Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[misko27]

So how does Scientology differ from a "proper" religion?

Academically or legally?
1. Legally, the focus on profit has been a dealbreaker for a lot of countries. (Wikipedia mentions the phrase 'religious corporation'). The issue with cult-like behaviors is another (their extreme vociferousness is harassing critics and engaging in illegal activity is yet another). They're not that far off from Mormons, actually, although Mormons at least seem reasonable (or became reasonable? I don't know enough to judge).
2. Academically, it is classified as a religion (although note that that does not make it at all exclusive with being a cult, and also bear in mind that Neopagans are classified as a religion I think).
3. As for whether it is legitimate, the real answer probably depends on whether L. Ron Hubbard was a hack and a con artist selling science fiction to people as using it to exploit them for money, or legitimately believed the words that came out of his mouth while simultaneously demanding money. It is a tough ask, but I know I've seen stranger things in my own life, so who knows.

As for the truth-values of what Scientology claims, ask someone else, ideally a religious philosopher-slash-science fiction writer (I'm sure there are plenty of those running around, right?).

[redwallzyl]

So how does Scientology differ from a "proper" religion?

As EH pointed out, it lacks the moral/practical lesson aspect of religion. Most faiths tend to be instruction manuals on how to live in their native land pre-industrial revolution, and give advice on how to do so with a reasonable degree of health, stability, and happiness.

That's also why they're struggling now-adays. A post-industrial world is quite different from a pre-industrial one, and requires different lessons to learn. Christianity seems increasingly arbitrary, for instance, the further we get from the circumstances in which the faith was founded (it doesn't help that preachers like that Joel guy in Texas have become depressingly common in protestantism, particularly American Protestantism. They do no favors to their faith, but since they aren't actually faithful they don't give a damn. Fucking moneylenders... *grumble*). Scientology on the other hand, it just arbitary, and pretty greedy at that.

I wouldn't say that religion has a specific problem with a industrial world merely that it is highly naturally conservative, that is preferring the status quo, by virtue of being what it is. There's also the problem of literalism, recognizing context is very important for interpretation but the problem i find with Protestantism is the whole anyone can interpret the bible thing. that's like saying anyone can interpret the roman historian Livy and divine the truth, its ludicrous. so you get stupid coming from Protestantism along with the opposite much more liberal minded sects compared to the structured and standardized Catholics who tend towards being more conservative but much more professional and resistant to religious innovation that leads so easily to protestant craziness.

[nenjin]

So how does Scientology differ from a "proper" religion?

As EH pointed out, it lacks the moral/practical lesson aspect of religion. Most faiths tend to be instruction manuals on how to live in their native land pre-industrial revolution, and give advice on how to do so with a reasonable degree of health, stability, and happiness.

That's also why they're struggling now-adays. A post-industrial world is quite different from a pre-industrial one, and requires different lessons to learn. Christianity seems increasingly arbitrary, for instance, the further we get from the circumstances in which the faith was founded (it doesn't help that preachers like that Joel guy in Texas have become depressingly common in protestantism, particularly American Protestantism. They do no favors to their faith, but since they aren't actually faithful they don't give a damn. Fucking moneylenders... *grumble*). Scientology on the other hand, it just arbitary, and pretty greedy at that.

I wouldn't say that religion has a specific problem with a industrial world merely that it is highly naturally conservative, that is preferring the status quo, by virtue of being what it is. There's also the problem of literalism, recognizing context is very important for interpretation but the problem i find with Protestantism is the whole anyone can interpret the bible thing. that's like saying anyone can interpret the roman historian Livy and divine the truth, its ludicrous. so you get stupid coming from Protestantism along with the opposite much more liberal minded sects compared to the structured and standardized Catholics who tend towards being more conservative but much more professional and resistant to religious innovation that leads so easily to protestant craziness.

Speaking of context though, appreciate what Protestantism was a reaction to. To being told you cannot mediate your relationship with God, someone else has to. You're not allowed to define your relationship with God, someone else does. You can't even read the word of God because someone won't write it in a language you can understand. And you're subject to whatever punishments they deem fit for whatever they (God) chooses to penalize. Or if you object to the giving of Papal Indulgences and Dispensations, well, too bad, God said it was cool.

Which is pretty much what you were getting at, but still I felt like it was worth speaking up for. I don't feel like the ability to negotiate your relationship with God yourself is a bad thing. But it does generate a whole lot of stupid when it's paired with organized religion and dogma in general.

[redwallzyl]

Yup, I have nothing against protestants seeing as I am one. But people do really stupid shit sometimes that wouldn't happen if their was someone that could tell them no. As a Protestant or a religious person or person in general it is very important to know when you don't know something and either learn about it or trust in someone who has authority on the subject.

[Dunamisdeos]

Yup, I have nothing against protestants seeing as I am one. But people do really stupid shit sometimes that wouldn't happen if their was someone that could tell them no. As a Protestant or a religious person or person in general it is very important to know when you don't know something and either learn about it or trust in someone who has authority on the subject.

This is generally the stated purpose of organized religion, to ensure that there is an authority in existence.

Because of humans being what we are, this inevitably descends eventually into the entire organization doing some really stupid shit eventually. It seems true of every human organization, in fact.

[Loud Whispers]

So, you go through all that bullshit only to be told that none of it really mattered.

This would be pretty cool if it did not come at the cost of everyone you loved and all your material possessions

[Max™]

So how does Scientology differ from a "proper" religion?

Time enough that nobody who wrote them was known to be a hack scifi writer who figured out the way to really get paid was starting a religion?

I mean, that would make a hell of an alt-history story for christianity to be the exact same scam but two thousand or so years earlier, but if nothing else was learned by christendom over that length of time it's the value of trying to come across as the good guys, the $cientologists just want to get them fat stacks and haven't had a chance to try and hide it behind altruistic acts.

[Karnewarrior]

So, you go through all that bullshit only to be told that none of it really mattered.

I'm extremely incensed by this information. I'm fucking livid right now.

My inner paladin just took levels in barbarian just so he could rage harder.

So how does Scientology differ from a "proper" religion?

Time enough that nobody who wrote them was known to be a hack scifi writer who figured out the way to really get paid was starting a religion?

I mean, that would make a hell of an alt-history story for christianity to be the exact same scam but two thousand or so years earlier, but if nothing else was learned by christendom over that length of time it's the value of trying to come across as the good guys, the $cientologists just want to get them fat stacks and haven't had a chance to try and hide it behind altruistic acts.

Nah, I think Jesus actually believed what he was saying. I dunno if he thought he was actually the messiah - he could have been a dude who realized that lying through his teeth would be a good way to get people to be more chill (for some time, at least) and decided it was worth it - but I think he believed in his real message, past the God stuff. Love Thy Neighbor wasn't just for kicks and all.

[Max™]

Plus it's a great "ok, we don't necessarily need to purge THESE guys who are preaching 'be good to each other' but lets get rid of those 'fuck babies and eat the old' nutters at least?" point which arguably helped it survive since even those completely without faith of any sort like myself don't have a problem with people being told it's cool to be nice to each other.

[Descan]

I mean I'm not even sure that scholars think the parts about "I'm GAWD bitches!" are actually directly attributable to Jesus. IIRC those sections are evidentially written way after the fact and merely attributed to the purported writer, but otherwise tacked on. (and I mean, the gospels themselves were written way after the fact in and of themselves, so that's double-way)

[redwallzyl]

There's also this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Jubilees

basically book of revelations 2. and you thought the first one was confusing.

[Starver]

Nah, I think Jesus actually believed what he was saying. I dunno if he thought he was actually the messiah - he could have been a dude who realized that lying through his teeth would be a good way to get people to be more chill (for some time, at least) and decided it was worth it

So, he was just a slightly naughty boy...

[Lord Shonus]

I mean I'm not even sure that scholars think the parts about "I'm GAWD bitches!" are actually directly attributable to Jesus. IIRC those sections are evidentially written way after the fact and merely attributed to the purported writer, but otherwise tacked on. (and I mean, the gospels themselves were written way after the fact in and of themselves, so that's double-way)

You're partially correct.

The Four Gospels were compiled long after the Crucifixion out of various oral traditions (either 3 or 5, IIRC) that have been dated pretty solidly (via cross-reference) to before AD 60 (this is one of the major reasons the various other "gospels" are rejected by mainstream Christianity - no evidence of them before AD 200 or so has been found). While there are almost certainly "anachronistic" elements that have been added or removed over the centuries, but most of those known or suspected are relatively small. The really dubious portions of the New Testament are found in sections after the Gospels.

[wierd]

Though at this point Scientology exists purely as a mechanism to extract as much money as possible from its practitioners.

Uhm, it ALWAYS HAS Been.

IIRC, Hubbard created scientology out of a joke that he could create one from whole cloth, and become fabulously wealthy.
http://www.lermanet.com/scientologynews/ReadersDigest.htm

It really is just a bunch of horseshit from a low-talent hack.
http://www.xenu.net/archive/infopack/8.htm

[Max™]

In more directly politics in America news: dude puts on swastika armband, talks shit, gets hit and of course the discussion I've seen ends up coming back around to "words shouldn't result in violence" type of arguments where it's a blanket "civil discourse should be valued" position, with occasional asides to discuss things like whether the people cheering nazipunching would be ok "if it was their team getting punched" and I'm like... whoa.

Wait a second, last I checked, "our team" held the world title in nazipunching and was called "Americans" wasn't it?

Real easy to not get punched for being a nazi: don't be a fucking shitheel who spews nazi bullshit at minorities in public while wearing nazi armbands, right? Last I checked, it isn't easy for someone who happened to be born a few shades too dark to avoid being a potential target for folks who are literally claiming white people are superior to everyone else, and thus to be alarmed hearing it now when said hateful bullshit wound up involving terms like "purge" or "genocide" the last time it wasn't answered with a quick pop in the jaw before it built any support.

Should the dude who punched him have to deal with the cops? Technically yes, society kinda relies on that shit, but it isn't going to fall apart if people look the other way when shitlerpunks get their shit slapped for being hateful and vocal racists in public.

You're welcome to think it was wrong to punch the dude, but you don't have to get mad about him getting punched, you can even laugh about it: fucker picks this shit up online, feels tough in a nazi echo chamber forum, gets worked up enough to start actually going public with it, ends up dropped on the pavement, humiliated, but alive.