Addiction By Definition

Obviously, not everyone agrees. Is there but one interpretation?

There is what the text says and there is what people wish it said. The apologists have an agenda. I don't.

Let's speculate. What might be their agenda? And I noticed that you lumped them all together. What is it that "they" have in common?

The desire for the belief to be accepted as real.This desire could be for many different reasons:
-personal, private mental-health reasons
-personal "afraid to be wrong" reasons
-controlling other people reasons
-monetary greedy reasons
...(I'm sure there's plenty more I'm not listing)

The belief in no kind of God without evidence is just as irrational isn't it? How is it any different? No im saying for a scientist to take up the atheist position is irrational. It introduces religion into science by responding to theists claims of God.
It then looks for evidence to support the atheist belief, disregarding any evidence to the contrary.
Beliefs are irrelevant in the hard sciences. Theoretical scientists ought to be agnostic. Childish is having threads taken down cos people cannot answer the question being asked and so complain to the moderator. I was asking what u ment by a "non-theistic God"... If theism is the belief in God then how can a God be non-theist?Do u have a theory on why religions were even created in the first place?

It would be, yes. But that's not what's happening. Holding a tentative position that aligns with all the available information/evidence is extremely rational.
It might very well be the definition of "rational."For more information, please see:
I Know That God Does Not Exist

No need to speculate. Their agenda is to promote their phony theology. The desire to promote their phony theology.If you recall, we were talking specifically about the talking snake and the "Fall". They want to whitewash the fact that the snake told the truth and God lied. They want to whitewash the fact that mankind improved because of their "disobedience" to God - i.e. they learned to think for themselves.The apologist theology has no room for a God that can be wrong - but that doesn't tally with what the Bible actually says. So they have to pretend that the Bible "means" the opposite of what it says.

I was hoping to to talk to Tangle as it is impossible to talk to multiple people all with differences in opinions.So if an atheist tells me there is no God it would be rational for me to say there is according to your logic.A tentative position would be agnostic as we don't have all the info/evidence available.
We aren't stuck between a black and white fallacious decision.Eg. I have a beard. Do u believe me?Edited by Porkncheese, : No reason given.Edited by Porkncheese, : No reason given.

Mid evening there is it? Take a nap 'til mornin!Been there, BTW!' Better ways to waste yer time!

If someone told you there was no other life in the universe what is the most logical position to take pending more evidence? Given the data that chemistry and astronomy has revealed you would be foolish to agree even though we have not directly detected other life. The processes are very well known and the numbers involved are staggeringly huge. An agnostic position on this question is an absurdity.If someone told you that there was a giant polka dotted snail smoking a hookah floating gently 2 feet off the ground on an iridescent lotus blossom in your closet what is the most logical position to take pending more evidence? Given that such organisms have never been seen and that no known mechanisms are known to exist that could produce such an organism together with the fact that the existence of such a thing would violate several well established theories in biology and physics should lead to a hard rejection of such a report pending more data. An agnostic position on this question is an absurdity as well.Your god falls into this second scenario. Now this we should be agnostic on. Given genetics and heritage it is not unreasonable nor unknown for a little waif of a girl to sport a beard so it is not outside the realm of human experience to consider the probability.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

You got lucky. If you agree with my insert to your statement, then yes. We are all agnostics, both believers and atheists. That's because agnosticism deals with knowledge not belief and none of us have knowledge of god.Agnosticism is purely word play. You either believe or you don't. If you don't know if you believe or not, then you don't believe. If you don't believe in god(s) you are an atheist We are, and it's not fallacious. The existence or non-existence of god(s) is binary. There either is or there isn't. The fact that we don't and can't know is irrelevant to his/their existence.If someone says all swans are white, all he's saying is that he's only seen white swans therefore he believes that all swans are white. He has evidence of white swans and no evidence of black swans so his belief seems rational. But without total knowledge of all swans, it's actually only a hypothesis.The existence of god(s) is a hypothesis. Believers believe in them, atheists don't. Neither know, but atheists have the stronger hypothesis. Well you either have or you haven't, what I believe about it is irrelevant.What I KNOW is that beards DO exist. So unless you give me reason to doubt you, I'll happily accept what you say, particularly as it a matter of no consequence. But if you then said that it was a prehensile beard and it can take food off you plate and put it in your mouth I'm going to call you a liar and ask for evidence. I'm now atheistic about your beard.

I don't believe you're old enough.

Let's discuss the whole RR thing from a fresh perspective. Here is a page that I compiled--

quote:

---

Clear your mind of everything you "know" about substance addiction.(Alcoholism)

​

For now, forget about:

​

the recovery group movement,

the disease concept of addiction,

brain chemistry, (I disagree, by the way)

lousy recovery statistics, and nonsense-jargon like:
denial,
powerlessness,
relapse,
triggers,
enabler,
alcoholic,
addict,
hitting bottom,
and other recovery group movement concepts.

​

Focus only on your use of alcohol and other drugs, and the painful consequences of drinking/using. Focus on the obvious.

​

If you're doing something harmful to yourself, wouldn't it be good to stop it?

​

If you have trouble with moderation, why stop just one-day-at-a-time?

​

Wouldn't it be wise to quit altogether?

​

Right now, experiment with the idea of never drinking or using again.

​

Never!
Think of the pros and the cons.

​

Listen! Listen to your own thoughts about quitting for good,
and notice the mixture of feelings you have.

​

Notice that you feel both ways about quitting.
This is the meaning of the word, "addiction."

​

On the one hand, you want to quit.
But on the other hand,
you would like to continue drinking or drugging as much as you want.

​

Forever.

​

You are ambivalent,
feeling both ways.

​

Your Addictive Voice (AV) is your body talking to you.
(Your primal urges talking to your rational mind)

​

In thoughts and feelings,
your AV tells you to drink or use drugs.

​

Your AV is the sole cause of your substance addiction.

​

Your AV is the expression of your appetite or your desire for alcohol or drugs.

​

That appetite originates in the biological,
animal side of human nature,
so we call it the Beast.

​

It's like there are two of you,
at cross purposes,
in conflict.

​

In mortal combat.
Your Beast is ruthless.

​

It cares for nothing you love.
It wants only one thing.

​

The high.

​

Any reason will do --
good, bad, or indifferent. (thinking with the primal urges rather than the rational approach)

​

It will exploit any tragedy,
take advantage of any good fortune,
or ask for no reason at all.

​

It drinks or uses for its own sake. (The animal brain is selfish and stupid)

​

To get high.

​

To feel real good all over, from head to toe.

​

Your Beast hides in the dark.

​

You cannot see it, any more than you can see your own eyes.

​

But you can feel it. Beasts have strong feelings!

​

AVRT puts light on the Beast as it hides in the dark.

​

It cannot tolerate for you to see it.

​

It fears being seen for what it is: a rogue, animal desire.
It knows that you can kill it --
once you see it.

​

It fears you, and you can feel its fear.

​

Your Beast is a rogue appetite for pleasure,
born of synthetic drugs.

​

Your Beast expresses itself through your thoughts. It uses mental images you can see, and it uses the same thinking voice that you hear reading these words.

​

It speaks with great authority because it is a survival drive.

​

But it cannot act on its own.

​

It needs pronouns.
It needs you, your precious "I."

​

Your Beast's favorite word is "I."
Without that word, it is paralyzed.

​

When your Beast wants a drink, you hear,
"I want a drink."

​

In AVRT, "It, not I, wants a drink/fix."

​

Too bad for it.

​

Do you want to continue drinking/using?

​

Or, is that your Beast?

​

DOUBLE-MINDED

​

dipsuchos NT:1374 lit. means "two-souled" (dis, "twice," psuche, "a soul"), hence, "double-minded," James 1:8; 4:8.
(from Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, Copyright (c)1985, Thomas Nelson Publishers)

​

James 1:2-8 NKJV
My brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various trials, 3 knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience. 4 But let patience have its perfect work, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking nothing. 5 If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him. 6 But let him ask in faith, with no doubting, for he who doubts is like a wave of the sea driven and tossed by the wind. 7 For let not that man suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord; 8 he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.
James 4:7-10
8 Draw near to God and He will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners; and purify your hearts, you double-minded. 9 Lament and mourn and weep! Let your laughter be turned to mourning and your joy to gloom. 10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and He will lift you up.
NKJV

---

Thus, let's rephrase the pronouns to model the AVRT: Q: Do I suffer from addiction?
A: It rather enjoys the ride! The question becomes whether I decide that my addiction is rational. I and I alone have the choice. I and I alone are responsible. It would have me believe that I deserve the pleasure. Only I can make the final decision.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.Edited by Phat, : continued fixings

As I've already said, I don't agree with the Rational Mind versus Animal Mind premise.

I may not know You but I can spot It a mile away.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.