ForumGarden

Why are we here ?


To become intelligent. The single greatest survival trait is intelligence, It is better and more powerful than any other trait such as fangs or speed. Therefore, where ever life begins, it will evolve towards intelligence eventually. Therefore the reason for the Universe is to create intelligence. The real question is why does the Creator want life to be intelligent?

On Earth that is. Is there a reason ?


Yes. Earth lies in the "life belt". In our orbit, we are not too close to the Sun or too far away. It's not too hot or cold to sustain carrbon-based life here. The early self-replicating molecules found that they could sustain reproduction here. The more complex the form, the better it's chance for survival. Therefore life evolved into humans.

Is it a fluke ?


No...The speed of light is 6.0 X 10^6 mph., the acceleration of gravity is 32 ft.^2, and the distance around a circle (or your atom or a planet, or a galaxy) divided by the distance across it is 3.1415926... These constants are set and have been set since creation. Change just one number by one digit and the entire Universe would cease to exist. So, no. It's no fluke, there is a plan to the Universe.

If God exists, why are we on this tiny blue planet

suspended in a vast and seemingly endless void of harsh

uninhabitable cosmos ?


Now you are asking the right question. Why does life exist at all? Since it's obvious that life exists to create intelligence, then the real question is "Why does life need to be intelligent?" No one has this answer, although I have a suspicion. I suggest that since "God lives in the birds and the bees, the rocks and the trees," He experiences his creation through us. Most religious people would agree that an omniscient God would see, hear and experience everything an intelligent human does. Perhaps we are how God lives...He lives through us.

Do we have a unified purpose ?


Once, long, long ago, you and I and everyone else were in the center of a star. That is the only place where heavy atoms like carbon and iron can be made. That star blew up and the dust cloud it made eventually condensed into this solar system. From those very atoms, your mother's body broke down the food molecules that she ate and made your body. That seems pretty unifying to me, but it's still just a unified history, not a purpose.

An individual purpose ?


Absolutely. Like the threads in a great tapestry, you and I cannot know our actual purpose or the repercussions of everything we do each day. But the beauty of the mathematics of creation suggests that there is a very clear purpose.

Let me put it this way. When you throw a stone into the water, you make ripples. When hundreds of stones are thrown, the ripples cross and recross making fantastic patterns. These patterns are just like our lives. You help a little old lady across the street today. Because of that, she doesn't get hit by a car. She now has a child. That child grows up to invent a cure for cancer. Without your individual purpose of helping her across the street, her son could never realize his individual purpose of inventing a cancer cure.

Is this a test ?


Most likely, yes. If you abscribe to the theory that there is a purpose to the universe, then there is a purpose to every part of the universe, including you. If you do not fulfill your purpose, you fail the test.

How are we doing ?


You'll know every detail. Exactly which lives you affected, how much, and when. Every nuance of the millions of decisions that you made throughout your lifespan will be made clear to you....

when you die.

Operation Snow White

Results of the Investigation

FBI raids on Scientology properties in 1977 not only turned up documentation of the group's illegal activities against the United States government, but also illegal activities against other perceived enemies of Scientology, such as "Operation Freakout", a conspiracy to frame author Paulette Cooper on false bomb threat charges, and conspiracies to frame Gabe Cazares, mayor of Clearwater, Florida, on false hit and run charges.


Fair Game

I wonder if helefra would be kind enough to explain what part of this the general public might be missing.

Before joining a group that might declare me a Suppressive Person if I decide I don't like their courses...I'd need a little clarification about the treatment of people who decide it's not for them (after they have gone to the Church to find out for themselves)

Most of the former members who can give first hand reports on the matter are mostly too busy in court, bankruptcy, hiding or have killed themselves.

Bryn Mawr:-6

Am I saying the pope has no mandate? Not at all. It is not for me to judge whether the pope or anyone else does or does not have a mandate. Any such mandate comes from the Holy Spirit. The pope is accepted by his church as the Bishop of Rome and granted control of Roman Catholicism.

Within the Agnlican church we have the Archbishop of Canterbury who is the titular head of the church. In the Anglican church the local bishop has authority over his diocese at the same time trying to recognize the concerns of the other dioceses.

I have apsolutely no problem with the concept of apostolic succession. Whether or not there was a break is really unimportant. What is important is that the message being presented comes from the authority that we have given to the Bible, the church traditions or the church counsels. In all cases they derive directly from the teachings of Jesus who did establish the first church.

Personally I have nothing agaist the RC church in general and have expressed my limited concerns elsewhere and have no desire to revisit them. I made my points and have no intentions of repeating them. They are no more nor any less then the concerns I have with my own church and which I have presented in the appropriate church forums.

I do think Bronwen is correct. This really belongs in another thread. This is just to respond to your question.

Shalom

Ted:-6

helefra wrote:

All Scientologists view life as a game, I also see life as a game - it is when we take life seriously that we no longer see it as a game and therefore become effect rather than cause. As to charade, it is the web links and the back and forth comments - me making positive comments while others making negative comments. It appears from these comments that whilst they are educational, no one can say that have actually been to the establishment and witnessed it for themselves.




I just can't help it. Since you mention how Scientologists view life...

Would you care to explain Xenu?

If you haven't got to that level yet (it does cost in the $20 000 range) Scientology views life as being plagued by alien spirits clinging to our bodies. The state of being "clear" meaning you've mastered L Ron's technique of removing these dangerous creatures. L Ron states in internal memos that the religion should not be explained to people because then they are being offered a choice. The auditors are taught to not Q and A with PCs (preclears) so as to control the conversation. They don't ask when you want to do something they tell you. Offering choices is against their training. If you want to know why they are reluctant to reveal their "secrets" take a look at the wikipedia entry on "Xenu" who would take such a thing seriously unless they've been trained first?

That read like a bad sci-fi novel.

Does scientology really believe in such things?

It is confirmed in court. At one point some members tried to deny it but, at most, some say it is only a surface layer and that you need to understand the symbology better. Others have no problem admitting it.

I look forward to checking in here later for a response to your two posts.

:)

helefra wrote: Interesting how you've brought up "Suppressive Person" (SP) - can you define what SP means verbatim? I didn't think so.


Defined by the CoS as :-

A suppressive person is a person who seeks to suppress any betterment activity or group. The suppressive person, also called an antisocial personality, works to upset, continuously undermine, spread bad news and denigrate other people and their activities. While it has sometimes been said that a suppressive person is just anti-Scientology, the fact is they oppose anyone doing better in life. Such people are not always easy to identify; however, they can be known by specific characteristics:

helefra wrote:

Another site you referred me to was "Wikipedia", have a look at this link about the person who runs this web site:-




The point about Wikipedia is that it's NOT run by an individual or a single organization. The content is open source.

helefra wrote: I would like to hear from others out there who have viewed this thread what their view point is - this excludes koan and sixyears who have already had their say.


That you ignore questions you cannot answer, you deflect others with non-sequeteurs and you attempt to self justify without external references or evidence.

Whilst I know little of the CoS, your techniques have convinced me to keep well clear.

I believe in the Bible as God's Word, and would be considered an evangelical Christian.

PS You cannot exclude Koan and Six from any debate, it is an open thread. Opinions from everyone is always acceptable FG policy.

helefra wrote:

Excellent Bryn, you have done your homework.


I was trying to point out your technique of diverting attention from a question you didn't want to answer. Koan's point was valid and worthy of more than a distraction.



helefra wrote: You are right about that, what is meant is that the person I have given above posts his viewpoints on this web link.


The fact that one person you don't like posts on a site the size of Wikipedia does not invalidate everything on there - would you care to answer the original question?

helefra wrote: Then that would be like saying "Prove that god exists".


But that's exactly the way you're trying to justify the CoS. It proves nothing and has a negative effect on your audience.

helefra wrote: Would you care to repeat the original question?


The point Koan made was :-

If you want to know why they are reluctant to reveal their "secrets" take a look at the wikipedia entry on "Xenu" who would take such a thing seriously unless they've been trained first?

Just scan back a few posts and it's easy to spot

helefra wrote: Well, I guess from the viewpoint of both six and koan that it appears to me you have already made up your mind.


I started out totally neutral - it's your handling of the discussion that's put me off.

If that's the way they train you then I want none of it.

The definition of Suppressive Persons is very easy to find. Of course I've seen it.

The link you posted about poor Tilman Hausherr is funded by "Religious Freedom Watch" which is connected to the CoS. They have smear campaigns against anyone who speaks out against them or reveals the secret of Xenu. In fact I've already refered to their "Fair Game" policy which prescribes destroying enemies of the church by any means possible.

helefra wrote: Interesting how you've brought up "Suppressive Person" (SP) - can you define what SP means verbatim? I didn't think so.


Nice try. I've also posted about how they teach to not open up Q and A. You shouldn't have asked the question in the first place and promptly answer it yourself to correct the situation. Problem is you are wrong once again.

So tell us about Xenu

helefra wrote: All which you have stated above is a perversion of the truth of Scientology itself. The people who published this, obviously have a vested interest to make money on the magazine and sell as much as they could by perverting the truth.You have the cart before the horse, hel. The very reason TIME magazine is so successful is that it is accurate and reliable. The magazine makes money because millions rely on it as a dependable source of news. There is no question that the article was carefully researched.

If you are denying that members were charged $19,500 to hear the 'Xenu' story, are all those claims false? lies? part of a conspiracy? Or maybe you believe that the story is true and actually WORTH $19,500. If so, how do you suppose Mr. Hubbard came by this amazing store of ancient knowledge?

helefra wrote: I would like to hear from others out there who have viewed this thread what their view point is - this excludes koan and sixyears who have already had their say.hel, youse can't do dat. You can certainly invite or even urge other posters to join the discussion, but you can't exclude those whose point of view opposes yours.

Helefra, as your title states, Have Your Say.

I think posters have asked specific questions-I know I do not like to debate on religious topics much, because it stirs up some hyper responses.

But since you began this thread, I would be interested in knowing your responses to some of Koan's and Bronwen's and six's questions.

We can cite court cases and other materials back and forth, for quite some time. That will get us nowhere. I found plenty to fill up pages, but after awhile I would consider it off topic. But for the specific ideology of scientology, and reponses to the previous posts, I would like to hear a response from you.

helefra

Is this the part from that last link that you wanted us to read?

re the content of the Gospel of Judas:

[Just because something was written over a thousand years ago] doesn't prevent it from being utter cobblers.

The Gospel of Judas was written by Gnostic Christians - but it reads more like Scientology than Christianity.


Many people, including me, wonder how the organization is allowed to continue after so many lawsuits. I think that's a great question.

helefra wrote: 1. If those involved with Scientology has committed so many crimes, how come it still exists today?


That status of Scientology as a religion has been challenged a number of times. In the case of Germany, SoC appealed to the UN for protection of religious freedom. It is a constant battle that is causing some governments to look closely into what exactly defines a religion. But before we move on to that debate I still want to know about Xenu.

helefra:-6

You ask for my say.

Any organization that tries to hide items or prevent folks from asking questions is purely and simply a cult.

If it has committed so many crimes why does it still exist? What about the Mafia, the Cosa Nostra, Satan's Choicke, Hells Angels, the drug cartel? Why did Hubbard chooe to live in international waters?

Another point that seems to be coming out is how can you critcize something you haven't tried? I know quite well that if I jump in fromt of a fast moving Mack truck I shall end up dead. I don't have to try it. I just need to use my brain.

$19 000+ dollars to learn a story!! Only a fool would pay it or one who has been thoroughly brain washed. Give me a break.

Shalom

Ted:-6

We're still waiting to hear about Xenu :yh_wait

I'm a Bible believing Christian and I believe Christianity to be the one true faith. Which means I'm going to be popular :wah:.

Just for the record that doesn't make me intolerant. People these days get the definition of 'tolerance' and 'relativism' mixed up. Tolerance is being able to live with someone with opposing beliefs and not kill them. Relativism is accepting that all beliefs are equally valid.

On the Scientology debate, all I'm gonna say is that it's an oppressive cult and you should get out now! There I've had my say.

helefra wrote: Did the Mafia have large buildings all over the world like Scientology? If I remember rightly, they were an organisation of several men that organised suppression on others. I don't think I can recall them having a large building called "The Mafia Organisation", do you?




Uh, yes, they did. THey are called Waste Management Companies. Some are called House Painting Companies. As in, "DO you paint houses"="Do you kill people for a living"?

Also, I am waiting to hear about Xenu.

helefra:-6

I'm not sure what having large buildings have to do with anything. That is just a red herring.

As for harmful crime: anything which engages in mind control or attempts, apparently legally to get lots of money out of people is a cult and they are indeed dangerous. What you are describing looks like such an organization. Brainwashing is a good technique to swindle people,

If we wish to talk about the books, the Qur'n or the Bible can be purchased for under $20. No ridiculous prices there. I've spent 9 years at university and that amount of education was cheap compared to Scientology.

If you wish to follow this nonsense, go for it. You have my sympathy.



I'm also interested in your answer to koan's question. A refusal to respond appropriately is just another example of what a cult does to people.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted and Koan:

Recently there was news story in which a guy was out in public in LA with tshirt on that portrayed Scientology in a negative light. Jenna Elfman (a known practising Scientologist) and her husband and another young accomplice approached the man and they started a debate with him. When the tshirt wearer brought up Xenu, Jenna Elfman was quoted as telling the young accomplice to "cover his ears".

That is weird.

Extremely sore shoulder at the moment so am typing as little as possible.

That is another example of cult behaviour. Once the JW's came to my door. After a lengthy discussion the younger of the two began to ask me questions. That was when the older one put an end to the discussion. Typical.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Hmmmmm. This looks interesting:

The following are suggested as tools for testing arguments and detecting fallacious or fraudulent arguments:





Common fallacies of logic and rhetoric

Ad hominem - attacking the arguer and not the argument.

Argument from "authority".

Argument from adverse consequences (putting pressure on the decision maker by pointing out dire consequences of an "unfavourable" decision).

Appeal to ignorance (absence of evidence is not evidence of absence).

Special pleading (typically referring to god's will).

Begging the question (assuming an answer in the way the question is phrased).

Observational selection (counting the hits and forgetting the misses).

Statistics of small numbers (such as drawing conclusions from inadequate sample sizes).

Misunderstanding the nature of statistics (President Eisenhower expressing astonishment and alarm on discovering that fully half of all Americans have below average intelligence!)

Inconsistency (e.g. military expenditures based on worst case scenarios but scientific projections on environmental dangers thriftily ignored because they are not "proved").

Non sequitur - "it does not follow" - the logic falls down.

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc - "it happened after so it was caused by" - confusion of cause and effect.

Meaningless question ("what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?).

Excluded middle - considering only the two extremes in a range of possibilities (making the "other side" look worse than it really is).

Short-term v. long-term - a subset of excluded middle ("why pursue fundamental science when we have so huge a budget deficit?").

Slippery slope - a subset of excluded middle - unwarranted extrapolation of the effects (give an inch and they will take a mile).

Confusion of correlation and causation.

Straw man - caricaturing (or stereotyping) a position to make it easier to attack..

Suppressed evidence or half-truths.

Weasel words - for example, use of euphemisms for war such as "police action" to get around limitations on Presidential powers. "An important art of politicians is to find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the public"



Kind of sounds like our friend Helefra-whatever...

Can someone please tell me about Xenu? That word seemed to scare him/her off.

Wow, I remember alot of that from philosphy class. And in science, they use Occam's razor alot.

Here is the link to the JEnna Elfman story I was talking about earlier:

"Bizarrely, Roecker also says that the Elfmans had a young, twenty-something male companion with them whom they continually instructed to move away and cover his ears whenever references to Xenu were made."



http://www.tmz.com/2006/06/13/when-elfmans-explode

And the owner of the site isnt a criminal.

:wah: :-3 :wah:

Oh, that is interesting.

*out of context*

KROQ is a great radio station! *sniff* I miss L.A. music!

*back on task*

Why would a shirt make them so angry? There are lots of T-shirts out there attacking numerous things, you must learn to ignore stuff like that.