Project Chanology

Remove all ads!

Marking words and erroneous placement of one letter is an awesome tool of debating. I salute you!

Not actually reading what someone typed is another. I stand in awe of your amazing brilliance.

 

Oh, please. You take yourself far too seriously. You used the word incorrectly and it was funny. Get over it.

And let's not cast aspersions about other people's debating skills when yours could use some help. You make assumptions and statements about religion without explaining or backing them up at all. Since you've taken the point of view that God (if He exists) has no bearing on organized religion, I'd like to see something that explains why you think that. Because just because you've said it doesn't mean I have to believe it. You didn't even explain the difference between what I interpreted you to have said and what you did say. You merely displayed even more "amazing blrilliance" and just got sarcastic and defensive. I wasn't coming here to debate, just to poke fun. But since you brought it up, so be it.

You say that there is a huge leap from "maybe there is something greater than us" to miracles and religion in general. The problem with your logic is:

1) You don't even understand (or ignore) what religions like Islam, Judiasm, and Christianity believe. They don't believe that maybe there is a God. They beleive for certain there is a God. Not only does He exist, but He has an interest in humanity, which leads to my next point.

2) According to these 3 major religions, the reason why God has an interest in mankind is because He created us. After creation, He set up some ground rules for how we should live--that comes to us through religion. Ideally, that is what religion teaches. Not surprisingly, these religions beleive that they are they correct message from God and they have some sort of way of validatiing that, at least to themselves. The idea is that people like Moses or Mohammed got their teachings from God, and they pass His word on to us. So, when you make "god has no bearing on religion" sorts of statements and assume we know and understand your anti-religion stance, forgive me if I laugh because that sort of an assumption to me is funny.

It sounds as if you think that if there is a supreme being he doesn't care about us and there is no Official Religion of God (tm). In light of what I've just explained I find that idea laughable. A wise and powerful being such as God certainly would have given mankind some sort of help in this life and this guidance takes the form of religion. It is so hard to recognise now because human beings decided to get in on the act after realizing that religion can be both lucrative and controlling. That is where all the religious confusion has come from and why we are now talking about Scientology.

 

Is He wise and powerful or not? Because if He is, then 'all this religious confusion' is part of His design.

Unless you want to argue that He couldn't foresee that, y'know, fallible humanity might corrupt The One True Faith. Or, for that matter, that He couldn't do anything to address the issue once it arose. Of course, if you do want to make those claims, then He doesn't meet my standards for 'wise and powerful'.

 

If He has the wisdom and power of a god, then I would caution against measuring Him against a measuring stick set by humanity. He does not answer to us nor does he have to explain Himself to us, although we may come to know the answers in time, in this life or the next. An apt analogy is this: parents put babies and children though all sorts of stuff that seems rather awful to the child (my son hates getting his diapers changed when he has a rash) for their own good. The child does not possess the wisdom to understand the reason for what they are being put through. I would venture that our wisdom is on a similar scale compared to His.

To speak more specifically to your question, AMaster, about the religious confusion, I think that He allows it to happen. If He were to smack down any competing manmade religions, the right choice would certainly be clear and easy but not very worthwhile. It would be like taking a test with the answer sheet in hand.

Is this a good approach for Him to take? Depends on what you think the point of this life is.

 

Which is pretty much my point; God shares responsibility for the 'confusion'.

 

Two things: First, what is this Xenu teaching. Perhaps it is not his origin but what he expects of his followers that would make Scientology more foreign to people as opposed to mainstream religion. Second, as a Mormon, I don't believe that Satan has horns or a goatee. I believe that portrayal of Satan is more from pop culture than actual doctrine.

Sad but true. Many groups take the name of their Diety to commit attrocities and hurt the faithful.

Leap one: God is the creator of all things.
Leap two: Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and thus would share His power over creation.
Leap three: Christ used that power to perform miracles on varied occasions (such as turning water to wine).

Not that difficult, but maybe not as simple. Sometimes religious experience just feels cheapened by trying to put it into words...

GB: It may not be a mistake, so much as a commentary on Religion. How many televangelists use the name of Christ to encourage donations to their cause, then skim off the top to support a luxurious lifestyle? In another recent thread, the Roman Catholic Church has faced accusations that they hold billions in assets that they've used their position to acquire over the centuries. Even my own faith has not been spared such allegations (Ask T2Bruno for more such charges and he'd be hapy to provide them).

He gives us the doctrine, but once given, it is in the stewardship of man, where it can get warped and twisted to the point where it may be hard to recognize or understand for someone of a different religious tradition. When my Grandmother was buried a week ago, the minister was of a different faith than my own. The tone of the prayers she gave and the nature of the ordinances involved were foreign to me. I could tell that they were Christian, but I had a harder time relating to them on their terms.

Actually, He did just that on many occasions. Adam was given instructions upon leaving the Garden of Eden. Noah given instructions around the great flood, Abraham around the rise of Babylon, or Moses when the decendants of Abraham were leaving Egypt. He even sent His son, Jesus Christ, to set straight the teachings and to provide the promised atonement. To the Mormons, Joseph Smith was similarly raised as a Prophet to once again fix things. The problem is that the people get set in their ways and don't realize what God is doing...

He knew it would happen, but could not prevent it without making our decisions for us. When we came to Earth, we were given the ability to choose our actions for ourselves. We are given a Law to follow, and will be judged accordingly.

 

Giles, I have no idea what you are talking about but it has no bearing whatsoever on what I have written in this thread. I am going to try to condense it so you might be able to understand despite the fact that most of your brain is occupied with the entire Oxford dictionary.

The leap from "there might be a divine being" to "Jesus was the son of God and everything in the bible is true" is the exact same leap as the one from "there might life on another planets" to "the scientologists are right". For me there very little correlation between the first and second statement in each example. Hope you managed to understand it better now but I am sure you will focus on finding some typing or spelling error you can make fun of.

 

Gnarf, actually Xenu is the bad guy of the religion. Apparently, Kidnapped billions as the galactic evil overlord, hauled the poor sods to earth in spaceships that looked like Boeing 707s IIRC, put them all next to nearby volcanos and blew the volcanos up with atom bombs. And then all the dead souls, called thetans, wandered the earth until they found the early humans, latched into their bodies and stayed there. And that's why we're unhappy, thetans cause it. Correct me if there are mistakes in there, it's been a little while since I last read about scientology.
Not too related, but though I'd add it anyways.

 

Could the complaints against religion in general/the defences against that please go and find another thread to pointlessly debate until the end of time? Let's stick to Scientology here - if you want to contrast it with other religions, sure - but discussing other religions here as the main deal isn't worthwhile. It's already been said a million million time.

 

I heard from a friend of mine that there's some sort of investigation going on in Germany against the church of scientology and it being a pyramid scheme. Now if that's true then of course the church of scientology is actually running a criminal organization dedicating itself for robbing people. A cynic might say that all religions do that but there's a difference between money going to church coffers and it going directly to private accounts. The first is legitimate the second is not.

Other than that there surely are a lot of crazy beliefs around and I think all this attention the scientologists keep getting over all these others will only make them more known and probably increase their membership, which is sort of sad.

On a personal note I leave it up for the police and courts to determine if they have done anything illegal or not, if they haven't then they are free to continue with their activities, I see no particular reason of protesting against scientologists as long as they live by the rules.

 

I think that's the crux of the argument against them, Morgoroth -- there seems to be a great deal of evidence that the Scientologists are NOT following the rules of civilized society. That being the case, it is the right and some might even say duty of citizens to bring this information to light and to the proper authorities. When it comes to punishment, though, that should be done by the authorities, not by individual groups.

 

For anyone who is in doubt that Scientology deserves this much attention in the for-great-justice department - some stories:

http://forums.enturbulation.org/showthread.php?t=3971
http://www.ecentral.com/members/skeller/

There are many more: www.exscientologykids.org has quite a few (and is more concise than the above).

This is why.

 

The bit about Disconnection seemed the scariest of all. They draw people away from their families and keep them through fear? WTF?

 

It really sounds creepy as heck, I agree. It reminds me of those stories of sects from the early- and mid-90s here, when every now and then people would commit suicide or emerge with talk about some sick cult which amounted to (near) mindrape. It was so bad that even though it's been over a decade since the last known cases, and there are still few words in Bulgarian with more negative connotation than "sect."

I'm very wary about any religious training program, but some of that stuff makes my hair stand on end.

 

So, the Operation Reconnect protest is on this Saturday, with the focus on raising awareness of the cult's disconnection policy. Anyone else going?

 

I've seen a few resurrections in the threads so I thought I'd do another one. Thought that this article might entertain a few of you.

Spoiler

Church of Scientology convicted of fraud
By Nicolas Vaux-Montagny, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Last Updated: 27th October 2009, 8:01am

PARIS — A Paris court convicted the Church of Scientology of fraud and fined it more than C600,000 ($900,000) on Tuesday but stopped short of banning the group as prosecutors had demanded.

The group’s French branch immediately announced it would appeal the verdict.

The court convicted the Church of Scientology’s French office, its library and six of its leaders of organized fraud. Investigators said the group pressured members into paying large sums of money for questionable financial gain and used “commercial harassment” against recruits.

The group was fined C400,000 ($600,000) and the library C200,000. Four of the leaders were given suspended sentences of between 10 months and two years. The other two were given fines of C1,000 and C2,000.

However, the court did not order the Church of Scientology to shut down, ruling that it would be likely to continue its activities anyway “outside any legal framework.”

Prosecutors had urged that the group be dissolved in France and fined C2 million ($3 million).

The verdict is “an Inquisition of modern times,” said Scientology spokeswoman Agnes Bron, referring to efforts to rout out heretics of the Roman Catholic Church in centuries past.

The head of an association that helps victims of sects, Catherine Picard, called the verdict “intelligent.”

“Scientology can no longer hide behind freedom of conscience,” she said.

The Los Angeles-based Church of Scientology, founded in 1954 by the late science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard, has been active for decades in Europe, but has struggled to gain status as a religion. It is considered a sect in France and has faced prosecution and difficulties in registering its activities in many countries.

Defence lawyer Patrick Maisonneuve said during the trial that neither the Church of Scientology nor the six leaders on trial had gained financially from the group’s practices.

The original complaint in the case dates back more than a decade, when a young woman said she took out loans and spent the equivalent of C21,000 on books, courses and “purification packages” after being recruited in 1998. When she sought reimbursement and to leave the group, its leadership refused. She was among three eventual plaintiffs.

Olivier Morice, lawyer for civil parties in the case, said the verdict was “historic” because it was the first time in France that the Church of Scientology has been convicted of organized fraud.

Investigating judge Jean-Christophe Hullin spent years examining the group’s activities, and in his indictment criticized what he called the Scientologists’ “obsession” with financial gain and practices he said were aimed at plunging members into a “state of subjection.”

The Church of Scientology teaches that technology can expand the mind and help solve problems. It claims 10 million members around the world, including celebrity devotees Tom Cruise and John Travolta.

Belgium, Germany and other European countries have been criticized by the U.S. State Department for labeling Scientology as a cult or sect and enacting laws to restrict its operations.

 

@LKD: the French Parliament made a mess of it because in May they introduced a change that made it impossible for judges to dissolve an organisation convicted of fraud. Since then that part of the law has been revoked but it served to protect the cult's interest in that case (the law still applies in that case). There is no telling whether that is merely an instance of sloppy legislation, pure incompetence or a devious attempt to protect the Church of Scientology.

Some people in France are quite concerned about a possible link between Scientology and the French government:

Spoiler

"Sarkozy hits back at critics over Tom Cruise meeting"

(AFP, September 02, 2004)

French Finance Minister Nicolas Sarkozy rejected criticism of his meeting earlier this week with Hollywood star Tom Cruise, an avowed Scientologist, as much ado about nothing.

"Tom Cruise wanted to meet me, it was an extremely pleasant meeting and to those who would ask questions about it, I refer them to my record at the interior ministry. They should have supported me at the time rather than criticizing me today," Sarkozy told reporters.

He dismissed as "groundless" the comments of Jean-Pierre Brard, a member of France's interministerial anti-sect advisory board who said Sarkozy should not have met Cruise, whose Church of Scientology is seen as a dangerous sect here.

Brard, a Communist parliamentary deputy from the Paris suburb of Montreuil, told AFP: "I don't understand how a government minister can receive a conspicuous member of the Church of Scientology."

Cruise, who was in Paris this week to promote his latest film "Collateral", met with Sarkozy for 90 minutes on Monday. The two discussed Franco-American relations, and Cruise invited the minister to visit his Colorado ranch.

"Even if the minister says that the issue of Scientology was not raised, it's still a mistake to have received him," Brard charged, noting that Scientologists have been convicted of wrongdoing in French courts.

"To give an analogy, one wonders if the minister would receive a member of an international drug trafficking or prostitution ring and then say 'We didn't talk about drugs or prostitution'," he added.

Sarkozy, who served as interior minister for two years before switching to the finance ministry, retorted: "Tom Cruise is a great actor. I'm a movie buff and I have a lot of time for him. He wanted to see me to talk to me. It was really nice and as we're practically the same age, we had a lot to discuss.

"Tom Cruise does not try to hide who he is in the United States, so does that mean we no longer have the right to go to the cinema to see certain actors?"

Founded in the United States in 1954 by science-fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology was accorded the status of religion there in 1993, but is regarded with suspicion in many European countries, where opponents accuse it of manipulating members for financial ends.

 

Am I the only one who whenever he sees Chan automatically assumes it is about Chandos?

 

Yeah, I thought this was going to be a thread along the line of "The Zen of Chandos."