Yo, my beautiful thetans.

Voodoo

Free Your Mind And Your Ass Will Follow
I don't count "independents" as having actually "left the church", they just changed denominations.
So, A=B=C=D?

The CofS and the religion of Scientology are two different things. A person can reject one without rejecting the other. Some reject the organization while still professing an allegiance to the subject itself. Some reject the organization, the subject, and the founder, as well.

Even further, there are different flavors of 'Scientologists'. Not all of them accept or agree upon all the tech of the religion, and some even adopt tech from non-Hubbard sources.

(For example, it's my personal belief that effective, workable tech in Hubbard Scientology ends at the upper limit of the lower Bridge. I believe it's at R6EW that Hubbard begins to introduce incidents to audit that are not of the pc's origination. It continues that way, all the way through OTVIII. Force feeding pc's incidents to audit is fundamentally unworkable, in my view.)
 

strativarius

Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband
So, A=B=C=D?

The CofS and the religion of Scientology are two different things. A person can reject one without rejecting the other. Some reject the organization while still professing an allegiance to the subject itself. Some reject the organization, the subject, and the founder, as well.

Even further, there are different flavors of 'Scientologists'. Not all of them accept or agree upon all the tech of the religion, and some even adopt tech from non-Hubbard sources.

(For example, it's my personal belief that effective, workable tech in Hubbard Scientology ends at the upper limit of the lower Bridge. I believe it's at R6EW that Hubbard begins to introduce incidents to audit that are not of the pc's origination. It continues that way, all the way through OTVIII. Force feeding pc's incidents to audit is fundamentally unworkable, in my view.)
It's my contention that the only reason somebody benefits from any scientology 'process' is because talking about one's problems and circumstances can be therapeutic. The fact that Hubbard invented these 'grade' processes has no bearing on the 'benefits' that might accrue from running them. It's just incidental IMO.

As you point out, from Grade VI on up it's all space opera and you are told what to audit, and this is of no practical benefit whatsoever unless you're Terril park.
 

Bill

Gold Meritorious Patron
So, A=B=C=D?

The CofS and the religion of Scientology are two different things. A person can reject one without rejecting the other. Some reject the organization while still professing an allegiance to the subject itself. Some reject the organization, the subject, and the founder, as well.

Even further, there are different flavors of 'Scientologists'. Not all of them accept or agree upon all the tech of the religion, and some even adopt tech from non-Hubbard sources.

(For example, it's my personal belief that effective, workable tech in Hubbard Scientology ends at the upper limit of the lower Bridge. I believe it's at R6EW that Hubbard begins to introduce incidents to audit that are not of the pc's origination. It continues that way, all the way through OTVIII. Force feeding pc's incidents to audit is fundamentally unworkable, in my view.)
If one believes in Hubbard's dogma, no matter the organization one is affiliated with, one is a member of that religion. If one modifies it a bit or omits a few precepts, then it could be said that one is a member of a schism of the Scientology religion. Just as Catholics and Protestants are all Christians. As long as believers take the dogma, the goals and promised "gains" of Scientology on faith, they are members of the Scientology religion.

However, a person who uses a "touch assist", for instance, because they find it works but doesn't swallow anything else from Hubbard should not be considered a member of the religion.

When a Catholic leaves that church and joins, for instance, the Lutheran church, they don't stop being a Christian. Even those who don't join another denomination but still believe in the Bible and Jesus would still be Christian. It's that way with the Scientology religion as well.
 

Clay Pigeon

Gold Meritorious Patron
If one believes in Hubbard's dogma, no matter the organization one is affiliated with, one is a member of that religion. If one modifies it a bit or omits a few precepts, then it could be said that one is a member of a schism of the Scientology religion. Just as Catholics and Protestants are all Christians. As long as believers take the dogma, the goals and promised "gains" of Scientology on faith, they are members of the Scientology religion.

However, a person who uses a "touch assist", for instance, because they find it works but doesn't swallow anything else from Hubbard should not be considered a member of the religion.

When a Catholic leaves that church and joins, for instance, the Lutheran church, they don't stop being a Christian. Even those who don't join another denomination but still believe in the Bible and Jesus would still be Christian. It's that way with the Scientology religion as well.

People often leave the Catholic Church so they can START being a Christian Bill
 

Voodoo

Free Your Mind And Your Ass Will Follow
It's my contention that the only reason somebody benefits from any scientology 'process' is because talking about one's problems and circumstances can be therapeutic. The fact that Hubbard invented these 'grade' processes has no bearing on the 'benefits' that might accrue from running them. It's just incidental IMO.

As you point out, from Grade VI on up it's all space opera and you are told what to audit, and this is of no practical benefit whatsoever unless you're Terril park.
It's my belief that Hubbard 'borrowed' all the workable parts of Dianetics & Scientology tech from real innovators.

Further, it's my belief that Hubbard developed all of the unworkable parts of Scn tech, such as the OT levels, ethics conditions formulas, 90% of the organization policy, Sec Checking, the Sea Org, RPF, crush regging, disconnection, most of the PTS SP tech, fair game, FPRD, the Ls, etc.

If it's LRH, it's not Scientology.
 

Voodoo

Free Your Mind And Your Ass Will Follow
If one believes in Hubbard's dogma, no matter the organization one is affiliated with, one is a member of that religion. If one modifies it a bit or omits a few precepts, then it could be said that one is a member of a schism of the Scientology religion. Just as Catholics and Protestants are all Christians. As long as believers take the dogma, the goals and promised "gains" of Scientology on faith, they are members of the Scientology religion.

However, a person who uses a "touch assist", for instance, because they find it works but doesn't swallow anything else from Hubbard should not be considered a member of the religion.

When a Catholic leaves that church and joins, for instance, the Lutheran church, they don't stop being a Christian. Even those who don't join another denomination but still believe in the Bible and Jesus would still be Christian. It's that way with the Scientology religion as well.
You don't have to be a member of a religious organization to practice any faith, including Scientology.
 

Bill

Gold Meritorious Patron
You don't have to be a member of a religious organization to practice any faith, including Scientology.
As I said. But my point was that you are still part of, and practicing, the religion if you still believe in the dogma and promises of Scientology.
 

Voodoo

Free Your Mind And Your Ass Will Follow
As I said. But my point was that you are still part of, and practicing, the religion if you still believe in the dogma and promises of Scientology.
Sorry, but I still see it slightly differently. You don't have to be part of any group to practice or believe in any religion.

For myself, I still accept some of Scientology's practices and theory as valid and workable, but I don't belong to any religious organization. I resigned from the CofS, but I didn't abandon the subject (completely).
 
Last edited:

Bill

Gold Meritorious Patron
Sorry, but I still see it slightly differently. You don't have to be part of any group to practice or believe in any religion.

For myself, I still accept some of Scientology's practices and theory as valid and workable, but I don't belong to any religious organization. I resigned from the CofS, but I didn't abandon the subject (completely).
If you accept "Release", "Clear", "OT", "Homo Novis" and "Scientology Works!" then you would be practicing the religion of Scientology. I doubt that applies to you so ... you aren't practicing the religion of Scientology. It really is pretty simple.
 

Voodoo

Free Your Mind And Your Ass Will Follow
If you accept "Release", "Clear", "OT", "Homo Novis" and "Scientology Works!" then you would be practicing the religion of Scientology. I doubt that applies to you so ... you aren't practicing the religion of Scientology. It really is pretty simple.
The fact that I reject parts of official Scientology and accept other parts, doesn't preclude me from practicing the religion, or even calling myself a Scientologist. Anyone can do both. In my view, the lower Bridge is Scientology - the upper Bridge is a product of Hubbard's fevered imagination. If someone chooses to practice the lower part while rejecting the upper part, I'd still consider that to be practicing Scientology.

For instance, my granddad was a solid believer in the Christian bible, but he'd rather have been shot dead, than be forced to spend an afternoon sitting in a suit and tie listening to some preacher castigate the assembled for being 'sinners'.

In all the time I knew him, I never knew him to proselytize or preach his faith to others. I also never once saw him step inside of a church, but that bible was sitting on his nightstand, and I know he read it, because I saw him do so many times.

Now, was my granddad a Christian? He sure was, but he didn't belong to any denomination or organized religious group.
 

Bill

Gold Meritorious Patron
The fact that I reject parts of official Scientology and accept other parts, doesn't preclude me from practicing the religion, or even calling myself a Scientologist. Anyone can do both. In my view, the lower Bridge is Scientology - the upper Bridge is a product of Hubbard's fevered imagination. If someone chooses to practice the lower part while rejecting the upper part, I'd still consider that to be practicing Scientology.

For instance, my granddad was a solid believer in the Christian bible, but he'd rather have been shot dead, than be forced to spend an afternoon sitting in a suit and tie listening to some preacher castigate the assembled for being 'sinners'.

In all the time I knew him, I never knew him to proselytize or preach his faith to others. I also never once saw him step inside of a church, but that bible was sitting on his nightstand, and I know he read it, because I saw him do so many times.

Now, was my granddad a Christian? He sure was, but he didn't belong to any denomination or organized religious group.
That was what I was talking about. The original comment was in relation to Clay Pigeon's comment about people "leaving the church" but still believing in Scientology. My response was, essentially, that they didn't leave the religion -- most just changed their denomination -- and some chose to practice the religion outside of a formal structure.

My point was to clarify what "leaving Scientology" meant. Those who have actually left Scientology do not, as a rule, think OT III had any value at all.

I, and many others here, have actually left Scientology and think Scientology is crap and that anything worthwhile is, and always was, available elsewhere.
 

strativarius

Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband
It's my belief that Hubbard 'borrowed' all the workable parts of Dianetics & Scientology tech from real innovators.

Further, it's my belief that Hubbard developed all of the unworkable parts of Scn tech, such as the OT levels, ethics conditions formulas, 90% of the organization policy, Sec Checking, the Sea Org, RPF, crush regging, disconnection, most of the PTS SP tech, fair game, FPRD, the Ls, etc.

If it's LRH, it's not Scientology.
OK, I'm not asking for all of them, but please could you give me two or three 'workable' parts of dianetics and scientology - bearing in mind of course that what is and what isn't 'workable' is a subjective evaluation anyway.
 

Voodoo

Free Your Mind And Your Ass Will Follow
OK, I'm not asking for all of them, but please could you give me two or three 'workable' parts of dianetics and scientology - bearing in mind of course that what is and what isn't 'workable' is a subjective evaluation anyway.
Sorry, won't do it. Why waste the keystrokes? Your mind is already made up about the subject.
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
OK, I'm not asking for all of them, but please could you give me two or three 'workable' parts of dianetics and scientology - bearing in mind of course that what is and what isn't 'workable' is a subjective evaluation anyway.
I am not afraid to answer. :D

1. 1st half of the Comm Course.
2. don't be afraid of using a dictionary.
 
Last edited:

strativarius

Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband
Sorry, won't do it. Why waste the keystrokes? Your mind is already made up about the subject.
Yup, my mind is made up because after probably hundreds of hours of auditing, including solo auditing on the clearing course and OT levels, none of the results promised by Hubbard materialised. And since I'm not an SP and I wasn't seriously ill or any of the other 'excuses' Hubbard devised for obfuscating the fact that scientology is a crock of worthless shit, and since my experience tallies with thousands of others, I can only conclude that precious little (if any) of it is 'workable'.
 

Voodoo

Free Your Mind And Your Ass Will Follow
Yup, my mind is made up because after probably hundreds of hours of auditing, including solo auditing on the clearing course and OT levels, none of the results promised by Hubbard materialised. And since I'm not an SP and I wasn't seriously ill or any of the other 'excuses' Hubbard devised for obfuscating the fact that scientology is a crock of worthless shit, and since my experience tallies with thousands of others, I can only conclude that precious little (if any) of it is 'workable'.
No problems, mate. I wouldn't think of challenging your reality. What's real for you is what you yourself have observed.

Same holds true for me, bud.
 

strativarius

Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband
No problems, mate. I wouldn't think of challenging your reality. What's real for you is what you yourself have observed.

Same holds true for me, bud.
I'm not challenging your right to have an opinion and a point of view on scientology, but this is the 'ex scientologist message board'. Most of us are 'ex' because we've grokked that it is a scam and a con, and all I'm saying is that folks such as you and William are simply pissing in the wind posting here. My thought would be 'why bother'? Wouldn't you be happier on a pro-scientology website?
 
Top