summary: God is a merciful, trustworthy, loving Creator that understands our different levels of faith in our work with Him, and He is able to carry us through temptations if we will only learn to trust in Him. God is the tester that checks if our faith is alive or dead, active or inactive; and the devil is the tempter that wants nothing more than to see our downfall so he can mock our faith and God. So, what are we to do? We should have faith, learn, grow, pray, act according to the way we know we should, and wait for God’s deliverance.

Chapter 68

If you really believe the consciousness of man is not an accidental product of nature, then you should feel a sense of awe and hold its importance in high regard. If you are prepared to genuinely believe that morality is not a mere illusion of rules passed down and borrowed from other minds; but rather that which is determinative and consequently able to point you to a Higher Power outside of yourself, then you are ready to make true, decisive intellectual progress. After all our tedious clearing out of the way competing theories against transcendent reality, if we are to avoid an outright metaphysical pestilence, we need to do a little more thinking. But for now, let’s move on…

I would like to now propose some new philosophical reflections which, as I have said from the outset that, from any strict theoretical point of view, may contain mysterious or unanswerable questions that face all of us. Have you ever chosen the weaker of two desires? Every new moment in life seems to bring necessities which must be satisfied at once. A want or a need causes a sensation and it is usually followed at once by a blundering effort to satisfy it. This, of course, then produces channels of habit which later on turns into a predisposition.

We are faced with a world in which we are occasionally forced to make judgments of regret. Hardly an hour passes in which we do not wish that something might have been otherwise, but does this necessarily imply that judgments of regret are bad? Calling a thing bad means that the thing ought not to be, and that something else ought to have been in its place. I see no escape whatever from the conclusion that some things, being what they were, could not have been any different in order to get us to the place where we are today.

In our world, no single point of view can ever take in the whole scene; and to a mind possessed with the love of simplicity and unity at any cost, this fact will no doubt remain forever unacceptable. Though the universe contains a principle of evil, without such a principle in it, good could not be appreciated for what it is. A certain amount of evil requires a condition by which a higher form of goodness is brought about.

It is of no small account when good snatches the victory from evil. This is what gives a palpitating reality to our moral life and makes it tingle with so strange and elaborate an excitement. It is breathtaking when we realize that our triumph is only possible when God works through us. And that, more than anything right now, makes me feel special.

Chapter 67

(here is a nice, simple chapter purposefully written in relaxed language to summarize my best philosophical viewpoints, most of which have already been shared throughout this book so far)

At this point, I would like stop, review, highlight, and summarize a few of my more important thoughts that I have shared throughout this book so far. If a particular piece of writing professes from the very outset to be a unique invasion into common thinking practices, do not be surprised if you are offended. Never settle for mental mediocrity when you can do something about it. If you have the disease of addiction, that does not excuse you from having to change your behavior but rather requires it.

If you get caught in the trap of being more interested in keeping up appearances rather than cleaning up your character, you will never get started in recovery. The ability to influence others carries with it a great responsibility; perhaps this is the basis for why most people try to avoid it. Who you are is who you become a magnet for, and every leader has a certain level of charisma and magnetism; that is what attracts people who want to be influenced. A leader who displays consistency of character, power, and purpose naturally draws people to him. If you take a quick look at your followers, this will reflect who you are as a leader.

Never for the sake of peace and quiet should you deny your own convictions or experience. We do not and should not all say the same things or think the same thoughts, and as such, we should also realize that no viewpoint is secure from misuse or abuse. The easy thing is to go along with everyone else, agree with everyone else’s prejudices and opinions, and just be “one in the crowd.” Never say “I don’t know who I am or where I’m going or what I should do, but at least I’m a member of a group.” You should not be so devoid of an identity that you try to lose yourself in the larger identity of a group and make excuses for why you can’t or won’t do or be more with your life. Never confuse lack of accomplishment or slothfulness with humility.

It’s easy to never amount to much and deceive yourself into believing that at least you’re doing as well as someone else; you should avoid this trap as it is called laziness. The power of your imagination can be the means by which resistance to this retrograde tendency is strengthened, and true validity can be pleasantly found in the logical unity of all your intelligent perceptions. If your imagination is not forced to flow into disciplined channels - which are avenues defined by clear and correct vision, then its uses are degraded into worthlessness. Never get lost only in the language of what might be, what could be, or what you ideal to be. Though an ideal is a perfect example, you will never achieve it; but don’t let that stop you from trying and asking for God's help.

Since time is the only thing none of us can ever afford to waste, we should take the time to plan our time so we don’t misuse our time. During those few moments in life when you reach unusual peaks of human aspiration and genius, you need to take action. And best of all, do not fear or oppose Christianity. It is true, reasonable, philosophically valid, perfectly logical, intelligent, and vastly superior to anything else. If you seek God, He can be found… He is one simple prayer away.

Chapter 66

Anytime you discuss the matter of origins you are forced to make a philosophical assumption of faith. You must decide for yourself what is more rational and logical: naturalism or theism. The truth or error of the judgments within both viewpoints requires faith, and the way in which you relate yourself to the implications of either perspective will ultimately determine your course in life.

Let us discuss some of the philosophical inferences that evolutionists make with regard to the upward progression of life from a pre-biotic soup. When discussing the whole issue of homology (or commonality of form), it is difficult to avoid circular reasoning; and as such, evidence (or lack thereof) forces the observer to make inferences. If we believe the act of inference is the genuine insight it claims to be, it follows that we must consequently use a fair and reasonable faculty of judgment in order to define more particular our purposes prior to the investigation. What I mean is simply this: If you decide in advance that macro-evolution is true, then any appraisal of evidence you investigate will be worked and massaged into that theory.

The idea that mutations are the driving forces of evolution encounters one fatal difficulty: There is no evidence to support it. Almost all mutations are deleterious (meaning they do the living organism absolutely no good). A simple illustration: If you start introducing copying errors and changes in a book of beautiful poetry, you do not eventually end up with a DVD on geography that is dependent on the independent variable of a DVD player needed to display to you its contents (not to mention the obvious fact that you certainly would get no inference by way of evidence on what was driving the change in the first place, if anything). No one can explain why living systems don’t experience catastrophic destruction under random mutations when all common sense (and scientific) evidence says otherwise.

The fossil record is simply mystifying; it does not sustain any kind of Darwinian prediction that can be intelligently derived by a proper use of inferential balance. I’m not just talking about the Cambrian Explosion; I’m talking about everything we see (The Cambrian Explosion refers to the geologic age in the fossil record where all complex living systems suddenly appear). We have never been able to mathematically or theoretically examine the central claims of natural selection by way of genetic algorithms. In other words, the mathematical cumulative improbability of even the slightest peptides bonding to form polypeptides changing upward to amino acids (amino acids are the building blocks of protein, which is the building blocks of life) is so staggering, that one would dismiss the claims of self-organizing, creative-evolution on the simple grounds of this alone.

Let us look at a few cultural influences that are used by atheists to protect and guard their faith. Richard Dawkins, who is somehow accepted as a great intellect, wrote a philosophical book on the use of Darwinism to support “intelligent” atheism called “The God Delusion.” The book is a complete bore, simply written, easily refutable, tells us nothing, and leaves you empty with unrequited questions. Bill Maher, who is also bizarrely accepted as an intellectual, made a movie called “Religulous.” The movie is a highly edited, endless succession of interviews with uneducated, unsophisticated, simple-minded people who have no idea how to defend their faith –all in a desperate and pseudo-comical effort to somehow leave the viewer with the impression that religious people are dumb. You may ask, why all the talk of these men? The simple answer: They are a couple of wind-bags who aggressively attempt to recruit others into their flawed way of thinking and are also well known as the predominant, self-appointed, sovereign priests of the powerful orthodoxy popularly known as the religion of atheism.

When the world changed in 1859 with the publication of Darwin’s famous “On the Origin of Species,” no one could have predicted the level of unholy zealousness in which people would attach themselves to its propagation. But let us look now at Darwinism for what it truly is: A kind of amusing collection of 19th century anecdotes that is unlike anything we see in the natural world or in the serious sciences (like physics) or in the fossil record. Yes, many biologists do collectively agree that this is the basis for the origin of life, BUT here are some points you should consider as well: The theory doesn’t have any philosophically valid substance to it; it’s not supported by the fossil evidence; it’s mathematically preposterous; and the fact that biologists uniformly agree on it could as well be explained by an obstinate Marxist interpretation of their economic interests. There is a tremendous amount of pressure on scholars to conform to prevailing views in an effort to sustain their research funding, but when one rogue philosopher is free to think and say and write as he pleases…

I will discuss in more specific detail my views on why Darwinism is wrong (as a creation myth) soon, so stay tuned (this is just the beginning). You may ask, why all the talk of evolution? The simple answer: Since I believe the best way to recover from life-controlling problems is through faith in God, we need a leveled playing field where faith can once again be logically and intelligently considered; therefore, this is necessary in order to undermine and reject the foundations of atheism and agnosticism in our present day and age. You need solid ground to stand on; therefore, you must fully understand and realize that faith in God is right, healthy, proper, intelligent, and good. Anything less is utter foolishness.

Chapter 65

Among the many difficulties that unbelievers and skeptics have about Christianity is the fact that (seemingly) childish imagery is used to describe spiritual facts. Without realizing that the application of rules governing decipherable literature must apply here, he may unknowingly blunder into thinking that imagery contributes nothing to the explanation of what is truly inexplicable. A skeptic is easily disgruntled and even disgusted when religious people speak of heaven in the sky, hell underground, devils with horns, golden streets, and a royal throne where the Son of God sits just to the right of His father. To some extent, this imagery seems like foolishness to the untrained man; but anyone who stops right there and quits is only playing with Christianity and allowing a child’s version of our religion to keep him from adult knowledge.

Because the impatient skeptic naturally approaches any talk of Christianity with the decision in advance that he intends to refute whatever we say, he sets his own pseudo-intellectual trap. He will seldom adequately fulfill the conditions of rules that govern valid reasoning and think that his dry and tedious analysis of our imagery protects him from having to decide if the claims of Christianity are either true or false. He thinks he can dismiss it all and mock everything we believe as some sort of measly figurative synthesis of imagination. But make no mistake, God is not mocked.

The modern skeptic is quick to dismiss the creation account in Genesis as mythology, yet seeks to supplant it with a form of Neo-Darwinist, self-existent, self-creative “Mother-Nature” whose ultimate purposes revolve around random mutation and natural selection being the driving forces of the development of higher, complex life (more on this later). The point he misses here is that evolution is itself, by definition, a creation myth. To illustrate with a simple analogy: We don’t need religion to tell us that there are flaws in a complicated narrative about how pool balls on a table moving around in obedience to the laws of motion, gravity, and friction can also explain where the pool table came from in the first place or who is using the pool stick to put the balls in motion. Mere common sense accompanied with valid reasoning will tell you that you cannot use descriptive rules of observable nature to explain the origin of the entire natural world itself, regardless of how intricate or complicated the theories or arguments may be. Whatever its value may be as an argument, it may be stated at once that this view of a “mother-nature” is quite wrong about facts.

That being said, it should at once seem obvious that a certain degree of mental and literary imagery (including metaphors) are perfectly valid things humans have to use at their disposal to explain that which is beyond our conceptions. For, even the skeptic who wants to believe in a non-Christian, indistinct “spiritual force” has not yet noticed that the use of the word “force” has itself opened the door to all sorts of images about winds, electrical forces, and so on. Anytime we humans try to form some kind of conception of that which is real, we will attach some form of imagery by default, which is just our nature. No matter how hard you try to avoid this, here it is: God is unavoidable. God requires you to make a choice. You are either with Him or against Him, and no middle ground is allowed.

Chapter 64

If you believe the totality of nature can only exist on causes beyond itself, you have made your first step toward the correct view of theism (which means belief in the existence of God). There is, of course, no question that religious people always claim the whole of creation is for man while science continues to discover that it is not. No one with any degree of respectable intelligence though would suggest that man, or even the entire universe was sufficient to fill the mind of God completely. If we as people are small compared to space and time then surely space and time is a much smaller thing in comparison to God who actually created it. God is beyond all things, both big and small. He is the original cause, the great self-existent I AM.

It is a philosophical mistake and an error in the proper use of correct judgment to assume Christianity ever proposed that all of creation was made for man. The universe was made partly for reasons we do not know, but we are a part of it, that we do know. There may be countless bodies floating in space much like (or unlike) our Earth that harbor life. There may be endless variations of life that exist elsewhere of which we can form no good conception. These other forms of life may or may not have needed redemption like the human race did, we just do not know. The universe may have many things in it that are quite dissimilar in nature from life as we know it in which God is interested though we are not.

The critical point here is this: We must never falsely assume size is in any way related to our importance in the eyes of God. We should not allow the fact that we ARE small to make us FEEL small or somehow insignificant. God is incomparably enormous and immeasurably superior and beyond anything our finite, little minds can possibly imagine, but always remember: He created us. He loves us. That makes YOU special on a cosmic scale. You DO matter in the eyes of God, and He is intensely interested in a personal love relationship with you.

Chapter 63

A very contemporary, false philosophical viewpoint propagated by the trendy, self-appointed intelligentsia in our society is that the more we discover the vastness of the universe and our small, seeming insignificance in proportion –this somehow strengthens and reinforces the idea that our entire existence is purely a naturalistic byproduct of mere chance. This philosophical viewpoint actually predates Darwinism, and seems to continue enjoyment in the limelight as the best argument against religious doctrine to date. (I will formally refute Darwinism in much greater detail later on in this book, as this should help any of my readers who falsely suppose belief in the creative forces of evolution enables a sophisticated brand of atheism)

Christian philosophers, poets, preachers, writers, and moralists have spoken about the wonder, awe, and vastness of the universe and our comparatively tiny spatial insignificance for thousands of years without even the slightest inclination that the facts about our smallness in any way conflicted with their theology. Why should we now eagerly seek to discard Christianity on the grounds that the universe is big and we are small? What is the source of this proliferation of aggressive ignorance?

If from the hugeness of the universe and the smallness of Earth we thus deduce and imagine Christianity is therefore false, in all fairness, we should then have some good idea of what the universe would look like if it were true. Any increase in our knowledge of nature or the universe can never alter the credibility of the philosophical doctrines that relate to Christianity one way or the other. We should never confuse ourselves that some kind of advance in science makes it harder to accept religious beliefs. The Christian faith has always presented itself as something outside of nature and as such, unscientific.

All possible knowledge depends on the validity and soundness of good reasoning, to some extent. You can make intellectual progress and grow if you remove or suppress the purely negative, emotionally restrictive sensations bellowing up inside you upon realization that you have harbored philosophical errors in judgment of this magnitude. At some point, you must seriously ponder whether your instinctive repugnance to such a confrontation with truthfulness is really rational, or whether it is merely emotional. I strongly suggest you place more emotional emphasis on the rational logic of faith, which is reasonably sound and intellectually superior to atheism on every conceivable level. Stretch yourself to grow beyond your present sphere of understanding.

Chapter 62

Great advances in the realm of psychology and countless research studies in neurobiology have officially overthrown the traditional perception that the ONLY problems addicts suffer from are that they are weak, bad, morally bankrupt people who are unwilling to control their behavior or lives. If this expression is to be accurately understood, while the aforementioned portrayal is obviously true to some extent, there is something going on with an addict well beyond his reasonable ability to control his behavior as it relates to obsessing, craving, and actively using drugs. I am a recovering addict myself and have every right to speak on issues relating to this –because I have first-hand experience. I know what it is like to be truly moral; I know what it is like to be deplorably immoral; and I also know what it is like to have raging compulsions beyond any human control.

Let us quickly examine the typical life-cycle of an addict. A person starts off with some sort of pain; it can be emotional, physical, and/or social. This person, by most societal standards is basically good, but finds his pain difficult to deal with. Since this person has an inner conflict or discomfort he does not know how to resolve (this could be difficulty fitting-in, anxiety, abuse, peer pressure…), he looks for a solution to the problem.

This is where the moral dilemma presents itself: Most people have troubles and struggles with life at some point, but the difference here is this person chooses drugs as his solution for one reason or another. The drugs appear to solve the problem and so a high value is mentally associated with its use. But this person believes a lie. Depending on the types of drugs used, full-blown addiction sets in very quickly, and he loses his power to choose. Casual, recreational drug use quickly turns into an uncontrollable obsession that traps the person in an endless cycle of craving, using, withdrawing, abstaining, and relapsing. The obsession is so powerful that all else in life means nothing, and the addict is even perfectly willing, at times, to die for his drug. Once the newly minted drug addict crosses the threshold of experiencing cravings, he’s in for the ride of his life.

The drugs heavily train the “pleasure sensors” of the brain, and simultaneously cause an absolute horror of the pain of physical withdrawal. He then seeks to reward himself with the pleasure that the drugs provide, accidentally increases his physical tolerance level, and will do anything to keep using. Now he experiences a downward spiral in his life; the drugs of abuse have permanently changed him both mentally and physically. There is a massive change in his original personality in that he will now start to harbor secret hatreds and hostilities and look for other people to blame for his condition. And all of this started with one simple immoral, bad decision: To believe the lie that drugs are the cure-all. The medicine that cures becomes the poison that kills.

As I have stated at the beginning of this book, the core of all addiction starts with a problem of belief; and consequently it can be treated by correcting false beliefs over time. Drug addiction, then, results from the immorality of excessive or continued use of habit-forming drugs in an attempt to resolve the original underlying symptoms of discomfort or unhappiness. That is why I believe it is helpful to have a full understanding of the psychological components that relate to addiction with the accompanying pursuit of spirituality. First things first though, if you are an advanced alcoholic or drug addict, you MUST go to a rehabilitation facility for an extended period of time to give yourself a chance at life, and that is as simple as I know how to make it. Remember that when you discover truth, even when it is placed before your eyes in its purest nature, you are not to expect from it any assistance other than that of a lighthouse or guidepost.

Chapter 61

There are two common views of addicts: one is the “bad person” view and the other is the “chronic illness sufferer” view. I believe a simple resolution to the contradistinction is this: It is clearly a combination of both. No matter how you view the problem though, these fundamental truths remain: There is no cure for addiction; a lifelong fight against the compulsions is required; the fight gets easier with time.

If we are to possess knowledge, any progress we may experience in the advance of truth discovery does not raise us above the need for occasional reproof and correction. It is true though that our correct judgments, with respect to their proper context, must not contradict themselves. The pursuit of greater knowledge or understanding can initially reach its aim with perfect ease as merely a logical proposition to separate the content from the context to discover if there are deeper interrelationships. There are, of course, many issues that do not fall within the scope of my present inquiry, but this by no means hinders me from uncovering a systematic method of truth discovery which must always be recognizable by means of obedience to the principles of non-contradiction.

On such a difficult subject as understanding the disease concept of addiction, a task with which general logic will have nothing to do, I must go beyond the given conceptions thus without being contradictory. For inasmuch as the conception of cause, in and of itself, must have a basis outside that of being a reproduction of distinctive, misguided imagination. Indicating the general conditions for rules or the case to which the rules must be applied is formal and entirely without content here. Our duty at present is to render as conceivable whether or not the principles that govern the conditions are sufficient as a criterion for truth.

Upon further discovery, I seek to make a positive use of these principles; for it is quite possible to possess truth in accordance with a synthesis of multiple conceptions. Such knowledge would, as such, never amount to anything and would be completely without validity apart from a simple treatment approach. One way to successfully treat an addict for his self-inflicted disease is through compelling moral rehabilitation over a long period of time.

Chapter 60

One goal of therapy is to find out what caused the problem in the first place. Psychotherapies are known as the talking therapies, and are based upon the notion that inappropriate thinking, either at the conscious or unconscious level, is the cause of the problem. Behavior therapies (including classical and operant conditioning) focus on the notions of inappropriate learning; that somewhere in our lives we learned inappropriate responses to stimuli.

In classical conditioning, the use of a process of systematic desensitization is the technique where you can learn to experience the previously anxiety provoking stimulus or situation while in a relaxed state, so your fear can be slowly minimized. This process is the behavioral modification technique of pairing a naturally occurring stimulus and response chain with a different stimulus in order to produce a response which is not naturally occurring (also known as Pavlovian or respondent conditioning). I believe therapeutic techniques of counter-conditioning can, for example, be used to assist an addict who must face his “old playground,” and not be triggered or emotionally disturbed to such a degree that his sobriety is threatened.

Behavior therapies based on operant conditioning (another behavior modification technique) basically work on the premise that you have a response which is followed by a reinforcement that increases the likelihood of a repeat of the behavior. Another therapeutic technique that I find interesting is a form of reductionist thinking, which is basically trying to get to the lowest level of what motivates us. This can be a helpful exercise for anyone struggling with a wide assortment of disturbing issues.

You may ask: Why all the discussion of psychology and its various behavior modification techniques? My answer is: Why not? There is no knowledge that we should fearfully regard as off limits. I consider any exploration into deeper knowledge as potentially advantageous, not to mention, it’s quite interesting. And often, addicts and alcoholics have many psychological problems outside their addiction issues (such as anxiety, stress, bewilderment, depression, despair, a sense of gloom…). There is a fundamental point in all of psychology though, and it is this: Any change that happens in your life must come from you and your own efforts. Although a psychologist or therapist can direct you toward truth and understanding, no one can do the work for you.

Psychology, in one sense, is not about getting rid of symptoms, or about waging war, or getting control of anything. Instead, it is about making peace with, by listening to and understanding, your symptoms. And curiously enough, once you listen to, rather than fear your symptoms, you might be inculcated with a sense of wisdom that could become a great blessing to your life. The light of truth, or depth of insight, however, is not necessarily sufficient in and of itself to bring about permanent behavioral change.

For initial psychological change to occur, you must react to insight with shock and alarm. Your unrepentant, blind heart must feel sorrow; sorrow for all the injury and pain that it has inflicted on others while trapped in its own blindness. You will no longer be able to blame others for the degree of your own misery. Instead, you can see the ugliness and evil of your own behavior for what it is. Shocked by the past, you can be motivated to change the present. And so it can be fairly deduced that one qualifying condition required to initiate lasting psychological change is: Sorrow.

Chapter 59

Your faculty of judgment has not been sufficiently exercised if you think you must give up all pretentions to knowledge without understanding that this distinguishing feature in our human nature is undoubtedly of great utility. I have noticed that in recovery, opposition to the value of our knowledge seems to circulate with almost universal indulgence, and any challenge to this seems to be on the order of blasphemy and absurdity. Continual, insufficient use of correct judgment is properly that which is commonly called stupidity, and for such a failing, I know of no remedy with dignity that is not utterly wonting. Here again, we find philosophy is called upon to apply all of its intensity and penetration as an element of necessity.

If we are making progress we will be able, with very little trouble, to use knowledge to lead us to truth, both good and bad. It is a requirement that we understand the difference between good and bad –without attaching irrational or imaginary constraints to the validity of this recognition, as this is a quick measure of our mental health capacities. Truth is either good or bad, there is little gray area; and the way in which we adjust ourselves to its implications is of extreme importance.

I will concede that truth sometimes presents itself to us in ways that allows us to turn around our thinking without any necessity of understanding the connections between cause and effect. But this does not rule out the value of understanding how cause and effect works. If we sought to free ourselves from the consequences of cause and effect without extracting the function of cause, a pure form of sensibility might appear to us. We might find that the truth behind the cause that led to the effect could teach us a valuable lesson.

When facing truth, if we do not wish to return to the state of utter ignorance from which we started, we must not afterwards complain of the obscurity or the obstacles in our path along the way to discovering it. My personal rule of thumb is this: Always endeavor to enlarge your sphere of understanding by using governing determinant rules that demand proof from either experience or from reason without betraying to a lamentable degree the effort that this exercise requires. And do not confuse difficulty with complication.

Chapter 58

When dealing with the philosophical foundations of the psychology of addiction (which is a hobby of mine as a layman), it is important to set forth what my viewpoint of philosophy is: It is merely a reflective re-evaluation of our thoughts, impressions, theories, procedures, and concepts which raises issues that cannot be settled by arbitrary fiat or by appeal to authority. That being said, I would now like to examine a few other philosophical issues that relate to the psychology of addiction.

In psychology, cognitive behavioral therapy focuses on the notion that it is inappropriate thought that is the cause of all problems. Sometimes it is not our environment that is causing us the trouble, but rather it is the way we look at our environment and how we react to it that matters. This is a key initiative for us in recovery. Can you identify which ideas in your head qualify as false beliefs in the areas of how you react to environmental stimuli? (It is important to point out here that defective thinking is only one of the many problems an addict has, and this is not the primary motivator in the sustenance of addictive use –that would be an area governed by the disease of addiction which is very real, though self-imposed, and deadly if left untreated.)

A cognitive behavioral therapist would tell you: If you have irrational or inappropriate thoughts, you want to turn it around and think in a different way. The therapist acts more in a directive way, and will help you change your thoughts by telling you what to think and do on the conscious level. Since you do have the ability to control your own thoughts to some degree, you just need directions on how to manage yourself. You can make progress by noticing your bodily reactions to anxiety and nervousness, for example, by focusing dependence on the independent variable of what you can do differently this time instead of robotically reacting on autopilot. Since we all know the definition of insanity (doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result), perhaps we can and should try something new.

People respond to incentives, although not necessarily in ways that are predictable or obvious; and consequently, the most powerful anticipatory reality in that corner of the universe is the law of unintended consequences. A good quasi-therapeutic technique to assist someone with directive questions that are designed to lead them toward the answers they need is this: Use motivators, incentives, influences, and invigorating reassurances. As I have stated before, people need to see change as a way of gaining advantage. In other words, help people to focus not on what they are giving up, but on what they are gaining. I will explain a little more on the topic of unintended consequences in a later chapter, so stay tuned.

Chapter 57

Pride is the one sin that, the more we have of it, the more we hate to see it in other people. The degree in which we react with self-righteous indignation toward someone exhibiting pride is a measure of our own. As discussed in the previous chapters, there are two primary categories of pride we should concern ourselves with in recovery: the narcissistic, arrogant type and the “false pride” type. We know what arrogance looks like and we all hate it, but what does “false pride” look like?

I believe there are two different types of false pride. One is where you try to gain respect, adoration, and recognition from others through intentional, fake appearances (in other words, you lie about your accomplishments to gain unearned respect). An example of this would be a man who has superficial self-confidence and pretends to be more than he is (I could go into great detail here to explain the hidden psychological motivators that might fuel this, but we'll get into that later). The other type of false pride is also known as "false humility," which is simply giving off the appearance of humbleness when secretly harboring prideful intentions and feelings. An example in the exposition of this type would be: Someone who, rather than just graciously accepting a nice compliment, would unnecessarily downplay themselves in an effort to fish for more flattery to inflate their ego.

A truly humble person with an accurate, confident self-image that is based on their identity in Christ would simply reply to a compliment with a nice “thank you.” This would reflect a proper self assessment of who they were, rather than focus too much on what they’ve done. This is extremely difficult to do, but we all must appeal to this higher standard of ourselves with the help of God. In summary: Pride is damaging to both ourselves and others, whether it be true or false. Humility is accurate self-knowledge; the good with the bad; being comfortable with who you are and not pretending to be what you are not; it is honest. When all is said and done, I would rather be fool in the eyes of man than a fool in the eyes of God.

Here is a quick little checklist to keep in mind about us: self-image = the picture of your soul, self-esteem = maintaining self-image, self-confidence = practicing self esteem, pride = overinflated self-confidence, ego = arrogant self-confidence, vanity = exhibiting pride and ego. Do you see the connections?

It is difficult to keep our confidence in check with humility. A simple picture of the right kind of confidence would be having an accurate self-image not too high, not too low, but just right. All of us who are members of the human race are at any moment in danger of allowing pride to creep into our psyche, it can be very subtle. The danger in overlooking pride in ourselves is that it strains our relationships and reduces our ability to influence others in a positive way.

Chapter 56

(chapters 55, 56, and 57 are all my best attempts to summarize some teachings that I learned by researching the subject matter of pride in a book and a few articles that I read... I have avoided putting my normal philosophical spin on things, and I hope my readers enjoy it)

In the previous chapter we examined pride and its adjuncts. Now let us consider another kind of pride that is often overlooked; and that is self-pity. When a man is being prideful he is focused too much on self, which is exactly what is happening with anyone self-absorbed in a sense of failure. People who seemingly espouse endless variations of self-pity (or sometimes called “false pride”) think they might conceal their motives of wishing they could be recognized or considered more important than others.

The prideful and overly self-focused person is one who complains or whines about the fact they are not getting what they deserve, or that they are not elevated and esteemed as they think they should be. When they find these desires unfulfilled, they become even more inwardly attentive and continue the vicious cycle. Basically it all boils down to this: Proud people believe life is all about them –their happiness, their accomplishments, and their worth. But what about God?

Do you see the inherent problems with being unthankful to God for what good gifts and talents He has given you? Do you see a problem with focusing too much on what you don’t have as opposed to what you do have? Do you see a problem with being angry at God for what you perceive as unfairness? Thinking on matters such as this poses great difficulty for most of us (especially me), but it is helpful to our growth to try and change into who God wants us to be. And that is loving, selfless, thankful people who seek to give God all the glory and seek none for ourselves.

Chapter 55

Humility is the opposite of pride. You cannot have humility where pride exists, and subsequently it is one of the most hated sins in the sight of God. We find a message in Proverbs 16:5 which says “Everyone who is proud in heart is an abomination to the Lord; assuredly he will not be unpunished.” (NASB) We also find another passage in Proverbs 26:12 which says “Do you see a man wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.” (NASB)

The question to ask yourself is not, “Do I have pride?” but, rather, “Where is my pride?” and “How much of it do I have?” and “What can I do to resist my pride?” At the center of our sinful nature is the inclination to think too highly of ourselves at the expense of loving others. The great preacher Charles Swindoll once said, “The world’s smallest package is a man wrapped up in himself.” Since it is obvious we are to avoid pride, let us consider a brief explanation of what it is.

There are six different Hebrew words used for pride, and all of them convey the following: lifting up, highness, magnification, rebelliousness, or presumptuousness of self. In Greek, the words for pride occur in two categories, one of which is “straining or stretching one’s neck” (as if to hold one’s head up high because of what he has accomplished or made) or “to magnify, or be haughty.” The other category in Greek conveys “blindness,” or the concept of being “enveloped in smoke.” Basically all throughout the Scriptures in both the Hebrew and Greek languages, we find that prideful people are portrayed as simply having too high a view of themselves. We learn that while we can be self-important and high up in the clouds in our own thinking, we are actually blind.

Here is the plain truth: In our sinful nature, we are blinded to our pride, blinded to God’s truth, and consequently blinded to reality. Pride is often indiscreet and very subtle, and is easily undiscerned by most people. It is more commonly cherished than spoken against, and it can take many clever forms. The various words in the Bible used to describe the character attributes of pride are the following: vainglory, boasting, conceit, loftiness, arrogance, haughtiness, presumption, being puffed up, high mindedness, scoffing, and self-seeking.

In the Bible, we never find the message “you’re thinking too lowly of yourself,” or “you should consider yourself more important than others.” In fact, quite the opposite is true. The fascinating insight about God’s plan for humanity is this: We are given many Biblical illustrations of how pride appears, and Scripture tells us to stop focusing on ourselves and what we want –and if we do, God will meet our needs. This requires walking by faith, not by sight. And since this very thing goes against our nature, we discover it as one more piece of evidence of God’s design.

Chapter 54

In AA meetings, you will occasionally encounter self-appointed “AA Police” who, in a seeming desperate desire to inflate their own self-importance in ludicrous and preposterous excess of its natural function, will try to regulate discussion topics, attitudes of attendees, types of words used, use of spiritual terms, nonuse of spiritual terms, and promote endless discussions of pure AA history ad-nauseam. Unfortunately, these types somehow think airing their own lengthy opinions is in some way helping others achieve sobriety; when in actuality, it is isolating certain addicts, pushing them away, and making them feel unwelcome. When you go to an AA meeting with a troubled heard, if you don’t share, you’re not there. Everyone should feel free to briefly discuss whatever is on their mind; with of course, a primary focus on what can be done to resist their alcoholic tendencies and obsessions.

It is important to remember this: Never promote the program ahead of the person. If anyone has a problem with the way in which people share their experience, strength, hope, and troubles, it is sometimes best to remain silent and resist prideful, intimidating remarks that could discourage them from sharing openly what is on their heart. You never know when someone is teetering on the edge of disaster, and maybe if they just come in the room and spill what is on their mind without fear of censorship, they might feel a little better and make it through another day clean and sober.

In many cases it is better to listen to another alcoholic or addict rather than listen to yourself speak to them. This is called working a program of selflessness, which is a reversal of our natural inclinations. And as usual, we come up against something which is simple but not easy. Everyone has a tendency to be right in their own eyes; and even if you ARE right, it takes more strength to listen to someone else with love, gentleness, kindness, meekness, and care.

Chapter 53

(I would like to take a break from writing philosophy, as it is extremely difficult and time consuming to think out. Here is a nice chapter written in very relaxed language to express some important views in theology)

According to the great theologians, the cardinal (which is a theological term meaning “important” or “key”) virtues for everyone are prudence (using practical common sense to think out what you are doing), temperance (going the right length with your pleasures), justice (fairness to others), and fortitude (strength of mind that enables you to endure pain or encounter danger). If we seek to grow spiritually, we must pursue these virtues and ask for God’s help.

Your biological life was derived from your parents, and so in a sense, you are only maintaining a life that was given to you. If you do not feed your body, or in some way neglect its upkeep, it will wither away. In the same way, your spirit life was given to you by God, and so you are only maintaining a spirit life that was freely given to you. If you do not manage your spirit life, it will also wither away and become unproductive and barren. When it comes to living a life in loving obedience to moral principles (or virtues), everyone needs to be reminded far more often than they need to be instructed. At base, most of us know what we should do; we just have difficulty doing it.

If we know there is a moral government over men, it follows there must be a Moral Ruler to administer that government, and of course that ruler is God. Moral laws are given to regulate the conduct of men in their relations both to God and to one other. And coming from so high a source (nothing is higher than God), we may feel confident they would be in perfect harmony with the eternal principles of right, that have their basis in the nature of God, and their expression in the revelation of His will, and their authority in His absolute sovereignty. From all this, we may know that morality is clothed with the infinite authority that belongs to the Sovereign Ruler of the universe.

Chapter 52

Formal deductive reasoning is analytic by nature. Though complex, it contains no new information, it simply rearranges what we already know; which is to say the conclusions implicitly follow necessarily from the premises. In some instances a simple analysis is not objectively valid and for that reason it cannot imitate superior logic. Thus we find ourselves involved in a difficulty which did not originally present itself within our normally recognized sphere of validity.

We are not barred from appealing to ultimate truth. It remains doubtful whether my project of thought has in every respect gone beyond the former conditions of normal sensibilities that correspond to the collective unity of thought shared by most people. I recognize that we do of course make use of a great number of empirical impressions without any use of deduction, with actions simply being a dissent from experience.

I find an extended range of practical application with the functions and orders of those mental powers which help differentiate the question of right from the question of fact, which is directly contemporaneous with the certainty we associate with formal logic. It is to me then, understanding, judgment, and reasoning that is entirely consistent without being derived from experience. If we are in possession of disagreeing conceptions that are not objectively valid and thus do not belong to the logic of truth, this should be of such a nature as a simple phenomena that would be without significance or be rejected as only a change in quantity, not in quality.

Chapter 51

If you want to develop sustainable movement in your life, you are obligated to apply an arduous determination of the mind. This movement must be perceptually specified without resistive hostility to foreign impressions that might enable you to hope for greater success. You should, however, carefully and inexorably apply yourself solely to the pursuit of truth that cannot easily exchange its proper function from the laws of correct thinking that govern it.

I have learned that if you are too easily seduced into confessing your own ignorance before going through a true exercise of a methodical elucidation, you may sell yourself short and unknowingly enter a mock contest in which no victor is ever crowned with permanent possession. If you combine the elements of all your knowledge without yielding to spontaneity in the production of conceptions, you can enjoy nothing but the purest form of thought.

Chapter 50

Albert Einstein (perhaps the smartest man who ever lived aside from Isaac Newton) once said, “Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.” Of course I agree with Einstein and would even like to go a step further to suggest if you blend imagination with knowledge, you get art. Modern art can take many clever forms and is rarely appreciated, especially if it is complex or abstract. There are, of course, a great many reasons for this –not the least of which is that most people are simply not willing to invest any effort to understand the artist or his motives and purposes.

In one sense, as a reader of my writings, you are viewing my personal artwork in the form of words, which upon closer examination, can be clearly seen as a formulation of my ideas and theoretical viewpoints. At no point have I made any suggestion that my views were necessary accoutrements to a successful program of recovery, in the same way that an artist would never suggest his particular painting fully represented all there would be to see or appreciate in the art-world. One primary reason my art (or, what you would see as my “book”) is deep, complex, and sometimes abstract is that I seek to stimulate the minds of my readers in a way that forces them to ponder and reflect on matters affecting us all –in a very broad sense. I consider my readers to be important, and I want to bring them value and make their time investment in reading this worthwhile.

In order to appreciate my book, it is interesting to know how much effort goes into all this, for example: Chapter 49 took me about 7 hours to write, as I had to think extremely hard and consider many possible objections and potentialities… not to mention, I revised it about 5 times to amend my grammatical mistakes and so on. Much of what you read here has taken me YEARS to think out, and I am finally getting all this knowledge out of my head and “onto paper” so I can pass it on. Many of my thoughts are very deep, so if you read it too quickly, you will miss it... read all of this very slowly and let it sink in. Overall, my book (you see the chapters posted here on this blog as I write them) is coming along just fine quite frankly, and I am thoroughly enjoying the exercise of writing it.

Many books have been written on the subject of recovery, but none quite like this. As I have stated before, a reader of my writings will be taken on a fully encompassing intellectual joyride all over creation with no particular rhyme or reason. Consider it an exercise. We all know that in order to achieve results from physical exercise, we must push ourselves beyond our normal limits… this makes us grow. Well the same principle applies with the mind: If you want it to grow, you need to exert, strive, groan, and push forward toward the objective of receiving benefit. The worst that could happen would be that you learn a few new ideas that could be helpful. Now that’s not so bad is it?

Chapter 49

In this chapter, you will find one of my brief attempts at philosophy as a layman. I would like to discuss the perfect ideal of wisdom and virtuousness as being our chief and essential prototype, and see if this leads us to rational faith in God through simple deductive logic governed by our ability to reason.

Perfect virtue and wisdom in their purest form are ideals. At any time, we are free to use this standard of perfection to reform ourselves without pretentiousness. We are, however, bound to confess the impactful measurement that our pragmatic elements of pain and pleasure impose on this ideal as a reliable motive source; otherwise it could fully govern our moral actions without difficulty. And accordingly we would recognize any abstraction from the pursuit of this ideal as contradictory to the sum of all possibilities. It is necessary to possess a knowledge of all that is possible within our power despite an awareness of our deficiencies, as this ideal is the only proper indefectible absoluteness.

In and through it, the ideal is the correct and highest prototype of all things, and an incongruous detraction from it could be considered little more than an illogical division between competing forms of false reality. We may discover that any demotion of the highest presentment of truth to our minds that has a connection to a possible perfected experience would be the source of a problematic illusion, and could even be treated as a phenomenon peculiar to the human mind. In consideration of our sinful nature, this would not be unpredictable.

We are free to choose our interpretations and opinions of reality, but we are not free to choose the facts that govern our reality. We might rightly presuppose this homogeneous nature of things as primitive and thus, original. Since there cannot be an infinite regression of causation, there has to be an original cause; thus, anything truly original befittingly originates from God. Consequently, the only deduction we are left with cannot be considered as anything other than an aggregate of the highest reality, the sum total of all possibilities filtered through the limited power and understanding granted us by God.

This is all so palpably correct, seemingly simple, and even intuitive. It is at least quite clear that our intuition to this standard of correctness and perfection, which is only possible by our capacity to receive clear directives from God, should resign itself upon the faculty of sensation. We now have proof of the nature of empirical intuition from an undeviating certainty outside ourselves, which is yet another design clue God left for us leading right back to Him. This then characterizes a peculiar nature of the origin of knowledge, intuition, reason, pragmatism, and the other various kinds of certitude available to us. We do not enlarge, but rather disfigure ourselves when we lose sight of our respective limits; however, we are rather foolish not to aspire toward the perfect ideal set before us and within us.

Chapter 48

(here is a chapter written in painful simplicity to appeal to a broad audience)

It is important that we (in recovery) do a daily moral inventory. Since it is clear we are to ASPIRE toward an ideal of goodness (despite our incapability to achieve that perfect ideal), I would now like to examine some of our God-given faculties of the soul that empower us to make such progress.

The first empowering faculty we possess is consciousness, which enables us to know ourselves as distinct from other people. By this we recognize our thoughts, feelings, and actions –what we know, think, and feel. Another faculty of the soul is reason, which enables us to discover truth, acquire knowledge, and to form opinions or judgments. Reason enables us to manage our life skillfully and to pursue happiness successfully. Under the guidance of reason, a man will act intelligently and responsibly. Another empowering faculty of the soul is willpower, which enables us to choose or refuse -to do this or that. Willpower enables us, at least to the extent of our natural strength and capability (which is suspended in active addiction), to do as we please. Willpower qualifies a man as an independent agent, free to act voluntarily to do as he sees fit. One last faculty of the soul is our emotional nature, which is indeed quite a great power (though if it is unchecked, emotions can be dangerously treacherous). Our emotions include such feelings as love, happiness, desire, joy, anger, sadness, envy, hatred, selfishness, covetousness, and greed. We must control our emotions because they are the moving forces of our soul; they impel us to action.

We are also given a transcendent moral faculty, or a sense of right and wrong. Our moral sensibilities enable us to judge whether a human action deserves to be approved and rewarded or reprimanded and punished. The sense of moral obligation that we all feel moves our conscience and willpower to act upon our emotions which then positions our actions and determines our life results. Do you see the connection? All of our faculties seamlessly work in harmony to produce either good or bad, and the choice is up to us individually.

The next obvious (and simple) question may be: What then qualifies an action as either good or bad? Actions are either good or bad, depending on the qualities found in them. Qualities that make an action good are willing obedience to rightful authority, truthfulness, honesty, unselfishness, love, charity, and so on. The qualities that make an action bad are the very opposite of those just mentioned such as disobedience, untruthfulness, dishonesty, selfishness, hatred, greediness, and so on.

Though it is easy to notice a logical relationship between all our God-given faculties of the soul, doing the right thing is seldom easy. An easy trap we all quickly fall into is pride, vanity, and covetousness. To covet means to desire too strongly what belongs to another. Not only are we to watch our thoughts that we may think no evil, but we must also watch our desires that we may wish for nothing beyond what we may justly obtain. This practice is quite difficult, to say the least, but is required of us nonetheless.

Chapter 47

Sometimes a wise, quiet, humble leader will restrain his use of power for the good of others. A leader of this type would focus on the provision of intellectual stimulation to responsibly empower those around him and he would also try to set an example by doing what is right. It may be difficult to discern and isolate motives for this degree of constraint in the expression of ideas; though a true leader does what he knows is right despite an immediate ability to understand or appreciate the reasons why it is right.

Any expression of ideas exercises a definite influence upon the audience. One train of thought is almost always followed by its contradiction, and no feature known to our reasoning ability is immune to this. The term regression can be fairly applied to any process by which we submit to a selective interweaving of unconstructive fundamentals maladapted for the transformation of hope into certainty. I believe we should always move forward. The only time it is necessary to renounce all claims to the restitution of logical thought processes may be when the means of expression are regarded as meager in comparison with the health and happiness of those to whom it applies. The person is always more important than the idea.

Good ideas and thoughts should proceed with tolerable frequency in a normal method of presentation, and should not be guided or influenced by fear or intimidation. The common and easily accessible forms of expressing disagreement, if unchecked by wisdom, serve the purposes of representing impulses. Conceptions which stand in opposition to one another should eventually yield to an ideal of loving acceptance, tolerance, and love.

Everyone has a tendency to see the world and others only through their own needs. Here is another thought: In the business world, it is well known that a man with an obsession has very little sales resistance –and a similar principle here applies in recovery. Anyone who is obsessed with the veracity and proclamation of his own ideas at the expense of others has very little sales resistance to unrighteousness.

Chapter 46

Since it is thoughts that occupy the space in your head (so to speak), this is where the center of your life is. If you have a disproportionate number of negative thoughts in your mind, the few good thoughts you do have will get easily brushed aside (for some odd reason) in favor of a mental state that begs to be “medicated” in order to relieve the “pain.” Negative emotions will also influence your moods and then cause your actions to vary widely with no good direction. So, if you do not carefully manage and control your thoughts, you cannot control your behavior –or life.

One way you can control your thoughts is to detach yourself from them occasionally, think before you act, and try not to react to negativity. Remember that you do not have to act on every impulse, and are better off slowing down and progressing in the way you know you should. This takes patience, courage, character, and experience. The battle is in your head, because that is what controls you –always be mindful of this.

Another helpful tactic to control your thoughts is to recognize and isolate defective, cynical ruminations about life and ask God to help you see things differently. Since you will act on your thoughts, identify and rid yourself of the defective ones –because defective thoughts lead to defective behaviors. Do not let an unhealthy desire become a fire. Instead of regularly inviting foulness into your mind, try being more open-minded and allow fresh, new, healthy ideas to come in instead. This may take great courage, but is well worth the cost (of pride).

I see no good reason to excitedly revel in ignorance or spiritual immaturity and obsessively attract others to follow that path. There is a pathway to Godly wisdom, and each of us can discover it on our own –gently, lovingly, slowly, and kindheartedly. We are all capable of imagining acts of Christian loving-kindness, and that is the class of thoughts I want floating around inside my head today.