I was just struggling to think how his ideas were secular but then he just 'decided' it was a religion when he realised he could make money. If you look at it that way, basically it's a cult and people are stupid for believing in it (sorry, my knowlege on scientology and L. Ron Hubbard are miniscule). Eh, I suppse then you do make a good point about the intent of scientology compared to christianity.

 

 

 

Before scientology was even called scientology, before he even decided it would be a religion, it was a secular idea he came up with. Then they realized they could charge people money to take a test, rig the test so they automatically fail it, and charge people more money so they could take classes to fix themselves. Scientology existed before it was ever a religion, and before it was ever "offering salvation." Its entire original intent is different, and is not comparable to Christianity.

I was just struggling to think how his ideas were secular but then he just 'decided' it was a religion when he realised he could make money. If you look at it that way, basically it's a cult and people are stupid for believing in it (sorry, my knowlege on scientology and L. Ron Hubbard are miniscule). Eh, I suppse then you do make a good point about the intent of scientology compared to christianity.

 

 

 

Before scientology was even called scientology, before he even decided it would be a religion, it was a secular idea he came up with. Then they realized they could charge people money to take a test, rig the test so they automatically fail it, and charge people more money so they could take classes to fix themselves. Scientology existed before it was ever a religion, and before it was ever "offering salvation." Its entire original intent is different, and is not comparable to Christianity.

 

 

 

Interesting stuff. Hey, do you know of any decent sources on the truth about scientology? I understand it's pretty secretive in covering up it cultish nature.

Interesting stuff. Hey, do you know of any decent sources on the truth about scientology? I understand it's pretty secretive in covering up it cultish nature.

 

 

 

I'd read The Foster Report which was published in 1971. It is very in depth, noting things like even as late as 1971, recruiters for scientology were very uneasy about describing it as a "religion" when recruiting people to the cause.

 

 

 

I would suggest that scientology is neither a cult nor a religion. It's a business scam gone very wrong.

scientology talks about an alien u idiots, not a god. a god makes sense, an alient sending other aliens here and then making them into ghosts doesnt make sense.

 

 

 

besides scientlogy makes no mention of how the earth was created. the bible does. so there again it doesnt make sense when god does.

scientology talks about an alien u idiots, not a god. a god makes sense, an alient sending other aliens here and then making them into ghosts doesnt make sense.

 

 

 

besides scientlogy makes no mention of how the earth was created. the bible does. so there again it doesnt make sense when god does.

 

 

 

The moment I saw your name in the last posted I knew I would be in for some lol worthy material.

 

 

 

 

 

You certainly did not disappoint me.

scientology talks about an alien u idiots, not a god. a god makes sense, an alient sending other aliens here and then making them into ghosts doesnt make sense.

 

 

 

besides scientlogy makes no mention of how the earth was created. the bible does. so there again it doesnt make sense when god does.

 

 

 

The moment I saw your name in the last posted I knew I would be in for some lol worthy material.

 

 

 

 

 

You certainly did not disappoint me.

 

 

 

so u only bother posting to spam and not counter my argument, moron

scientology talks about an alien u idiots, not a god. a god makes sense, an alient sending other aliens here and then making them into ghosts doesnt make sense.

 

 

 

besides scientlogy makes no mention of how the earth was created. the bible does. so there again it doesnt make sense when god does.

 

 

 

The moment I saw your name in the last posted I knew I would be in for some lol worthy material.

 

 

 

 

 

You certainly did not disappoint me.

 

 

 

so u only bother posting to spam and not counter my argument, moron

 

 

 

There's really nothing their to argue against, now is there?

 

 

 

What if they are simply alien gods, eh? Their creationist story is likely that of what modern scientists belive. Well, without all the alien-soul-collector stuff.

so u only bother posting to spam and not counter my argument, moron

 

 

 

I know Nad probably doesn't care, but i'd appreciate if you didn't throw around those kind of 'insults' baselessly. Clear?

baselessly? look at his post

 

 

 

no contribution to the thread, no content exept for trying to insult me. that is spam.

Funny, that sums up the attitude of a lot of your posts.

 

 

 

Just because it doesn't contribute to the thread doesn't mean it's spam, and it still gives no right for you to insult someone.

but he has the inherent right to insult me?? without contributing anything to the thread

 

 

 

u have a go at me for insulting him when he comes along and insults me totally unprovoked??? how does that work???

He didn't insult you, and stop pushing me on this.

I challenge you, carlin, to produce a post of your 88 that wasn't made to be deliberately antagonistic and insulting to at least someone.

 

I don't mind confrontation, but when it's as relentlessly uneccessary and hypocritical as yours, there's just no point. Except for a cheap laugh at your expense.

By the way, Carlin, I would be glad to refute your opinion if it made some sort of sense or was at least presented likewise.

 

 

 

I'm not in the position to argue if Christianity is more realistic than Scientology or not.

 

 

 

Even if I was, I can't argue anything there. You saying that a god makes more sense than an alien... well, you do realize that according to the definition of an alien God would very much likely be an alien, right?

There's really nothing their to argue against, now is there?

 

 

 

What if they are simply alien gods, eh? Their creationist story is likely that of what modern scientists belive. Well, without all the alien-soul-collector stuff.

 

Stargate SG-1 :thumbsup: .

 

You just refuse to answer my initial question about finding me fictional writings from the same time period and therefore, should be ignored. If you are so sure that you can use a modern day perspective on an ancient document to talk about its origins, you have no place talking about this. You can't say, "because this is untrue, it seems likely that it had no original intent of being passed off as true." The reason being is look at authors like Hesiod. He wrote what we would consider outlandish fiction/fantasy - but we also know that he was telling stories he believed to be true. You're arguing a non-existent point with absolutely no evidence to back it up.

 

 

 

Hesiod lived around 500-700 years after the first books of the Bible and was from Greece, I'd hardly call him a fiction author from when the Bible's first books were written. What non-fiction authors from the biblical times of Moses write like that?

Most certainly a cult

You just refuse to answer my initial question about finding me fictional writings from the same time period and therefore, should be ignored. If you are so sure that you can use a modern day perspective on an ancient document to talk about its origins, you have no place talking about this. You can't say, "because this is untrue, it seems likely that it had no original intent of being passed off as true." The reason being is look at authors like Hesiod. He wrote what we would consider outlandish fiction/fantasy - but we also know that he was telling stories he believed to be true. You're arguing a non-existent point with absolutely no evidence to back it up.

 

 

 

Hesiod lived around 500-700 years after the first books of the Bible and was from Greece, I'd hardly call him a fiction author from when the Bible's first books were written. What non-fiction authors from the biblical times of Moses write like that?

 

Okay, you guys need to take this to the PM box. Please. This is a thread about scientology, and there's absolutely nothing in either of those posts that has anything to do with scientology at all.

 

 

 

Go argue about how the other person's logic makes them look like an idiot somewhere else.

but he has the inherent right to insult me?? without contributing anything to the thread

 

 

 

u have a go at me for insulting him when he comes along and insults me totally unprovoked??? how does that work???

 

 

 

You have the inherent right to insult everyone on this thread? Lets take a look;

 

 

 

scientology talks about an alien u idiots,

 

 

 

So, my justification for the following insult is that you insulted me first. Your such an idiot it's so unbelievable.

Hesiod lived around 500-700 years after the first books of the Bible and was from Greece, I'd hardly call him a fiction author from when the Bible's first books were written. What non-fiction authors from the biblical times of Moses write like that?

 

 

 

I never said Hesiod was around during Biblical times. I was giving an example of how you can't say because it doesn't seem possible in this day and age, it makes sense for it to been have written as fiction.

 

 

 

Don't try and turn this around and avoid my question. If you can't do it, then your made up point remains made up. It's kind of sad that you have to make up arguments that don't exist to prove a point.

 

 

 

Okay, you guys need to take this to the PM box. Please. This is a thread about scientology, and there's absolutely nothing in either of those posts that has anything to do with scientology at all.

 

 

 

And your post has to do with what exactly? Thank you.

Hesiod lived around 500-700 years after the first books of the Bible and was from Greece, I'd hardly call him a fiction author from when the Bible's first books were written. What non-fiction authors from the biblical times of Moses write like that?

 

 

 

I never said Hesiod was around during Biblical times. I was giving an example of how you can't say because it doesn't seem possible in this day and age, it makes sense for it to been have written as fiction.

 

 

 

Don't try and turn this around and avoid my question. If you can't do it, then your made up point remains made up. It's kind of sad that you have to make up arguments that don't exist to prove a point.

 

 

 

You seem not to want to answer your own question. I have not read any non-fiction writings from the time. Point me in the direction of an author from Biblical times who wrote like Moses or whoever the author was and I'll look into it. You're suggestion that all non fiction writings were written like that isn't backed up either. Anyway, i still hold the belief that the Bibles orginal intentions are ambiguous. You have not shown me anything to say otherwise so far.

You seem not to want to answer your own question. I have not read any non-fiction writings from the time. Point me in the direction of an author from Biblical times who wrote like Moses or whoever the author was and I'll look into it. You're suggestion that all non fiction writings were written like that isn't backed up either. Anyway, i still hold the belief that the Bibles orginal intentions are ambiguous. You have not shown me anything to say otherwise so far.

 

 

 

Your point is absolutely made up until you give reasons for it. The only reason you've given is absolutely nonsense. Why not give a reason for your made up point? Because you can't.

There is no reason so far as I can see to suggest that the orginal intentions are not clouded - seperate from faith.

 

 

 

Your claiming that non-fiction authors of the time wrote like that, your offering no authors name or book to see for myself.

 

 

 

You maintain no reasons to say that it's orginal intentions were non-fiction, let alone back that up with any sort of evidence.

 

 

 

You seem to have knowledge of books or authors from biblical times that show similar writings styles to the first books of the Bible, whereas i don't to my knowledge. So, why not give me a few names?

Wait? So you're saying that your point is made up and you have yet to give any evidence to support your claim? Interesting...

Wait? So you're saying that your point is made up and you have yet to give any evidence to support your claim? Interesting...

 

 

 

What do you mean, my point is "made up".

 

 

 

There is lack of evidence to support the claim it was written with the intention to be non fictional therefore it's point becomes ambiguous. There is lack of evidence to suggest the first books all had the same author, or that any were written by the man they were supposed to be written by.

 

 

 

When the author becomes unknown, then the intentions become unknown and therefore ambiguity surrounds it. Show me some evidence pointing towards it being written in a non-ficticious manner.

 

 

 

I don't have to prove ambiguity, the ambiguity is a state that occurs when there is no reliable proof that it has a particular motive behind it. That proof falls onto your shoulders to present.