Scientology IS a religion

Post Reply New Topic

It's a pyramid marketing scheme.

It's what I was implying. Also implying the same about every religion that uses religion as a job.

You don't have to donate to a church while in Scientology you have to pay for the services or else you don't get them. That's a business. You can't independently practice Scientology. The whole point of it is to make money. They own and trademarks all their symbols and other crap they do.

The religion I'm part of doesn't charge for literature or require tithes. They don't "pass the plate" around either. Nobody can call my religion a racket because they don't charge for ANYTHING; everything is funded by volunteer donations. Can Scientology, or any religion for that matter, make this claim? I think no.

I find it quite telling that you use early Christianity's position on money as some sort of ideal for what a religion should be. Early Christianity was marketed to the poor, Scientology is an affluent man's (or woman's) religion. Of course its ideology regarding wealth would be distinct - the religions aim for different demographics.



Uh, YES!!

Jesus demanded a lot of his followers and encouraged grossly counter-cultural actions.
After his death, the religion displayed hoodlum measures (like spitting at ancient Roman religious statues). Once Christianity gained any semblance of power, it became horribly venal (the infighting of various Popes and their Italian family financiers is a good indicator).

Whereas scientologists use litigation to silence their critics, late early Christians used the next best thing - violence. So, too, did the Muslims. The fanatical xenophobia and lack of self-doubt that characterizes Scientology characterized the earlier religions.



Scientologists think biomedical psychiatrists are harmful. I'm sure some are and some practices will be dropped as knowledge expands. In the future, I'm sure the hagiography of Scientology will be able to point to one Scientologists who - aiming in the dark at every psychiatrists - actually managed to criticize an unethical or theoretically absurd one. Confirmation bias will then set in.

Wow...
Scientology IS a religion. - More opinion really.
Is Scientology a religion? - Wait - what?

Making a statement, then asking about people's views?

The world IS round
Is the world round?
A) Flat
B) Sure
C) I don't know
D) Who cares
E) Let's find out

See what I did there?

I quoted Jesus, the founder of Christianity. If subsequent Christians disagreed with Jesus' position on money, their opinion (at least on that topic) would be un-Christian. It isn't 'early Christianity's position', it's Christianity's position.

If you knew Christianity well, you would know that it is 'marketed' to everybody.

Lastly, what is 'telling' about picking one of the world's largest religions as a comparison between respectable religions and scientology?


You said 'numerous', not 'one or two'. Also, a number of your proposed examples don't seem terribly convincing. (I have never heard of reports of scientologists spitting at statues. If they did, I'm not sure I would disaprove.)

The problem, of course, with your pretension to actually know "Christ's position" is that you only get it through conflicting mouthpieces (the gospel writers).



If you knew critical scholarship well, you'd know some passages of the Bible indicate that Jesus Christ (or, whoever wrote his lines) was aiming to convert messhianc Jews.



The fact that you think one religion's idiosyncratic view on wealth should somehow be the standard bar for "what a religion would - in every circumstance - say on money".


You said 'numerous', not 'one or two'. Also, a number of your proposed examples don't seem terribly convincing. (I have never heard of reports of scientologists spitting at statues. If they did, I'm not sure I would disaprove.)[/quote]

The reported massacres of other religious groups (the Midianites) by the Hebrews, for example, indicate a similar out-group hatred and fanaticism (even if the actual campaigns didn't occur, the early Hebrews weren't that tolerant of other religious groups). Mormonism founding likewise reveals dubiousness and a need to silence critics. The Roman Catholic Church used things far worse than litigation to silence critics and does perpetuate dubious tales of "miracles" that can be compared to frauds. John Calvin's theocracy in Geneva burned quite a few opponents as well. Does the list go on, or are you going to discredit "sects" as religious entities? I find it quite arrogant that you claim to talk for "Christianity" as if it were a unitary entity - doctrinal divisions have been widespread in that religion since the start.

F) All of the above.

Right. Show me the conflict, where Jesus says in one gospel that money is what gets you into heaven, and in another that it doesn't.


That isn't what I said.

If you actually think that scientology's take on money is typical, you could try to prove it.


While Christianity has had numerous divisions of all kinds, there is quite a lot that all Christians agree about. One of these things is the majority of the New Testament, especially the Gospels, which is what I quoted from.

I never claimed to be the mouthpiece of Christianity, nor that they are all united on all issues. All I did was quote from a very central document that is held sacred by all of the branches and sects of the religion.

It seemed like a pretty reasonable interpretation at the time.



It might be an unconventional take on wealth, but that certainly doesn't disqualify it as a religion.



That's pretty hard, since the Gospels are contradictory.



Okay, do the various "sects" of Christianity count as "religions" or at least "sub-religions"? If so, then many of them followed strong-arm moves and racketeering methods that resemble Scientology's.

I voted that it is not there yet, since many people see it as a money worshipping cult rather than a legitimate religion.

But the longer it exists, and as it becomes less shunned and persecuted over time, it will likely become a legitimate religion. Maybe not on the same level as Christianity, Catholicism, or Islam. But you know, something to a smaller scale like Witnesses or Mormons.

I consider it a cult because their aim is to manipulate and control its believers.

Please, Scientology is a dangerous cult that preys upon the mentally ill. Scientologists know that only someone with a schizoid mind will believe their nonsense, and they take advantage of the individual's paranoia/delusions. They will then brainwash the already mentally ill individual, forcing him to pay for their services or eventually end up in an ultimate demise.

Why do you think Scientologists have such a hatred for psychiatry, because they know that if the mentally ill individual gets psychiatric help, he will probably end up somewhat mentally healthier and realize that he is being scammed.

I mean can it get any clearer?

And Christianity doesn't do this? Islam doesn't do this?

I think the only western religion that isn't that bad about it is Judaism and even they have their fundie nutjobs...just, thankfully, most of them are fairly moderate and approach the matter as more a forum for reflection rather than a means to simply dictate some blind morality.

I don't know how Islam works but no Christianity does not. The aim of Scientology is to make money.