Culture & Lifestyle

Rant

Scientology and the Abrahamic Religions

Posted 17 months ago|230 comments|1,176 views
VIDEOS
Written by
Chef Xenu
Columbus, OH
Scientology is one of the only religions I know which claims they they are compatible with other religions. In other words, they will tell you you can join the Church of Scientology and yet remain in your Christian, Muslim, Jewish, or whatever faith you were before.

Recent candid admissions by Scientology's official spokesperson Tommy Davis in an interview with WESQ News reporter Nathan Baca tell a different story, however.

The portion quoted below begins at approximately 28 minutes, 30 seconds into the video.

Tommy Davis (official spokesperson for the Church of Scientology): "Now, in terms of what do Scientologists believe in terms of, uh, I think, what was your question?"

Nathan Baca: "The "Genesis" story."

Tommy Davis (official spokesperson for the Church of Scientology): "The "Genesis," sure the "Genesis" story. The fundamental belief in Scientology is that is man, or the individual, is an immortal spiritual being. Like, you are immortal spiritual being, you don't, you don't have a soul, you don't have a spirit, you are an immortal spiritual being. You're not your your body. So you lived before and you'll live again. And its a religious belief that's, um, that really goes back to the, the, the oldest and most ancient religious beliefs of, of our civilization, going back to India and Asia and the origins of much of modern religion in that uh, that belief in past lives, that belief that one has lived before and one will live again through the endless track of time."

Tommy Davis agrees! Reincarnation is fundamental to Scientology.

Unfortunate for Corporation of Scientology claims that they are compatible with other main-stream religions in America and elsewhere, is the fact that reincarnation is antithetical to the religious traditions which trace their lineage back to Abraham (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam).

Unfortunate for Corporation of Scientology claims that they are compatible with other main-stream religions in America and elsewhere, is the fact that reincarnation is antithetical to the religious traditions which trace their lineage back to Abraham (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam).

Paragraph 1013 of the "Catechism of the Catholic Church" clearly states the Catholic position that "Death is the end of man's earthly pilgrimage... There is no "reincarnation" after death." This is not a position over which many protestant, Jewish or Muslim theologians have disputed with Rome.

Perhaps the most visible (to outsiders) indication of Scientology's reincarnation beliefs is to be found in the Navy themed paramilitary wing of Scientology, the Sea Organization (or Sea Org). Sea Org has as its standard contract term for enlistees a period of 1,000,000,000 (one billion) years. Copies of this contract are widely available on the internet. Lest one be tricked into thinking this is merely symbolic and not indicative of a belief that they will return to serve again and again, the Motto of the Sea Organization should be noted. It appears in the Sea Org's coat of arms.

Please view the Sea Org's coat of arms here:
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/1028/socoatofarms.jpg
or using this tinyurl:
http://tinyurl.com/ddkmuw
or on this website run by Scientology:
http://www.bonafidescientology.org/Chapter/05/page09.htm

The motto "Revenimus," according to Scientologists means "We Come Back." Sea Org also uses this "We Come Back" motto on promotional images, one of which you can see at the following link:
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_wxGgsSfXiyk/SbLpyPdB3uI/AAAAAAAAAoE/cO9z9fc_qh8/s400/SO1996%20We%20Come%20Back.jpg
also with tinyurl:
http://tinyurl.com/akuc8z

Some relevant quotes from LRH:

"There are vast organizations which work to slow the genetic line down. I won't mention any names, because these organizations are well contributed to, um, and besides you shouldn't say the name "Roman Catholic Church" on Sunday because Sunday's a holy day." L. Ron Hubbard. "Solution To Psychosis" a lecture given on 29 December 1956 in The Washington Congress On Anti-Radiation And Confront Lectures.

"Anyway, didn’t you know that, that Christianity is based upon the writings of Plato, and the Catholic Church at all times when challenged about its doctrines has uniformly referred to the authority called Plato? You understand I’m not.. not in any way, sense or form against the Church. I think the Church is a good organization. But we got a better one now." L. Ron Hubbard. "The Logic’s: Methods of Thinking" a lecture given on 4 December 1952 in the Philidelphia Doctorate Courses.

"Uh.. TIME magazine is run by a Catholic, I think he is, or something, and I think it’s on the.. on the uh.. the magazine is published, and.. by license of a papal bull. And uh.. a fellow by the name of Luce runs this magazine; and I merely want this to be on a tape for the record for posterity. If this fellow ever turns up for processing he’s to be thrown in the clam. And put there very heavily and very strongly and left to go about his way. "The last person that was thrown violently into the clam lost all of his wisdom and molars. That’s right, that’s what happened." L. Ron Hubbard. "ABOUT THE “PRESS” TONE LEVEL: PSYCHOMETRY" a lecture given on 18 December 1952 in the Philidelphia Doctorate Courses.

"However, engaging in long discourses, or trying to educate a minister of some Protestant church or a priest of the Catholic faith into the tenets of Scientology is not desirable and is directly contrary to Article 10 of the Code of a Scientologist." L. Ron Hubbard. "The Scientologist: A Manual on the Dissemination of Material. Ability Magazine. Phoenix Arizona. 1955. - "10. To engage in no unseemly disputes with the uninformed on the subject of my profession." [p. 388.] L. Ron Hubbard. Scientology 0-8. Los Angeles, CA. Bridge Publications, Inc. 2007.

from a drill "Using Buttons - Hate/Love" on how to handle Scientology's percieved enemies: "e. General scene: a local Catholic bishop is causing many local attacks on the org. " 1. Send several FSMs over to the Catholic church to swear at him in confessionals. " 2. Connect him up to abortion end/or pornographic activities. " 3. Write the Pope an anonymous letter stating that the bishop is really a rabbi under cover. " 4. Spread a rumor around town that he's against air pollution. "f. Mock up 5 similar examples as aoove on your own, noting the correct answer. "i. Third party a group to another group ensuring that you get as your product an observed conflict between the two. "j. Write up results."

"There are many types of involuntary withholds. Do you realize that most of you have all—are out of ARC with the Marcab Confederacy at this time because you're not saying anything to them. Somebody who is very Christian, extremely Christian—you know, has to have permission to eat breakfast and has to have permission to eat lunch and then forgiven for the evening. You know, their life wholly turns on these little pivots—will sooner or later in one lifetime or another listen for a moment after the prayer, you see, or something, and the circuit they've been using hasn't—hasn't spoken for some time. They get no acknowledgment. And they realize they've been talking all this time to the Big Thetan, you see? And nobody's ever said a word. And they get madder than hell at the Catholic church, you know. And they start revolutions and burn popes and . . . It's marvelous." Hubbard, L. Ron. Lecture of 1 May 1962: ARC BREAKS AND MISSED WITHHOLDS.

Do not be deceived when devoted but uninformed or misinformed low level Scientologists (or informed high level Corporation of Scientology liars) try to tell you Scientology is compatible with Christianity, Judaism, or Islam.
EMAIL| SHARE|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
17 months ago: Excellent rant here Chef Xenu.
17 months ago: The diference between a Jack H Remmington's Rant and your's? You have actual sources to back it up.
17 months ago: You're taking a negative statement and attempting to make a positive statement from it. Scientology's statement: "There is an 8th Dynamic". Which means Scientology is saying, "God exists". You imply there is a Scientology God, incompatible with other religion's "God". You further imply Scientology requires certain worship thereof, or at least belief therein. None of that is true, you simply make it up out of grapeseed or something. From "there is an area of life called God", you assume Scientologists must worship or hold some particular attitude about "Scientology's God". But that is all a made up myth, like your Green Alien sketch. There is nothing to it but Anonie Hot Air, it is fairy tale spawned from imagination. Scientology says "there is an area of life commonly called God, one's relationship with same is up to the individual".
17 months ago: Terryeo, you have obviously misread the rant. No where does Chef Xenu imply that their is a Scientology God. Chef Xenu makes the argument that the Scientology belief in reincarnation is incompatible with the beliefs of Arahamic religions. This rant offers a rebuttal the Church of Scientology's statements that Scientology is compatible with Abrahmic religions. Chef Xenu does not in his article make a case that there is a Scientology God.

I believe your argument's purpose was to derail Chef Xenu's above rant and insinuate that it was something which it is not. While Chef's arguments are backed up by sources taken from literature and speech, your arguments have a lack of sources to back them up. Please stay on topic in the comment section and make sure to have read one's rave/rant before making insinuations about it. Thank you and have a nice day.
17 months ago: There is nothing about Scientology that requires any belief. No practitioner is required, expected, encouraged or forced to believe anything. Period. Therefore it can not be incompatible with any belief. You see how that works?

Scientology makes a statement about God. Believe it or not, accept it or refuse it, that is purely up to the individual. Christianity which says something like "you might live forever (in heaven)". Scientology does not add the "in heaven" and doesn't expect you to believe you are eternal. But it does make statements about our eternal existence. However, you need not know that, you need not believe that, you can even be utterly, totally certain there is no eternal existence and study Scientology. And call yourself a Scientologist. There is no belief to it. Sure, I know, Anonies make up these strange fairy tales and quote what they say are stolen documents. But even those don't say, "now, you must believe this or you're not a Scientologist".
17 months ago: One of the keen observation that L Ron Hubbard makes is that the level of reason of a person is dependent on their emotional tone. For example if you try to reason with an angry man his level of reason will be low. Some one that is conservative will weigh things cautiously while someone who is high toned as in enthusiasm will think almost instantaneously and come up with solutions. You see this in sports and the arts. Those ranters who are in negative emotions will only reason to a point and to the limitations that their emotional tone allows.

My point? Scientology has a lot to offer and if you don't or can't get it sorry it may have something to do with your own attitude. Anonymousercaters check your head.
Moneen
Moneen
South Africa, Republic of
17 months ago: Scientology is like a good vacuum cleaner or Assurance salesperson.
It will agree with the point of view of a sales target as a means of always closing a sale or conversion.
Once converted the aim changes by how the salesperson has got their target in an addictive need for what continues been sold always on the terms & conditions of the salesperson or of Scientology.
Chef Xenu
Chef Xenu
Columbus, OH
17 months ago: Terryeo, you are either lying, misinformed, or you have a MU on "belief." I have frequently heard Scientologists make the claim that it is "not about belief" but the fact of the matter is that you believe the tech works, you believe LRH knew what he was talking about, you believe the emeter is measuring something more than the conductivity of your skin and the tightness of your grip on the cans, and many more things. You can claim these beliefs are not beliefs. You can start referring to things you believe in as things you "have reality on" to make it easier for you to accept the fallacy that you don't have dogmatic beliefs, but term-switching doesn't make it so.

It is like the card game of Mao. No one ever lists the rules of Mao. If it had written rules, this would probably be the first one. None the less, after a little time playing the game with someone, you know the rules pretty darn well. Just because the rules were not given to you up front does not mean there are no rules. The rules are in fact very rigid. Scientology seems to introduce its public to reincarnation in much the same way. When you get to OT-III you either figure out that reincarnation (by whatever name) is one of the rules, the dogmatic beliefs which either you accept or your case gain stops dead in its tracks.

If you do not believe in the whole track and your Thetan's trip through ...birth-life-death-implanting-birth... on the whole track, you are not going to be able to do your OT levels. Period.

The Corporation of Scientology will, of course, be happy to take your money for years before you ever get to the point where you really start delving into the whole track experience, but you will never achieve LRH's version "Total Freedom" as an "Operating Thetan" if you reject the whole track, as any Jew, Muslim, or Christian must if she or he wants to remain in their traditional faith.
17 months ago: Judyjudy judy, you state that you cannot reason with someone who has a negative tone. Tone is picked up through two main senses; sight and sound. By communicating through text alone, we have already handicapped our ability to pick up on tone. While the above hypothesis is intriguing, it is a hypothesis nonetheless and until proper sources can be given, it will be considered to have no validity. However, if I were to take the hypothesis and treat it as true, I could argue that it is worthless to argue with you because you come off as a very negative person. Through your post you did a very well job putting forth your hypothesis and opinions without sounding caustic. But when you finish your post, you leave behind a vituperation that makes fellow posters seem inane and ignorant, “Anonymousercaters check your head.” You thereby imply a number of things. You effrontuously say that “Anonymousercaters” (I am assuming Anonymous, one of the numerous organizations that are critical of the Church of scientology) are idiots, but you provide no reason for your accusation. This also slyly implies that Scientologists are in general smarter than critics of scientologists which harmful and slanderous.
So Judyjudyjudy, if you still wish to believe that your above hypothesis that those with an angry tone are too difficult to reason with, than you probably will not respond to this post in a mature, reasonable manner. Also, as a side note, the topic of this Rant is whether or not Scientologists beliefs conflict with those of Abrahamic religions. Please stay on topic in these rants, or you are more than welcome to start your own rant or rave to discuss your own ideas. Thank and have a nice day.
17 months ago: Chief, let me give you an example. You're sitting in a boat, fishing with a couple of priests. Over a period of an hour they each walk across the water to shore and relieve themselves. You're needing some relief, too. If they did it (and you saw it happen) then you can do it. You step on the water and sink like a stone. One priest says to the other, "Do you think we should have told him where the rocks are?" The problem was, you believed what you saw. But didn't have all the data.

Scientology is a study of knowledge, to understand, so it can be applied immediately in all kinds of circumstances. The missing data is "understandings". It seems trivial at first. It seems inconsequential, hardly worthy of attention. But this is the difference that worked in Dianetics and that Ron carried forward into Scientology. The rocks you don't see are understandings in the mind of parishioners. Woot, made that one up myself.

Dangerranger, Judy said a mouthful, have a nice day.
Chef Xenu
Chef Xenu
Columbus, OH
17 months ago: a: old joke is old
b:rephrasing old joke as an analogy which has nothing to do with making the whole track and reincarnation compatible with the Abrahamic religious traditions is non-responsive to my rant or previous comments.

The fact, or "stable datum", if you will, is that you must accept the "whole track" and past lives, ie:reincarnation by whatever name, if you want to progress on the "bridge to total freedom." There is no getting around this.

You can be on "the Bridge" and still attend religious services at your synagogue, mosque, or (Christian) church (because most of these places welcome those who don't agree with them into the place of worship). But you can't hold true to Jewish, Christian, or Muslim beliefs AND be making Scientology case gain beyond the lowest pre-OT levels.

If you are taking communion at a Roman Catholic parish after you have attested to OT-III, you have either committed what the Corporation of Scientology calls a "high crime," (falsely attesting to OT-III) or you are committing what Rome calls a "mortal sin" (by taking holy communion while rejecting a foundational tennent of the faith).

Scientology and the Abrahamic religions cannot be reconciled unless you have multiple personality disorder.
Chef Xenu
Chef Xenu
Columbus, OH
17 months ago: Oh, and its "Chef" not "Chief." I'll cook you dinner buy am nobody's leader, and never achieved the rank of Chief when I was in the United States Navy.

You can call me Ray, and you can call me Raymond, and you can call me Chef, but please don't call me sir or chief.

;-)
17 months ago: Terryeo, I see you've found a different and altogether more suitable place to push Scientology than on Wikipedia. Good for you.

In any event, I have a very simple question for you: Can you proceed up the Bridge without believing in reincarnation?
17 months ago: Terryeo, first of all, you did not make the above scenario up, that is the basis of a joke. Do not accredit yourself with work that is not your own. How can someone study knowledge? Webster defines knowledge as, “expertise, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject.” If one already has the expertise and experience to perform a skill, why must they study it? By having the expertise, it implies that one already has the understanding of it already. So if scientology studies what is already known, isn’t that redundant. It would be more practical for scientologists to just take their knowledge and apply it, skipping the studying step altogether.

The statement that it is applicable in all situations is true and not true. Scientology is just one incarnation of the truth that is true for some and untrue for others. This is just the same as romanticism, realism, modern realism, transcendentalism and other philosophies that try and define the truth that are similarly true and untrue for people. [continued]
17 months ago: You say that understanding is trivial but it is actually the basis for everything you do in day to day life. One has the basic understanding that when the sun rises, it is morning and it is time to rise too. You may not fully understand why this is true, but since it works, you go along with it. Similarly, we has humans do not fully understand gravity. We know that it is there. We can measure it. But we do not know what it looks like or where it comes from or how. This does not prevent us from using gravity as a constant in equations when measuring projectile motion or sending rockets into space. Therefore, the statement that scientology sets itself apart by finding and explaining the understandings of how things work is not that special. Christians (for example) explain their observations of the truth and consider the understandings important. For them, it is important that one understand that Jesus Christ died to save mankind’s sins. It is important to understand that there is only one God and that mankind was created in his image. It is important to understand that there are 10 commandments that Christians must abide by. As this example shows, all religions explain their understandings of the world to their followers.

Also, it would have been nice if you had taken more time to acknowledge my post to Judy and taken time to say more about it then excuse her post with “[Judy] said a mouthful.” However it is nice to say that kindness is contagious. You too have a nice day Terryeo.
17 months ago: Sorry Terryeo to show that it was an old joke too, I did not see that Chef and pointed that out already.
Chef Xenu
Chef Xenu
Columbus, OH
17 months ago: Hehe, yeah, I think the first time I heard that joke was back in 1983 while my dad was working on a sermon, he didn't make it up, but he used it in his sermon, and even though he was by no means a comedian, his delivery was much better than Terryeo's.
The Cypress Gang
The Cypress Gang
Cypress, TX
17 months ago: Could we get off of Scientology for one single day? Maybe start on the Moonie's or Krishna's? Same concept but they work different street corners.
17 months ago: I'm sorry Cypress, I really wish we could. If I could do something, I totally would. But, I don't think we can. Maybe, maybe someday in the future.
Chef Xenu
Chef Xenu
Columbus, OH
17 months ago: The Cypress Gang:

What are the names of some Moonies who have been killed by the policies of their movement?

Where are the Moonie prison camps located?

What false scientific and medical claims have been made by Rev. Moon?

And, more to the point of this rant, where and when did the Moonies say you can continue practicing your old religion after you join them?

Same concept? Hardly...

The Cypress Gang
The Cypress Gang
Cypress, TX
17 months ago: Well I guess we opened up a whole new can of worms.
Moonie's in the 70's and 80's sold fairly nice flower packages on the street corners. While the hummmm guy's would collect the money and the hummmm gal's would deliver.

Funny that while the first transaction was taking place you (if the right persuasion) would be asked if you needed or want any other flowers from the delvery crew.

I see all of them a a bunch of whores.

Don't like it? Tough. Tough LOVE.
The Cypress Gang
The Cypress Gang
Cypress, TX
17 months ago: I guess there was some truth in my reply.
Waited over 2 hours for an answer.
I'm hoping it killed the thread.
Like I said.. Whores.. but I didn't say that their husbands are the ones who Pimp the Whores.
Oh well. just did.
Don't give money to or buy anything from corner street trash. Make a small little form out that has the local numbers to shelters and Social Security for them to call. Don't even give them a quarter to make the call.
17 months ago: Nah, i have not commented becuase i have been waiting for a reply that was more relevent to the discussion of scientology and the abrahamic religions. I don't really know anything about the moonies.
Chef Xenu
Chef Xenu
Columbus, OH
17 months ago: The Cypress Gang: I also didn't reply because, to be honest, your comment didn't make any sense. Your argument seems to break down to:

selling flowers = (equals) prostetution => (therefore) you should talk about the Unificationists instead of the Corporation of Scientology

sorry, I'm not following your logic.
17 months ago: Very interesting discussion. As a Scientologist, I agree, you can't do the upper levels of Scientology processing and still retain your faith in certain tenants of other religions - such as the idea that you only live one life.

However, as a Scientologist who has done the upper levels, I would say that it has strengthened my beliefs in certain things are are compatible with main stream religions, such as a basic belief in a higher power (God), recognition of the importance of right and wrong and the desire to help others.
Before you say I'm splitting hairs, let me say that I agree - as a Scientologist who "believes" in the concepts of the upper levels of Scientology I would not now become a Catholic, Jew or Muslim. On the other hand, I could probably be a Buddist. I personally won't tell people that they can be a Catholic and a Scientology OT. BUT, they can be a Catholic and USE Scientology to better their lives.

Get a hold of The Way To Happiness book or booklet and you'll see just how closely the Scientology moral code parallels the moral tenets of other world religions. (Con't...)
17 months ago: What saddens me is that, in focusing on the OT levels of Scientology, people dismiss the volume of useful techniques that were created and are available to anyone without having to become a Scientologist. Yes, you can be a Christian and still use Dianetics, or Scientology communication skills, or the Tone Scale, or administrative methods. These all have value and can help everyday people in everyday situations, without them having to subscribe to the rest of the religion.

I personally am long past the "zealot" stage, where I had felt that I had to introduce everyone to my new found religion and get them on board. I'm much more interested in helping people where I can, with what I know can work for them. If they want to become a Scientologist, great. But on the other hand they can continue in their own belief system and still improve their lives with the tools we offer.
Anyone can pick up "Scientology: A New Slant on Life" at the local library, read it and select those things from it that would help them.
17 months ago: First of all, "reincarnation" is more an Indian (from India) idea, isn't it? That's where you come back as a animal of some kind, depending on how karmicly you acted, this lifetime, right? That's the idea?

Scientology doesn't base on beliefs. It doesn't encourage beliefs, adhere to beliefs, require beliefs and really, would prefer you think for yourself. It simply says, "You are an eternal spiritual being". It doesn't say where you are eternal. It doesn't say what lifeforms you manifest as, or when you are eternal, it just says "eternal". But here you are, a human being. Now how do you expect me to believe that you are eternal when you are a human being? How are you going to prove that? How could anyone prove that? Think, "I am eternal, I am eternal, I am eternal". Now, are you less a Christian, Mormon, Jew or Islamic because you thought that? Further, Scientology doesn't suggest you believe eternal existence or believe anything. The written word appears on the page, you read it. How did reading words effect your devotion to your religion? There is no incompatibility because Scientology doesn't suggest belief.
17 months ago: Terryeo: Yes it does. You have to, absolutely have to, move past the notion that Scientology is stablished fact if you want to be able to argue sensibly in favor of it. "You are an eternal spiritual being" is itself a *belief*, because it's inherently unprovable. Repetition of "I am eternal" is absurd, and if that's your standard of proof, that's kind of silly. I can repeat "I am a rutabaga" in my head over and over, and that doesn't make it true.

Accept it. You *believe* you are an eternal spiritual being. It is a belief for which you have absolutely no proof but your own experiences, and that's not something you can pass on to other people.

As for reincarnation, of course you believe in it. Again, don't try to deny that. If you are a "spiritual being" who has had many bodies, that is the definition of reincarnation right there.
17 months ago: Merrill: Exactly which techniques in Scientology are useful for non-Scientologists? Hubbard's administrative system is largely only used by Scientologist-run businesses, and has gotten no traction at all in the larger business world, where it would compete with the likes of iso9000.

I've personally been on the receiving end of someone using Hubbard's communication "tech," which I found to consist largely of speaking in a loud, rude tone, and acting like a complete boor in order to guarantee that attention was on him. Communication tech works in that being rude with intent is likely to get people to pay attention to you, but if your goal is anything beyond that, it's counterproductive.

The list of failures in Hubbard's tech when applied secularly is long. Narconon and Criminon are utter, abject failures, and rife with unlicensed Scientology employees performing the "therapies" therein. Applied Scholastics, which mostly seems to consist of teaching kids the wrong definitions for "mass" and "gradient" and making them do moronic clay demos, has gotten almost no traction in the academic world, and every time it does, the ties to Scientology become clear and it gets tossed again.

And the Tone Scale is not only an arbitrary and largely inaccurate classification of emotional states and the responses that work best with each, in areas where it is actually accurate it is also so extraordinarily obvious that I'm stunned anyone bothered to write it down. If you need to be told the way in which someone in pain (1.8 on Hubbard's scale) will act, then something is wrong with you.

So, where is the benefit to non-Scientologists in all this?
Chef Xenu
Chef Xenu
Columbus, OH
17 months ago: I'm with HeyNoniNoni on this one as well, the Corporation of Scientology has yet to put any of its "technologies" to scientific testing. Where we have actual data it is clear the tech has failed those to whom it was applied.

Dianetic processing was subjected to scientific testing years ago (1953) by Harvey Jay Fischer. The experiment used only auditors certified by Hubbard. Long story short: NONE of the promised benefits of Dianetic processing could be observed to even the minimal level of statistical significance.

None of my friends over at the Fisher College of Business have ever expressed one iota of admiration for Hubbard Management Tech.

When the Purif was put to the test following the Chernobyl incident, there was no sign it changed the rate at which toxins or radioactive particles were expelled from the bodies of the subjects.

NarCONon and criminon claim to have a success rate much higher than any other drug treatment program, at times advertising success rates as high as 80%. Whenever outside examiners have stepped in and actually looked at the recidivism rates, however, it has become clear that narCONon plays loose and fast with statistics, and in reality does no better, and often worse, than secular drug treatment programs.

The only things Scientology seems to be able to succeed at it convincing people who have had no actual measurable improvement to their medical or psychological condition to say they feel better.

Unfortunately, Dianetics and Scientology don't claim to make you more content with conditions as they are, they promise to actually improve conditions. On this promise they have consistently failed to deliver.
Moneen
Moneen
South Africa, Republic of
17 months ago: The spirit only gets reborn in the flesh when not knowing the real truth that sets the spirit free.
It is because Scientology does not know such real truth that they require being reborn in the flesh.
17 months ago: Please. When you, or I, or anyone says "the sky is blue" or "you are blue-eyed", or "you are an eternal being". Please. Understand it is a statement. It is not you. You are not it. The words on the page are what you read, not what you are. Then you judge for yourself whether the statement is true or false, is possible or impossible.

The Abrahamic Religions are founded on, are based on, belief.

Scientology is not based on belief. It is information, it is written words. You make of it what you will. The only thing there is in Scientology, for anyone, is their own, personal conclusions. Their own personal experiences, their own personal wisdom. It is not beliefs and can never be "All Scientologists (anything)".
The Cypress Gang
The Cypress Gang
Cypress, TX
17 months ago: I actually kind of liked that post Terryeo!
BlueMoon! Actually the colors you think you see are only a perception based on what colors of the spectrum are absorbed by chemical compounds.

Blue might not really be blue.
How does the apply to S?

Perception.


Chef Xenu
Chef Xenu
Columbus, OH
17 months ago: Terryeo, you can claim as often and as loudly as you like that Scientology is not based on beliefs, but frequent repetition and attempts at redefinition will not make it so.

The Abrahamic traditions are as rooted in text as Scientology. Text (in this case the Torah, the New Testament, and the Quran) is information in the form of written words no less for the Abrahamic faiths than it is in Scientology or geology.

Once you internalize the data and digest it and reach a conclusion about it, it becomes belief. It doesn't matter if that belief is that Moses parted the sea, or that the Holy Spirit ministers to the suffering, or that Allah rewards the merciful, or that auditors clear engrams from the reactive mind, or that water will boil at a temperature of 212 degrees fahrenheit, it is still belief. If that belief cannot be scientifically proven, that belief involves faith.

Some of the beliefs which Scientology implicitly requires faith in:
L Ron Hubbard knew what he was talking about.
The "Tech" works.
Man is an immortal spirit being (thetan).
The emeter is measuring more than just you skin's resistance to electrical current and how tightly you are squeezing the cans.
There is a reactive mind which stores engrams, and which the "Tech" can "run out."
Scientology processing is worth paying exorbitant fees for.

It is ludicrous to claim that Scientology does not involve belief, and if you want to deny the beliefs of Scientology require faith, you had better get to work in the laboratory working up some valid experimental evidence derived using accepted scientific methodology.
17 months ago: Terryeo:

"Please. When you, or I, or anyone says "the sky is blue" or "you are blue-eyed", or "you are an eternal being". Please. Understand it is a statement. It is not you. You are not it. The words on the page are what you read, not what you are. Then you judge for yourself whether the statement is true or false, is possible or impossible."

That has got to be the biggest load of horse pucky I have read this month. I'm sorry, but that's not just illogical, it's downright moronic. Just to start with, not all "statements" are created equal. If I write down "the sky is blue," it is not equivalent in value to writing "canticle floorwax pufferfish." Of course both are statements, and of course both are words representing ideas, not the ideas themselves. But one is utter nonsense. And - this is important - it will continue to be utter nonsense regardless of whether or not some crazy person reads it and goes, "Of course! Canticle floorwax pufferfish! It all makes sense now!"

Look... If you honestly believe that all statements have intrinsic value and that it's up to the individual reading it to decide if a statement is true or not, then you're insane. I don't mean that as an insult, and I'm sorry to put it so harshly, but that's insanity, right there.
17 months ago: ...Continued...

"The Abrahamic Religions are founded on, are based on, belief."

True, though woefully incomplete. They're also based on the written word, just as much as Scientology.

"Scientology is not based on belief. It is information, it is written words. You make of it what you will. The only thing there is in Scientology, for anyone, is their own, personal conclusions. Their own personal experiences, their own personal wisdom. It is not beliefs and can never be 'All Scientologists (anything)'."

False. Well, partially false. Scientology is based on belief. Seriously, if you want to come off as a sane human being, you have to accept this. You believe in reincarnation. You have no scientific evidence to back up a single thing in Scientology. Regardless of its merits, this is thus a matter of belief. Even if it is 100% "true for you," that is a belief. It is also written words, of course. And various rites and rituals (yes, when you're "auditing," you're engaged in one of your belief system's rites).
17 months ago: HeyNoniNoni: When you've seen techniques applied badly, or not at all, it should reflect badly on the person applying the technique, not necessarily on the technique itself.
To your points: I know ISO 9000. This is not an administrative system. It is primarily a compliance testing system. Are you aware of ANY workable, proven administrative system?
Communication: See http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/SH5.HTM for what Scientology communication is supposed to be. Certainly being loud and rude is not part of this.
Criminon & Narconon: Can you direct us to your sources of failure rates? There are a significant number of web sites to the opposite.
Applied Scholastics & Study Tech: Here again, you should read what this is and how it is applied. See http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/SH1_1.HTM
The Tone Scale: Every person I've ever shown this to has said it correlates with their experiences, and many have said it is obvious. You are certainly entitled to your opinion.
Again, my point is that there is help here for anyone who wants to learn these things and apply them. There is no requirement to be a Scientologist.
17 months ago: Chief Xenu: My experience has been that in the “soft” sciences (education, administration, rehabilitation) our society is incredibly incompetent and regularly fails to perceive what works. Rather, in all these areas I observe degenerating success, abandonment of what has worked in the past, and adherence to the latest fads. Trying to get people to use a methodology, ANY methodology, with repeatability and discipline seems nigh impossible in today’s short attention span world. You want to throw out everything that Hubbard developed. I say that there is much there that is of significant use if used intelligently by people who are willing to follow instruction and have the discipline to get something done.
17 months ago: