A Very Good Friend Of Mine Is Now OT VI in Scientology

ScottProphhit
Some say that's just like the bible but the bible is pure history

I'm sorry but what?
The bible is most certainly NOT pure history.
It's a series of allegorical stories based on astrology.
No one walked on water.
No one turned anyone into a pillar of salt.
Burning plantlife does not speak.
The world was not created in six days.
The world is not 10000 years old.
The only Adam I know of is Adam Carolla, the only Eve I know is Eve Laurence and the only Lilith I know of was on Cheers.
You can't claim something is ridiculous by claiming something even more ridiculous makes perfect sence.
You also bypass the notion that religion can only be passed on through inflicted trauma.
Either by mental abuse in childhood or coinsedental trauma in adult life.
You say scientology is garbage...I agree with you there. You want to say "only Jesus saves"?
We're gonna have a problem.

-Amitaba-

reply to post by AQ6666


Maybe it ties in with their belief system. e.g. a person who is rich (has more money than normal) is also 'corrupted' more than normal. and therefore the thetan/soul is way more in need of healing (scientology style), therefore, by making scientology expensive, they are filtering out the needy (rich) from the not so needy (people who cant afford $40,000 dollar a week religions).

Just a theory!

Is that basically what you were hinting at?

It's just a big cult. stay away from cults

Metallicus
reply to post by AQ6666

 

I haven't had any RL experience with Scientology, but it seems to me that ANY religion that would purport to be the 'only way' to advance, find God, save your soul, et al is false.

I'm sorry... I don't mean to nit-pick... but this is the second time today on ATS I've seen this used improperly. Part of me can't help but wonder if you saw the first guy (girl, actually, I think) use it this way and assumed it was proper, as an intelligent person capable of understanding words via context might be likely to do.

Unfortunately, in this case the context was wrong, so the term was used wrong, and I'd like to prevent more ATS members from making such a mistake.


The word / abbreviation you wanted was "etc" (etcetera) which basically means "and so on" or "continuing thusly" and is meant to imply the continuation of a list.


The word you improperly used was et al. (et alii / et alia) which means "and others" and generally should only be used to imply a continuing list of people (as opposed to things.)

It is most commonly used in citations. For example, abbreviating a list of the authors of a particular paper ("Social Dynamics and Proper Use of English," B. Singer, D. Winchester, B. Johnson, et al)


Now, if you were listing types of people, and not actual persons, "etc" would be acceptable. ("Mothers, fathers, brothers, etc.) But generally if you're listing individual, specific persons, you want "et al." (And that's pretty much the only time you want it.)



etc and et al


et al.


etc



Strange how language, including its improper use seem to spread memetically. Doubly so online, it would seem. But I suppose that's a whole other topic. Just be careful who you pick up your language cues from. Never know exactly who is behind that computer.

reply to post by AQ6666


If someone can afford it and also knows where to draw the line on pressure tactics, then Scientology is fine. I really like most of Hubbard's early books (1950s) except for Dianetics, when he and people in the group were exploring and finding techniques which really worked in connection with how our minds work. But as a group that pressures people for money, they should really back off on that.

One of the main reasons Scientology protects itself and gobbles up money is that Hubbard correctly analyzed new religions, and estimated that most of them are under heavy attack by the established society they emerge from for at least 50 years. So he assured that Scientology would protect itself against those type of organization-ending attacks by lost of means necessary. If it stays a religion for hundreds of years, then we are all lucky to see it near its beginning.

reply to post by AQ6666


Hi OP

Scientology is without a doubt a cult.

Not only do they take everything a person has to pay their extortionate course fees, they are also known to dump people on the streets when the money runs out. When I was studying for ordination, one of the areas that I learned a lot about was cults (I really wanted to work as a de-programmer when I was done) and the awful things that they do in the name of "faith". I didn't realise just how big the Scientology issue was until then.

I'm a massive fan of Operation Clambake and would recommend it to anyone who is looking for a good starting point to study the evil (a word which I do not use lightly) that is Scientology.

I really hope your friend doesn't outlive his usefulness to the cult, but if he does, then at least he has a good friend like you to support him and that will really make a difference.

Rev

FlyersFan

AQ6666
Ok, what do you think about this cult/group ?

People can believe what they want. But I think South Park said it best about Scientology.
South Park - Trapped in the Closet Episode
Watch the whole 1/2 hour. It's a hoot.

To this day, that is still my favourite South Park episode...that and the one where they turn Chef in to a kiddy-fiddler because the dude who played him (Isaac Hays I think) was in Scientology and he was forced by the "Church" to make a stand and quit the show.

I think the thing I love most about South Park is that they mock everyone and everything equally. The world needs more people with the balls to do that.

Rev

reply to post by Tardacus


And to think it is ALL tax free!

Eryiedes

ScottProphhit
Some say that's just like the bible but the bible is pure history

I'm sorry but what?
The bible is most certainly NOT pure history.
It's a series of allegorical stories based on astrology.
No one walked on water.
No one turned anyone into a pillar of salt.
Burning plantlife does not speak.
The world was not created in six days.
The world is not 10000 years old.
The only Adam I know of is Adam Carolla, the only Eve I know is Eve Laurence and the only Lilith I know of was on Cheers.
You can't claim something is ridiculous by claiming something even more ridiculous makes perfect sence.
You also bypass the notion that religion can only be passed on through inflicted trauma.
Either by mental abuse in childhood or coinsedental trauma in adult life.
You say scientology is garbage...I agree with you there. You want to say "only Jesus saves"?
We're gonna have a problem.

-Amitaba-

edit on 11-10-2013 by Eryiedes because: Typo

Couldn't have said it better myself.
Also, that's the first Eve I thought of too.

rangerdanger
Also, that's the first Eve I thought of too.

Still laughing at that one!
(The rest of you will just have to do an uncensored internet search to figure out which Eve we are referring to.)

-Amitaba-

Metallicus
reply to post by AQ6666

 

I haven't had any RL experience with Scientology, but it seems to me that ANY religion that would purport to be the 'only way' to advance, find God, save your soul, et al is false.

Any religion worth its salt would need to embrace all people at all stages of development and realize there are many different ways to live a good life.

Also, I find it unlikely that a TRUE religion would need so much of your money, JS.

I couldn't agree with you more. Growing up in a multicultural family, multicultural neighborhood, led me on the spiritual quest at a very early age. I decided that there is indeed a God, and whether you called him Buddha, Jehovah, Krishna, or EBE.

I have no idea how anyone believes that an omnipotent God would have any need for money. Why wouldn't this God give you money, instead of expecting you to give money to him? I am not mocking anyone's religion but I sometimes think people ignore the obvious. A real God won't demand that you suffer for him. Or will promise you a land of your own, drag you through the desert for years, then leads you to a place that is already owned and occupied by another people. All you have to do is kill those people that are already there and the land is yours. You don't need a God to do that. Most leaders of other countries have done this throughout history in almost any land that they happen upon.

I believe in a God being, but not one that is that human.

NightSkyeB4Dawn
I decided that there is indeed a God, and whether you called him Buddha, Jehovah, Krishna, or EBE.

Buddhism is a philosophy...not a religion.
Don't try and involve Buddhists in this "whack-a-mole" nonsence.

-Amitaba-

Eryiedes

NightSkyeB4Dawn
I decided that there is indeed a God, and whether you called him Buddha, Jehovah, Krishna, or EBE.

Buddhism is a philosophy...not a religion.
Don't try and involve Buddhists in this "whack-a-mole" nonsence.

-Amitaba-

edit on 11-10-2013 by Eryiedes because: Typo

What is religion if not a philosophy?

Are you a budhist? do you believe Buddhists are above debate?

combatmaster

What is religion if not a philosophy?

Are you a budhist? do you believe Buddhists are above debate?

Philosophy does not entail a "dogma"...

"Dogma is a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true...."

THAT'S the difference.

If you wish to know more:

en.wikipedia.org...

-Amitaba-

reply to post by Eryiedes


I was not speaking of religion. If anything, I was trying to separate religion from the equation. The problem seems to me not so much one of the God entity, but how those chose to see the God entity and how they worship it.

NightSkyeB4Dawn
reply to post by Eryiedes

 

I was not speaking of religion. If anything, I was trying to separate religion from the equation. The problem seems to me not so much one of the God entity, but how those chose to see the God entity and how they worship it.

Scientology, the bible (christianity), the koran (islam), the talmud (judaism)...take your pick...doesn't matter which one...all exist only because of dogma.
It's just a tool they all use to say "You can't question what we say".
I am sorry if this upsets people....America can be a very religious place so what I am saying is BOUND to rub some of you the wrong way.
I can't help that.
That said, I am an atheist and are probably about as far from a Buddhist as one can get...but I do admire the mindset.

-Amitaba-

RomeByFire
reply to post by ScottProphhit

 

Really?

Thank you for telling me I accept Satan but not God. I wasn't aware of my own beliefs, but thank you for pointing them out to me.

For what it's worth, I believe in Xecenta. He's a seventeen light year talk robotic-dinosaur who has 666 eyes and passes inter dimensionally into the human consciousness until we all wake up in an era of enlightenment, created in Xecenta's image; we will become the dinosaurs.

Once again, thank you for clarifying my beliefs to me and telling me what I believe in. I truly appreciate your holier-than-thou I know you better than you know you God complex.

I said you accept Satan not that you believe in him. Regardless of what you believe, he's in control of this world and everything in it. And my God complex? If it's a complex, why do I view every human being as a God?

Eryiedes

combatmaster

What is religion if not a philosophy?

Are you a budhist? do you believe Buddhists are above debate?

Philosophy does not entail a "dogma"...

"Dogma is a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true...."

THAT'S the difference.

If you wish to know more:

en.wikipedia.org...

-Amitaba-

In Buddhism, the Gautama Buddha's Kalama Sutta highlights the notion/principle that when you find that something agrees with reason and is conductive to the good and benefit of yourself and others then accept it and live up to it, and not to believe in anything (simply) because it is found written in one's religious books?

So basically, Buddhism makes oneself the authority, which follows the principle that there is no other authority, and it's written by an incontrovertible authority (Gautama Buddha).

I believe that even in scientology, there are those who believe it is free of dogma. But no belief system is free of dogma.

reply to post by combatmaster


No it's not.
If it was...it would be called a "religion" instead of a philosophy, no?
Sorry I have upset you.

-Amitaba-

Thank you all for your opinion. I see almost everyone has not a good opinion about scientology and this meets my thoughts and fears regarding it as well.

Try to change my friend's mind about this is hopeless. maybe when he reaches the top level and see they are not delivering what they promiss he will see something is wrong. In the meanwhile a few thousand dollars have gone.