It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What is with Scientology?

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2005 @ 12:11 AM
link   
Duzey,

Thanks for the input.

This discussion has been quite something. See, I don't have a problem with someone posting a link to a site and asking about it. It is those who deliberately create the sites that trash Scientology, it just spreads confusion. Then when someone asks about it, like say here, these links get referenced to as the authority.

I know I keep stating it, but the key to understanding Dianetics and Scientology is to read the books, read the actual literature.

The organization itself runs off the principles in the literature Ron wrote, so here again the answers are within his writings.

Man is basically good. When Hubbard discovered this fact he nearly cried.

Much love to all,

Troy




posted on Jan, 16 2005 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by cybertroy
The organization itself runs off the principles in the literature Ron wrote, so here again the answers are within his writings.


I believe that is the bone of contention. Some of the tech has been rewritten and is no longer as Ron originally wrote it. Thus creating a struggle between those who believe in the old ways and those that believe in the new. If you think about it another way, does it really matter which they follow all that much? They are still doing what Ron wrote, and isn't that the important thing for a scientologist?



posted on Jan, 16 2005 @ 02:32 AM
link   
First off Cybertroy, I would like to state that I was in no way bashing your beliefs for to do so would be completely wrong. I believe I went a little overboard in my original post, as I had just finished reading the linked site, and was a little alarmed. My goal was to find out if the site I posted was fact or fiction. My knowledge of Scientology is very limited unless you count the stories that the mainstream media has reported on. I was hoping to get answers from those that were familiar with the COS so I have to say thanks for all of the responses. I'm actually pretty happy with the direction this thread has taken, for I now have a better understanding of the present day COS.



posted on Jan, 16 2005 @ 03:18 AM
link   
I would agree. I have really enjoyed the discussion and debate on this thread, and it has been nice to see how calm everyone has been able to remain, no name-calling or anything. I think all of us posting to it just want to learn more about the views and experiences of others. Cybertroy, I for one hope that you do not stop posting to the thread precisely because you do contribute an opposing viewpoint. The world would be a very boring place if everyone were alike.



posted on Jan, 16 2005 @ 08:01 AM
link   
I only have a minute, but I would like to differentiate between sites that "trash" Scientology and Freezone sites. These are two entirely different animals!

Freezone sites fully support scientology. As the Freezone is a loose coalition rather than an actual organization, indivdual opinions vary with regard to the church. Most believe that it's a good organization gone bad.

We all believe that there's Another Way. Just like you don't need to attend church to call yourself a Christian and live by Christian values, you also don't need to join the Scientology church to call yourself a scientolgist and apply Hubbard's philosophy to the benefit of yourself and others. There's no harm in doing it that way, and if you believe - or even suspect - that the church is no longer viable, then there's great benefit.

If you don't believe me, have a look at my site (see signature). I challenge anyone to find any scientology-bashing there.



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 12:41 AM
link   
I am in no way the authority on Scientology or Dianetics. I was priveleged to be a part of Scientology. I saw the translation of Dianetics and Scientology books into a great number of languages while I was there, thanks to those within the organization and those who work outside the organization (known as Field Staff Members). I worked in 4 different organizations in my time there, and met the coolest people, and made a lot of friends. Normal people, but with a drive and purpose that you don't allways see in the world. I had felt levels of excitement, and well being that I don't know that I had ever felt before I had gone into the organization. I've seen Criminon (an organization that uses Scientology tech) go into a jail and stransform criminals. I know some people think criminals are just a bunch of bad people, but they are basically good too. They just took a bad path for whatever reason.

Could a bad person get into the organization? Sure. But a bad person sticks out like a sore thumb in this organization, so it's not like "Hitler" can come in and take over.

One realization I had, that is very important, is the realization that we are spiritual beings, and creation is in fact a reality. Creation is just an overwhelmingly simple concept to understand once you really look at it. You peel away life and all its complexities and you are left with the spirit. You peel back the universe and all its complexities and you are left with a creator. This is kind of my summation, but you only need to look back at the beginning, back when matter, and all this "stuff" first came into existence. And ask how did it get here in the first place? You are left with only one answer, creation. Nothing comes about without there first being an idea or thought about it.

It's late guys, got to go to bed.

Troy



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 04:15 AM
link   
Once again, Troy, I think we agree on more things than we disagree on. I, too, had a great experience working in a CofS organization, met great people, saw "miracles" happen, and all that. Many of those things may still be going on in the church, and probably are, but I have no way of knowing that. (As I mentioned early in this thread, I would liked to have found out, but no one would talk to me.)

Much depends, I think, on how long ago your experience was. Mine was in1980, which is considered by many to be just a couple of years prior to the start of the church's decline.

The point that you seem to have trouble getting is: there is no conspiracy. No one here is "bashing" the church. I doubt the church has ANY real enemies, at least not any worth paying much attention to. Perhaps in the past - the IRS comes to mind; that battle is well-documented and, as far as I can tell, resulted in a resounding victory for the church.

Also: if you believe the technology works, then nothing else matters except for the tech. Anyone, anywhere, who is delivering truly standard tech, is doing good work. Nothing that Hubbard wrote argued against that concept, and much that he wrote supported it. It was the church hiearchy, not the founder himself, who decided 'this is ours, no one else can have it, it can only be used within our organization under our own strict control". (And then proceeded to alter the tech...but that's another story...)

And that, my friend, is the true conspiracy. A waste of effort, and doomed to failure, but that's the path they've chosen.



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azeari of the Radiant Eye
Many of those things may still be going on in the church, and probably are, but I have no way of knowing that. (As I mentioned early in this thread, I would liked to have found out, but no one would talk to me.)


This is the problem in a nutshell. By closing themselves of, and not talking, they started this whole thing. If they had chosen to be open, and explain things to the curious, people wouldn't have to go to these websites to find out what it is all about. Most peolpe don't want to ask the church directly because of the extreme pressure they are subjected to.

And because it is so secretive, that makes it much easier to believe that the church is up to no good. It's like when I go to MacDonalds. I want to be able to see those kids making the food because then I feel OK. If they're hidden away, I always wonder what they're doing to my big mac. Silly, considering it's MacDonalds and couldn't really get any worse that it starts off. But the point is, they are losing the PR battle, and need to change their strategies if they don't want to lose the war.



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 10:59 PM
link   
Pretty cool, I didn't know that there was a Scientology environmental task force, helping with planting trees, and cleaning up the environment. I was interested in environmental stuff before I had heard about the church. The environment is important too.

Anyway, how do you feel that the technology has been altered? I want to get an idea where you are coming from.

Troy



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 11:06 PM
link   
Iwill leave that one for Azeari. He will be able to provide you with specifics, and first hand knowledge. I'm sure you two would get along quite well and have an interesting discussion, if you could just address him directly. I won't tell if you don't.



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by cybertroy
Pretty cool, I didn't know that there was a Scientology environmental task force, helping with planting trees, and cleaning up the environment. I was interested in environmental stuff before I had heard about the church. The environment is important too.


Not sure where that came from...have I missed something in a previous post??



Anyway, how do you feel that the technology has been altered? I want to get an idea where you are coming from.


Any intense discussion of this would be (as we say) "out gradient" for this forum. Two things right off the top of my head: GAT and the "new" definition for the second dynamic.

Feel free to U2U me, I'll send you my e-mail address & we can debate it till the cows come home...



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 11:42 PM
link   
Yeah it was a bit off topic. Just looking over the Scientology site, and it nice to find some environmental activities. It would be hard to audit people with no planet to audit on.

True, some things shouldn't be discussed here, there is a gradient to understanding Scientology. Not to confuse anyone here. It's pretty much like anything you study. Like if you study electronics, you don't just hop in and become a master electrition. I'd like to try and stay away from the verbal information anyway, so I'm not creating my own version of Scientology. It was meant to stay by the book so it doesn't loose it's effectiveness. My e-mail is open if you want to go over anything.

troyhonaker@aol.com

Much love,

Troy



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by cybertroy
It was meant to stay by the book so it doesn't loose it's effectiveness. My e-mail is open if you want to go over anything.


Exactly. "By the Book(s)", not "By the Regime."

An analogy: it's like if the Guild of Master Electronics Engineers decreed that only members of the Guild are allowed to know anything about electonics, members are prohibited from discussing the subject with anyone outside the Guild, that all words and concepts associated with electonics are subject to Guild copyright...well, you catch my drift.



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 12:02 PM
link   
These are the ones(cruise, travolta, etc) responsible for the attacks on christianity ....

Well, I should say they are funding the ACLU and other like minded organizations ....

They are basically in the same boat with rael and his lemming ....

They are nibbling at the cheese and the trap is ready to spring ...



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azeari of the Radiant Eye
Exactly. "By the Book(s)", not "By the Regime."

An analogy: it's like if the Guild of Master Electronics Engineers decreed that only members of the Guild are allowed to know anything about electonics, members are prohibited from discussing the subject with anyone outside the Guild, that all words and concepts associated with electonics are subject to Guild copyright...well, you catch my drift.


The problem is that most who know little about Scientology, myself included, feel that this is exactly what is happening. From what I have read, through out this thread, it seems that those in charge of the COS would really like to keep it that way as well. I'm not bashing the concepts of Scientology, I actually think they are rather brilliant, but those in charge of the COS is what concerns me. With power, there will always come greed, and it seems that they have taken a wonderful philosophy on how to live and have turned it in to a commodity. Thats wrong, completely wrong, in my opinion.



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 02:51 PM
link   
skychief,

If this is your understanding, then you have completely gotten it right, 100%. Nothing wrong with Scientology, that is a personal choice. It is the church executives who are creating the problems the church faces, at the expense of everyone else who might be involved with it, or are considering it. It is trying to have a monopoly on the tech, which from my understanding goes against much of what Hubbard wrote. Hubbard meant for this to be shared, not hidden.



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 03:00 PM
link   
Well Duzey, if that's the case, and I'm beginning to believe that it is, then I can see why there is a sort of free zone scientology. It's always a shame to see one mans vision distorted and manipulated by others for personal gain.



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 03:42 PM
link   
I'm glad there is a freezone, so that people who are no longer with the church, have somewhere to go. The problem is that while you are in the church, you don't know there are options, and nobody tells you. They have to find it on their own, after they have left.


Thats why whenever I see these threads, I like to bring the FZ up. A lot of people aren't aware there is another way.



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 09:58 PM
link   
Scientology isn't responsible for attacks on religion? Where did this information come from? On of my friends was Jewish and was still Jewish when he worked in the organization. He did the Matzaa thing. (hope I spelled it right)

A Baptist minister was involved with Scientology and was still a Baptist minister.

Scientology ministers study the bible.

Scientology has fought those who oppose religion. I was there, I had the CCHR (Citizens Commission on Human Rights) booklets in my hands in the year 2000, which fought for religious freedom, not against it.

Scientology is copyrighted to keep it safe. If there wasn't any protection of the technology then it could be destroyed by those who would alter it, or want to destroy it. How could Scientology not be copyrighted? That could have been a great mistake. We aren't dealing with a patent on a car, this technology is much more important than a car or something of the sort.

Anyone can grab a copy of Dianetics, or Self Analysis, or one of several books available at bookstores around the world, and never step foot in the Church, and be free to use it. This isn't secretive, our government is secretive.

The amazing thing about the technology is that it doesn't age. As long as it isn't altered it will work just as well now as it did years ago.

I'm going to cruise the forum a little bit. See what I can find out about the weather.

Troy



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 10:15 PM
link   
From what I understand, Scientology has no problem accepting other religions, and does have members who are active in other religions at the same time. This may change once they achieve the higher levels, but that's probably because if they got that far, they don't feel they need anything but the tech anymore, and stopped going.

I believe they just have a different opinion on where those religions originate.

Regarding copyrights, I know they are to protect the works. It is the liberal and vindictive nature of the enforcement of these copyrights that gets a bit scary where the church is concerned.

[edit on 19-1-2005 by Duzey]




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join