MightyBoosh and DeuceKicker, sorry I never responded. It seems that you got a better conversation than you would have with me anyway, in RLK and Aaron.

Seems strange for me to reply saying that I didn't reply, just didn't want to be rude, and not sure I have the stamina to go 12 rounds at the moment, but I enjoyed reading the thread.

Scientology sure gets a lot of attention for being such a small religion. Why do people care so much about it? There are hundreds of tiny religions and cults that act the same.

Having Tom Cruise make a fool of himself really helped.

Really? I'd like to see some sort of data for this claim.

I would much rather be discussing this with you.

So you can't show that the little man with the flashlight in black holes isn't some instance of your god? I know, what a ridiculous question right? Unfortunately, it's as equally plausible as that he isn't your god, or that in fact your god doesn't even exist at all. Of course, you can arbitrarily assign behaviours and characteristics to your god that could make it less plausible, but, they'd be arbitrary.


I think this is disingenuous. The tenets of the two religions stem from what it's believed that your gods want, what they require of us, how they behave, their assumed characteristics, what they explain etc etc. While there are similarities, there are also different and even contradictory tenets, and so they cannot have originated with the same god. Ergo, they're different gods.

I can provide differences if you really require them. That might be an interesting and informative discussion for us both.


Where a collection of ancient stories, written at a time of great ignorance and superstition by people you know next to nothing about and compiled by people who could plausibly have had an agenda is much more convincing?

So you consider the most important and defining law, as issued by god himself through Jesus, to be the one that instructs you to worship him and ignore contrary views ('with thy whole mind'). I think this reveals more about your own personal needs and the paradigm from which you approach these discussion than it does about the plausibility of Christianity, or the Christian version of god. It adds nothing to this discussion though.


I'm quite sure I understand what faith is and you should care because it would highlight how faith is simply a means by which the need for good reasons for, or evidence that something is real can be ignored and we can progress directly to firm belief.

What did Tom Cruise do that was so bad? Tons of celebrities act strange and we don't start saying that is because of their religion.

Watch the Scientology video featuring Tom Cruise, then read about his divorce, and then get back to me.

I am sure it is rather unique. So what?

The Pope wearing a costume and speaking in a dead language is unique.

Why are the Pope's speeches given credence and Scientology mocked?

Easy to attack a small group that seems different.

Scientologists should play the 'persecution' card, it's very effective, on those easily distracted by appeals to.. er.. persecution.

Uniqueness is not really the point. You also say it as if you're not even bothering to look into and taking a position of willful ignorance.

You seem to not have read anything about Scientology. Why not actually do some reading and thinking and get back to me.

Yes. But this is more than just being different.

I know Scientology fairly well. I
saw that video a long time ago.

How is it more than being different?

The thing about Scientology is that you are either 100% in or not. Other regions allow you to be a partial member. You can call yourself Jewish or Christian and not follow any of the rules.

Let's take your statement:

Suppose this were true. Presumably, all of these "tiny religions and cults" would all be "different." Yet we don't really know anything about them and they aren't really being targeted. So clearly, uniqueness alone doesn't really mean anything.

I'd be interested in hearing your explanation of this. People can take just the introductory course and stop taking courses. Are they Scientologists or not?

I'm not even sure what this means. Anyone can call themselves an anything.

Scientology is targeted because of the "celebrity" nature of it. Celebrities help recruit so I guess it is live by the sword, die by the sword.

I was going by David Miscavige's comment I saw in the documentary that you are either in Scientology or not. No half-measures. I believe the average Scientologist is much more passionate about their religion than the average Christian, Catholic, Jew or Muslim (at least in America.)

Ummmm... yes. That's what I was saying all along.

....

Okay. I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, but it's also far from clear that such a statement is actually right. I think a lot of that statement has a lot to do with the framing and context, and that taking it in isolation is likely an error.

For example:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...063001394.html

...

I think it depends on how exactly you parse that statement, just as with the previous statement.

If observing day-to-day events doesn't convince someone, I wonder what it would take for a person to realize there is no god.

Interesting. Many people observe the same day-to-day events and realize there is a God.

There are probably more people that practice Wicca, Christian Science. and Jehovah's Witness. But those religions don't seem to face the same hostility that Scientology does.

Is it because of Tom Cruise and John Travolta? The HBO show focused so much attention on two members.

am christian, but atheist.

i read some leaked documents that you usually get after reaching a certain level (OT8 or 9 is the max). it was some of the craziest bs that i ever read in my whole life. usually you get those documents after paying a s**tload of $$$$.

it's just a gigantic rip-off operation in my opinion, not a religion.

see for yourself: http://listverse.com/2007/07/28/top-...f-scientology/

Unfortunately I couldn't find a better link than that, scientology threatens people or even hosting companies that host them. i bet you can find more of those OT documents if you search for yourself.

There is also speculation that some of those very entertaining documents were written by hubbard while under the influence of LSD nuff said. http://www.xenu.net/archive/OTIII-sc...bts-or-dts.txt

I should start my own religion, anyone want to join???

I think clear is below OT3. This is some fear mongering ad for what you should do after being "clear":
http://www.xenu.net/archive/OTIII-scholar/ot3-ad.txt

I believe a big part of the attention and scrutiny they are receiving is due to those two. And I expect much of the hostility is due to the scrutiny and revelations about the practices of the organization.

I don't believe the other groups you mention have similar types of practices. You may think they're weird and wrong, but it's hard to say that they're harmful in the same type of way as Scientology is. (Christian Science might be harmful in some ways, but not the straight manipulative sort of way that Scientology seems to be.)

A super force creates the world in 6 days.

Super force creates a man. Takes rib from him and creates a woman. Gives them a garden to live in but doesn't allow them to eat an apple from a tree. But still sets up an animal to trick them into eating it. Super force human creations eat apple and are banished. Animal ends up losing legs.

Super force later on decides to have a son and puts him on his planet. His son can walk on water and do all sorts of stuff. Humans kill his son! He reappears though. He isn't really dead. And if you live your life like his son, you may just got into the special place in the sky for eternity.

Noah's Arc and two animals of every kind...

And hundreds of other stories that sound just as crazy but hundreds of millions believe in it.

I don't know understand how anyone that believes in that can look at Scientology as any more bs crazy. Or how any atheist, as you profess, can say one religion is crazier than another. They all should be crazy in your book.

Do you assume that the only way of reading that is a strictly literal way?

Great question. I guess anyone can interpret it how they want. And use it for their own benefit.

The thing about religion is that the older it is, the more it is respected. "New religion" is a pejorative term.

It is true that anyone can interpret anything in anyway they want. But I think you would agree that some interpretations are more reasonable than others.

I'm not sure this is true. The religion of Egypt is quite old, but it's not respected. Similarly, the Greek gods aren't really respected, either.

I don't really know anyone who uses the term "new religion" in any meaningful context. For this reason, I'm not sure it's a pejorative term.

You are right that old religions are no longer respected. I think that is because Europeans were very effective at forced conversion. Diminished competition numbers. Pope given a lot of power.

It will be interesting over next 1,000 years. I think it could change if life is found on other planets, especially more intelligent than ours. Would we defer to their way of thinking?