what is scientology?

[LeoSalinas22]

what do you guys think? check it out here!

[ardenz]

Leo....looks like a good plot for a novel...a science fiction novel

[LeoSalinas22]

i know right? lol! its crazy if all this is true. it drips of cult.

[Muslimwoman]

Well this is yet more proof that "it takes all sorts". Isn't this the chap that said all sin comes from psychiatry?

[Tao_Equus]

The most important thing to remember is that Mr L Ron Hubbard created Scientology for a bet. he most surely collected. Scientology is a clever pseudo-religion that lures you in with simple universal truths and extracts cold hard cash for a succession of 'enlightenments'. I am very against censorship in any form, but I feel this racket should be hauled up and held accountable and made to justify its claims. Then outlawed. It is indeed the quintessential idea of an evil nasty cult.

Tao

[JosephM]

Leo,

Actually, that was not a very accurate depiction of scientology. I would suggest you read the book Dianetics to get a clearer understanding of the basics. What the referenced writer has done can be done to Christianity to also make it appear as utter nonsense by focusing on such things as a whale swallowing Noah and spitting him up alive three days later. A jackass speaking, the sun moving back-wards or standing still for about a day, and in the NT graves opening up and people coming out of them and showing themselves to many others in Jerusalem as alive, just to name a few. A lot of religions have beliefs that can appear as irrational as the one focused on in your reference. Just a view to consider.

Love and Peace,
JM

[17th Angel]

We're onto this... again?

[Postmaster]

I think it points out the dark side of all organized religions, from perverted sexuality to financial milking by promises of things that are beyond our reach.

[17th Angel]

Those barstewards!

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by JosephM

Leo,

Actually, that was not a very accurate depiction of scientology. I would suggest you read the book Dianetics to get a clearer understanding of the basics. What the referenced writer has done can be done to Christianity to also make it appear as utter nonsense by focusing on such things as a whale swallowing Noah and spitting him up alive three days later. A jackass speaking, the sun moving back-wards or standing still for about a day, and in the NT graves opening up and people coming out of them and showing themselves to many others in Jerusalem as alive, just to name a few. A lot of religions have beliefs that can appear as irrational as the one focused on in your reference. Just a view to consider.

Love and Peace,
JM

JM,

Which 1?, I have read 3. And I tell you exactly why Lafayette so rigorously dissses psychiatry/psychology. It is because a study of this Cult or its members would reveal it to be a deliberate scam devised by a confirmed scamster. The 3 books are riddled with the weaknesses of Hubbards ego and his paranoia of exposure. Truly, reading his books is laughable, a sick comedy when you know his intent. Scientology is not a religion, its a deliberate pseudo-religion that has dangerous policies and nothing but nothing to hail it as a force for good. It should be outlawed as a scam cult.

Tao

[JosephM]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

JM,

Which 1?, I have read 3. And I tell you exactly why Lafayette so rigorously dissses psychiatry/psychology. It is because a study of this Cult or its members would reveal it to be a deliberate scam devised by a confirmed scamster. The 3 books are riddled with the weaknesses of Hubbards ego and his paranoia of exposure. Truly, reading his books is laughable, a sick comedy when you know his intent. Scientology is not a religion, its a deliberate pseudo-religion that has dangerous policies and nothing but nothing to hail it as a force for good. It should be outlawed as a scam cult.

Tao

Perhaps you are right Tao but still there are many others who do not see it that way and to them it makes sense. Most religions are laughable to those of a different persuasion especially if one focuses on one particilair aspect that is not even part of the basics. The article referenced was in my view, an unfair depiction of scientology while the book Dianetics at least give a fuller view and understanding to one who is open. I am not endorsing scientology nor am I labeling it a cult. It is what it is to him/her who adopts the beliefs. I know people who seem to have benefited from some of its basics and if it helps them then who am I to criticize it? There are those who use a religion for a force of 'good' and those who use it for that which many consider 'bad'. It seems to me to be obvious when studying any religion and it's professed believers. Just a view to consider Tao. No more... No less.

Love amd Peace,
JM

[Postmaster]

I think what we really should be disputing is if Scientology is a divine religion or not but it takes more of an intuitive view or common sense.

[LeoSalinas22]

Originally Posted by JosephM

Leo,

Actually, that was not a very accurate depiction of scientology. I would suggest you read the book Dianetics to get a clearer understanding of the basics. What the referenced writer has done can be done to Christianity to also make it appear as utter nonsense by focusing on such things as a whale swallowing Noah and spitting him up alive three days later. A jackass speaking, the sun moving back-wards or standing still for about a day, and in the NT graves opening up and people coming out of them and showing themselves to many others in Jerusalem as alive, just to name a few. A lot of religions have beliefs that can appear as irrational as the one focused on in your reference. Just a view to consider.

Love and Peace,
JM

hi joseph,
i know it wasn't an accurate depiction because of the "cartoony loony" that scientology was presented. but, i really wanted to know how much of the information on the link was actually true? like about the alien xanu and hubbard's claim to go to space? thanks.

[Dondi]

Originally Posted by JosephM

What the referenced writer has done can be done to Christianity to also make it appear as utter nonsense by focusing on such things as a whale swallowing Noah and spitting him up alive three days later.

I'd be concerned too, if it focused on Noah getting swallowed by a whale, especially since it was Jonah who was the cetacean's lunch that day.

[JosephM]

Originally Posted by Dondi

I'd be concerned too, if it focused on Noah getting swallowed by a whale, especially since it was Jonah who was the cetacean's lunch that day.

Thanks Dondi for the correction but you get the point and as a bonus see the fallability of human communications in my writing and possibly others.

Love and Peace,
JM