Scientology's Credibility Questioned Over Video Channel 450
stonyandcher writes to share that the Church of Scientology has come under fire for some items on their recently launched video channel. Most notably, claims have been leveled that dignitaries in one of their videos were faked and at least one of the people featured in the video is claiming their statements were taken out of context.
Won't be the first time a religion did this. (Score:4, Insightful)
What do you expect from groups that require that members first suspend disbelief and accept claims of 'eternal life'?
Since when (Score:5, Insightful)
Besides among the easily duped?
The last frantic grapsing of a desperate group (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Won't be the first time a religion did this. (Score:4, Insightful)
Tell me about it (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd be more surprised if the site launched and everyone found out it was entirely on the up-and-up.
Re:Won't be the first time a religion did this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Impressive. Two posts into the thread and someone's already trying to turn it into a debate over all religions. I'm not accusing you of being a Scilon - merely pointing out that it's a tactic the Scilons try to cultivate, because it turns the entire discussion into a debate about theology, effectively distracting everyone from the main issue.
Were this a thread about religion, for instance, it'd be fine, but the Co$ debate isn't about theology.
Organizations that use barratry ("The purpose of a lawsuit is not to win, but to harass") and violence (consider the similarities between the mysterious fates of Judge Swearinger's dog in 1998, and the fate of an outed anonymous protester's cat earlier this week) as a matter of policy are not religions.
Re:Won't be the first time a religion did this. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The last frantic grapsing of a desperate group (Score:5, Insightful)
You forget: there's a sucker born every minute. And those suckers will continue to buy penis enlargement products from poorly written emails, and give their remaining money to Scientology.
A lot of these people also feel that the criticism and "attacks" on Scientology only *validate* it. How do you argue with that?
Scientology is the quintessential religion (Score:3, Insightful)
Scientology is no more ridiculous than christianity, islam, or judaism. OK, spaceships that look like DC3s, OK, that's weird, but no more so than virgin births, 5000 year old flat earth, talking snakes, noah's ark, or killing your first born.
Re:Won't be the first time a religion did this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Credibility? Sanity! (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Won't be the first time a religion did this. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Credibility??? (Score:5, Insightful)
Pay attention all!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Won't be the first time a religion did this. (Score:2, Insightful)
The Pope is the top of the Catholic Church, as God is not a member of a Church. Similarly, Allah is not a Muslim, he is Allah.
Re:Credibility??? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:News for nerds. Stuff that matters. (Score:3, Insightful)
And if you're that keen on only seeing specific articles - there's a billion filters you can apply. Might want to use the full site. Or are you not nerd enough to figure out filter settings?
Re:The main issue is lying liars. (Score:3, Insightful)
Answer honestly. If the CoS suddenly decided to go donation only would you agree they are now a religion or would you move the goalposts?
Re:Won't be the first time a religion did this. (Score:3, Insightful)
If God is the one making the rules, then he's on top. If not, the whole thing is a scam.
Re:It is a cult/organized crime (Score:3, Insightful)
That is a very bold statement. I thought we were in the middle of a war against radical Islam...
Re:Yea, and some well know atheists.. (Score:4, Insightful)
As a more direct rebuttal specifically to the Osiris [egyptianmyths.net] resurrection thing, that was written in hieroglyphs. How else would we have known about it? It's not like there have been any native Egyptian speakers for a long, long time, so we had to learn about ancient Egypt through other methods [wikipedia.org].
But hey, why let the facts stand in the way of your chosen God, right? He's infallible, and if anyone that believes in him says anything about him, it must be true!
Re:It is a cult/organized crime (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Scientology is the quintessential religion (Score:5, Insightful)
When Dionysus turned water into wine, we understand that as a myth.
When Romulus is described as the Son of God, born of a virgin, we understand that as a myth.
When Vespatian's spittle healed a blind man, we understand that as a myth.
When Apollonius of Tyana raised a girl from death, we understand that as a myth.
etc... etc... etc... Jesus was just a guy that had Pagan mythological stories thrown on his name decades after his death to start a religion. Nothing more.
Re:The main issue is lying liars. (Score:1, Insightful)
Well, I'm not an atheist, I'm a Pastafarian. But I don't hate you for not believing in His Noodliness. But we've already dealt with the fact that this isn't about whether a certain beliefs are true or false or even falsifiable. The issue at hand is about behavior.
And since you're now talking about behavior, let's continue to stay on topic. This thread is about the behavior of the Co$, not the behavior of other organizations.
The cult strives to spark this debate wherever it can, because most people don't recognize the logical fallacy of tu quoque [slashdot.org] when they see it. The Scilons depend on this. Don't fall for their tactics.
Re:Credibility??? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Scientology is the quintessential religion (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:who gives a shit? (Score:4, Insightful)
Well all those cults like to hole up in their little compound off out of our way.
This cult likes to convert celebrities and use them to evangelize their cult, spread itself across the country, and litigate anyone who tries to slow their acquisition of money.
Basically, Scientology has a much greater chance of affecting me or someone I know than any of those other cults. Mainly because those other cults were actually "cults" run by some crazy messiah-delusion leader, while Scientology is a deliberate scheme for accruing vast amounts of wealth and power in the guise of a cult.
Re:Won't be the first time a religion did this. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Credibility??? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Scientology is the quintessential religion (Score:4, Insightful)
You make it sound as though I have a problem with their beliefs. But I've got to tell you, I don't give a flying DC3 what they believe. I could care less.
Yes, I consider myself religious, but (unless he tells me that he wants to sit down and have an intelligent discussion about it) what the next guy chooses to believe is up to him, and whether it's deism, humanism, theism, or FSMism, that's fine by me. I have a problem when he (and yes, this includes members of my own religion) uses coercion or threats or violence or elitism etc. to force his views... and hence my beef with Scientology.
Re:Won't be the first time a religion did this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why should that be important. Hell, the Anglican Church had an Archbishop of Canterbury who doubted the divinity of Christ. Does that mean the entire Episcopalian movement no longer qualifies as a religion?
The chief difference seems to be that a successful religion is a sect or cult that manages to get near-universal acceptance as a religion within the societies that it exists. Scientology is seen by most of society as a crazy-ass money-hungry cult with a pack of swirly-eyed true believers who pay their money and believe any and all nonsense that Hubbard and his heirs shove down their throats.
Mormons were in the same boat for decades. They were seen as sexually deviant heretics. Fortunately for them, in those days a cult could basically seize control of a large, unpopulated area and grow relatively undisturbed for decades, and by the time the greater society finally met them head on again, they're numbers were sufficient that they had to be dealt with as a religion.
Re:News for nerds. Stuff that matters. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Won't be the first time a religion did this. (Score:5, Insightful)
It'll still be a scam, just a conventional, accepted and well-integrated one.
Scientologists are loons for sure, but let's not differentiate their own brand of crazy from all the others.
As Douglas Adams said- 'Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?'.
Re:It is a cult/organized crime (Score:1, Insightful)
Lying to and stealing from is positively passive compared to molesting, murdering (see crusades, witch hunts etc), forbidding life saving medical treatments, forbidding condom use and the list could go on and on. It says right in their book that gays and back-talking kids should be stoned to death! As kooky as Scientology is, they don't hold a candle to mainstream religions in terms of violence and all around nastiness.
Re:The last frantic grapsing of a desperate group (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Won't be the first time a religion did this. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Scientology is the quintessential religion (Score:3, Insightful)
Some alien planes locking an alien god into a mountain, told somewhere in the middle of the 20th century? Well, I didn't live back then, but I'd say the majority of halfway sane people would consider such a story a wee bit dumb, hard to believe and maybe call anyone really calling that some sensible 'faith' a moron.
That's the main difference. Also, the "big" religions usually have some kind of moral codex that should enable the group believing in them to work together. Whether you take the bible, the quran or the vedes, all of them contain messages how you should interact with each other, and those messages are usually positive. In the COS, you're already surrounded by "enemies" who you have to outperform. That's more a business structure than a religion.
Re:The main issue is lying liars. (Score:1, Insightful)
As a Buddhist, I have never given any amount of money to any Buddhist temple or member.
Scientology is not a religion. Get that through your head. Once you do you'll realize that the arguments of "well, if they become donation only will that make you happy" are so completely absurd and have nothing to do with what is being critized about Scientology. In other words, this discussion does not fall into the easy safe world of a black and white argument.
Oh, and there are organizations that do follow the "teachings" of L-Ron and believe that the information and benefits contained within Scientology should be freely available.
Re:The main issue is lying liars. (Score:3, Insightful)
Most people wouldn't have a problem with the CoS if they were 1) donation only, 2) totally open about their beliefs and not trying to hide everything, and 3) didn't try to keep their members locked up inside the church, while cutting them off from outside influences like family. When was the last time you heard about someone that had trouble leaving any church that wasn't considered a cult? Oh, that's right, never.
If they want to call themselves a religion, so be it. But their tactics are sickening and THAT is what most people have trouble with. That is also why most people want the "religion" monicker removed from them.
Re:Scientology is the quintessential religion (Score:3, Insightful)
Scientology is just a little more direct than the catholic church, but the motives are the same.
They won't ask for cash if you want to advance your knowledge of their belief system.
I think that is the best part of their belief system, it restricts the followers to a select group of quantifiable gullible.
Re:Won't be the first time a religion did this. (Score:5, Insightful)
To some extent it is that, but there is a much creepier aspect. From what I have seen, Scientology seems to be more of a social club for wealthy people who are interested in learning how to use aggressive psychological attacks such as hypnotism.
I started reading Dianetics, and it really does seem like a manual for using psychological attacks. A thetan is like a soul, but also like an influence. Non scientologists are infected with alien thetans, and once you are "clear" of them, you can become an "operating thetan". Then you can begin infecting the minds of others. Before it had always confused me that non scientologists have to rid themselves of thetans, but scientologists refer to eachother as thetans.
It was pretty sickening to realize that so many scientologists know exactly what it is all about. They develop new psychological attacks. Then they train their followers. The followers then use those attacks to manipulate those around them so they can become more successful in their careers, and increase the size of the church. This money is then reinvested in developing new psychological attack methods.
Someone please correct me if any part of this is inaccurate.
Re:I seemed to have missed the bus on this (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It is a cult/organized crime (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Scientology is the quintessential religion (Score:3, Insightful)
Indulgences and penances (which I assume you're referring to) is asking forgiveness for screwing up. You're not paying the church for permission to read the next book in the Bible.
I think that is the best part of their belief system, it restricts the followers to a select group of quantifiable gullible.
I'm fairly certain that as long as you have money, you're qualified. While those who make more cash than I can hope to in a life time aren't affected by throwing several thousand to get the latest and greatest from the CoS, those whom are less well off are hit pretty hard with the fee to learn more. This is where I have issue. They're not restricting their set of gullible to the rich, they're set is anyone with money, rich or not. I'm not saying it would be okay if it were just the rich falling victim (wary of using that phrase) to this. There are people who believe in Scientology enough they're willing to sell essentials, like their car to get to work, just to be viewed as holier than thou who didn't want to sell their car.
Now, I'm told there are a few people who will give away or resell (wasn't there a story here a while back about the CoS restricting EBay sales of their beloved E-meter?) their old tools to those interested. Oddly, the CoS frowns muchly upon this practice because they don't make a dime off it.
Re:Won't be the first time a religion did this. (Score:3, Insightful)
Religion, n. Large popular cult.
Cult, n. Small unpopular religion.
Doctrines of real religions are not secret (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Won't be the first time a religion did this. (Score:3, Insightful)
You are an idiot. Science doesn't confirm his beliefs, as is your interpretation because you are a believer by nature and have a tiny closed little mind like believers do. Believers believe things like angles, fairies, spooky ghosts, and that everything is here by design.
When the GP said "science confirms", he meant that it is the function of science to confirm things. Or, in other words, we use science to confirm things. Science also disproves things. So he might have said "science confirms and disproves" which would be more correct, but slightly redundant.
Idiots like yourself, on the other hand, just believe regardless of confirmation or disproof, so you are an idiot. Now please stop being idiotic.
Re:Credibility??? (Score:4, Insightful)
That was my WHOLE point.
Your faith in me being Satan is perfectly "OKAY", and by that you probably mean "All right", which also means correct.
All faiths are EQUALLY correct. Correct means:
Free from error or fault; true or accurate.
In order for something to be correct you must base that on logical proof, material evidence, etc. This means that all "Faith" is equally based on nothing tangible in this world. It does not matter how many people share it, or if is only a faith of one person. They all have the same foundation!
Now to ACT upon your faith is a whole different story altogether........
Re:Credibility??? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Credibility??? (Score:3, Insightful)
You have some old records of a man who claimed he was God. That doesn't make "He was God." a fact. The only thing that those papers prove is that there once was a man who said he was God. You could go to an insane asylum and hear much the same.
Authenticity does not equal veracity (Score:3, Insightful)
You hit the nail on the head. Authenticity does not equal veracity. However, it is a prerequisite. Anabaptists claimed that their religion is the one started by the apostles. Catholicism claims the same thing - however, evidence discredits Anabaptism in favor of Catholicism.
analysis over historical records regarding the New Testament can only confirm us that the words in them were actually what the man called Jesus said - and not an invention made by a group of fanboys. But from that to affirming that Jesus is the son of God, that is up to the believer.
In other words, we cannot confirm that religion is true based only on ancient manuscripts - however, we CAN confirm that a religion is NOT true based on ancient manuscripts, if they disprove what the religion claims.
In the particular case of Scientology, physical evidence disproves Scientology's numerous claims - starting with the e-meter.