Is Scientology dangerous?

[Drea]

If you have ever said to your child "You get to go to heaven if..." then you are twisting him into knots to try to please an unpleasable, unknowable, unproven entity.

Maybe not YOU personally, but "you" in the general sense.

I am not trying to attack you so no need to go into defense mode AW.

Edited December 8, 2007 by Drea

[jazzer]

I see. Believers have to "prove" their beliefs, but non-believers don't have to prove theirs. Their beliefs are facts. Because you said so.

Yes, believers have to prove their beliefs if they are to be taken seriously. They make the claim, so the burden is on them. Non-believers don't have to prove anything. How do you prove a negative?

Edited December 8, 2007 by jazzer

[Guest American Woman]

If you have ever said to your child "You get to go to heaven if..." then you are twisting him into knots to try to please an unpleasable, unknowable, unproven entity.

Maybe not YOU personally, but "you" in the general sense.

I am not trying to attack you so no need to go into defense mode AW.

I didn't think you were trying to attack me, so if you think I'm in defense mode, you couldn't be more wrong. I believe what I believe regardless of what you or anyone else believes. I just shake my head over the absurdity of it whenever anyone-- believer or non-believer-- thinks they have all the answers; that their beliefs are "facts" and others' beliefs are "fiction." No one knows. That's the only "fact."

Furthermore, while I've never once made such a statement (and I'm sure many other religious people haven't), your statement above is nothing more than your belief. What makes you think every child who has been told that has been "twisted into knots" any more than a child being told to obey the laws of society is twisted into knots? In case you're truly unaware of it, a lot of people get immeasurable peace and happiness from their beliefs.

But it's your claim that others' beliefs are nothing more than fiction-- that it's a fact that they are wrong-- that I'm refuting.

[Guest American Woman]

Yes, believers have to prove their beliefs if they are to be taken seriously. They make the claim, so the burden is on them. Non-believers don't have to prove anything. How do you prove a negative?

So you wouldn't have taken those who said the world wasn't flat back in the day when they couldn't prove otherwise seriously, eh? You don't think those claiming it was round, but couldn't prove it, deserved to be taken seriously. Guess that would have made you wrong.

[bush_cheney2004]

So you wouldn't have taken those who said the world wasn't flat back in the day when they couldn't prove otherwise seriously, eh? You don't think those claiming it was round, but couldn't prove it, deserved to be taken seriously. Guess that would have made you wrong.

But they could prove it...with several common methods (see lunar/solar eclipse). Most educated people "back in the day" knew the world was not flat. Ignorance is Faith's best ally.

[Drea]

Furthermore, while I've never once made such a statement (and I'm sure many other religious people haven't), your statement above is nothing more than your belief.

Lack of belief is not a belief in of itself.

What makes you think every child who has been told that has been "twisted into knots" any more than a child being told to obey the laws of society is twisted into knots?

We know if you (general you not specific you) break the law there are consequences that can be measured. Fines, jail time, etc.

If one refuses to obey religious law there is no discernable, knowable consequence.

In case you're truly unaware of it, a lot of people get immeasurable peace and happiness from their beliefs.

Peace and happiness comes from within your own self. No outside source can "give" you happiness or peace. Many atheists feel at peace with themselves.

But it's your claim that others' beliefs are nothing more than fiction-- that it's a fact that they are wrong-- that I'm refuting.

I am refuting the fact that believers have no proof for their claims, yet base life decisions on these unsubstantiated claims.

[Guest American Woman]

But they could prove it...with several common methods (see lunar/solar eclipse). Most educated people "back in the day" knew the world was not flat. Ignorance is Faith's best ally.

At one time they couldn't "prove" it. They could offer up evidence, but that's not the same thing as "proof."

Anyway, like I said, people can believe or not believe to their hearts' content. None of them, however, know anything for a fact. For one and all, regardless of their beliefs, it's nothing more than "beliefs."

[marcinmoka]

I agree with you about Germany and the German people. I have often wondered why Stalin is no where near as vilified, or how this has not been transferred to the Russian people as the recollection of Hitler's crimes are heaped onto the German populace. Odd to say the least.

Obviously you have yet to go to Eastern Europe, or pay any attention to E.U - Russia relations.

Again... Jews and Christians have already done it (inflitrated gov't, etc) and the Muslims haven't yet but want to.

You really don't get it. There is a tremendous difference between persons of religion partaking in government, and persons of religion infiltrating a government for the end of it benefiting their OWN CHURCH. In the end, it comes down to with whom your allegiance is.

Doughheads (pun intended), FSM is a joke. It is not meant to actually be believed in. Sheesh

Nah.....you don't say! I'm shocked.

Edited December 8, 2007 by marcinmoka

[Guest American Woman]

Lack of belief is not a belief in of itself.

Of course it is. You believe that there is no God; no afterlife. That's your belief.

We know if you (general you not specific you) break the law there are consequences that can be measured. Fines, jail time, etc. If one refuses to obey religious law there is no discernable, knowable consequence.

That's true for those who don't believe; it's not true for those who do. But my point is, why would having to follow one set of rules not 'twist a child into knots,' while being expected to follow another set of rules would?

Peace and happiness comes from within your own self. No outside source can "give" you happiness or peace. Many atheists feel at peace with themselves.

Obviously for many people an outside source can-- and does-- give happiness and peace. I've known people who have lost a child who get peace from the belief that their child is in a better place and they will be reunited some day. Who are you to say they can't get peace from such beliefs? And what I said is: "a lot of people get immeasurable peace and happiness from their beliefs." I've never encountered or read of an atheist who gets "immeasurable peace and happiness" from their beliefs, but I wasn't singling out specific beliefs in my statement. If atheists get that same peace from their beliefs, that's a good thing. I won't say that they can't.

I am refuting the fact that believers have no proof for their claims, yet base life decisions on these unsubstantiated claims.

Why would you refute how others choose to live their lives? You are living your life based on your beliefs. Would you want religious people to refute what you base your life decsions on?

[Drea]

Of course it is. You believe that there is no God; no afterlife. That's your belief.

I lack a belief in an entity. As far as life after death.... I don't know what happens but I am not going to jump through some religious hoops "just in case". I hope there is something after death, but I have no faith that there will be.

My mother had belief... but she always covered her butt (with god) by saying "god gave me a brain so he will understand my need for proof, my doubt".

That's true for those who don't believe; it's not true for those who do. But my point is, why would having to follow one set of rules not 'twist a child into knots,' while being expected to follow another set of rules would?

"Mummy I hit my sister, do I still get to go to heaven?" That is twisting a child into knots over something no one has any control over whatsoever.

Obviously for many people an outside source can-- and does-- give happiness and peace.

No, it is one's reaction to an outside source. Happiness and peace come only from within. No one can "give" you happiness. No one can take it away. It is a mindset.

I've known people who have lost a child who get peace from the belief that their child is in a better place and they will be reunited some day. Who are you to say they can't get peace from such beliefs?

The peace they feel still comes from inside their brains. Just like the angry man that finds Jesus and says "Jesus makes me calm". He is wrong, Jesus doesn't make him calm, only he can do that, inside of his own head.

And what I said is: "a lot of people get immeasurable peace and happiness from their beliefs." I've never encountered or read of an atheist who gets "immeasurable peace and happiness" from their beliefs, but I wasn't singling out specific beliefs in my statement. If atheists get that same peace from their beliefs, that's a good thing. I won't say that they can't.

I get immeasurable peace and happiness. When I sit back and look at my life, my son, my hubby, my experiences that have made me who I am...

There are people out there that cannot "thank" themselves for this peace so they thank an outside source -- god.

Why would you refute how others choose to live their lives? You are living your life based on your beliefs. Would you want religious people to refute what you base your life decsions on?

Because religion causes people to fight one another. They fight because they believe they are the holders of the "true" religion and all others are "false" religions. It is just stupid, this fighting over something no one can possibly know. Yet they do it. Every single day on this planet someone dies because of someone else's beliefs.

Families are split apart because of "belief". Countries go to war because of "belief". People commit suicide and take others with them because of "belief". People get offended over little things because someone's opinion is an affront to their "beliefs".

While quietly being religious is just fine by me. I have a real problem with those who try to "convert", "kill", or otherwise harm people for the unknowable.

Now back to "Is Scientology Dangerous".

Not any moreso than any other religion. If one wants to start up some religion, who are we to say they are wrong. Pehaps god has spoken to them directly and asked them to do so. We will never know.

Edited December 9, 2007 by Drea

[marcinmoka]

Because religion causes people to fight one another.

Yes, with prime examples being:

The Napoleonic Wars

WWI

WWII

The Cold War

Korea

Vietnam

Iraq

All perfect examples of religious wars........oh wait....

-------------

If you seriously believe the above statement, I pity you. Religion can, and sometimes is used a pretext, but the real reason is power, wealth and the desire for preservation (all of which are inherently linked). Religion is just the tool to get certain segments of the population a bit more riled up.

[Drea]

Yes, with prime examples being:

The Napoleonic Wars

WWI

WWII

The Cold War

Korea

Vietnam

Iraq

All perfect examples of religious wars........oh wait....

-------------

If you seriously believe the above statement, I pity you. Religion can, and sometimes is used a pretext, but the real reason is power, wealth and the desire for preservation (all of which are inherently linked). Religion is just the tool to get certain segments of the population a bit more riled up.

SO the suicide bomber who is promised 72 virgins is NOT killing himself and others for his belief? He is doing it for the "power"?

I pity some people, those who are brainwashed by a nutty notion that there is a life after this one. While leaders may go to war because of "power" they brainwash the citizens into fighting for them under "religious pretenses".

Would those people kill themselves if not for the promise of a better life after they die?

Would they still be so willing to die if there were no promise?

Of course not.

If we know we only have 80 or so years to live and there is nothing to look forward to after death, we are much more likely to want to live the whole 80 years IMO.

[marcinmoka]

SO the suicide bomber who is promised 72 virgins is NOT killing himself and others for his belief? He is doing it for the "power"?

He or she may very well believe so, but those who are paying for those suicide belts and provide the 'martyr money' to their family certainly have other motives (since obviously, they are not strapping the belts to themselves)

Would those people kill themselves if not for the promise of a better life after they die?

What about those who enlisted for WWII, or more recently, Afghanistan. They to are ready to die for a better life, albeit not for themselves, but for their nation(s) and family, i.e survival.

Would they still be so willing to die if there were no promise?

Of course not.

See above. Remember, there are far greater amounts of people who are willing, and have, died for an earthly cause.

While as repulsive as their actions may be, giving a one off example of a bomb belt laden Jihadi unfortunately translates into little in the bigger picture.

[kengs333]

Yes, with prime examples being:

The Napoleonic Wars

WWI

WWII

The Cold War

Korea

Vietnam

Iraq

All perfect examples of religious wars........oh wait....

-------------

If you seriously believe the above statement, I pity you. Religion can, and sometimes is used a pretext, but the real reason is power, wealth and the desire for preservation (all of which are inherently linked). Religion is just the tool to get certain segments of the population a bit more riled up.

Look at what you're dealing with, though. You could make rational, factual arguments about tis all you want but it will just not make a difference to some people. People who are wrapped up in their own sin simply have to lead a life that justifies their past indiscretions because their lack of faith leads them to believe that there can be no forgiveness for the error of their ways, that there is no meaning to life other than satiating wordly desires. And one of the means by which they seek to justify their lifestyle is to attack and destroy the faith that tells them otherwise; they fear goodness, they fear admitting they are wrong, and they fear taking responsibility for their actions.

[Drea]

This bears repeating: Note that I did not write it...

History does not record anywhere at any time a religion that has any rational basis. Religion is a crutch for people not strong enough to stand up to the unknown without help. But, like dandruff, most people do have a religion and spend time and money on it and seem to derive considerable pleasure from fiddling with it.

One man’s theology is another man’s belly laugh.

Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream up a God superior to themselves. Most Gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child.

God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent-it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks, please. Cash and in small bills.

The most preposterous notion that H. Sapiens has ever dreamed up is that the Lord God of Creation, Shaper and Ruler of all the Universes, wants the saccharine adoration of His creatures, can be swayed by their prayers, and becomes petulant if He does not receive this flattery. Yet this absurd fantasy, without a shred of evidence to bolster it, pays all the expenses of the oldest, largest, and least productive industry in all of history.

Edited December 11, 2007 by Drea

[Oleg Bach]

This bears repeating: Note that I did not write it...

I dealt with these guys 30 years ago - the first thing they wanted was that I get a co-signer for a bank loan and give the money to them..secondly after they found out that my girl friend was from a weathy family - they insisted that we seperate and that she be vulnerable to the theift of 20 milllion bucks - we escaped them..they are not a religion - they are killers and theives===when I look at John Travolta and the rest of those nuts - I want to vomit - they should be destroyed as quickly as possible for public safety.

[Drea]

But Oleg, who is anyone to say they are wrong?

Religion is impossible to prove or disprove.

Many Christian televangelists bilk money out of poor old people, yet there they are, operating within the law.

My aunt became a JW. They "encouraged" her to "ignore" her non-JW family members, but she doesn't listen, we still visit her and she still loves being a member of the Kingdom Hall.

One person's cult is another persons saving grace I guess.

I prefer to stay out of religion alltogether... although I almost became converted because of the song "Christmas Shoes"... what a sad song... ".... if mamma meets Jessssuuuss tonight". I cried my eyes out on the way home.

Heartless sinning heathen that I am.

[jefferiah]

But Oleg, who is anyone to say they are wrong?

Religion is impossible to prove or disprove.

Many Christian televangelists bilk money out of poor old people, yet there they are, operating within the law.

Asking people for donations is legal.

As for your "will I go to heaven if?", I don't think I have ever heard someone say that in my life. And since Christianity is based on the premise that no one can do anything good enough to get into "heaven" it would be irrelevant.

[Drea]

Christianity is based on the premise that no one can do anything good enough to get into "heaven" it would be irrelevant.

really? Then what makes a Christian believe? What is the point of not "sinning"? If anyone can get into heaven, what would be the point of having a religion? You mean those poor people have been squelching their "earthly desires" for no reason?!

Yippee! I get to go to heaven too /kidding LOL

I have read numerous books on Jesus. As I was a JW at one time, I have a copy of the King James bible... besides being an inacurrate account of history I thought it was about teaching people what to do and what not to do in order to get into heaven.

Anyhoo... the books I've read say that Jesus was a man and I can believe that. He was a good man who tried very hard to get the people of his era to accept one another (be tolerant), etc. He did say in plain Hebrew (I read the english translated version) "do not look to the heavens for the Kingdom of God is within you".

Yes, the ability to be at "peace", tolerance, etc is in all of us. It does not come from (nor does one go to) an outside source.

It wasn't until much later that people began to say he was not human.

Edited December 11, 2007 by Drea

[jefferiah]

really? Then what makes a Christian believe? What is the point of not "sinning"? If anyone can get into heaven, what would be the point of having a religion? You mean those poor people have been squelching their "earthly desires" for no reason?!

Jesus himself said that it is impossible for man, but what is impossible for man is possible for God. Jesus did say that the Kingdom of heaven is within you or "among you" (which I think means that Heaven is not something you enjoy or experience with your outward senses...the root of it is in the intangible things--the world of the heart and mind---its not about a place where you have a billion dollars and fluffy white clouds and lots of virgins), but he also said that the Father was in Him, and that He (Jesus) would be in those who love him, and that the fruit cannot grow apart from the Vine. Basically that thing which is in within you flows from a source. Christianity is also referred to as a body with many parts, with Jesus as the head. As a finger I cannot assert my independence and seperate from the body.

Some people would say that Christianity is not a religion.

When someone repents they must have a true sense of self-conviction. If they repent simply for heaven it is meaningless. And true repentance creates the desire to try to purify oneself in deed. Paul said that where sin increases grace and mercy increase. But then he says that this is not an excuse for someone to keep sinning. Whoever sees it this way is not truly repentant.

Let's say you had two children Drea. You catch them both doing something wrong. You may forgive them both but one of them has the attitude that your forgiveness for what was wrong means it is ok to continue doing so, while the other tries to not do it in the future. One of those children loves and respects you while the other just looks at you as if your forgiving nature is to be abused.

[Drea]

Jesus himself said that it is impossible for man, but what is impossible for man is possible for God. Jesus did say that the Kingdom of heaven is within you or "among you" (which I think means that Heaven is not something you enjoy or experience with your outward senses...the root of it is in the intangible things--the world of the heart and mind---its not about a place where you have a billion dollars and fluffy white clouds and lots of virgins), but he also said that the Father was in Him, and that He (Jesus) would be in those who love him, and that the fruit cannot grow apart from the Vine. Basically that thing which is in within you flows from a source. Christianity is also referred to as a body with many parts, with Jesus as the head. As a finger I cannot assert my independence and seperate from the body.

So one simply believing Jesus existed is enough? If god were powerful enough to create a son to come to earth then why can he not show up now, when atheism is on the rise? Of course I know there is no answer to this question but it begs asking (for the skeptics anyway).

When someone repents they must have a true sense of self-conviction. If they repent simply for heaven it is meaningless. And true repentance creates the desire to try to purify oneself in deed. Paul said that where sin increases grace and mercy increase. But then he says that this is not an excuse for someone to keep sinning. Whoever sees it this way is not truly repentant.

So one must repent in order to get into "heaven"? So there ARE hoops to jump through and one can be "good" enough if one were to recognize their "sinful" behaviour (I fail to see how playing with my godgiven "toy" is sinful, but I'll go with what you say...) and promise never to do it again.

Here are the seven "sins"... each and every human being on earth, repentant or not is doing at least ONE of these things right now as I type this... heathens!

1. Pride is excessive belief in one's own abilities, that interferes with the individual's recognition of the grace of God. It has been called the sin from which all others arise. Pride is also known as Vanity.

I think we should all take pride in what we do. I am proud of myself when I manage a difficult situation at work. It feels good to be proud. I also like how I look.

I guess I am vain.

2. Envy is the desire for others' traits, status, abilities, or situation.

I would so love to have a huge chunk of land like the one I grew up on... I also envy those who do not have to worry about money, mortgages, etc.

I am envious.

3. Gluttony is an inordinate desire to consume more than that which one requires.

I LOVE dark chocolate and will go so far as to hide it so no one else gets any.

I am a chocolate glutton.

4. Lust is an inordinate craving for the pleasures of the body.

OMG OMG OMG. I never have to fake it.

5. Anger is manifested in the individual who spurns love and opts instead for fury. It is also known as Wrath.

Anger can also spur one on to do good things. I get angry when I see homeless people being treated badly by others.

6. Greed is the desire for material wealth or gain, ignoring the realm of the spiritual. It is also called Avarice or Covetousness.

I want a bigger house. I want a cool new car. I am greedy because I already live in a house, I already drive a car, but they are not enough, I want better/newer ones.

7. Sloth is the avoidance of physical or spiritual work.

Ok yah got me. I am not sloth. I work daily at my work, my house. I do my own spiritual work as I do Yoga and centre my chakras every morning.

I freely and without guilt practice these seven "deadly" sins.

I-am-a-human.

Edited December 11, 2007 by Drea

[jefferiah]

So one must repent in order to get into "heaven"? So there ARE hoops to jump through and one can be "good" enough if one were to recognize their "sinful" behaviour (I fail to see how playing with my godgiven "toy" is sinful, but I'll go with what you say...) and promise never to do it again.

I freely and without guilt practice these seven "deadly" sins.

I-am-a-human.

Well, the Bible says that even repentance is a gift from God.

Sure I commit those sins as well. They are not mentioned in the Bible though. And I think some of those seven deadly sins might be contrary to what is said there. And you make an excellent example by pointing out righteous wrath or anger.

Edited December 11, 2007 by jefferiah

[jefferiah]

deleted

Edited December 11, 2007 by jefferiah

[Drea]

Honestly Jefferiah, I just cannot understand how there can be a creator, an entity so to speak, that judges whether or not we get an afterlife by how hard we prayed rather than how we lived our lives.

If a person lives their life without harming others, doing work to help others; being a productive, non-disruptive, fair and equitable human without the belief in Jesus/God -- shouldn't that person be more deserving of an afterlife than the person who harms others, is unproductive, disruptive, goes out of their way to be mean to others, yet believes in Jesus/God?

I call myself an athiest because I do not know. Not because I don't want their to be an afterlife, but because I doubt that it exists.

A book written by human beings so many generations ago is not enough to convince me that it is true. It is so full of contradictions and antiquated ideologies that I am amazed it hasn't been relegated to the basements of old libraries.

I have read portions of the King James bible. I am especially interested in Genesis and Revelations. I think Genesis is a illiteration of real history copied from much older texts. Even the Sumerians said their texts (The Epic of Gilgamesh, etc) came from sources much older.

I got a book for my hubby for Christmas (I am dying to read it myself) called "Fingerprints of the Gods". It's about the possiblity that there have been civilizations on earth for tens of thousands of years.

Revelations... tough one. Could be an "fanciful" account of ancient asteroids hitting the earth...

Interesting at the very least...

Edited December 11, 2007 by Drea

[jefferiah]

If a person lives their life without harming others, doing work to help others; being a productive, non-disruptive, fair and equitable human without the belief in Jesus/God -- shouldn't that person be more deserving of an afterlife than the person who harms others, is unproductive, disruptive, goes out of their way to be mean to others, yet believes in Jesus/God?

Well if they are going out of their way to be mean to others, then perhaps they are not truly repentant. Also there is something in the NT about knowledge of the law--About those who know alot about God and religion and are not productive, and those who don't know but have righteousness in their hearts. It also says God judges less harshly those who do not know. And it also says that even Satan acknowledges there is a God. That alone is not salvation.