Scientology - keep reading, serious discussion ahead

[SacredSpirit]

Just plain creepy

http://www.scientology.org/

Alot of Celebraties and rich people do this religion. My mother says its a new made up religion for rich people who think their special and so they made up it up to be difdferent and stuff.

I personally think its wierd and demonic

For example
Tom Cruise and his wife

We shes having her baby, no one can say anything. It has to be completely quiet. She cant cry out or anything while having the baby.

CRAZY!!!!

[lions mane]

this isnt a religon its more of a belief if that makes sense!

and do u know that kattie (that crazy girl with that sorry actor) cant see the baby for 7 days (a week) after she gives birth! omg! what the heck kinda birth is that? :eek:

but yes! this is a very stupid (stupid) belief! ya know?

[Someonebeatmetowunderkind]

They are getting as wierd as Michael Jackson.

[lions mane]

They are getting as wierd as Michael Jackson.
omg! michael jackson is one of the greatest singers of all time! if not the best! how's he weird? :confused: :eek:

[~HoRsEy_gUrL~]

Awwww, she can't see the baby for 7 days!!!!!

[♣Teh Deviant♣]

UGH DONT EVEN MENTION IT! :mad:

but Kaballah is cool though, better than Scientology at least. And lots of famous ppl are doing it.

[♣Teh Deviant♣]

this isnt a religon its more of a belief if that makes sense!

and do u know that kattie (that crazy girl with that sorry actor) cant see the baby for 7 days (a week) after she gives birth! omg! what the heck kinda birth is that? :eek:

but yes! this is a very stupid (stupid) belief! ya know?

AND she has to go thru labor in SILENCE! :eek: :mad: :( Poor Katie...I never liked her, anyways, but..

[DeplorableWord]

Uhh, that's wierd!

[lions mane]

u guys! she just gave birth! the babys name is suri! :eek: poor kid! ya know?

[mrstumnus99]

Yeah but Apple is worse. At least she's named after one of the lemurs in "Dinosaur"!

[king_phiilip]

i wonder if tom did this he said he would

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16959400&method=full&siteid=66633&headline=cruise--i-ll-eat-my-baby-s-placenta--name_page.html

[Rhyanidd]

Well if she can't see the baby for 7 days after its born then Breastfeeding is shot to..um...the pits of despair! And dont cry out when she is in labour?!?! that is stuupid! Its a painful process!...Ya know I think TC needs to go through something like that and not be allowed to cry out!

But what do they do if she does cry out?

[Elf Of The Grey Havens]

This is gonna get locked... Jimmy K's thread did.

[Señor Puntos]

Scientologists make me sick. Or, in fact, the people who are in the high positions of scientology make me sick.

[SacredSpirit]

I just read the thing on birth on the website and she can cry out but it has to be quiet they want the baby to come out in a world thats calm and peacful.

[theorangejello]

actually wanna know whats ironic
brooke shields.. also had a baby girl. lol.
that was like 20in and 20ounches.sumthing like that.

[*IOWW the Iasc*]

u guys! she just gave birth! the babys name is suri! :eek: poor kid! ya know?

Suri is hebrew for Princess.

Which is strange considering Tom Cruise doesn't believe in God...

I think it's a pretty name...but that poor kid...having to have Tom Cruise as a dad...

[xovermyheadx]

Suri is hebrew for Princess.

Which is strange considering Tom Cruise doesn't believe in God...

I think it's a pretty name...but that poor kid...having to have Tom Cruise as a dad...

I think its an ugly name
i feel bad for the child!
plus having THEM as parents :mad: :rolleyes:

[*IOWW the Iasc*]

I think its an ugly name
i feel bad for the child!
plus having THEM as parents :mad: :rolleyes:

Your entitled to the opinion about the name...but I disagree, I think it's pretty.

Actually, you can have your opinion on both...because I know Tom is a head-case, but Katie may not be that bad.
I'm not going to automatically think the kid is gonna have an awful life, because she probably wont.

[xovermyheadx]

Your entitled to the opinion about the name...but I disagree, I think it's pretty.

Actually, you can have your opinion on both...because I know Tom is a head-case, but Katie may not be that bad.
I'm not going to automatically think the kid is gonna have an awful life, because she probably wont.
Tom does have problems
yeah..the name thing......uck

katie..idk

[skandarsgirl411]

ya i heard about that too it really sucks for katie!!!!!!!!! lol

[Elf Of The Grey Havens]

Out of respect for Jimmy K, this thread should really be closed. When he started a thread about Scientology, it got deleted.

[lions mane]

this thread is more about the crazy people who follow scientology not about the religon/belief itself ya know?

and IOWW do u know that kattie has stop talking to all her long time friends and everything ever sicne she started things up with tom? yah.... i use to like her to cause one of my fave shows of all time is/was dawsons creek! ya know? but ever since she got with that manicac (who i never actually liked, just some of his movies) i just cant stand her no more! ya know?

[tgraveline]

Well, scientology is supposedly based off the book Battlefield: Earth, which to my knowledge is a science-fiction book, made religious by a few people. I am not sure if the Author even believes in this or not. I do know that the movie was postponed for many years as the producers said noone would see it, well they were right and John Travolta got his way and it got more popular.

I myself find this to be a bit rediculous as a sort of religion, but by definition this is a cult, based on the size of it. Second, from what I know, they go to "church" for a lack of a better term on Sunday. I ask myself why? Because thats when Christians celebrate for their sabbath and other religions do so on other days based on specific reasons. This just settled with Sunday, for lack of a reason and more for convienence. I'm sorry, but for a guy to just make this up and get turned into a religious thing, just seems a bit stupid.

At least all of the other religions have some sort of book, and history to it that doesn't date back to some sort of alien thing, lol. Most of those religions end in mass suicide, scary.

tg

PS on a side-note, Kaballuh was mentioned earlier, and that is a form of Jewish Mysticism, and I must say I wish I came up with the idea of holy drinking water, dang charging five bucks a 20oz bottle is just ingenious, lol. Second, I'm sorry but Brittany Spears is in this apparently and she got some Hebrew writing tattoed somewhere on the back of her neck I believe, and that is one of the oldest Jewish whatever deity taboos. Should check up on your own "religion" before you do something to your body people.

[MrBeaver]

this isnt a religon its more of a belief Enlighten me as to what the difference is.

This looks to me like a really demented rip of Universism (http://www.universist.org/), which is basically a group of people of any religion who apply skepticism to their beliefs (i.e. - the Bible has been translated and revised multiple times, and is not always told from the same view. How do we know for sure what happened, besides the general picture?) and keep an open mind to others' beliefs and not have "faith" -- as in believing in any one "truth" without any question.

EDIT: Ooh, the new Unviersist site layout hurts my eyes...
DOUBLE EDIT: Hey, where'd the rest of the site go? :(

[MrBeaver]

omg! michael jackson is one of the greatest singers of all time! if not the best! how's he weird? :confused: :eek: He's a child molester that's addicted to plastic surgery, for one...

[Euphrates]

Well this has been a pleasantly uplifting, encouraging, educational, and Christ-like discussion. *sarcasm*

Scientology is based on a philosophy espoused by L. Ron Hubbard in the 1950's. If it is based on a writing, which it kinda is, it is based on the Dianetics. He also wrote sci-fi books. It is considered by some to be a cult because there have been accusations of them exploiting their members for money and harassing critics of their organization. Nations such as Germany and France have labelled Scientology a cult. The Church of Scientology has the status of a religion in America.

There's an old cliche about not saying anything if it's not nice, but I think Scripture puts it better: "A man who lacks judgment derides his neighbor, but a man of understanding holds his tongue." Proverbs 11:12

I can't see a good reason to continue with the "Scientology bad" stuff. If that's what you think... fine. But there's no point is starting and continuing a thread that is meant to deride Scientology and gossip. (See: Proverbs 26:20, Romans 1:29-30, 2 Corinthians 12:20)

If you're worried about the family friendly nature of narniafans, you need look no farther than here. This thread should be locked because it serves no useful purpose and is a stumbling block for many.

[Naydiss]

It really stinks for Katie because she has been raised and grown up a Catholic adn now because she is having a baby with Tom Cruise, she is changing her entire life to evolve around Scientology. I feel bad for her :(

[Señor Puntos]

Did you know Scientologists try to get college drop-outs who don't know what to do with their lives to go away on boats because they tell them they're actually ancient warriors but they usually end up going crazy and that the whole religion is based on a lie and is a load of crazy lies? :)

[inkspot]

Out of respect for Jimmy K, this thread should really be closed. When he started a thread about Scientology, it got deleted.
The reason I didn't close this one is: it seemed to be more a little chat about Tom and Katie's baby with a little Scientology thrown in. It wasn't, before page three, masquerading as a real discussion about Scientology.

If you want the Thread to continue, and you want to post something bad about Scientology, please post your documentation and your own reasoning. Don't just say, "Scientology is bad! Scientologists make me sick!"

Actually post some facts about Scientology and explain why you react to these facts the way you do.

Otherwise, just gossip about Tom and Katie and other Scientologists.

The thing is, Scientology is a religion, and it is very disrespectful just to throw out incendiary statements without documentation and without being reasonable. If you can be reasonable and respectful, the Thread can be open. If you just say mean things about Scientology, it will be closed.

Hope this clears things up. :)

Did you know Scientologists try to get college drop-outs who don't know what to do with their lives to go away on boats because they tell them they're actually ancient warriors but they usually end up going crazy and that the whole religion is based on a lie and is a load of crazy lies?
This sentiment may be true, but in order for the discussion to be reasonable, you would be better off to say:

Did you know Scientologists believe humans are actually ancient warriors whose spirits have come to dwell in human bodies? This of course is in contrast to Christian teaching.
:)

[WillsGirl]

Yeah but Apple is worse. At least she's named after one of the lemurs in "Dinosaur"!
Apple isn't so bad, it's a Biblical name and there's a cute story behind it.

I cannot express my feelings enough about this matter... I went off on a rampage saying how much I hate Tom Cruise... (Which I probably shouldn't have... :rolleyes: ) But you know, all of his scientalogy crap is ridiculous and insulting! He's basically saying that vitamins and excorcise is enough for anybody and there is no such thing as a chemical embalance or depression!
Yeah well, let's see YOUR brother get cancer and THEN come back and say it again YOU IDIOT! :mad:

Okay I'm done.... :o Sorry for ranting here guys...

[sylara]

[QUOTE=lions mane]this isnt a religon its more of a belief
[QUOTE]

As I'm currently working on an article on Scientology perhaps I can help with a few facts. First, Scientology actually claims to have nothing to do with faith or belief. Rather their philosophy is that whatever is observed by you is true for you. The primary definition as given by www.scientology.org is "Scientology is the study and handling of the spirit in relationship to itself, others and all of life. The religion comprises a body of knowledge extending from certain fundamental truths." One of these 'truths' is that man is a spiritual and immortal being with unlimited capabilities. However, scientologists believe that because man is 'diseased' (for lack of a better term) that he/she has 8 dynamics within life that must be accepted and absorbed before finding complete happiness. These dynamics of the spirit range from the individual to God (merely a supreme being to them).

Another of the rather odd concepts from scientology is the tone scale. The tone scale gives a wide range of emotions and states of mind upon which every individual supposedly falls. The idea is that by looking at the scale and knowing where one person falls on it you can use Scientology to communicate with that person and move yourself up along the scale to what is considered the pinnacle at 40.0 (the supreme state of beingness). One of the methods of finding a person's position on the tone scale is a device called the E-meter. The E-meter (electropsychometer) is controlled by a leader in Scientology who uses it to pick up electronic readings on the individual's mental state.
That is the official word from the scientology website.

Now, one thing it is important to note, Scientology was started by L. Ron Hubbard and most of the ideas came out of a book published in 1950 called "Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health." This book was more specific but eventually led to the modern day version of Scientology.

There have been several controversies over Scientology although as of late the group is steadily growing despite the fact that the majority of Americans view it as a cult religion. (Whether the latest antics of TomKat have anything to do with the American opinion of it I can't say). In 1991, Time Magazine published an article on Scientology entitled "Scientology: The Cult of Greed." The magazine was sued for libel but ended up winning its case. The main reason for the case was for several papers known as The Fishman documents. Steven Fishman, a former scientologist had spoken with Time and provided about 65 pages of information from the church's "Operating Thetan" (the rules of Scientology). The group did ultimately win their case in stating that their documents should remain private. However, it has hurt the public view as access to these documents is only allowed to followers who have proven to be spirtually aware. Coincidentally, it will also cost you tens of thousands of dollars to view these documents. (Hardly a policy that looks good in light of the Time article).

It is also important to note that constant battles are being waged. Much of Europe has found Scientology to be fraudulent and there have been several cases of mistreatment/miseducation of children reported. Many Californian cities have been finding various problems within curricula of Scientology and some of the practices.

Hopefully that provides a little insight. I would be happy to answer as many questions as I can. The more opinions I get in, the better my editor likes me. :)

[inkspot]

Thanks, Sylara!
What do you know about this theory that all humans are actually reincarnated alien warriors? Is this something Scientologists believe?

[sylara]

It is a little more complicated than that although no matter how its worded I have to say I still find it extremely disturbing and odd. Having said that, here is my best attempt at objectivity.

In the 3rd level of the Operating Thetan (which I mentioned before) there is a story of Xenu. The story goes that Xenu was an alien who was the head of the Galactic Federation approximately 75 million years ago. (apparently George Lucas wasn't as ahead of his time as he thought ;) ) Supposedly he had a severe overpopulation problem so he created a hydrogen bomb (again, the US is behind the times) and brought the extra 'beings' to this planet where they were blown up and then packaged. The reasons for packaging the remains are unknown by outsiders to the group and will cost you a good sum to find out the answer. However, the general idea is that their spirits were still free and so now our bodies here are infested with these spirits. This is all discovered at level 3 and other members try to help each other get rid of these 'spirits' through mediation and channeling that is supposed to remind them of the time they were blown up.

It is interesting to note that the only other time this information was published outside of official Scientology documents was in an article done by the Washington Post. The paper was sued for "trade secret violations" a very telling case. The group made no efforts to sue for defamation. Their suit simply said that the paper was telling their secrets not that these secrets were false. That suit was a big push in the public eye as to the oddities of Scientology.

I hope that answered your question, Inkspot.

[inkspot]

Yes, thank you. Very good answer. So, the spirit is like a parasite that we need to get rid of. I thought it was our soul, that we were in effect the revived aliens. But no, you make it more clear: these revived aliens leeching into us are the source of our troubles because they don't belong in us.

I get it. Thank you. :)

[sylara]

Actually, that's where it gets a little confusing. its supposed to be that they are parasites yet members help each other to rid themselves of the parasites by remembering being blown up. I haven't yet been able to discover whether they have these memories because of the spirits being attached to them or because in the broad spectrum of Scientology beliefs, we are all space beings and so remember them that way. One of my sources for my article has stated that the facts for that are located in the Operating Thetan. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find any confirmation of it. (If anyone has a spare million dollars around I could get plenty of answers though. :) )

[Gryphon]

oh my goodness, you people and your celebrity gossip, not everything the media says is true for one thing and also, who cares about what other people do? its not like we can change anything.

anyway, if there is anything these people need its prayer, period, the media is eating them enough as it is. :rolleyes:

[sylara]

I'm not sure if you're referring to the many posts on the celebrities or the thread as a whole but I haven't been discussing the various celebrities involved at all. I'm currently working on a piece on Scientology in light of its recent popularity and I was attempting to explain it to people. I agree they need prayer but I was hoping to clarify some details on their beliefs for people who were curious.

[tgraveline]

Very informative sylara, good to know. thanks for the info.

tg

[Gryphon]

oh, no, its just after Will and Skandar and all that crap im tired of hearing anything having to do with the media in general in reference to alot of things, mostly celebs.

[jesusfreak]

This a kult and nothing less. Poor Katie is going to have a terrible time. There are also stupid rules that if the Katie is having problems with the delivery she can't take medicine and can't have any metical attention or anything. If this has any complications it is very posible that she could die! So sad.

Even if you don't a religion, doesn't this sound completely bazare and crule to the baby and Katie?????

[sylara]

Scientology claims that the thetans (which I mentioned above as the alien beings whose spirits supposedly inhabit our beings and for which we use the Operating Thetan as a manual for getting rid of them) attach themselves to a newborn almost instantly. The idea is that silence during the birth, the use of as little anesthesia as possible, and separation of child and mother will keep the number of thetans limited. Supposedly if there is little sound the thetans cannot hear them and if there is little contact the many thetans around the parents won't shift over to the child immediately. Here is an exact quote from Dianetics the book that started it all on silence in birth.
"Maintain silence in the presence of birth to save both the sanity of the mother and the child and safeguard the home to which they will go. And the maintaining of silence does not mean a volley of "Sh's," for those make stammerers."
L. Ron Hubbard, "Dianetics", Chapter X, "Preventive Dianetics", page 193

Again, it certainly is odd and numerous doctors have pointed out the many dangers of this. Babies need that connection to the outside world and many doctors are worried about the effects of Scientologist practices. The one benefit is at the moment they still give birth in hospitals. The fear is if they began to require home births in which the child would truly be alone other than its feedings.

[inkspot]

Thanks, Sylara. At least this will help people understand why all these procedures were required for Tom and Katie's baby. For whatever we may think of it, Tom and Katie think they are doing what is best for their little one. :)

[Nosferatu]

Finally I'm back!

Well I saw this scientology discussion and I thought I would join in!


As It has been previously stated Scientology was founded by (One of the greatest Science fiction writers) L Ron Hubbard (OK If I spelt his name incorrectly it's because I'm extremely tired!) And the religion actually started in a Bar where Hubbard was talking to his friends about religion And he stated that religion was dead and that if it was to come back it would be in a science fiction pretense. His friends disagreed with him so Hey decided to write his book. *NOTE* OK The following is speculation stated by various journalists and Articles it is not Necessarily the truth *END NOTE* Years later when scientology was successful It is said that Hubbard was going to come out and say that scientology was merely a experiment and nothing more... A little while later Hubbard disappeared. Now granted scientology today is different then it was back then. Back then it was a horrible terrorist organization and the government had hundreds of busts taking down many of the radicals of scientology. But the rumor is that the scientologists kidnapped Hubbard and kept him in a boat out of American Waters. Ok This is facts I have gained from various news organizations and other documents. So nobody get angry and start throwing their stones! :D

P.S. If anybody find my post hard to read please be gracious because I think I need glasses and again I am extremely tired! :)

[Lawrence]

Friends,

I would have to agree with the previous poster who stated that Scientology is not a religion. They may have a history, a mythology, etc., but they have no belief in God, simply the "power within" (which got there by some of the most convoluted, science-fiction I have ever read). They supposedly do good work with their Narcanon (helping narcotics addicts), but on balance their ability to pull souls away from God and his Son negates any good work they might do in my humble opinion.

In less enlightened times folks who believed in powers other than those of God (and permitted by God) were treated far less kindly than Tom and Katie, John Travolta, Kirstie Allie, etc. People who talk of "Thetans" and "Xenu" might as well be talking about Asmodeus or Beelzebub, as far as I am concerned.

Pax,
L

[Jood]

omg! michael jackson is one of the greatest singers of all time! if not the best! how's he weird? :confused: :eek:
HOW IS HE NOT WEIRD!!!!!!!!
HE WAS BORN BLACK!!!!!!
NOW HE'S WHITE!!!
EXPLAIN THAT!!!
HE WAS ON CHILD YOU-KNOW-WHAT-CHARGES!!!!
WEIRDO TO THE MAX...
He's probably gonna turn out to be you-know-what.

[Euphrates]

There are a number of different skin diseases that could account for his change in skin color. None of which include being "weird". Let's not attack people for things they cannot change.

Again:
"A man who lacks judgment derides his neighbor, but a man of understanding holds his tongue." Proverbs 11:12

[Jood]

ahhh come one..
We ALL know, or should know, it wasn't a disease, it was chemicals, and surgery, to give him a really weird nose.

[lions mane]

He's a child molester that's addicted to plastic surgery, for one...
yah, i dunno how off topic this will be but i just saw it and wow!

hes so not a child molestor, and if hes addicted to plastic surgery so what? does that make him a monster? does he lose all credability for that? does that make him crazy?

[Euphrates]

Michael Jackson if off topic for this thread... but the thread's original title did encourage gossip. And while we're on it: "Judge not, lest ye be judged" Matthew 7:1. I think Christ was right. What do you think?

Basically, keep the unsupported personal attacks to yourself.

[Nosferatu]

I'm not sure how relivant this is but when Jesus said that it was mean't that don't Judge and condemn someone to a Sin that you yourself are guilty of. Like someone trying someone for adultery when they themselves where adulterers.

[Euphrates]

"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." Matthew 7:1-2

This does not only apply to hypocricy.

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Luke 6:31

This applies to all actions.

I tell you that there are skin diseases that can cause massive skin color change as seen in Michael Jackson. Dermatologists have testified that Jackson has vitiligo and lupus. Suggestions that his change in skin color is due to chemicals is unsubstantiated rumor. Furthermore, Jackson has never been convicted of child molestation. We should not judge him, or anyone else, in such a manner.

The same is true of Scientologists. Most accusations come from people who are not well informed about the subject and at a place where there are no Scientologists to defend themselves and their philosophy. It is best not to deride our neighbors.

[inkspot]

Yah, let's stop giving Michael Jackson a hard time. We're just discussing Scientology.

[shmeepie]

sorry if you guys don't want to hear any more about michael jackson, but i HAD to comment.

what's all these news stories about michael jackson going to court, on charges of what? child molestation!

and skin disease my foot. he got plastic surgery because he was ashamed that he was black.

sorry if i seem too opinionated.

[Ephinie]

It would be cool if we could get a scientologist on here to give us some "inside information" on it. I was especially interested in what Sylara said about how you have to pay a lot of money before you can learn certain inside things about what they believe. This is typical of most cult's, I believe. They keep a bunch of knowledge about their doctrines secret, reserved for a select few. Therefore, its adherents actually follow a religion that they know very little about, unless they are in this coveted inside circle.

Christianity is not like this now, but it was similar at one time. There used to be a time when very few people could read for themselves, so they had to rely on what they were told by priests and those who could read for themselves. I am so glad those days are over, and there are no secret doctrines or anything like that in Christianity now. Makes things a whole lot better, in my opinion.

[inkspot]

Agreed. I also thought it was interesting what Sylara said about when the Washington Post published some of those Scientology doctrines, they weren't sued for defamation or libel or something, but for disclosing trade secrets -- as if their secrets are what they sell to keep the business going ... It's quite different from Christianity, where we would be delighted if the Washington Post would publish our plan of salvation through Jesus. We don't want it to be a secret!

[Euphrates]

sorry if you guys don't want to hear any more about michael jackson, but i HAD to comment.

what's all these news stories about michael jackson going to court, on charges of what? child molestation!

and skin disease my foot. he got plastic surgery because he was ashamed that he was black.

sorry if i seem too opinionated.
You are wrong and your comments are hurtful. I refuse to allow you to have the last word when they are so clearly misguided and mean.

How would you like it if you were accused of something but not convicted and people took the accusation as a sign of guilt? In America we have this thing called the presumption of innocence. It's a good idea. Michael Jackson has never been convicted of child molestation. You would be wise to keep that in mind.

How can plastic surgery change someone from being black to being white? And what chemical do you think he used? Any evidence? I tell you there is expert testimony that accounts for his skin change due to diseases, but all you say in response is "skin disease my foot". Good one.

It's not that you are too opinionated, but you are making wild accusations against a real person with real feelings and a real soul. Your accusations are unsupported and hurtful. You need to stop.

[inkspot]

Is Michael Jackson a Scientologist? I thought his family was Jehovahs Witness or something. Because Scientology has a lot of rich and famous patrons, it's hard to keep this discussion from centering on their eccentricities rather than their faith. But we should let Michael Jackson alone for now, okay? He is the King of Pop, dances great, and had a lot of good songs back in the day. I am sorry for his misfortunes now and hope he finds spiritual hope for eternity.

Now, back to the discussion, if anyone has anything else on the religion rather than the celebrities ... I wish one of our members was a Scientologist and could explain it.

[LifeMaiden]

Michael Jackson is a Jehovah's Witness.



I belonged to Scientology for about a year back in 1990. I have to tell you guys from my own personal experience that it was both positive and negative, but MORE negative. I'll tell you what really spoiled it for me. There was a book that was written and published in Canada about L RON HUBBARD, the founder of scientology, and about his several children and his wife. I remember that I kept asking questions about where his wife and kids were, and the answers I received were always evasive.

Some of the teachings were sensible and practical but nowhere near being worth what scientology charged in relation to the services. You could go to a therapist for so much less, or even better, talk to your friends and loved ones for FREE. It costs about 40,000 dollars ( and that was back in 1990) to reach what they call a state of CLEAR, meaning that your mind has been cleared of past problems and past influences that may have troubled you, and you are ready to move on to what they call OT, meaning operating THETA, or being able to operate on a highly spiritual level. There are eight operating theta levels. To reach level eight you'd have to spend at least a hundred thousand dollars, all of which are considered church 'donations'.

I was given this book to read, banned by scientologists for obvious reasons, by an ex scientologist himself. It discussed the hypocriticial lifestyle L Ron Hubbard lived.

I never fully immersed myself into this group because somehow, down deep inside, I felt they were more cultlike than anything else. I only went through a few stages before I quit. After I quit they sent people to my parents' house, and called many, many times. I got the feelng they were spying on me. It was frightening to think about at the time.

I asked a lot of questions while I was a member at this one center where I lived. Too many questions which were never answered which made me suspicious. The emphasis on clean living was ruined by nearly all the members smoking. When I asked them why they chose to do something as unhealthy as smoking, the answer was almost always the same from every member who smoked...because the body was meaningless and the 'theta', or 'soul' . That's an interesting hypocritical viewpoint...to try to emphasize healthy living and then ruin it by smoking two packs a day. L Ron Hubbard himself was a chain smoker.



There was an emphasis on holistic medicine and a more natural approach to treating illnesses, with the belief that most illness came from something emotional or something that you were withholding emotionally....( and avoiding doctors like the plague which could be deadly), vitamin consumption, and a process of sauna and body cleansing to rid the body of toxins...it was said you could experience past lives through this. I, unfortunately, did not. There is also a huge cruise ship that cruises around the oceans, never docking, which is run by highly trained scientologists

I personally believe from reading the book on L RON HUBBARD that like many people, he simply used his views as a way to obtain money. What else is new? His wife is supposedly in prison because of income tax evasion. There was a HUGE emphasis on the fact that psychology and psychiatry were evil and bad...and all anti depressants were just soul killers.

I'm just glad I didn't continue on with this!!

[Ephinie]

Michael Jackson is a Jehovah's Witness.



I belonged to Scientology for about a year back in 1990. I have to tell you guys from my own personal experience that it was both positive and negative, but MORE negative. I'll tell you what really spoiled it for me. There was a book that was written and published in Canada about L RON HUBBARD, the founder of scientology, and about his several children and his wife. I remember that I kept asking questions about where his wife and kids were, and the answers I received were always evasive.

So... how did you become involved with scientology? Did they come to your door and do the evangelism thing, or did you come into contact with them through some other medium? Also, you mention lower down in this post about his wife being in prison, but did you ever manage to find out anything about his children?


Some of the teachings were sensible and practical but nowhere near being worth what scientology charged in relation to the services. You could go to a therapist for so much less, or even better, talk to your friends and loved ones for FREE. It costs about 40,000 dollars ( and that was back in 1990) to reach what they call a state of CLEAR, meaning that your mind has been cleared of past problems and past influences that may have troubled you, and you are ready to move on to what they call OT, meaning operating THETA, or being able to operate on a highly spiritual level. There are eight operating theta levels. To reach level eight you'd have to spend at least a hundred thousand dollars, all of which are considered church 'donations'.


I'm curious... what specific "steps" or practises do you they lead you through in order to get to this state of "CLEAR." And when you get to the highest theta level, do you get some sort of special prize or something? Did you know anyone personally who had reached either, "clear" or one of those higher operating levels; and if you did, did you notice any marked difference in their personalities, satisfaction with life in general, and whether or not they really did seem better off?

I was given this book to read, banned by scientologists for obvious reasons, by an ex scientologist himself. It discussed the hypocriticial lifestyle L Ron Hubbard lived.


Could you tell me the title and author of the book, please? It sounds like something I might want to read...

I never fully immersed myself into this group because somehow, down deep inside, I felt they were more cultlike than anything else. I only went through a few stages before I quit. After I quit they sent people to my parents' house, and called many, many times. I got the feelng they were spying on me. It was frightening to think about at the time.


That isn't uncommon behavior, I think, when dealing with cults. You're lucky they didn't try to knock you off or harm your pets or anything wierd and psycho like that. Maybe they're too high profile to engage in hard-core stalking and threatening. But I'm glad you seem to have gotten through all that now.


I asked a lot of questions while I was a member at this one center where I lived. Too many questions which were never answered which made me suspicious. The emphasis on clean living was ruined by nearly all the members smoking. When I asked them why they chose to do something as unhealthy as smoking, the answer was almost always the same from every member who smoked...because the body was meaningless and the 'theta', or 'soul' . That's an interesting hypocritical viewpoint...to try to emphasize healthy living and then ruin it by smoking two packs a day. L Ron Hubbard himself was a chain smoker.

There was an emphasis on holistic medicine and a more natural approach to treating illnesses, with the belief that most illness came from something emotional or something that you were withholding emotionally....( and avoiding doctors like the plague which could be deadly), vitamin consumption, and a process of sauna and body cleansing to rid the body of toxins...it was said you could experience past lives through this. I, unfortunately, did not. There is also a huge cruise ship that cruises around the oceans, never docking, which is run by highly trained scientologists


Interesting that they would be all right with smoking because they were concerned about the "soul" while also condemning medicine and doctors in favor of natural remedies. So in one breath, they say the body doesn't matter; and in the next, they condemn doctors because they aren't good for the body. Or something. It's a bit confusing, isn't it? Also... I'm interest in this cruise ship. What is the purpose of this ship? Where does it go? Who gets to go aboard and for how long? What do they DO on it?

I personally believe from reading the book on L RON HUBBARD that like many people, he simply used his views as a way to obtain money. What else is new? His wife is supposedly in prison because of income tax evasion. There was a HUGE emphasis on the fact that psychology and psychiatry were evil and bad...and all anti depressants were just soul killers.

I'm just glad I didn't continue on with this!!

I'm glad you didn't continue with this, either! I am incredibly curious about this Scientology stuff, and I admit that I do not know very much about it at all. Yet, based solely on what I HAVE seen of it thus far, I get the impression that it is not good or healthy.

Also, I am curious about this, if you or anyone else knows the answer... How do Scientologists view Christianity? I know there are some cults or pop fads or other religions that teach people you can be both Christian and what they are. Is this a view that Scientology takes, or do they have a different stance on it?

[LifeMaiden]

I'm off to bed now but will tell you in greater detail and depth about this so-called religious cult. They considered themselves a religion with LRON HUBBARD as a god of sorts...and so on. There is much to discuss here. That's why I love this site!!

[Ephinie]

I'm off to bed now but will tell you in greater detail and depth about this so-called religious cult. They considered themselves a religion with LRON HUBBARD as a god of sorts...and so on. There is much to discuss here. That's why I love this site!!

Goodnight! I look forward to reading what you have to say about it all.

[LifeMaiden]

So... how did you become involved with scientology? Did they come to your door and do the evangelism thing, or did you come into contact with them through some other medium? Also, you mention lower down in this post about his wife being in prison, but did you ever manage to find out anything about his children?



I'm curious... what specific "steps" or practises do you they lead you through in order to get to this state of "CLEAR." And when you get to the highest theta level, do you get some sort of special prize or something? Did you know anyone personally who had reached either, "clear" or one of those higher operating levels; and if you did, did you notice any marked difference in their personalities, satisfaction with life in general, and whether or not they really did seem better off?



Could you tell me the title and author of the book, please? It sounds like something I might want to read...



That isn't uncommon behavior, I think, when dealing with cults. You're lucky they didn't try to knock you off or harm your pets or anything wierd and psycho like that. Maybe they're too high profile to engage in hard-core stalking and threatening. But I'm glad you seem to have gotten through all that now.



Interesting that they would be all right with smoking because they were concerned about the "soul" while also condemning medicine and doctors in favor of natural remedies. So in one breath, they say the body doesn't matter; and in the next, they condemn doctors because they aren't good for the body. Or something. It's a bit confusing, isn't it? Also... I'm interest in this cruise ship. What is the purpose of this ship? Where does it go? Who gets to go aboard and for how long? What do they DO on it?



Also, I am curious about this, if you or anyone else knows the answer... How do Scientologists view Christianity? I know there are some cults or pop fads or other religions that teach people you can be both Christian and what they are. Is this a view that Scientology takes, or do they have a different stance on it?



I tried to sleep but hehe...got carried away by ebay bids on Narnia goodies and then lay down but tossed and turned so here I am. I have to go train someone in the gym at 11am so I have time to get some sleep before then.

First let me say that the book I read is not available anywhere in the US. Scientologist 'spies' ( that's the only word I can think of) have made sure copies which find their way into the states are destroyed. The book was a bestseller in Canada which exposed the fraud and hypocrisy of the man who founded this religion. I only obtained the book very secretively from someone who was a former scientologist who had found a copy of the book in a used bookstore there in Vancouver. I never asked him any more details about it. I read it in its entirety at his house, because God forbid what might have happened if the scientology group found it at my house.

I think they would have said it was all lies anyways, but there were some things that stood out to me, like the vast amounts of money LRH was getting andn hiding, his big fortress-like compound he built, his controlling ways with his wife and philandering, and how no one EVER talked about his wife at the scientology center I was at. After reading that she was in federal prison, I casually asked them where they thought she was, and their response was , " She's around somewhere.'


Now, the ship is composed of these people who are highly trained scientologists who have made it to the very top of the ladder, the Operating Theta 8 level. Basically, you work your way up this very long ladder as you get rid of psychic and emotional baggage. That could be a lot of stuff. Counseling sessions as I mentioned could cost thousands upon thousands. But their justification for it was that NO COST WAS MORE IMPORTANT than the freedom of your true self...your body was just a shell, your TRUE SELF was your THETA, or your immortality.

They never spoke of Christianity in degrading ways, but they definitely didn't see Christ as the Messiah. LRon Hubbard was the Messiah, and religious dogma of the western sort ( Islam, Christianity, Judaism) was not frowned on but they seemed to take more of a 'Eastern' way of things...the belief in many past lives and reincarnation, the idea of astral projection or the soul leaving the body. There was also the belief in alien life forms and so forth.

There were about 40 different states of being that I can remember which preceded its way to CLEAR. 40 positive states above the number 0, and 40 negative states below it.

I have to admit that this chart was very organized and sort of your way of charting how far you were going up the emotional scale. These scales were called TONES. For example, if you were a drunk and a down and out street person lying on the ground, you would be -40 tone, meaning all the way at the bottom. If you were a so-so person with moods, you'd be at tone 4, above the 0.

The goal was to then get to the top positive 40 tone which then was CLEAR.


CLEAR was achieved in therapy, intense, brutal therapy sessions which could take 8 hours sometimes. You had to hold on to these two metal cans attached with a wire to a machine called an E METER, which measured electrical impulses when you were angry, disturbed, or telling a lie. To ME, it was more of a lie detector because if you were withholding something painful they wouldn't let you out of the session til your E METER read positive or 0. The needle would be at middle position when you started. It was a strange machine, and when I asked what it really was, no one answered me.

The next step after the initial ten or so therapy sessions was to then go into the sauna cleansing process which was very extreme. I felt it was damaging to your health. This is where the scientologists were the most hypocritical. They'd want you to clean out toxins EVEN FROM YOUR PAST LIVES haha...but then they'd all smoke. THEY WERE DEAD SET AGAINST DRUGS however, and yet, the hypocisy was ...NICOTINE IS A DRUG and can be more if not so destructive in the long run than marijuana or cocaine...neither of which cause CANCER.


My sauna experience however was what got me interested in exercise physiology and I have to say the one positive thing scientology did was to get my butt in shape. For ten days, we had to run a mile or two, and then get into the sauna for 4-6 hours, taking a few breaks, drinking water, and downing bottles of vitamins, SPECIFICALLY NIACIN, a supplement that was supposed to make you flush out toxins. I felt like puking every time I went in there. I had to do this ten days in a row until I felt all my toxins from my blood, from every drug, from everything negative in my body was gone.

The next process ( I came NOWHERE near to CLEAR as there were, I believe about a dozen more steps and the cost was 35,000) was effective communication, teaching you to avoid your emotions. This is where I really started to see some of these people were like robots, like mere shells of themselves. If you asked a question, everyone seemed to give the same answer, as if somewhere, they had it drilled in their heads that you could not variate from giving different answers. I didn't like that. You're not human if you learn not to have emotions other than being a smiling shell all the time.

For example, that's what I call cultlike. There was no room for differences, no room for questioning. Unanswered questions were everywhere in my mind and I got yelled and screamed at from the top lady at my scientology center for it. All the so called therapy sessions were really CONFESSIONS, and I felt that stupid E METER thing was there to make sure we told all our dark secrets. Otherwise we couldn't leave the room. The counselor was the one who had the E Meter so you never could see what it was doing.


CLEAR then was a stage reached by intensive counseling or therapy for the soul, and beyond that, you became a fully operating THETA up to 8 levels. These people were considered like superhuman robots to me ...they never got sick, never showed their emotions, just smiled happily and maddeningly and acting in charge all the while believing their souls were at the top of the human heap. They believed their souls could leave their bodies at any time.

The ship no one knew about it unless I read it in that book on LRH. They were military style uniforms which depict their rank of Operating Theta 1, all the way to Operating Theta 8. They run a ship that trains scientologists who one day will also be these robots on the ship...it's the scariest thing to me, this ship which floats around, has another ship come to meet it for supplies and food... It was like a cult on a boat.


I have to say that I did notice remarkable changes in my physical body but that was because of the running and the sauna cleasning out the toxins. It was very extreme to do this but it motivated me to pursue a fitness career after I became so adept at running. I also learned to communicate better and more directly without distractions.

What's scary is they lie about LRH, about his wife, and about all the money they charge that was going to him. The books he wrote were a joke...those books on science fiction or whatever...scientologists, armed with tons of money, would buy the books THEMSELVES by the bulk to make it look like LRH was a best selling author.

LIES, LIES, LIES!

They didn't try anything more with me once I left...I just simply had had enough. And I didn't have 40000 at the time neither would I have had the hundred THOUSAND dollars it would have taken to make me a totally operating THETAN. I am a very strong willed, outspoken person who is afraid of NO ONE, NO MAN, NO WOMAN. and I let it be known if they continued to harass me in any way, I would get my cousin, a prominent attorney, to do battle with them .

[inkspot]

Wow, IceMaiden! Thanks for sharing. This is very interesting from someone who has been on the "inside."

The people in the islands know about the cruise ship, The FreeWinds, because it does dock, in Curacao and the small island of Bonaire. I lived on Bonaire, and this is where I first came in contact with Scientology. Very occasionally, someone would come off the cruise ship and go scuba diving with me. They were nice people (they were cruisers, not the staff, they were students, not teachers as it were) but they never could tell me much about their faith. One of them did give me the Hubbard book "Dianetics," which I thought was odd, to say the least.

When Tom Cruise comes to FreeWinds for classes, he rents another yacht and ties up with the cruise ship -- I don't know if he goes to classes with the other students or has private ones. I do know he goes scuba diving with his own guides, not local people. Which most people with yachts do have their own dive guides aboard.

These days, some of the students leave the ship to shop and dive on Bonaire.

[LifeMaiden]

I think for me, the scariest thing was seeing some of the people who were deeply involved think and act like robots...they had similiar answers for everything, because they were trained ( so to speak) to say the same things. To me, being an emotional person is NOT a bad thing, and I'd rather have a few problems than become an empty shell, which more than a few scientologists at my center resembled. It was as if they were hollowed out inside.

[Ephinie]

Wow, thank you for all the detailed information, Icemaiden! It has been very informative.

First let me say that the book I read is not available anywhere in the US. Scientologist 'spies' ( that's the only word I can think of) have made sure copies which find their way into the states are destroyed. The book was a bestseller in Canada which exposed the fraud and hypocrisy of the man who founded this religion. I only obtained the book very secretively from someone who was a former scientologist who had found a copy of the book in a used bookstore there in Vancouver. I never asked him any more details about it. I read it in its entirety at his house, because God forbid what might have happened if the scientology group found it at my house.

So you're saying that since you read it in his house, and it's been a while, you don't remember the title and author of the book? Because I can get a hold of it, even if it isn't available in the US. All I need is the author and title.

I think they would have said it was all lies anyways, but there were some things that stood out to me, like the vast amounts of money LRH was getting andn hiding, his big fortress-like compound he built, his controlling ways with his wife and philandering, and how no one EVER talked about his wife at the scientology center I was at. After reading that she was in federal prison, I casually asked them where they thought she was, and their response was , " She's around somewhere.'

I suppose, to be charitable, that it could be possible the specific people at your center did not know. In that case, "She's around somewhere," would be a valid answer. But they should have said that they don't know, I think. What would have made it REALLY interesting would be to look her up and show them evidence of her being in Federal prison, and see what they make of that. I think that the names of who is in what Federal prison and for what crime are a matter of public records, so long as you know how and where to look. But I could be wrong.

[Ephinie]

Now, the ship is composed of these people who are highly trained scientologists who have made it to the very top of the ladder, the Operating Theta 8 level. Basically, you work your way up this very long ladder as you get rid of psychic and emotional baggage. That could be a lot of stuff. Counseling sessions as I mentioned could cost thousands upon thousands. But their justification for it was that NO COST WAS MORE IMPORTANT than the freedom of your true self...your body was just a shell, your TRUE SELF was your THETA, or your immortality.

So then... based on this and Inkspot's post, the ship is like a huge travelling classroom where scientologists who have reached a certain operating level go to be further indoctrinated. Am I correct, or does it have some other specific purpose?[/QUOTE]

They never spoke of Christianity in degrading ways, but they definitely didn't see Christ as the Messiah. LRon Hubbard was the Messiah, and religious dogma of the western sort ( Islam, Christianity, Judaism) was not frowned on but they seemed to take more of a 'Eastern' way of things...the belief in many past lives and reincarnation, the idea of astral projection or the soul leaving the body. There was also the belief in alien life forms and so forth.

I guess what I was really asking was whether or not they specifically condemned other religions as being wrong. Would they allow that one could be a practising Christian and go to church every week, yet also be working their way up the tone scale as a scientologist? Would a scientologist, at some point, be asked to give up their former religion altogether in favor of being completely dedicated to their new way of life?

There were about 40 different states of being that I can remember which preceded its way to CLEAR. 40 positive states above the number 0, and 40 negative states below it.

Is this scale something that L Ron Hubbard specifically devised himself, or is it something that scientologists, as a group, have come up with over time?

I have to admit that this chart was very organized and sort of your way of charting how far you were going up the emotional scale. These scales were called TONES. For example, if you were a drunk and a down and out street person lying on the ground, you would be -40 tone, meaning all the way at the bottom. If you were a so-so person with moods, you'd be at tone 4, above the 0.

The goal was to then get to the top positive 40 tone which then was CLEAR.

It does sound highly organized. If nothing else, I guess we can give LRH and his followers a thumbs up for putting a lot of thought and effort into devising what they have invented.

CLEAR was achieved in therapy, intense, brutal therapy sessions which could take 8 hours sometimes. You had to hold on to these two metal cans attached with a wire to a machine called an E METER, which measured electrical impulses when you were angry, disturbed, or telling a lie. To ME, it was more of a lie detector because if you were withholding something painful they wouldn't let you out of the session til your E METER read positive or 0. The needle would be at middle position when you started. It was a strange machine, and when I asked what it really was, no one answered me.

That entire scenario, to me, is utterly frightening. But when they say that they would not let you out until they were satisfied, is that to say that they would not concede to you that you were finished with that step; or does it mean that they physically, against your will, held you there until they were satisfied?

The next step after the initial ten or so therapy sessions was to then go into the sauna cleansing process which was very extreme. I felt it was damaging to your health. This is where the scientologists were the most hypocritical. They'd want you to clean out toxins EVEN FROM YOUR PAST LIVES haha...but then they'd all smoke. THEY WERE DEAD SET AGAINST DRUGS however, and yet, the hypocisy was ...NICOTINE IS A DRUG and can be more if not so destructive in the long run than marijuana or cocaine...neither of which cause CANCER.

Did they ever address, specifically, why they seemed to regard nicotine as something different than a drug? This view point has absolutely no basis in any logic that I can make out.


My sauna experience however was what got me interested in exercise physiology and I have to say the one positive thing scientology did was to get my butt in shape. For ten days, we had to run a mile or two, and then get into the sauna for 4-6 hours, taking a few breaks, drinking water, and downing bottles of vitamins, SPECIFICALLY NIACIN, a supplement that was supposed to make you flush out toxins. I felt like puking every time I went in there. I had to do this ten days in a row until I felt all my toxins from my blood, from every drug, from everything negative in my body was gone.

I'm glad that you were able to gain something positive from the experience, in spite of the crap that you had to put up with along the way.

The next process ( I came NOWHERE near to CLEAR as there were, I believe about a dozen more steps and the cost was 35,000) was effective communication, teaching you to avoid your emotions. This is where I really started to see some of these people were like robots, like mere shells of themselves. If you asked a question, everyone seemed to give the same answer, as if somewhere, they had it drilled in their heads that you could not variate from giving different answers. I didn't like that. You're not human if you learn not to have emotions other than being a smiling shell all the time.

That's an interesting thing you said... teaching you to avoid your emotions. I find it odd that a group that placed emphasis on emotional health would teach people how to avoid emotions. Perhaps, to them, emotional health is the absence thereof.

For example, that's what I call cultlike. There was no room for differences, no room for questioning. Unanswered questions were everywhere in my mind and I got yelled and screamed at from the top lady at my scientology center for it. All the so called therapy sessions were really CONFESSIONS, and I felt that stupid E METER thing was there to make sure we told all our dark secrets. Otherwise we couldn't leave the room. The counselor was the one who had the E Meter so you never could see what it was doing.
I agree. That is EXACTLY how cults behave.

CLEAR then was a stage reached by intensive counseling or therapy for the soul, and beyond that, you became a fully operating THETA up to 8 levels. These people were considered like superhuman robots to me ...they never got sick, never showed their emotions, just smiled happily and maddeningly and acting in charge all the while believing their souls were at the top of the human heap. They believed their souls could leave their bodies at any time.

Didn't you say, in a previous post, that scientologists are very against counseling or psychiatry of any kind? So then they go and make you do therapy. That makes perfect sense. It sounds like what they really want to do is keep your mind away from any outside influence that could mess with the intense psychological conditioning that seems to be going on. And that second part... just sounds... strange.

The ship no one knew about it unless I read it in that book on LRH. They were military style uniforms which depict their rank of Operating Theta 1, all the way to Operating Theta 8. They run a ship that trains scientologists who one day will also be these robots on the ship...it's the scariest thing to me, this ship which floats around, has another ship come to meet it for supplies and food... It was like a cult on a boat.
So... is the ship run and operated by Theta's of level 8, and used to teach and train lower level theta's who are working their way up? Or do they allow people who have not yet achieved clear to come aboard and learn?


I have to say that I did notice remarkable changes in my physical body but that was because of the running and the sauna cleasning out the toxins. It was very extreme to do this but it motivated me to pursue a fitness career after I became so adept at running. I also learned to communicate better and more directly without distractions.

What's scary is they lie about LRH, about his wife, and about all the money they charge that was going to him. The books he wrote were a joke...those books on science fiction or whatever...scientologists, armed with tons of money, would buy the books THEMSELVES by the bulk to make it look like LRH was a best selling author.

LIES, LIES, LIES!

They didn't try anything more with me once I left...I just simply had had enough. And I didn't have 40000 at the time neither would I have had the hundred THOUSAND dollars it would have taken to make me a totally operating THETAN. I am a very strong willed, outspoken person who is afraid of NO ONE, NO MAN, NO WOMAN. and I let it be known if they continued to harass me in any way, I would get my cousin, a prominent attorney, to do battle with them .

It's good that you are strong-willed and will not be intimidated by anyone. I shudder to think of what kind of experiences a weak-willing, easily manipulated person would go through regarding Scientology. Thank you very much for sharing all of your input on this. It has been incredibly enlightening

[LifeMaiden]

So then... based on this and Inkspot's post, the ship is like a huge travelling classroom where scientologists who have reached a certain operating level go to be further indoctrinated. Am I correct, or does it have some other specific purpose?

There is no further doctrination past the Operating Theta Level 8. That really was a strange idea...that you couldn't really go past that level because it meant you were the highest, most capable human being...almost superhuman in a way. Yet, what made me question this idea of reaching a certain set point was that to ME, anyways, humans ALWAYS have the potential to grow and learn every day, no matter how accomplished they are, no matter how spiritual they are. There is no limit to me on how someone can grow as a person. The boat seemed to me like a sort of odd pseudo-naval thing. They did train other scientologists how to give therapy sessions, use the E meter, and so forth. It was the most isolated and stringent of all the scientology 'centers'.



2.I guess what I was really asking was whether or not they specifically condemned other religions as being wrong. Would they allow that one could be a practising Christian and go to church every week, yet also be working their way up the tone scale as a scientologist? Would a scientologist, at some point, be asked to give up their former religion altogether in favor of being completely dedicated to their new way of life?

ANSWER: No they didn't condemn other religions as being wrong. It would be hard to be Christian and be a member, though, because many of the ideas in scientology went against Christian teaching, such as being able to experience astral projection, one's soul leaving the body. At the center I was at I noticed a large number of Hindu and Buddhist practioners, because those faiths believe in reincarnation, and mysticism, which seems a little more fitting with LRon Hubbard's ideas.

3.Is this scale something that L Ron Hubbard specifically devised himself, or is it something that scientologists, as a group, have come up with over time?

ANSWER: Yes, the scale is something LRH came up with...it was very very detailed and elaborate...when people would be in a bad mood, for example, the words they would say would be, " I'm on tone level 8..." which might be the level of annoyance. EMOTIONS, in other words, were called TONES, like the tones on a scale of the piano.




4.That entire scenario, to me, is utterly frightening. But when they say that they would not let you out until they were satisfied, is that to say that they would not concede to you that you were finished with that step; or does it mean that they physically, against your will, held you there until they were satisfied?


ANSWER: They wouldn't physically let me leave the room until the E meter registered that my emotions for that time being were 'clear', and I had gotten everything off my chest. The premise was that your emotions had electrical impulse, so the best way to tell you what the E meter was, in my opinion , was to say that it measured your emotions like a lie detector. If you had something on your chest, that meter would read like one of those PG and E meters you have at your house.



5. Did they ever address, specifically, why they seemed to regard nicotine as something different than a drug? This view point has absolutely no basis in any logic that I can make out.

ANSWER: And that was actually one of the things I began to really get annoyed with and suspicious of. No one can tell me they're trying to go get clean physically without quitting smoking. Smoking isn't like doing cocaine or heroin everyday, but in the long run, it will blacken your lungs and kill you. I even showed up one day with a photo of a seriously damaged lung from a chronic smoker, and you know what the head of the center told me? He told me he was sure that wouldn't happen to a scientologist.




6.I'm glad that you were able to gain something positive from the experience, in spite of the crap that you had to put up with along the way.

ANSWER: Well, it's like I said, I try to see everything in a good light. I did feel my communication skills verbally were reinforced, and I did like some of the ideas they had for business organization and for production in the work place. That was their main strength.


7. That's an interesting thing you said... teaching you to avoid your emotions. I find it odd that a group that placed emphasis on emotional health would teach people how to avoid emotions. Perhaps, to them, emotional health is the absence thereof.


ANSWER: Well, I'm a very emotional person by nature, and maybe I should have said that they emphasized a certain ZEN thing..you know how in Buddhism, there's this thing called ZEN, where you radiate a certain calmness that's supposed to be peaceful. But to me I just can't see any human doing that ALL THE TIME.




8. Didn't you say, in a previous post, that scientologists are very against counseling or psychiatry of any kind? So then they go and make you do therapy. That makes perfect sense. It sounds like what they really want to do is keep your mind away from any outside influence that could mess with the intense psychological conditioning that seems to be going on. And that second part... just sounds... strange.

ANSWER: they were strictly against psychiatry in particular because of the use of antidepressants and shock therapy. I can see their viewpoint because things that psychiatry have done in asylums and therapy...well, I don't always agree with them either. Electroshock therapy was brutal and damaged brains. Lobotomies are despicable. But I do believe that there are people who need chemical intervention with the use of medication. They were against PSYCHOLOGY because they felt its premise, based on Jung and Freud, were largely outdated and outmoded for the modern world.

But yet, the main background of scientology was ALL ABOUT THERAPY...hours and hours of it, in a room with a trained scientology who wrote nearly everything you said down on paper and used that E meter thing.



9.So... is the ship run and operated by Theta's of level 8, and used to teach and train lower level theta's who are working their way up? Or do they allow people who have not yet achieved clear to come aboard and learn?

ANSWER: I am not sure about that, but I think you needed to be CLEAR in order to get on that ship.


10. It's good that you are strong-willed and will not be intimidated by anyone. I shudder to think of what kind of experiences a weak-willing, easily manipulated person would go through regarding Scientology. Thank you very much for sharing all of your input on this. It has been incredibly enlightening.


ANSWER: They took advantage I felt of people who suffered from loss. I had a close friend who lost her favorite aunt, and immediately after that, she became very deeply involved in scientology and I truly felt they used her grief to get her to spend more and more money. I believe that they are a cult, and that they used several deviant methods to achieve their means. I didn't like the secretive nature they had on many issues, or how they avoided answering my many questions. My feeling is if they can't or won't answer questions what are they trying to hide?

[dude]

Just plain creepy
We shes having her baby, no one can say anything. It has to be completely quiet. She cant cry out or anything while having the baby.
This is just misinformation.

[inkspot]

According to L Ron Hubbard's book Dianetics, a completely silent birth is essential to the future health and well-being of the baby. He is the founder of Scientology, so I assume this practice could be part of their church/organization.

[dude]

According to L Ron Hubbard's book Dianetics, a completely silent birth is essential to the future health and well-being of the baby. He is the founder of Scientology, so I assume this practice could be part of their church/organization.
A quiet birth is good for a child. But (from http://faq.scientology.org.uk/news/quietbirth.htm ):

Does this mean that a mother cannot scream or moan at all?

Of course they can make noises — the point of silent birth is NO WORDS. This is a principle of Dianetics and to fully understand why, read the book Dianetics the Modern Science of Mental Health, by L. Ron Hubbard. It is words that are the culprit. Outside of not speaking, the objective is generally to have as peaceful and relaxing an environment as possible for the mother and child. It is doubtful that any woman could give birth without making any noise at all.

Mothers naturally want to give their baby the best possible start in life and thus keep the birth as quiet as possible.

Does the application of these principles preclude a mother from using medicines?

The Church has no policy against the use of medicines to help a person with a physical situation. This, too, is up to the mother and her doctor.

[Ephinie]

dude, are you by any chance a Scientologist?

[dude]

Yes. I sure am!

[Ephinie]

Yes. I sure am!
YAY! *clings to you* We've been waiting for a real scientologist to show up ever since this thread started! IceMaiden used to be into scientology, so she sure helped a lot. But it's always a bonus to have a current one around to tell us stuff. :)

[dude]

Thanks - it's a fascinating and useful subject! I was an atheist until two and a half years ago. I've only been in Scientology 2 years but I have read and listened to a lot of LRH's work and am nearly "Clear".

[Ephinie]

How much longer do you think it will take you to reach that "clear" state? I am not sure how much of this thread you have read, but do you have any insight to add to what we have already discussed?

[dude]

About 40 hours - though that will take me a few months to fit into my schedule!

I'm not that interested in defending Scientology. In my opinon it's like defending Mother Teresa against people calling her a paedophile (although that's quite an extreme example! :) )It's often pretty difficult to talk about though because people have fixed ideas on the subject. It's often easier to talk about the evidence for us being spiritual beings outside of Scientology because that's often a bit less emotionally charged yet there are many issues that come up which are relevant to Scientology too.

But if someone seems genuinely interested in understanding my point of view I'll answer any of their questions. Critical analysis is useful once you understand something but criticising something before you understand it just prevents you from understanding.

Basically for me I had become convinced based on my research that we are spiritual beings but couldn't find anyway to understand exactly what our nature is. When I found good answers to that from a Scientologist and heard it could help me get proof of my immortality I figured it was worth investigating.

[Ephinie]

Dude, I was wondering how long you've been a scientologist and if anyone else in your family are scientologists as well. There are some religions, like the Mormons for example, who place a very high value on healthy family relationships and family values. Do you find that Scientology is very family-oriented or more single-person oriented?

[QA48]

About 40 hours - though that will take me a few months to fit into my schedule!

I'm not that interested in defending Scientology. In my opinon it's like defending Mother Teresa against people calling her a paedophile (although that's quite an extreme example! :) )It's often pretty difficult to talk about though because people have fixed ideas on the subject. It's often easier to talk about the evidence for us being spiritual beings outside of Scientology because that's often a bit less emotionally charged yet there are many issues that come up which are relevant to Scientology too.

But if someone seems genuinely interested in understanding my point of view I'll answer any of their questions. Critical analysis is useful once you understand something but criticising something before you understand it just prevents you from understanding.

Basically for me I had become convinced based on my research that we are spiritual beings but couldn't find anyway to understand exactly what our nature is. When I found good answers to that from a Scientologist and heard it could help me get proof of my immortality I figured it was worth investigating.

Tom Cruise should hang out with you more often ;)

[LifeMaiden]

There were good points that scientology had to offer, I wouldn't refute that at all. Since I had extensive dealings and involvement with scientology, I would say my biggest criticism is the amount of money it costs to become what is known as the clear state. I don't believe that I have to spend forty thousand dollars and up to a hundred thousand dollars to become immortal or a operating level 8 thetan. I also did not like the hypocrisy that seemed to stem from their wanting to live a 'clean healthy' life, but because it was okay that LRon Hubbard was a chain smoker, they could emulate his lifestyle and then claim since they were operating thetans, smoking wouldn't harm them.


I am sure that every scientology center is somewhat different. The one I attended was one of the largest and the most powerful in California, with many members and a big financial base of wealthy people in the Silicon Valley.


Their strong points include a highly detailed organizational system for business...how to keep the business ( of any kind) functioning, making money, and keeping workers highly motivated. They were efficient and were positive people as a whole.



The three people who got me involved in scientology were very wealthy, so money was not an objection to them and they were very good, encouraging people. But as I said, the disturbing part about scientology was how it attempted to somehow de-humanize human emotions. I found many of them to be shells of people rather than whole people.



Ephinie, to answer your question from my experience, and I hope to hear Dude's as well, they are actually pretty family oriented. In fact the first thing most scientologists will say is that they love children. Most of them were married with kids, a handful were single, but they didn't prejudice themselves against anyone who was childless/childfree or unmarried. However, if you said you disliked children generally they would see that as a negative state of mind, and that someone who had an interest in children and loved kids was probably a lot more emotionally healthy. I disagree with that. I don't hate kids but I don't consider myself one to be a parent. If you know you don't want kids, you should not have them.

[LifeMaiden]

A quiet birth is good for a child. But (from http://faq.scientology.org.uk/news/quietbirth.htm ):

Does this mean that a mother cannot scream or moan at all?

Of course they can make noises — the point of silent birth is NO WORDS. This is a principle of Dianetics and to fully understand why, read the book Dianetics the Modern Science of Mental Health, by L. Ron Hubbard. It is words that are the culprit. Outside of not speaking, the objective is generally to have as peaceful and relaxing an environment as possible for the mother and child. It is doubtful that any woman could give birth without making any noise at all.

Mothers naturally want to give their baby the best possible start in life and thus keep the birth as quiet as possible.

Does the application of these principles preclude a mother from using medicines?

The Church has no policy against the use of medicines to help a person with a physical situation. This, too, is up to the mother and her doctor.

Scientologists recommended that a woman be CLEAR before she gives birth so she doesn't pass any emotional contamination onto the child.


Most scientologists where I was at ( known as The Org LOL) discouraged the use of medicines and hospitals when illnesses occurred. They preferred the use of vitamins, especially when you did the purification program in the spa, and had to take cupfuls of vitamins and especially a supplement called NIACIN. and


From my experience, Scientologists believe that illnesses were often psychosomatic, in other words, people who were CLEAR and beyond CLEAR, those who became operating Thetans, were not supposed to get sick. But many of them did. I didn't see any difference in health between those who claimed to be the highest operating levels and those like myself who hadn't even reached CLEAR. They would often let symptoms really get bad before seeking out medical help.

Now I am not one to pop pills or medications like candy, but I also believe if you have to go to the doctor, you better go, and not rely on a bunch of vitamins to help you out if you have an illness that isn't getting better.

[dude]

Dude, I was wondering how long you've been a scientologist and if anyone else in your family are scientologists as well. There are some religions, like the Mormons for example, who place a very high value on healthy family relationships and family values. Do you find that Scientology is very family-oriented or more single-person oriented?
Scientology is pretty Utilitarian. You are important, your family are important, your friends are important, your area is important, your country is important, the world is important etc. In Scientology we call these dynamics - you need to take them all into account when looking at the best solution.

[dude]

IceMaiden - this is my only post to you. I am not interested in discussing this with you. From your first post you start off misrepresenting Scientology. All your posts show a complete lack of understanding of what Scientology actually is. So many misunderstandings one has to wonder whether you're just not good at grasping things or whether you actively want to attack Scientology.
I'll just take the first post as an illustration:
I'm off to bed now but will tell you in greater detail and depth about this so-called religious cult. They considered themselves a religion with LRON HUBBARD as a god of sorts...and so on.
You've called Scientology a cult - misrepresentation.
2nd misrepresentation is the idea that Scientologists view LRH as a god.

Brian Wilson, also an Oxford scholar has some good stuff to say about apostates (ex-members):

http://www.neuereligion.de/ENG/Wilson/

"Neither the objective sociological researcher nor the court of law can readily regard the apostate as a creditable or reliable source of evidence. He must always be seen as one whose personal history predisposes him to bias with respect to both his previous religious commitment and affiliations, the suspicion must arise that he acts from a personal motivation to vindicate himself and to regain his self-esteem, by showing himself to have been first a victim but subsequently to have become a redeemed crusader. As various instances have indicated, he is likely to be suggestible and ready to enlarge or embellish his grievances to satisfy that species of journalist whose interest is more in sensational copy than in a objective statement of the truth. "

[LifeMaiden]

I'm not going to sit here and argue with you any more than you're going to present a set of 'facts' to me that I've experienced through nearly two years in Scientology. It IS a cult more than a religion, and if it a religion as you say, then it's one of the false ones. More importantly, did you ever read the book on LRON HUBBARD, which was available only in Canada because scientologists made a big stink about this biography being sold here in America, afraid of what it would expose other scientologists to, the true nature of LRon Hubbard as a greedy self-centered jerk, and his wife, in jail to this day for income tax invasion? Did you read that book, written by a high-ranking ex-scientologist with the operating level theta 3? Of course you probably didn't...because the book would have never found its way to the US or to the UK.

Funny isn't it how when a person decides to get OUT of scientology, the first words that are used against her or him is 'misrepresenting' scientology as a cult. There's always an 'answer' to everything when a person leaves the group..i.e. what you posted below regarding apostates by Brian Wilson. And when one decides to leave, other scientologists follow the person home, try to come to their door for their lost progeny, spy on that person such as the cars which used to daily park across the street from my parents' home and sit there trying to see when and how often I came out of my house....instead of just accepting that I left the cult and they lost a potential 'big spender' member. They were more interested in my father's bank account and spending 40000 up front than they were in my own spiritual wellness.


And don't even try to get condescending with me and attempt to tell me I'm not good at grasping things LOL. If I had a hard time grasping things I doubt whether I would have skipped a grade, gotten a 155 on my IQ test, or gotten a 3.95 in college....when you've just wasted your forty thousand or more so you could become 'immortal' on your way up to an operating thetan. Tell me, do you have plans to reach OT 8? For another 100,000?


Your response is, and was typical, of all the scientologists that I encounted at my org when I decided I no longer wanted to be a part of that cult. You know how it is. When you decide to leave a cult, they basically think there's something wrong with 'you' and not the rest of the group. And yeah, I actively am attacking scientology while pointing out a 'few' of its better ideas. Oh yes, I should add that scientologists actively discourage people from going to college or getting a higher education because they might....hmmmm....want to keep their members unexposed to other realms of thought?

I remember when I was going to go and join that ship of operating THETANS and quit college. They were so overjoyed that I was quitting college, considering college, along with psychology and psychiatry to be so evil that I wondered if that was the real reason that clapped and cheered that day. Not so much that I had decided I would put on a cute naval uniform and sail around the world as a OT, but because they villified college.


But by all means, since scientology supposedly contains all the secrets of the universe, emphasizes past lives going back millions of years, charges people a donation fee of 40,000-100,000 to 'set themselves free and Clear, and later to become a fully operating thetan', Dude, I wish you well in your quest to find immortality, which can be found a lot simpler in the relationship you could have with God. Scientology taught me that I WAS a god. Unfortunately, I tend to disagree with that just as I do with experiencing past lives on the planet ZeeBopp back in 1 million BC or whatever.

[LifeMaiden]

Thanks - it's a fascinating and useful subject! I was an atheist until two and a half years ago. I've only been in Scientology 2 years but I have read and listened to a lot of LRH's work and am nearly "Clear".


And how much have you spent so far? 16 years ago, the price or er...donation...was 40,000 to reach clear.

[inkspot]

Dude, we're so glad to have a practicing Scientologist here to tell us about the religion.

I would ask you not to discount IceMaiden's experience simply because she left the church. By that reasoning, you would have to believe that there are no cults -- because people who are still in the cult would not say anything bad about the cult, do you see? And so who would you trust to give a witness about the cult: people who are in it and not allowed to say a bad word about it, or people who have left it? No one else would know any of the facts ... Your source says of the "apostate":
He must always be seen as one whose personal history predisposes him to bias with respect to both his previous religious commitment and affiliations But the same is true of the true believer, yes? Someone devoted to the faith is going to be predisposed to be biased in its favor. Neither can really be said to be creditable by that standard, right?

I am not saying your faith is a cult, but I don't think you can discount the experience of former members simply because they are former members.

The purpose of these Threads is really explanation and debate, not necessaruly just a fan club for the topic, so be prepared for opposing viewpoints. You can state the facts and give your documentation, but please don't assume no one else knows what they're talking about. Thanks!

[LifeMaiden]

Thank you Inkspot for remaining polite as you always do :)

I did not state that ALL of scientology's premises and beliefs were bad. In fact 'bad' is not a word I would use. When someone no longer was a scientologist and left the cult, none of the other members were allowed to talk to them any longer, and they sent 'spies' out to my parents' home to keep an eye on me, which I felt was truly disturbing. If they were the accepting people they claimed to be, they would have let me leave peacefully and without hostility. The people who got me involved no longer spoke to me either, and that was a real shame, because I think the real fear was that the person who left the cult was going to tell others 'not to join.'

In my case, my negative perceptions of scientology came largely AFTER I had left...because when you're friends with a group of people you genuinely like, and suddenly you decide to leave and they turn their backs on you...that's pretty harsh in my opinion. I left the Catholic Church and my Catholic friends never did that...in fact they wanted me to come back for years.


The discounting of former members, Inkspot, is just that...their views and opinions of their former cult is discounted because they're no longer scientologists.

[echoscot]

IceMaiden

You are truly a woman of many surprises. You have had such an array of cultural experiences, I am amazed. My mind would be whirling with all of the philosophies and ideas and creeds that different groups try to indoctrinate their people with.

Personally, I'll stick with the "Jesus Cult", the only price of admission is one life. And that has already been cleared with the doorman. :D

This is quite the exciting little thread, though.

Remember when we thought the abortion thread had dried up?LOL

[LifeMaiden]

I can live with some of the inconsistencies that scientology offered, because nowhere did I state that its entirety was negative. What I don't like the most is the way they try to attack someone who has chosen to leave their group. If they have nothing to hide, then why should they be afraid of someone who leaves the group and attempt to make that person feel or look as if he/she is 'discrediting' the group? What's wrong with a person saying they left because they disagreed with some of the notions scientology had to offer?


I make it a point to question everything, even Christianity, as many of you know. I don't think anyone should accept something blindly. What annoyed me in scientology was their vague or hypocritical answers and their prejudice towards psychotherapy or psychiatry. I don't believe that every single person on this earth can have their mental or emotional problems erased by being 'CLEAR'. Mental disorders, depression, etc...are scientifically known to be caused by BIOLOGICAL brain chemical imbalances that CAN be helped by cognitive therapy, but not always with just therapy alone. I don't agree with everything psychiatrists do either, especially in the past, but I don't condemn them for the help they do give many patients.


There should be NO reason why the scientology org sent out people to spy on my parents house by driving by, sitting there across the street in a parked car, or immediately turning their backs on me by accusing me of trying to discredit them. If they have nothing to be discredited of, and nothing to hide, then they shouldn't worry about whether a member decides to leave or not, and simply say, " We're sorry to see you go, but good luck to you...." Rather than, " Okay, we don't want to have anything to do with you again, and the reason you're leaving is because you're under the influence of anti-scientologists and therefore, are going to attempt to discredit us."


When I asked questions, I was often met with very vague answers. Such as

" Where is Mrs. LRon Hubbard?"

"She's around somewhere." ( yes, in a Tennessee federal penitentiary for federal income tax evasion in the millions)


" How come you guys place such a big emphasis on your health and clearing the body of toxins but many of you are chain smokers?"


" Because we're clear or OT, our bodies won't get cancer." ( Ok, well, let's not forget LRonHubbard himself smoked 4 packs a day)

[Lawrence]

"Brian Wilson, also an Oxford scholar has some good stuff to say about apostates (ex-members)..."

There is no need to drag everyone's favorite Beach Boy into this discussion.

But seriously, folks, very good discussion and extremely well mannered interchange on Scientology. I couldn't sleep one night and decided to read everything on Wikipedia about Scientology. After Mormonism, of which I am somewhat familiar, the theology of Scientology has to be some of the most complicated (and by that I mean convoluted) stuff I have ever come across. The different epochs, Xenu, a billion year this and a thousand year that, it made my head spin. But, I did attempt to read about the group and not rely on what our friends in Big Media would let us know about Tom, John, Kirstie and the like.

IceMaiden's experiences are extremely similar to many others who have written about leaving that particular group.

Pax,
L

[Ephinie]

dude, in all of my experiences with IceMaiden, she has never given me the impression of a person who either has trouble assimilating information or forms biases without good cause. I am sure it was not your intention, but the post to her sounded unduly harsh. What inkspot said was very accurate. People who have left will have their biases, but people who are members of something will also be favorably inclined toward it. Believing in something and being favorably inclined toward something is a bias just as much as disagreeing with something.

That said, I value your input. You seem to be the only Scientologist who is currently in Scientology on here, so your thoughts are invaluable.

Couple questions: In your experience with Scientology, do people in your group smoke? You may have said this or not before, but I don't remember... have you ever been a part of another religion before you joined Scientology? And finally, are all the basic doctrines that you adhere to found in Hubbard's books, or are there some things that Scientologists have come up with apart from his orginal works?

[LifeMaiden]

There was a lot of space age things in scientology that I was unable to 'grasp' just because it was too far out. Another interesting tidbit is that L Ron Hubbard's book Dianetics was a big bestseller, but wealthy scientologists purchased huge numbers of his science fiction works, which were actually not as popular as they seemed to be. There was a big emphasis on past lives as well.

I did enjoy the purification program, because that was what got me into working out and fitness. I do believe in the body detoxification idea to an extent...although our liver pretty much gets rid of a lot of wastes and toxins, there was something refreshing about sweating it out in a sauna and taking vitamins...although it was a bit extreme sitting in there for four hours and taking a cup of vitamins a day at one point ( which I threw out...I only took a few supplements). But you had to jog and exercise before getting into the sauna, which really helped me start a workout program after that. I started running more and more.

It's like I said...there were aspects of it which I did enjoy and which I felt were beneficial..but ultimately, I simply do not believe that one needs to pay so much money to get healthy or mentally clear.

[echoscot]

I can live with some of the inconsistencies that scientology offered, because nowhere did I state that its entirety was negative. What I don't like the most is the way they try to attack someone who has chosen to leave their group. If they have nothing to hide, then why should they be afraid of someone who leaves the group and attempt to make that person feel or look as if he/she is 'discrediting' the group? What's wrong with a person saying they left because they disagreed with some of the notions scientology had to offer?


I make it a point to question everything, even Christianity, as many of you know. I don't think anyone should accept something blindly. What annoyed me in scientology was their vague or hypocritical answers and their prejudice towards psychotherapy or psychiatry. I don't believe that every single person on this earth can have their mental or emotional problems erased by being 'CLEAR'. Mental disorders, depression, etc...are scientifically known to be caused by BIOLOGICAL brain chemical imbalances that CAN be helped by cognitive therapy, but not always with just therapy alone. I don't agree with everything psychiatrists do either, especially in the past, but I don't condemn them for the help they do give many patients.


There should be NO reason why the scientology org sent out people to spy on my parents house by driving by, sitting there across the street in a parked car, or immediately turning their backs on me by accusing me of trying to discredit them. If they have nothing to be discredited of, and nothing to hide, then they shouldn't worry about whether a member decides to leave or not, and simply say, " We're sorry to see you go, but good luck to you...." Rather than, " Okay, we don't want to have anything to do with you again, and the reason you're leaving is because you're under the influence of anti-scientologists and therefore, are going to attempt to discredit us."


When I asked questions, I was often met with very vague answers. Such as

" Where is Mrs. LRon Hubbard?"

"She's around somewhere." ( yes, in a Tennessee federal penitentiary for federal income tax evasion in the millions)


" How come you guys place such a big emphasis on your health and clearing the body of toxins but many of you are chain smokers?"


" Because we're clear or OT, our bodies won't get cancer." ( Ok, well, let's not forget LRonHubbard himself smoked 4 packs a day)


I hope you didn't misinterpret my last post, It was meant to be complimentary.

[LifeMaiden]

Oh no Echoscot I was just replying to in general how I felt about scientology :D No misinterpretation here at all.

[dude]

Dude, we're so glad to have a practicing Scientologist here to tell us about the religion.

I would ask you not to discount IceMaiden's experience simply because she left the church.
I understand why you think this and you can rest assured I've done a lot of research into the subject. However she is spreading disinformation about Scientology - it's not just a case of "well i didn't find it useful for myself'.

If someone leaves Christianity they'll often be prone to spread their own mis-understanding around. The difference is that Christianity is so big and so common that few people are going to believe you if you spread ridiculous rumours about it.

Then there is the fact that Scientology is a workable philosophy- it's not merely theoretical. In my opinion someone who didn't get something to work is less capable than someone who did in any field.

I do understand why you'd find IceMaiden plausible though - I would too if I hadn't got so much experience with Scientology.

[dude]

dude, in all of my experiences with IceMaiden, she has never given me the impression of a person who either has trouble assimilating information or forms biases without good cause. I am sure it was not your intention, but the post to her sounded unduly harsh.
Couple questions: In your experience with Scientology, do people in your group smoke? You may have said this or not before, but I don't remember... have you ever been a part of another religion before you joined Scientology? And finally, are all the basic doctrines that you adhere to found in Hubbard's books, or are there some things that Scientologists have come up with apart from his orginal works?
I understand your opinion about IceMaiden. On the other hand I know she is spreading misinformation.

I've not really been a part of another religion before Scientology. I did read up on Buddhism and Christianity when I was trying to work out what our spiritual nature is.

Some Scientologists smoke, some eat chocolate and some drink coffee too. If it's not done in moderation then something is wrong though. Smoking's not very healthy but it doesn't have much affect on your mind.

Hubbard did a lot of research and there are still techniques he developed that haven't been released yet as delivery is still being prepared. So new research isn't the main priority - it's getting people to do the existing techniques so we can make this a saner planet.

[Ephinie]

dude, thanks for answering my questions! I have another:

Based on your experience with Scientology, how well does it mesh with other religions? Like, do you know any Scientologists who practise both that and Christianity... or both Scientology and Islam... or both Scientology along with any other religion? Also, does Scientology make any statements about other religions in general, such as how accurate or not their beliefs are? Most religions generally view other religions as false.

[LifeMaiden]

I understand your opinion about IceMaiden. On the other hand I know she is spreading misinformation.

I've not really been a part of another religion before Scientology. I did read up on Buddhism and Christianity when I was trying to work out what our spiritual nature is.

Some Scientologists smoke, some eat chocolate and some drink coffee too. If it's not done in moderation then something is wrong though. Smoking's not very healthy but it doesn't have much affect on your mind.

Hubbard did a lot of research and there are still techniques he developed that haven't been released yet as delivery is still being prepared. So new research isn't the main priority - it's getting people to do the existing techniques so we can make this a saner planet.

Smoking's not healthy but it won't affect your mind...how about the lungs and the body? This is the kind of so called cult mentality that permeates this group. Funny, I'm, starting to remmeber a lot of words that scientologists would use around others who either were not in the group or decided to leave. Such as spreading MISINFORMATION...doesn't that sound like a strange thing say?
And this where you are simply wrong. Spreading 'misinformation' was something that was used almost like some kind of codekey word. "


AHHHH yes the SANER planet...what a joke. The goal is to make as many people get into scientology to make the world 'sane'...a LRonHubbard utopia.

[dude]

It depends on your interpretations of other religions I think.
I think Scientology and Buddhism are most compatible. I know several Christian Scientologists but there are many different types of Christian too - some state you can't be a Christian if you believe in reincarnation and so on.

Scientology is about techniques and not really faith so there is room for Christians using the techniques while having their own ideas about God.

[Ephinie]

Well... really, to speak specifically to the statement that smoking is unhealthy but won't affect the mind, I actually have to disagree with that. Smoking creates an addiction, and addictions most certainly do affect the mind.

[dude]

Also, does Scientology make any statements about other religions in general, such as how accurate or not their beliefs are? Most religions generally view other religions as false.
Scientologists practice religious tolerance and don't go around trying to invalidate others based on their beliefs. Everyone has a right to believe in what they want as long as they don't use their beliefs to harm others.

[dude]

Well... really, to speak specifically to the statement that smoking is unhealthy but won't affect the mind, I actually have to disagree with that. Smoking creates an addiction, and addictions most certainly do affect the mind.

Well if you can't sit still for several hours without thinking about cigarettes then your smoking is definitely a problem to you as a Scientologist. To be more precise nicotine (and caffeine) don't have any significant affect on your ability to create mental image pictures. Similarly nicotine doesn't really have detrimental on your ability to say drive a car - that's why you're allowed to have it in your system when driving.

[PrinceOfTheWest]

It's a stretch to say that one could be a Scientologist and a Christian. A Scientologist may believe that, but no educated Christian would. The two systems have totally incompatible understandings of human nature, of the nature of sin, and (mostly) the nature of redemption. Someone may think they could adhere to the teachings of Scientology and still follow the external cultural forms of Christianity, but I'd submit such a person is an uneducated Christian.

I have this from my brother, who has rejected Christianity in favor of Scientology on the basis that the two are incompatible.

[Ephinie]

It's a stretch to say that one could be a Scientologist and a Christian. A Scientologist may believe that, but no educated Christian would. The two systems have totally incompatible understandings of human nature, of the nature of sin, and (mostly) the nature of redemption. Someone may think they could adhere to the teachings of Scientology and still follow the external cultural forms of Christianity, but I'd submit such a person is an uneducated Christian.

I have this from my brother, who has rejected Christianity in favor of Scientology on the basis that the two are incompatible.From my own, Christian perspective, I can say pretty easily that Scientology and Christianity are incompatible. But what I was asking for more specifically was whether that could be said from the Scientologist's perspective as well. Sounds like your brother's decision answers that. Thank you.

[LifeMaiden]

It depends on your interpretations of other religions I think.
I think Scientology and Buddhism are most compatible. I know several Christian Scientologists but there are many different types of Christian too - some state you can't be a Christian if you believe in reincarnation and so on.

Scientology is about techniques and not really faith so there is room for Christians using the techniques while having their own ideas about God.


Yes, that is true. I think I mentioned that in one of my older posts that I felt Scientology was more in common with the eastern faiths and the belief in past lives.

[dude]

It's a stretch to say that one could be a Scientologist and a Christian. A Scientologist may believe that, but no educated Christian would. The two systems have totally incompatible understandings of human nature, of the nature of sin, and (mostly) the nature of redemption.
Well I still think you can fit them together pretty well if you want.
For example sin comes about because of becoming too divorced from your spiritual nature (or God) and redemption involves confronting your sin learning from it and moving back towards God.
If you're not a Scientologist and a Christian you probably wouldn't bother fitting them together though.

[Ephinie]

For example sin comes about because of becoming too divorced from your spiritual nature (or God) and redemption involves confronting your sin learning from it and moving back towards God.
I don't know about that one... from the Christian perspective, redemption comes from Christ's sacrifice on the cross. It doesn't actually have anything to do with our own effort or own learning or understanding.

[dude]

yeah - but you could view our time on earth as being something we need to do in order to develop spiritually or understand God better, or experience unconditional love.

it's not like christ died on the cross so we can rape and murder whoever we feel like.

[PrinceOfTheWest]

Well I still think you can fit them together pretty well if you want.
For example sin comes about because of becoming too divorced from your spiritual nature (or God) and redemption involves confronting your sin learning from it and moving back towards God.The only way you can "fit them together" is by ignoring vital aspects of Christianity. Your description proves pretty conclusively that Scientology is not compatible with orthodox Christianity. What you're describing here is more like classic Gnosticism, which maintainted that spirit was good, matter was evil, and what was required for salvation was liberation from matter and following the spirit.

Orthodox Christianity's answer was that matter is good, though limited, but the spiritual component of our identity was not innately "good" or "evil", but rather could choose between the two. The spiritual side of our nature has the potential to be very good or very evil, depending on the choices it makes. The good choice is submitting our rebellious will, acknowledging our sins and turning from them (i.e. not doing them any more) accepting the forgiveness that is offered through the Blood of Jesus Christ, and walking in ongoing obedience to His instructions. Our bodies play as much a role in this as our spirits do (hence the place of the Sacraments).

[Parthian King]

yeah - but you could view our time on earth as being something we need to do in order to develop spiritually or understand God better, or experience unconditional love.

it's not like christ died on the cross so we can rape and murder whoever we feel like.

That you would make these statements at all shows how completely you misunderstand Christianity. What Christian would deny that spiritual growth and the knowledge of God are part of His purpose for us in this life? It is for this reason that pilgrimmage is one of the primary paradigms used in Scripture to describe true spirituality (it also doesn't cost any money).

Similarly, the statement that any Christian would springboard off of Christ's sacrifice as a license for sin is absurd, and in direct violation of Scripture:

Someone might argue, “If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?” Why not say—as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is deserved.--Romans 3:7-8

And again,

What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.--Romans 6:1-4

I can't be entirely sure, but the false choice you set up appears to rest on the erroneous dichotomy that either we must see Christ's death as an example of unconditional love (and nothing more), or we must view it as something akin to a lowly blood sacrifice that pays all and gives us carte blanche to do whatever we please. Naturally, those who see things this way inevitably opt for the former view rather than the latter. The problem is, this dichotomy flattens New Testament teaching. Christ's death is a show of unconditional love, yes. But it is also redemption; His blood does not merely "clean the slate"--it grants new birth to those who put their faith in Him.

That transforming new birth--central to any understanding of the Christian faith--is the factor lacking in your statement, and reveals that you have not grasped the most basic elements of the Christian doctrine you reject.

[dude]

Hey PK this is the Socratic Club not the Oxford Union! :)

So now you've proven to me that a religion I thought I was in broad agreement with I have no understanding of and actually reject it.

Anything else you want to set me straight about? :)

[PrinceOfTheWest]

Gee, dude - you're a Scientologist who professes to be trying to set people straight about Scientology. Why object to Christians trying to set you straight about Christianity?

[dude]

Gee, dude - you're a Scientologist who professes to be trying to set people straight about Scientology. Why object to Christians trying to set you straight about Christianity?
Well here you seem to be assuming two things - that I profess to be trying to set people straight about Scientology and that I object to Christians trying to set me straight about Christianity.
I can see why you make those assumptions but neither of them really fit with my assessment.

[inkspot]

Just a word in response to a couple pages back when Dude said IM was spreading misinformation: she is merely telling us her experience with Scientology, and unless Dude has some proof she is lying about her experience, I don't think it is nice of him to say she is spreading misinformation. She said what happened to her in the year she tried Scientology. I don't think she is lying about what happened to her, so I don't think she is spreading misinformation, and I still believe her statements are valid here.

Further: we know IM left the Catholic church for quite some time, and when she first began posting here, she was estranged from that faith. But when she posted about the faith (which she had left) she honestly told us what bothered her about Catholics/Christians, and the things she said were accurate. It was her experience that Christians had been mean -- she never said the doctrines were bad or that Jesus was mean. She did not spread misinformation about the faith; her understanding of it and its forms was good. It was the people she complained about, and her experiences were true. I do not believe just because someone has left a faith that their understanding of it is bound to be wrong. While their evaluation might be harsh, the fact of their leaving does not make their opinion invalid, as IM's comments on Christianity demonstrated, in her case.

Dude, we appreciate your comments because you are a practicing Scientologist, and we are learning about Scientology from your comments. Thank you. Please allow that other people with experience in the faith might also have a valid viewpoint. And when you do venture over into the Christian side of things, then please allow us to inform you about Christianity, as many of us have been practicing it for some time.

PK and PoTW, I insist you bring your other brother to this Forum!!!! your family is fascinating. Do you have some sisters?
:)

[dude]

Just a word in response to a couple pages back when Dude said IM was spreading misinformation: she is merely telling us her experience with Scientology, and unless Dude has some proof she is lying about her experience, I don't think it is nice of him to say she is spreading misinformation.

It's not my assessment that she was merely telling us her experience. I pointed out an example of that. Her posts of full of such rubbish.
She IS spreading misinformation.

[PrinceOfTheWest]

In the words of the prophet: sez you.

According to her account, what she is recounting is true and accurate. Since there is no reason why she should lie, and especially since what she relates squares with other things I have learned from sources within Scientology (including, but not limited to, my own brother), I have no reason to doubt her account.

Which brings me to my next question: why are you so determined to discredit her? It doesn't make sense to me. I'm Catholic, and we have members from time to time who are ex-Catholic who chime in with their negative experiences with the Church. I'm sorry that they have had those experiences (which are sometimes genuinely negative), I try to express concern for their situation, and I try to explain what the Church really stands for and what should have happened in their circumstances. But I never accuse them of "spreading misinformation" - even if they're misinformed. To do such would be at least an insult to their experience.

What makes you so frightened of what she might say?

by the way - my apologies for misunderstanding you. I thought when you began accusing IM of spreading misinformation, you indended to supply correct information about Scientology. My mistake.

[Swimfan1918]

Suri is hebrew for Princess.

Which is strange considering Tom Cruise doesn't believe in God...

I think it's a pretty name...but that poor kid...having to have Tom Cruise as a dad...


uh....ok i dont wanna sound like a know it all but i speak hebrew and suri is not hebrew for princess its not even hebrew. Neseecha is princess in hebrew.

[inkspot]

IceMaiden - this is my only post to you. I am not interested in discussing this with you. From your first post you start off misrepresenting Scientology. All your posts show a complete lack of understanding of what Scientology actually is. So many misunderstandings one has to wonder whether you're just not good at grasping things or whether you actively want to attack Scientology.
I'll just take the first post as an illustration:

You've called Scientology a cult - misrepresentation.
2nd misrepresentation is the idea that Scientologists view LRH as a god.
Okay, here is what you said was misinformation in IM's posts:

2. Scientology = cult.
The jury is still out on that, as many people beside IM have stated it based on their experience in the program, and some practices (such as sending members to her home or parents home after she left the faith to "spy" on her) tend to indicate a cult. The strict guarding of the doctrines and secrets of the program are also cultish, as is the fact it is founded on one charismatic person, LRH, and the idea that you must be initiated slowly into secret rites and pay as you go are also cult-like things. I am not saying it is a cult, but also I am it appeared to be so to IM, so her opinion is, again, not misinformation. And if anyone has a right to call a cult a cult, it would be an ex-member who had been subject to its abuses, right?

2. Scientologists consider LRH like a God.
Dude, you obviously do not, but IM had friends and acquaintances who did act as if LRH were divine. This was her experience of the program. Again, not misiniformation.

This would be similar to an ex-Catholic who said they left the church because Catholics worship Mary and that's wrong. As PoTW pointed out, the preferred response to someone making that assertion is to lovingly relate the correct doctrine and explain why sometimes it appears some Catholics might be "worshipping" the saints. It would be ridiculous to say, "oh yeah? that's a lie!!!" I mean, yes, it isn't correct, but still, it would tend to alienate a person that we would reallly rather draw back into loving relationship with God.

So, let's not discount IM, as she has an experience with Scientology which was different from yours, and we'll take each experience as it is related, in good faith that each of you is speaking the truth as you know it. Thanks. :)

[Parthian King]

Hey PK this is the Socratic Club not the Oxford Union! :)

So now you've proven to me that a religion I thought I was in broad agreement with I have no understanding of and actually reject it.

Anything else you want to set me straight about? :)

As a matter of entirely cool discussion, I do find this comment rather odd. You have stated that you were an atheist until two years ago. Now you are in Scientology. I am not in Scientology, but I do have a brother who has been in it for years. Nevertheless, both practically and formally (in terms of this discussion) I have no problem granting you functional authority as the "resident practicing Scientologist." As long as you make claims about that, and only that, I'm all ears. That doesn't mean I'll agree, but I certainly won't say, "Hey, you've got Scientology wrong." Correspondingly, if I make an incorrect statement about Scientology doctrine and practice, I would consider you entirely within bounds to correct me.

But when you start talking about Christianity, ahem, that's my turf. You seemingly have never been a practicing Christian. At very least you have not engaged the faith as an adult. Yet you, in your discussion about Scientology, cross over and make a rather bold declaration: Scientology and Christianity are compatible. Not only so, but you begin to make statements regarding Christ's crucifixion and the relationship between that act and our lives. In other words, you embark on a systematic theology in the Christian realm, albeit on a very minor scale.

Now, just as you would have every right to correct me if I were to say "initial Scientology auditing fees run $200,000" (when in fact they run a paltry $40,000), so I would think it fair that you would similarly grant me a functional authority in the realm of my experience and authority--New Testament theology. I don't know about "straightening you out" on anything else (like whether or not you like Hot Tamales--see the Duffer thread), but on Christianity, I don't feel it hubris for me to say I have a bit of an edge between the two of us.

The fact is, "belief" for a Christian, in the Scriptural sense, has little to nothing to do with intellectual assent. "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ" does not mean "think that He is a great prophet" or even "agree doctrinally that He is Son of God." It means repenting of sin, abandoning all false gods, turning on your heel, and surrendering your life to Him. That is believing. Jesus also made clear that, with Him, there is no middle ground. Either you radically repent, leave everything that might hinder your love for God, pick up your cross and follow--or you cannot be His disciple and you are not a Christian. You are either for Him, or against Him.

Of course, part of this process does rest on a proper understanding of who Christ is. The historical Church (whether Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant) holds that the one and only sovereign God humbled Himself, and through the miracle of the Incarnation, became man. In Jesus Christ we see One who is fully God and fully human, with neither nature compromising the other. He was crucified, died, and buried, and on the third day He was raised to life. He comes again to judge the living and the dead. Beside Him there is no other. We human beings, His creation made for His pleasure, are given one life, one shot--it is appointed once to die, and after that the judgment. Hence, we are to live reverentially and circumspectfully in His sight.

Now, unless you see Jesus as I have just described, and have done what I explained beforehand in relation to Him, by your actions and inactions you have rejected Christ. This is not a personal slam, a comment on Scientology, or a point gainer in the discussion. It is simple Christian teaching of the most basic sort. I invite any other orthodox Christian to correct me if I have erred.

So, dude, I am not trying to lord anything over you. Again, if you want to tell us the way it is in Scientology (along with any other present or past Scientology practitioners that might want to join the discussion), have at it. But don't balk when Christians, in their turn, have something to say about their faith. To take your response to my post at face value, it seems you want to be the authority not only over Scientology (over against all other comers), but Christian teaching as well.

PK and PoTW, I insist you bring your other brother to this Forum!!!! your family is fascinating. Do you have some sisters? :)
I don't know about our brother, but we have quite a few sisters that already frequent the site. One of 'em is a mod!

[onlymystory]

not to take away from PK's post. (I'm going to use that argument in some of my classes) but Suri means either wealthy in Armenian or Help Me! in Babylonian (how appropriate). It can also mean pointy nose in some Indian dialects or pickpocket in Japanese. And some Hindi areas use it as a boy's name. There's no princess meaning for it in any language.

[Elf Of The Grey Havens]

Bravo, PK.

[LifeMaiden]

Allright I'm back. I was spacing out early this morning when I was posting on this forum due to lack of sleep, then I had to go to the gym and train until about 6pm.


Here's my response:


1. When a group turns its back on a member who decides that not ALL of scientology's principles or ideas and practices are positive for him or her, there should be NO reason to go and send out people to try to spy them. If you're accusing me of lying, Dude, then I beg you to please take it up with me right here and now. I have no reason to lie. NOWHERE did I ever say that the entirety of scientology was BAD.

2. If a group has NOTHING TO HIDE, AND NOTHING TO FEAR, then why is a former member immediately accused of 'misrepresenting' or 'not grasping' or 'misinterpreting' scientology? As I understand how people should be, if a person leaves a group, they should be treated with respect, not condemnation, for their CHOICE to leave. I didn't have nor did I desire to spend in excess of 40,000 dollar to 100,000 dollars for the supposed clearing and salvation of my being.

God's offering of salvation does not come at a price. Why should scientology, a man-made series of postulates and ideas, come at such a high cost? Why should I have to go and sell my house or get a loan from ( amazingly, a scientology-based loan company offered the loans at a 20% interest rate to those who wanted to be clear, located close by to the Dianetics Org).


3. What are you exactly accusing me of misrepresenting and lying about, Dude? You see this is what I have a problem with...why the need to accuse someone who left the group when they have something negative to say about scientology? What is so wrong with critical analysis and criticism of a group?


4. Emphasis on ONLY THEIR kind of counseling, which means I sit in that room with a counselor and he or she uses the E Meter until the E meter registers no 'energy' was like being in confession only they made sure you confessed everything even if it meant I was there for eight hours is ridiculous. The outright bashing of psychology and psychiatry came from a fear that people might see those options as viable and not as the barbarism that L Ron Hubbard made it out to be. I stated very clearly that I also did NOT agree with some of the concepts and treatments psychiatry offered, but I also agree that psychological problems have some biological component and are NOT just the result of holding back suppressed emotions.



5. Not being able to answer my questions is a dead giveaway that there is something being hidden from me. If you can't answer me as to where Mrs L Ron Hubbard is, or you can't answer me as to why it's okay for people to chain smoke while promoting an otherwise healthy lifestyle ( because LRon Hubbard was himself a chain smoker) then most definitely I'm going to have even MORE questions and suspicions.


6. L Ron Hubbard was revered in a godlike manner, perhaps I should NOT have said he was considered a virtual god. But scientology's premise is that human beings can have unlimited powers akin to God by going through all the way to Operating Theta 8 ...meaning a fully functional, fully free of issues, etc...is both unfounded and unproven. I saw Operating 8 level people get sick all the time which they were obviously supposed to be practically immune to.


7. The emphasis that a college education wasn't important made me wonder...are scientologists afraid that you might study other religions or philosiphies in school that run opposite to scientology, and therefore, they might 'lose' someone to another point of view? Some of the members there, including some of the counselors, had masters degrees from universities which they were quick to condemn " It means nothing if you're not aware of the universe." Define what being AWARE of the universe is.


The kids at my scientology org went to a scientologist school known as the DELPHI SCHOOL. With the emphasis on drug free. Well that's not hard to do if there's only 40 students and they're under 14 years old. Nicotine is a drug...if there was such a big emphasis on remaining drug free then no one there should have smoked. Period.




Accusing a former member of misrepresenting scientology just because they disagree with some of its practices and tenants and attempting to discredit a former member's experiences makes me wonder...why ARE scientologists afraid of these ex members? Because we will tell the truth about our negative experiences? Because we refused to pay to 'clear' ourselves? Or because we know that scientology, with its good points, has many bad points as well?

INSTEAD OF SAYING " I WILL DISCREDIT YOU" how about " I DIS-AGREE WITH YOU?"

[dude]

As a matter of entirely cool discussion, I do find this comment rather odd.

Well if you want to debate you're going the right way about things. If you want to try and build understanding then I don't think you are.

[Ephinie]

Question here, though this was probably already answered before... (I just don't remember). Is L. Ron Hubbard still alive or did he die already? I assume that if his wife is in a federal penitentary, that means she, at least, is still alive.

Also, how many children, if any did they have; and how old would they be now?

[dude]

Okay, here is what you said was misinformation in IM's posts:

2. Scientology = cult.
The jury is still out on that, as many people beside IM have stated it based on their experience in the program, and some practices (such as sending members to her home or parents home after she left the faith to "spy" on her) tend to indicate a cult.

It suggests to me that she is lying.

And if anyone has a right to call a cult a cult, it would be an ex-member who had been subject to its abuses, right?[/qutoe]
Yes. But also an ex-member is likely to be someone who hadn't understood what it was about given that Scientology is so positive.
[quote]
2. Scientologists consider LRH like a God.
Dude, you obviously do not, but IM had friends and acquaintances who did act as if LRH were divine. This was her experience of the program. Again, not misiniformation.
Well LRH said himself he was not a god and that he shouldn't be worshipped. Is it just a coincidence that all the Scientologists IM met didn't have a clue how Scientologists should behave or about what Scientology is?


So, let's not discount IM, as she has an experience with Scientology which was different from yours, and we'll take each experience as it is related, in good faith that each of you is speaking the truth as you know it. Thanks. :)

Well I discount her for the reasons I've mentioned - you're free to believe her of course.

[Ephinie]

Well LRH said himself he was not a god and that he shouldn't be worshipped. Is it just a coincidence that all the Scientologists IM met didn't have a clue how Scientologists should behave or about what Scientology is?It is highly possible that the specific Scientology center where she was a member is an "offshoot" of the rest of Scientology. They may have strayed from what you and other Scientologists understand to be appropriate behavior. If that is the case, then there is no reason to think that she is lying, exagerating, or otherwise misrepresenting her personal experience with them.

I, personally, don't have any experience with Scientology. I do have experience going to several different Christian churches, however. I can say from those experiences that there have been times when my family attended churches that do not adhere to sound doctrine. That is to say, we've gone to a few churches that teach some pretty wacked out stuff and that even teach things that Orthodox Christianity considers to be heresy. So it stands to reason, I think, that if a church can stray from orthodox teachings in Christianity... why can't there be a certain Scientolgy center that strays from the proper teachings of Scientology?

Based on that, along with my experience of how IceMaiden posts and how she behaves on this forum, I have to conclude that her experiences with Scientology that she talks about are genuine.

It sounds like you have had a different, much more positive experience than she has had. I'm thinking that you probably are from a different part of the country than where she is from, though. So would it be very hard to accept that maybe there is one or two Scientology centers out there that need to be brought into check by the rest of Scientology, if they are treating members the way she has been treated? It doesn't discredit Scientology as a whole. Just as one church that strays from orthodox doctrine does not discredit Christianity, I would think that one Scientology center that behaves inconsitently would not discredit Scientology either.

And if the particular center where she was a member was an "offshoot," then it makes sense all the members she met would behave the way their specific branch behaved.

[Parthian King]

Well if you want to debate you're going the right way about things. If you want to try and build understanding then I don't think you are.

What do you mean by "understanding"? That we mutually grasp what the other is saying so we can have a coherent dialogue? Or do you mean by "understanding" that we are vaguely diplomatic and "nice" without ever dealing with difficult and concrete concepts, so as to justify or negate statements like, say, "Christianity is compatible with Scientology"? Does truth matter at all to you, or is this just an exercise in PR?

I'm not sure you would have found Jack Lewis to be very "understanding" either.

[dude]

Ephinie,

If it was an "offshoot" and behaving in such a way then I agree. I disagree that they would have the right to be called a Scientology center however as they are not behaving in accordance with certain rules about how a center should operate. I think it unlikely that it wouldn't have been picked up upon if this was the case.

I have 100% understanding for why you think IM is not trying to misrepresent Scientology.
I however do think this.

[dude]

What do you mean by "understanding"? That we mutually grasp what the other is saying so we can have a coherent dialogue?
Yes!!!!!!!!!

[Parthian King]

Yes!!!!!!!!!

Oh. Fascinating.

[PrinceOfTheWest]

Y'know, dude, the way you try to interact with others on this forum makes me wonder how much you understand basic conversational courtesy in general and behaviour on this forum in particular. When you make these kinds of statements about other people's posts:
It suggests to me that she is lying.that is the rhetorical equivalent of a slap in the face. You have no grounds at all to call into question another person's experience, and even if you did, the more courteous response would be to grant the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps the other party's experience differed from yours for a variety of reasons. Perhaps the other party knows more than you, and therefore is more qualified to speak. To call someone else a liar without grounds is a very insulting and juvenile thing to do.

You, for instance, claim to have studied at Oxford. I have accepted that at face value, and if you have, I'm glad you've had that experience. But you could be lying. You could be a high-school teenager at an internet cafe in Tempe, Arizona with delusions of grandeur. But it would be discourteous of me to assume that you were lying unless I had some proof of it. Even as it is, based on my own past discussions with active and ex-Scientologists, as well as your petulant behaviour here on this forum, I am far more inclined to believe that you are lying when you claim to come here simply to promote understanding and dialogue. My experience with Scientology even before I met IM would give me reason to believe that your agenda is more one of deception and misinformation intended to burnish the public image of an aggressive, ruthless fund-grabbing machine. Ephinie is younger and more trusting than I, therefore she is willing to suggest that perhaps different experiences stemmed from different facilities. Having been around the block a few more times, I am more aware that men will take advantage of the willingness of others to believe the best and grant the benefit of the doubt. To me, your touchiness, swiftness to take offense, and willingness to accuse others tells me far more about your true agenda than your words do.

[inkspot]

Dude, I am sorry IM is saying things which you feel aren't true about your faith, but you are not being realistic. You say she must be lying, because Scientology is so positive. Yet you yourself are very negative toward IM, and truthfully, if Scientology were so positive that no one could say a bad word about it, why would IM ever have left it? Be serious now: people leave their faith for one reason or another, and their reasons are valid for them. IM has no reason to want to bad-mouth or discredit Scientology here; what possible motive could she have?

She has plainly stated the areas in which it helped her, and even changed her life. You seem to want only a 100% positive view of the faith to be presented here, and that is impossible because it obviously is not 100% positive, or no one would leave it.

Now please desist in saying IM is lying. We know her better than we know you, and it is clear to us she is telling us the truth of her experience with Scientology. Just because it was not 100% positive, it shouldn't be completely discounted.

That would be like my saying a defrocked priest could not tell the truth about Catholicism. Of course he could! His head knowledge of the faith would be as good as mine (much better, actually). The fact that he left it doesn't necessarily mean he would lie about it. That makes no sense.

When Ephinie pointed out an offshoot Scientology Center might teach some stuff which is not exactly the same as you believe, you did not say, "Oh, well, that could explain why IM had a bad experience -- sorry that happened her," instead you said, "Such a center shouldn't call itself Scientology!" as if that made it okay for you to call her a liar. It doesn't.

So far, you have really presented a far more negative picture of Scientology through your rejection of IM and her views than I was predisposed to have simply from what she said about the faith ... in fact, your attitude toward her has sort of reinforced to me what she had already said about the faith. Based on your atttiude, I must admit, maybe it is a cult, as you seem to brook no dissent to your views, and seem unable to say or allow anyone else to say a negative word about the faith.

Your interactions with us here so far have had a profound impact on my opinion of Scientology. I appreciate your willingness to dialog with us, but I hope if Scientology is as positive as you say it is, you will show some of that in future posts.

[LifeMaiden]

Well I appreciate members here coming to my defense. Thank you.


What some of you have clearly stated is obvious...if Dude is an example of an almost 'clear' scientologist, he shows very little of the respect, intelligence, and reasonable attitude that these people are supposed to have. As I mentioned, many of the scientologists I knew who were clear and beyond that were for the most part engaging, friendly people ( as long as I remained in the group ) who knew how to effectively communicate.

There were two other things I wanted to say about scientology that were positive and that was it helped me communicate effectively and directly in one of their early courses on communication, and they had this light massage technique ( I forgot what it was called) that involved running the fingers down the spine and outwards, to dispell negative energy in the body. That could be very relaxing. They also emphasized chiropractors rather than than traditional doctors, and preferred vitamins and natural holistic healing to potent medicines and hospitals. Despite what I found out about L Ron Hubbard and his wife in that book which scientologists condemned as lies, he was a prolific writer and had great and imaginative detail to many of his programs and philosiphies. But that did not give him the right to evade income taxes and live lavishly, of which his poor wife, the mother of many children, ended up spending years in a Tennessee State Penitentiary.

He also was against abortion very strongly, which led me to wonder about his conflicting views regarding reincarnation, and how most scientologists I knew did not view death as the end ( all will meet again in another life, you just didn't know it, and all have led past lives, so death therefore was transient and one should be cavalier about it. To me, it's HEALTHIER to BE concerned about death than to say, no big deal, see you in the next life). If abortion to him was wrong, then he obviously believed that one did NOT have past or future lives, and that abortion was murder, therefore, a fetus could NOT be born again and again after its subsequent death by abortion. I believe ( not sure on the numbers) L Ron Hubbard had 8 children.

It would be very hard for me to see how someone of the Christian faith could be a scientologist and still be a practicing Christian, as many things in scientology were more along the lines of Eastern thought. There was no salvation by God or Christ, but salvation through going through many levels of subsequent processes to reach that ultimate goal of clear, and the 8 steps beyond it to operating Theta 8, about 100,000 dollars or more later.


I'll take salvation through believe in the Lord, thanks.

[echoscot]

What I find amazing is that most of Dude's posts are in this thread and the atheism and evolutionism threads. I'm not really convinced of his authority on Christianity to be able to draw a valid comparison between that and scientology.

Though he has some good insight in the evolution thread. This one has kind of degenerated into bashing, and surprisingly from the scientologist. Other threads have gotten a bit harsh from the Christian side, but this seems a first.

I hope we can clear this up, because I am sure a lot of us could stand to learn a bit more about a philosophy that plays a rather predominant role in life in the US.

[dude]

Dude, I am sorry IM is saying things which you feel aren't true about your faith, but you are not being realistic. You say she must be lying, because Scientology is so positive. Yet you yourself are very negative toward IM, and truthfully, if Scientology were so positive that no one could say a bad word about it, why would IM ever have left it? Be serious now: people leave their faith for one reason or another, and their reasons are valid for them. IM has no reason to want to bad-mouth or discredit Scientology here; what possible motive could she have?

I'll give you an example - someone who does WeightWatchers and can't stick to it is quite prone to simply go around saying WeightWatchers doesn't work.

More accurate would be "WeightWatchers didn't work for me - I didn't try very hard anyway and have bad self-discipline". But most people aren't that honest.

Actually IM herself said she never really immersed herself in Scientology as she considered it a bit cult-like from the beginning - so logically we can say that she never really gave it a chance and that there is a good chance she never really understood it.

There are people who don't want others to succeed. And a good way to attack something is to appear as reasonable and nice as possible. You know the story of Judas!

[dude]

What I find amazing is that most of Dude's posts are in this thread and the atheism and evolutionism threads. I'm not really convinced of his authority on Christianity to be able to draw a valid comparison between that and scientology.

Well all I've really been saying is that there are some people who are Christians and Scientologists - one's about faith, the other is about techniques.
I think there are some apparent incompatibilities myself depending on your interpretations but nothing major. Perhaps there are some interpretations of Christianity that aren't allowable for whatever reason - that would make me non-Christian. I'm not saying I am a Christian. But I still think you can interpret the teachings of Jesus in a way that is extremely compatible with Buddhism or Scientology. I'm sure some people here think that's not possible and that's fine but I'm not really that interested in that discussion.

Though he has some good insight in the evolution thread. This one has kind of degenerated into bashing, and surprisingly from the scientologist. Other threads have gotten a bit harsh from the Christian side, but this seems a first.

Yeah I know - the alternatives would have been to spend ages arguing with IM or letting her spread her misinformation without stating my position about it. Basically being more reasonable and less straight-forward about my opinion.
The only reason anyone doesn't continue with Scientology in my experience is because they have ethical problems - I've seen it time after time after time. IMs has such problems - I can see from her posts very clearly.


I hope we can clear this up, because I am sure a lot of us could stand to learn a bit more about a philosophy that plays a rather predominant role in life in the US.
Yeah - that's enough about IM. Any more discussion I think should be of a general nature about why a good thing or person gets attacked.

I'd be happy for people to find out that I'm a nice guy who doesn't make accusations about people without evidence. :)

[LifeMaiden]

Ethical problems? Now that's an interesting theory coming from a scientologist. I think you need to take a good look at what ethical and ethics mean before you attack someone else who decided scientology wasn't for them...talk about 'wildly attacking or accusing.'

" Why a good thing or person gets attacked..." Hmm. I don't recall 'attacking' scientology in any way other than to say it wasn't for me, and I don't agree with some of their principles. And as for a 'good thing or person' getting attacked, isn't that what you're doing when you accuse me of...um...having an unethical nature or 'ethical problems?'

[LifeMaiden]

I'll give you an example - someone who does WeightWatchers and can't stick to it is quite prone to simply go around saying WeightWatchers doesn't work.

More accurate would be "WeightWatchers didn't work for me - I didn't try very hard anyway and have bad self-discipline". But most people aren't that honest.

Actually IM herself said she never really immersed herself in Scientology as she considered it a bit cult-like from the beginning - so logically we can say that she never really gave it a chance and that there is a good chance she never really understood it.

There are people who don't want others to succeed. And a good way to attack something is to appear as reasonable and nice as possible. You know the story of Judas!


You know Dude, the more you keep talking, the more convinced I am that it's YOU with the ethical problems. Now you're comparing me to Judas? That's even more ludicrous and more laughable.

Why don't you state what you consider my ethical problems to be, Dude? You might as well get it all out in the open since you're attacking my character now LOL.

I immersed myself as far as I allowed myself to go. "Never really understood it?" There you go again with your accusations along the same lines of 'not grasping scientology.' Unfortunately, I understood it all too well, which is why I chose to leave.

What kind of 'ethical' person accuses someone of doing a betrayal as Judas did just because another person doesn't want to be part of that group, and has stated that there were positive things about scientology? Where have I stated or even implied I didn't want others to succeed?


Unfortunately your comparison to WeightWatchers and something as costly and complicated as scientology isn't that great of a comparison.


It's amazing to see your true personality unfold as the discussion goes along. I'll let others respond to your accusations of what you consider me to be.

[Parthian King]

Well all I've really been saying is that there are some people who are Christians and Scientologists - one's about faith, the other is about techniques.

That's funny. Here in the States Scientologists bill themselves as a religion and a church. You make it sound like chiropractic. If only the proper information were out there...

I think there are some apparent incompatibilities myself depending on your interpretations but nothing major. Perhaps there are some interpretations of Christianity that aren't allowable for whatever reason - that would make me non-Christian. I'm not saying I am a Christian. But I still think you can interpret the teachings of Jesus in a way that is extremely compatible with Buddhism or Scientology. I'm sure some people here think that's not possible and that's fine but I'm not really that interested in that discussion.

So what you're saying is, if someone has an angle on Christianity that doesn't square with yours (that is compatible with Scientology) you don't want to talk about it. But if they do agree with you a priori, then giddyup.

Let me remind you, dude, that you were the one who made an assertion about the relative compatibility between these two disparate visions of reality. It is totally fallacious to make that statement (especially on a C.S. Lewis website!), then stipulate that the only discussion you will entertain on the matter is that which will not contradict you. Now, no one here would ever accuse you of being a Christian, so rest easy there. Given the broad agreement which we can mutually enjoy on that point, allow me to address the rest of your statement:

No one is saying that at certain points of conceptual contact the teachings of Jesus do not bear some similarity to those of other major world religions. The issue, rather, is the foundational, core doctrines of Christianity itself. Instead of reinventing the wheel on this one, let me simply cite the Nicean Creed, which is broadly recognized as the quintessential expression of orthodox Christianity:

We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate.

He suffered and was buried, and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father.

And he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead, whose kingdom shall have no end.

And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets.

And we believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church.

We acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

The fact that I pulled this from a Protestant website (it is recited in every celebration of the Roman Catholic Mass) reveals its universal appeal for Christians ("catholic" with the miniscule indicates "universal"). Now, any "interpretation" of Christianity that fundamentally and substantially differs from this statement is by definition no longer Christianity.

By way of corollary, Christ's teachings (those usually cited are drawn from the Sermon on the Mount) are fundamentally grounded in His theology of the eschatological Kingdom of God and cannot be divorced from it. Even the most liberal NT scholar would confess to this. Once this is recognized, things begin to reveal themselves for what they are.

For example, I remember reading a pamphlet of my brother's, written by L. Ron Hubbard, and addressing these very issues of "compatibility." Hubbard praised the teachings of Jesus and Jesus Himself as a significant moral figue. But he failed to mention that Jesus claimed to be divine--the unique Son of God. Sort of like ignoring an elephant in the parlor, don't you think? And when it came to commandments, Hubbard's professed motives for following the teachings of Christ were heterodox, to say the very least. Adultery was to be avoided, yes. Why? Well, your wife might find out and put glass in your soup (this is a direct quote). Yet Christ commands us not to commit adultery even through a lustful glance because it diminishes both us and the object of our lust, and it sullies the glory of God--not simply because we are looking out for "number one." Besides, the fury we seek to avoid by obedience is principally that of God, not that of a scorned woman (as terrible as that might be). Christ's commands and teachings are grounded in His own self-perception as Messiah and His vision of God's Kingdom--there is no divorcing those two realities and "floating" the Sermon on the Mount apart from its context in order to make its content some sort of mystical handbook for ascending to a higher plane. And, incidentally, this grounding in Jesus as Divine Incarnate and purveyor of God's Kingdom is what sets His teachings apart from those of other major world religions, however much they may bear superficial resemblance to one another.

So I repeat, Scientology and Christianity are worlds apart. No one who responsibly assesses the foundational confessions of Christianity could ever say with any amount of intellectual honesty that these two worldviews are compatible.

I'll leave some of the other more incredible statements to some other folks.

[dude]

OK PK. I understand your position.

[Parthian King]

IM, what I am curious about is the tipping point. What was it that finally brought you to the decision to leave Scientology?

[LifeMaiden]

Whoa!! I don't remember the part about adultery and 'glass in the soup' if 'your wife finds out.' LOL!!!

I mentioned that people of all faiths were allowed to be in scientology, but that scientology's principles were largely along the lines of Eastern/Oriental thought...regarding past lives, etc etc etc. So I would say that in some ways it would be impossible to be a practicing Christian AND be a scientologist because many of the core beliefs of each run into direct opposition to each other.

And Dude, you haven't answered my questions or addressed any of what you think my ethical problems are.....

[LifeMaiden]

IM, what I am curious about is the tipping point. What was it that finally brought you to the decision to leave Scientology?



1. They were pressing me to get the loan for the 40,000 I needed to do my Clear program. As I began to see they were more interested in my money than my salvation ( their salvation of Clear) I began to withdraw. Even if I had the money personally, I would not have given it to them. When I asked bluntly to the owners of the org why the cost was so high they said to me, " Isn't your life worth 40,000 dollars? "( I could name these people, but I will not, for privacy issues) A person was encouraged to continually bring prospective new members into the group, and I wasn't interested in 'spreading the word'.


2. I began to sense hypocrisy among the staff members and this strange sort of disconnectedness that their personalities had. They were friendly and engaging, but there was something 'empty' behind their smiles, sort of as if their true personalities had been burned out.

Staff members and the owners could never answer my questions, PARTICULARLY about WHERE L Ron Hubbard, his many children, or his wife were. ( dead, wife is in prison, his kids parcelled out to relatives, and NO ONE at ANY scientology center had ever seen the kids or the wife, obviously. Wouldn't you think they would let themselves be shown and try to advance their cause even more?) Why were they in what appeared to be 'hiding?'

It was as if a person was not allowed to ask 'where' anything.


3. Reading the Canadian biography of L Ron Hubbard that was banned in the states by scientologists ( don't ask me how, I just know it was....the ex-scientologist who let me borrow the book had been a former staff member who was a highly 'operating thetan level 3') that finally answered my questions about exactly what L Ron Hubbard was about. While he was certainly a highly intelligent, profilic writer of much organized thought and theory, some of which is practical and useful, he was...how shall I say this? A very flawed individual. It would be like finding out Jesus WAS married to Mary Magdalene and had ten kids!



4. Seeing a good friend of mine get sucked further and further into scientology after her beloved aunt died, and I saw they took advantage of her grief..." You really need to be Clear now, " they told her. And barely able to afford to pay her own rent, she got that loan at a 20% interest rate. Once I left the organization, she never spoke to me again.

[Parthian King]

Could you give the specs on that biography, IM? Even just the author or whatever?

[inkspot]

The only reason anyone doesn't continue with Scientology in my experience is because they have ethical problems - I've seen it time after time after time. IMs has such problems - I can see from her posts very clearly.
Dude, you don't know IM, and you cannot judge her ethics any more than I can. I consider this a personal attack on IM, and as a moderator of this Forum, I am warning you to let it go. We do not engage in personal attacks here. No one has said, "What a liar that Dude is!" have they? Of course not. We don't play that way. If we question the veracity of your statements, we question the statements, but we do not frame an attack on you, and we won't tolerate your doing it to anyone else.

IM has said nothing except what her experience was with Scientology, and although she left the faith, her experience is as valid as yours.

[LifeMaiden]

Could you give the specs on that biography, IM? Even just the author or whatever?


I'm going to search for that book online right now and get back to you. From what I remember it had a rose/pink cover, was published by a firm in Toronto, and was written about 1990 or so. The ex scientologist who gave it to me had purchased it there in Canada at the time. It MAY be out of print, and I wish I had remembered the author. But this book I found below, though published in 1996, sounds similiar:




http://www.book-shopper.co.uk/books/detail/lron-hubbard-messiah-or-madman/0942637577.html


http://www.ronthenut.org/
http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/religion/cult/l-ron-hubbard/

[Parthian King]

Dude, you don't know IM, and you cannot judge her ethics any more than I can. I consider this a personal attack on IM, and as a moderator of this Forum, I am warning you to let it go. We do not engage in personal attacks here. No one has said, "What a liar that Dude is!" have they? Of course not. We don't play that way. If we question the veracity of your statements, we question the statements, but we do not frame an attack on you, and we won't tolerate your doing it to anyone else.

IM has said nothing except what her experience was with Scientology, and although she left the faith, her experience is as valid as yours.

Thanks, Ink. I am trying to find anything in IM's description of her departure from Scientology that has any parallel to Judas, any parallel to a frustrated Weight Watchers drop out, or any evidence of unethical activity. I can't see any. (OK, I do see the money connection: Judas was so greedy for money he betrayed Jesus for 30 pieces of silver, and IM was so greedy she wanted to keep her $40,000 at 20% interest, but apart from that...)

[LifeMaiden]

LOL!!!!! I was just going to say.....er, um...I'm not as cheap as Judas...I'll might have gone for 40,000 pieces of silver, not just 30 LOL ;) And I don't think hanging from a tree is that attractive either. :D


That was great PK!!!!!!

[Parthian King]

Yeah, well, it was that or make a comment about the Weight Watchers/lack of discipline thing. Apparently dude hasn't read your profile.

[dude]

Dude, you don't know IM, and you cannot judge her ethics any more than I can.


I disagree very strongly here, but best to drop it rather than explain why.

The most dangerous people are those that on the surface seem nice yet take every "reasonable" opportunity to cause harm without being spotted.

Being able to spot such people is very useful. PK is a pretty antagonistic guy but that's much preferable imo.

[Parthian King]

The most dangerous people are those that on the surface seem nice yet take every "reasonable" opportunity to cause harm without being spotted. Being able to spot such people is very useful.

Indeed....

[echoscot]

I disagree very strongly here, but best to drop it rather than explain why.

The most dangerous people are those that on the surface seem nice yet take every "reasonable" opportunity to cause harm without being spotted.

Being able to spot such people is very useful. PK is a pretty antagonistic guy but that's much preferable imo.


I have to disagree on both counts here, Dude. For one I have found PK to be pretty strongly opinionated, but not antagonistic. There is a difference. As a matter of fact, he has given you more leeway in this thread than others have just from reading back through it.

On the point about IM's ethics, you are quite alone there. Maybe she has caused "great harm" to Scientology in your opinion, but she has not shown any indication of a hidden agenda or scope. She has been very open, as a matter of fact, and that is a very noble and ethical way to be. You have made that statement about "niceness" twice now but have failed to give reasonable evidene other than that she is an apostate member. That alone does not discount anyone's evidence. I am Southern Baptist, I have heard many ex-Baptists decry what they thought was wrong with either Christianity or the Baptist denomination. Yes, I am disappointed that they feel that way. But that does not discount their experiences or their evidence. The conversation with Siren on the Wicca thread is a good example of this. If I feel a person makes a statement that is incorrect, I try to correct their perception, or at least state what my perception is.

I think you have been actually pretty nasty towards her. What we want is not for you to attack IM, but give statements in response to the questions she raised.

1. Do Scientologists really ask for such large donations to work towards being clear?

2. Is the Canadian biography that she cites unreliable for some reason? And what reasons would those be? ( Please don't be like the HP bashers who say, "Well I've never read them , but I know what they are about and they are wrong." Give specific examples.ie, The book claims this, but this is actually the truth...)

3. Do you really cut off communication with apostate members? Could that be part of the reason you are pushing her aside?

There are several others that are raise, and as our resident Scientologist, it seems you are the only one with any authority to "set the record straight" but it does not require personal demeaning statements about another members character.

[Parthian King]

Dude, you don't know IM, and you cannot judge her ethics any more than I can.I disagree very strongly here, but best to drop it rather than explain why.

Echoscot, thanks for your thoughtful post. Now, looking closely at the statement dude cites from Ink, and his retort, some conclusions can be drawn.

Clearly, dude does not know IM personally, so he cannot be disagreeing with that part of Ink's declaration.

Therefore, he must be disagreeing (very strongly) with Ink's statement that he is not in a position to judge IM's ethics. Again, since he does not know IM personally, has never has a business dealing with her, been witness to a relationship in which she was a party, or even have so much as a casual conversation with her, the only way we can conclude that he makes such a judgment is based upon ideology. That is to say, IM's experience with Scientology in the past and her current perspective on it places her (in dude's view) in a position of diametrical opposition to him, ideologically speaking. There is nothing earth-shattering to this in itself, and I think all participants can agree to it as nearly self-evident.

What is remarkable is that dude, as a member of Scientology, feels very strongly that IM categorically is an unethical person because--and only because--she has left Scientology and is publishing the reasons for her departure. His most recent post continues to paint her as a fake, a walking lie who is nothing but a wolf in sheep's clothing who acts as if she wants to do good, but really entertains the most sinister of motives. Dude also maintains that he is in a better position to judge her as such than Inkspot is (and, I would guess, anyone else on the forum), also presumably because of her professed history of (leaving) Scientology.

For my part, though dude says it is "best to drop" the issue in the wake of Inkspot's warning, it seems to me by his following comment (about false people who seem nice) that he hasn't dropped it at all. I also, along with Inkspot, find his attitudes most illuminating.

[LifeMaiden]

You'll notice that when someone avoids answering SPECIFIC questions, and other members here other than myself have asked VERY specific questions to Dude, they remain UNANSWERED. Why is this, I wonder?

My only intent to post in this section about scientology was to reinterate MY personal experiences with it, and that it offers both negative AND positive things. What is so wrong with pointing out negative? I am not alone in my experience with scientology as an ex-member, there are many, many other ex members who feel the same way as you can see from doing a search on the internet. How am I being unethical or doing great harm to scientology by simply stating some criticisms about it, but leaving it up to the individual whether or not to join? I never said " Don't ever join this group," rather, my statement would be, " Proceed with caution and don't accept everything blindly. Question things."


Dude mentioned the thing about a wolf in sheep's clothing " Those who act nice can do the most harm." Interesting, because if I just came out and said, " YES SCIENTOLOGY IS BAD, HARMFUL, AND ANTI-CHRISTIAN" would that be better than saying, " I believe scientology has good things to offer, but it comes at a price?"

[Ephinie]

That book that goes with the link IceMaiden posted is available at barnesandnoble.com, for anyone who is interested in obtaining their own copy. It isn't available new, but there are several used copies that you can get through the site. I'm debating whether or not I ought to spend the cash on it... it look so interesting, but still... it's money spent, ya know?

[inkspot]

The most dangerous people are those that on the surface seem nice yet take every "reasonable" opportunity to cause harm without being spotted.
I would hate to live in a world where the people I had to fear the most were the nice ones! Guess what, Dude? Some of the nice folks in this Forum are just nice folks. Now if you are going to say our pleasantness and rationality in dealing with you is proof that we are in fact diabolical, then I just feel sorry for you.

You've caused far more harm to Scientology in this Thread than IM ever dreamed of by your mean attitude. You say Scientology is a positive experience in every way, yet your posts have exuded negativity and criticism.

But I am thankful that you have chosen to stop your personal attacks on IM, and I ask you now, if you are still willing to share, to go ahead and tell us about Scientology in your experience. EchoScot lined out some questions for you, and for me, I would like to hear about the Xenu (sp? sorry) part of the theology.

[LifeMaiden]

And ironically, some of the members of scientology that I met at my old org were just like Dude described...they appeared ' nice' on the outside, and were nice as long as I continued to be a participating member, but once I decided that the group wasn't for me, they were no longer nice people. Me, I am far too honest for my own good, and often wear my emotions on my sleeve, to be a deceitful person or to act nice when I don't feel like it. I'm pretty blunt and will say what I feel, so I'm probably the last person that someone could accuse of acting nice and then having alterior motives. Believe me, the Ice Maiden SAYS whatever is on her mind!!

[PrinceOfTheWest]

Y'know, IM, I'd never noticed that about you!



(:D)

{I know, I know - waaaay off topic..... *runs from room, dodging flying objects...*}

[Parthian King]

"Nice" is such and inspid little word anyway. The Spanish cognate, "necio," is a low grade insult.

[echoscot]

I had a 9th grade English teacher who refused to let us use the word "nice" in any papers. We had to find "real" words instead.

Okay, way off topic......Just a little fun fact. ;)

[LifeMaiden]

Y'know, IM, I'd never noticed that about you!



(:D)

{I know, I know - waaaay off topic..... *runs from room, dodging flying objects...*}



* IM runs to her Narnia room, picks up soft plushie toys, and hurls them at POTW*

POW!!!



Where is Dude? Why hasn't he answered any of my questions or anyone else's questions regarding scientology?!

[inkspot]

I think we scared him off with our excessive nice-ness.

Way to go, IM and PK. :p

JK, I hope he returns and moves on to some real talk about Scientology.

[Parthian King]

Oh no, not me. I'm a "pretty antagonistic guy", remember?

(Spanish subtitle:¡Ay, yo no fui! ¡Yo no soy el necio aquí!)

[LifeMaiden]

Perhaps he retreated so that he could regroup his thoughts, or he could be gathering an army of scientologists to do battle. :D

[dude]

I think you have been actually pretty nasty towards her. What we want is not for you to attack IM, but give statements in response to the questions she raised.

Well I don't think her statements are really worthy of response.


3. Do you really cut off communication with apostate members? Could that be part of the reason you are pushing her aside?

Only those who spread misinformation about Scientology.
Scientology works and is fantastic. There is also a very good system in place so that if an individual person who thinks they are a Scientologist is not acting in a way expected of Scientologist then this will be taken up and sorted out. It is every Scientologist's responsibility to see that that happens and that unethical actions or ignorance are corrected.
IM does sound very reasonable on the surface but by her own admission never really gave Scientology a chance. She's been here longer than me and I fully understand why you find her plausible.

To be honest in a situation like this I think there's little point in discussing Scientology above the point of saying that IM is giving out misinformation. Anyone giving Scientology a chance would find that out and it's easy to do so.
Actually I'd go further than that and say that there's little point talking about Scientology on the internet above saying it does work as it claims to and you can find out about it should you be interested from www.scientology.org and by reading Dianetics.

[dude]

I would hate to live in a world where the people I had to fear the most were the nice ones! Guess what, Dude? Some of the nice folks in this Forum are just nice folks. Now if you are going to say our pleasantness and rationality in dealing with you is proof that we are in fact diabolical, then I just feel sorry for you.

I got you - but that's not what I was trying to communicate. But you must have encountered some people who seem nice but then talk about you behind your back (and then deny they did so)? Anyway - probably better for that just to be a rhetorical question and

You've caused far more harm to Scientology in this Thread than IM ever dreamed of by your mean attitude. You say Scientology is a positive experience in every way, yet your posts have exuded negativity and criticism.

Well I don't think I've said anything that isn't pretty obvious or verfiable. Sounding reasonable but leading people in a negative direction isn't very positive.

But I am thankful that you have chosen to stop your personal attacks on IM, and I ask you now, if you are still willing to share, to go ahead and tell us about Scientology in your experience. EchoScot lined out some questions for you, and for me, I would like to hear about the Xenu (sp? sorry) part of the theology.
Attacking someone who people have a liking for is always risky. My original intention was to just point out IM made was spreading misinformation and not discuss her further. That usually works but I didn't do a very good job of it here. :) I do think it would have been better to say "I understand your opinion IM. In my experience Scientology isn't like that at all and there are very good measures in place to stop people getting the impression about Scientology that you have. If any Scientologist went around spying on others I'd consider them completely nuts and wasting their time utterly when they could be spending it much more profitably."

Xenu is a complete load of misinformation - it's not what Scientology is about.

[Ephinie]

I've been looking at that Scientology website thingy.

I did a search on where the closest center to me is. There are none within a hundred miles. There are only two centers in the state of Missouri, one in Kansas City and the other in St. Louis. I guess it's not all that popular around this area.

I kind of want to do that personality test thing, but I'm too scared to give them my address and contact information. It says that you have to meet with someone to get your test results, and I'm not cool with that.

[LifeMaiden]

I'm still not understanding the 'misinformation' part at all. What have I communicated here that is 'misinformation' about scientology, Dude? Perhaps the reason you don't think certain aspects of my experience with scientology are not worth 'responding to' is because all too often, with many ex-members, their stories are similiar, therefore, must hold truth that you believe is 'misinformation' when all it is about is...a personal experience.

[LifeMaiden]

I've been looking at that Scientology website thingy.

I did a search on where the closest center to me is. There are none within a hundred miles. There are only two centers in the state of Missouri, one in Kansas City and the other in St. Louis. I guess it's not all that popular around this area.

I kind of want to do that personality test thing, but I'm too scared to give them my address and contact information. It says that you have to meet with someone to get your test results, and I'm not cool with that.


Ooh you're in Missouri, I didn't know that. I knew you were over in the Midwest...I liked both St Louis and Kansas City. St. Louis had a lot to offer in terms of music, esp jazz and blues, and I stayed over at the Marriott near the river ( I forgot the name of the new shopping center that was nearby my hotel...Riverside?) in Kansas City. I got a chance to check out Liberty, Missouri too. I'm big on history and I love Jesse James and the history of the Kansas/Missouri Civil War stuff...lots of guerilla warfare.


California I think has one of the largest numbers of scientology centers. I got involved because my employers were both OT 8 ( operating theta 8's) levels and very wealthy...I was their house keeper for a year. I noticed they had all these scientology books. They never tried to get me involved or forced me to do anything...I was the one, in fact, who asked them both about what scientology was about, and they were very active members in the org that wsa close by their estate. So one day I asked to take the personality test and met with one of the members at my employer's org.


I then began reading some of the scientology books, and it's like I keep repeating here over and over, there were GOOD things I still retain to this day in my life from reading some of L Ron Hubbard's books. But for some reason, Dude wants to just continue to accuse me of misinformation, and not even acknowledge that I had some negative experiences with scientology. When is it spreading MISinformation just to state what your personal experience is with a group of people?!


Both of my employers were great people, but I didn't feel that they were any different from other non scientologists I had known all my life, which is my very point...you don't NEED scientology to be a fully operating human being on many different levels. My employers' wealth came long before they entered scientology. I felt that scientology ENHANCED their lives, but didn't really make them any different than non scientologists.


After the personality test and reading some material, I went to the org nearby and was stunned to run into a good friend of mine, who later became heavily involved in scientology and no longer spoke to me once I left as a member...who was actually working there at the org as the front desk person. She and I had gone to school together but she never mentioned being involved in scientology.


I began to take some of the basic courses that were needed to involve oneself in scientology, and I loved the communication course. A man I was dating at the time was also involved with the business end of scientology, using L Ron Hubbard's principles to run his business, and even he stated that it was an excellent but very complex. He too left scientology eventually, and the same thing happened to him...none of his former scientology friends spoke to him again. He paid his way up to clear and that was it.


I started the auditing process ( the therapy/counseling) soon after I completed the courses basically, and through time, I began to question many things, all the time, and apparently, I asked too many questions. After I completed the purification process in the sauna, it was then that an ex scientologist gave me that Canadian biography of L Ron Hubbard, which left me stunned and simply reinforced some of my doubts that I had already about scientology and its principles.

[Ephinie]

Okay, okay... so I have a question. I honestly can't remember if this has been addressed yet or not.What does Scientology have to say about the question of origins? As in, how did the universide come into existence, how did the human race come into existence, ect.?

[inkspot]

I do think it would have been better to say "I understand your opinion IM. In my experience Scientology isn't like that at all and there are very good measures in place to stop people getting the impression about Scientology that you have. If any Scientologist went around spying on others I'd consider them completely nuts and wasting their time utterly when they could be spending it much more profitably."
Yes! That is exactly what would have been appropriate, rather than accusing IM of intentionally spreading misinformation. Thank you, I think Dude, you are beginning to see the light.

Now, you insist Scientology works and is easy, yet you say you cannot tell us about it on the internet. Or presumably, cannot tell us at all until we investigate it ourselves. Why is this? If someone wants to know about my faith, I can babble on for about 10,000 characters, and then the website says my post is at its character limit ...

Can you tell us nothing of what you believe? And if not, why not?

Also, why is Xenu misinformation? Is there such a person, and is he part of Scientology, or no?

[dude]

I can talk about Scientology all day too. The official website does it better though.

[inkspot]

I can talk about Scientology all day too. The official website does it better though.
Oh well then, I guess you have nothing more to offer us. That's a shame. Thanks anyway.
:)

[Parthian King]

I'm still not understanding the 'misinformation' part at all.

"Misinformation," IM, is what some people call the words of others who disagree with them. If you don't agree with dude, then that's misinformation.

*Sheesh*

You're really smart and everything, but I had that one figured out a while ago.;)

[LifeMaiden]

"Misinformation," IM, is what some people call the words of others who disagree with them. If you don't agree with dude, then that's misinformation.

*Sheesh*

You're really smart and everything, but I had that one figured out a while ago.;)

Okay, I was asleep at the wheel! LOL


I would be interested in hearing what Dude has to say about scientology and the idea of God and who created the world, etc. Since it has been a long time I've been out of touch with scientology I had forgotten what their stance was regarding God and origins of creation, as Ephinie has asked here.

[Ephinie]

Ya, cause I looked all over the website for that; but I didn't see anything about origins on there.