Nihilism Among Christians

Actually no. A lack of electric fence is not the author of suffering.

I think I was referring to the statement you know what your weaknesses are and denial is of no avail to you. If you are using your ideals of right and wrong to make assessments of your own state of being then you end up punishing yourself or someone else on an arbitrary basis. You are damned if you do, and damned if you don't. When you say you know your weaknesses you set a boundary up around yourself which nothing can penetrate as your will is inviolate.

If I may rephrase, you cannot be defeated but you can throw away your power as though you never had it.

Calling those who quit, quitters, is one issue. Those who quit are by definition, quitters.

Being confused and quitting are not the same thing. Being confused is not lacking in any thing but clarity. The world exists for us to the extent that we insist that it is so.

I said I am not judging those who stop. Stopping is expedient in order to change direction, but stopping does not end addiction or the inclination to be addicted in the most fundamental sense. To be so ever controversial, addiction is not in the substance, it is in the attachment to sensation.

To be clear I am not denying the effects of chemical dependency. But the road to addiction and the tendency toward addiction is paved with the desire for pleasant sensation and the aversion to unpleasant sensation.

See above.

It is not to add what I prefer you meant but to state it in synonymous terms that you may see a different angle or reflection of it.

Perception is not knowledge and perception based on a sliding scale of weakness and strength cannot even lead to it. Please don't take this personally, this is a philosophical discussion.

 

Quote: "Tell me, do you view others who have given up non-productive, or destructive activities as weak and defeated?"

Quote: "No. I view them as confused."

If ever I find myself on trial for something I had written, and my freedom depended on whether or not I could convince the jury that I had not written what I had written, I want you to be my defense attorney!

It is true that removing a substance from your field of being does not end an addiction. However, it is incorrect to conclude that such abstinence is an indication of confusion. Perhaps the one abstaining recognizes where self-destruction lies, and are taking the first step toward a whole life. Or, perhaps the substance no longer holds any attraction for you.

If a particular activity or substance is no longer conducive to my success or my happiness, then it is not a weakness of will that brings me to the decision to forego that activity or substance, but rather, it is the exercise of my will. If you examine the reason for your indulgence, you will perhaps find that you are seeking a pleasant sensation, which, for all intents and purposes, is a counter-measure against . . . whatever. That is fine. As you know, there is no right or wrong concerning your decision to indulge in this or that. There is only what you feel is expedient to your purpose. I would not judge your purpose; that is for you, and you only. Your action or your desire is based on your reasoning. Your reasoning, in turn, is based on your values. Your values, as it turns out, are based on your desires.

Concerning your choice to indulge, you will continually superimpose your own reasoning over another's until you, too, experience for yourself a reason to abstain.

 

I usually just keep talking until we forget what the question was, but just so we are clear. Do you view others who....., others who, are not all others who.

In some cases.

This would be a level of confusion. Nothing real can be made unreal. If there is a self that can be destroyed, it is the illusion of self.

There are no holes in reality.

Here we have reason. When the effects of what you are becomes less than pleasurable then it no longer weighs as attractive. We instinctively warm to pleasure and recoil from pain.

Happiness is a state without resistance, without complaint. We can always find something to complain about. You always exercise your will. What appears as weak will as far as effort toward a desired aim, is rather a preference for comfort over truth.

This is a fundamental confusion about our role in manifesting our own experience. There is no lack of motive or effective power in anyone, but there is confusion about what we might prefer.

I personally indulge do demonstrate and propagate indulgence.
We see John fasting in the dessert and say he has a demon, we see me drinking and eating and you call me a drunkard and a glutton.

Severity and disdain.

Where my treasure lies, there is my heart also.
I trust implicitly, what is so.

I pick up or lay down according only to my will.

 

Well, you can keep talking, but I am not prone to forgetfulness. And I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask you to restate the second sentence of your opening response to the quotes I posted which pointed out that you did in fact state that those who give up non-productive activities are confused. It seemed rather . . . confusing--lacking clarity. It caused me to rethink my desire to employ you as my defense attorney.

I really don't recall calling you a drunkard and a glutton, or even a demon. Another projection?

It is true that we instinctively warm to pleasure and recoil from pain. What is it when one interprets pain as a lack of a particular pleasure on a consistently regular basis? Have you come up with an arbitrary amount of substance you might use in a given amount of time whereby you feel you can draw the line between dependence and non-dependence?

 

In retrospect, I am usually not so loose with my statements but all in all I like the result thus far. The discourse has allowed exploration at a deeper level than might have otherwise been accomplished.

A saying attributed to jesus of nazareth. It is consistent with the saying it is not goes into a man but what comes out.

Interpretation.

I need do nothing.
But if it is arbitrary, it is not specific to amount or given time.

As far as I can tell though, our requirement is a range of warm bloodedness and we have a range of phenomena that might contribute to that, from the speed of light to absolute zero.