What's the story about how a mighty OT comes to be a neurotic wimp that has to or wants to or ought to, go through the process of rehabilitation? What power, other than our own has bound us to this mortal coil?

What's the story about how a mighty OT comes to be a neurotic wimp that has to or wants to or ought to, go through the process of rehabilitation? What power, other than our own has bound us to this mortal coil? — unenlightened

The thetan's power is that which binds. How it is explained, although this concept is more esoteric meaning less Scientologists know about it, is before thetans were bound to physical form they simply were (their form does not exist as something measurable, it is static). Then they started making shapes, a cube or a pyramid. They would show these objects to their fellow thetans and the thetans would validate the shapes. Because the shapes were praised thetans began "becoming the shapes that they made" so that they would be validated, not the shapes. This started the downward spiral from a pure existence of being to being something and needing praise. That is how it began, but not even remotely all that is said to be removed from our abilities.

Thetans are stupid then, by the sound of it. In which case there's no particular reason to go back to that state. This seems like the equivalent to the problem of evil - the problem of stupidity. If OTs got us into this mess, why go back to that?

I have this problem generally with cosmologies that posit a 'higher reality', that they invariably work like that annoying know-it-all that spoils the film by giving away the plot, or the one that insists that it really doesn't matter where the ball ends up when you're playing a game. Even if the game is to escape from the game, still such religions are like cheat-modes.

Let me make my mistakes on my own, I don't need your help. — Jerry Garcia

A thetan isn't all knowing but is all powerful, at least at its full potential. The shape occupying syndrome occurred to beings who had little conception of the consequence.

All apologetics aside I had a similar realization before I decided to reject Scientology. I decided I didn't need salvation and worked from that to rejection.

Have you visited Operation Clambake?

Hi there, whilst l have sympathies for the Scientologists (people show their ignorance when they condemn it but on questioning haven't a clue why they think it's bad), l take issue with the claims of your OP (as l'm guessing you do too, as an ex-Scientologist) because:

- This seems to be a reaction to Abrahamic faiths, rather than a standalone religion
- Thetans have a huge age, lots of zeroes added, feels like somebody is trying to impress us. Of course, l say this in the absence of any evidence, but is there actually any evidence for "a 76,000,000,000,000 year old soul called a thetan"? If not, then it seems like someone's trying to impress us with how ancient they are.
- Seems like that someone is playing devil's advocate, literally. By trying to make us all like Satan disdaining mankind because he was there before, he was way more ancient. So now, we are all so very ancient.
- Also the idea that we will one day become gods, that seems like another concept in Abrahamic faiths, whereby Satan envies God and towering pride wells up because he would like to replace God. So, now, we can all be like Satan, by becoming gods too.
- Then there's the connection with Crowley & the defrauding of poor Jack Parsons, who himself was trying to literally create a demon and ended up burning to death. I think there's a lot of "devil's advocate" in this, whether you believe in the devil or not, it's clearly a subversion of the Abrahamic spectrum.

Have you visited Operation Clambake? — fdrake

Not until now, thanks for sharing the website.

This seems to be a reaction to Abrahamic faiths, rather than a standalone religion — BaldMenFighting

It is rumored that he claimed to be the Antichrist when they (it was after his death) released OT 8.

Scientology is a hodgepodge of various religions and philosophers. He believes he is the reincarnation of budda for example. Also Dianetics (the first Scientology book) is an alteration of Freud's therapeutic techniques; it replaces sex with pain as a basis of all aberration.

Thetans have a huge age, lots of zeroes added, feels like somebody is trying to impress us. Of course, l say this in the absence of any evidence, but is there actually any evidence for "a 76,000,000,000,000 year old soul called a thetan"? If not, then it seems like someone's trying to impress us with how ancient they are. — BaldMenFighting

The number comes form early auditing (what Scientologists call counseling). In it you are required to state the time of the painful incident, I guess when they "discovered" past lives everyone wanted to have an older and older incident, to one-up eachother. An interesting book is "Have you lived before this life" it's an out of print Scientology book that contains 70 stories of past lives that came up in Scientology auditing. The oldest that I've heard of is actually 78,000,000,000,000 years ago.

All the other statements are a bit "out there" so I won't bother.

Under which legislature is a 1 million year contract unvoidable by default? Where I'm from, terms which are clearly impossible to fulfill, or which creates a clear form of inquity between the parties render the contract void from the start. And I'm sure its the same for most Common Law legislatures.

Doesn't it fills you with shame, having to realize you believed in such undiluted bullcrap for any amount of time? I mean, the core tenets of scientology are about as realistic as the interdimensional snake people conspiracy... but you hardly ever find someone who accepted interdimensional snake people to be real that doesn't have clear cognitive issues, such as schizophrenia. Obviously, there is a whole marketing aspect to cult indoctrination that means you arent fully responsible for accepting those beliefs, and this doubly so for a kid that was raised into the cult, but still, werent there times, often even, when you thought, "wow, this shit reads like bad sci-fi"?

Under which legislature is a 1 million year contract unvoidable by default? — Akanthinos

Publicly the contract is symbolic but within the group we used to talk about the logistics of returning in the next life. If you die before you become OT you go to what is called an implant station, which causes you to forget your past lives. The contract isn't enforceable in any legal respect, only within the Scientology culture are there consequences.

Doesn't it fills you with shame, having to realize you believed in such undiluted bullcrap for any amount of time? — Akanthinos

These types of questions are what I mean when I say most miss out on 99.9% of what Scientology is. As a religion Scientology is more consistent than any evolved religion because it was created by one person.

werent there times, often even, when you thought, "wow, this shit reads like bad sci-fi"? — Akanthinos

Most of the time I thought the stories were cool and I couldn't wait to remember my past lives and reach total freedom. When individuals told me their own past life stories however, I noticed that some of them were very childish. One of the things that helped me was my family being poor, I did very little auditing (it takes the big bucks, hundreds of dollars for a set of 12 1/2 hours of auditing) and therefore wasn't fully brainwashed.

Scientologists aren't stupid either, most of my friends and colleagues IQs were higher than the average of 100, including my parents.

I fail to see how anyone believing in the claims of Scientology isn't stupid. These claims have no credible evidence backing them up and are as outlandish as hell, and there is no credible way for the founder of Scientology to have any knowledge of such claims either. Regardless of IQ test scores, a person believing in Scientology is not using even basic common sense.

-- These types of questions are what I mean when I say most miss out on 99.9% of what Scientology is. As a religion Scientology is more consistent than any evolved religion because it was created by one person.

Religion isnt about consistency, tho. It is never going to be consistent, really, because by nature an overarching sets of ordering beliefs about the world is going to be as diverse and rich as the culture which created it. Its about meaning creation. When a Christian says the soul comes from God, he assert a link between his essence and that of the Divine Creator. When you say a soul is the soul of an alien who died 76 million years ago... that means nothing. Say what you will about Christianity, Judaism or Islam, but they generally do effectively sets meaningful behavioural guidelines to vast populations, and still have those cultures either maintain themselves or thrives.

If you look around on this forum, you'll find plenty of evidence that people can say stuff pretty consistently, and yet only ever say stuff that doesnt make any sense.

Remember, 'an open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded'.

I think most of the posters in this thread, @Akanthinos, @LD Saunders, are mistaking the reasons people who grow up in cults believe, or more generally are troubled by, whatever beliefs the cult have as engaging neutrally with an intellectual position. Coming into rational conflict with the beliefs of your cult certainly goes some way to distancing yourself from it, but by then a lot of the damage is done.

People here also seem quite ignorant of the ways cults maintain the belief of their participants. One example specifically from scientology is that it fosters a conspiracy against scientology and has a list of 'suppressive persons' (of which my brother and I are proud to be on) which are denounced as inhuman. You can see someone suffering under such indoctrination here. Scientologists of a certain level are invited to ask 'What are your crimes?' to protestors.

People get baptised (figuratively) into scientology through public demonstrations of the technique in dianetics called 'auditing'. Auditing is a procedure where a person is invited to relive traumas and horrific memories, to blame themselves for any lingering sense of shame, in a manner similar to particularly vindictive psychic medium cold readers. The procedure is framed as scientific, and a person holds a modified wheatstone bridge called an E-meter, it measures changes in electrical conductivity of the skin; which usually changes, in those vulnerable or troubled enough to be prey, in response to heightened sweating when being invited to dwell in your darkest memories and fears. Not coincidentally, spikes in electrical conductivity are interpreted as bad. This is when they are offered more auditing. Accept and you're well on your way to serving the interests of the vampires that run this thing.

Most of the people in this pyramid scheme built on trauma do not deserve contempt, they do not deserve to be called idiots. They deserve compassion from falling prey to a predatory pyramid scheme trying to hit them where they are most vulnerable. Even more so if they're born into a traumatising clusterfuck.

Moral of the story: don't treat cults as philosophical positions, treat them as social institutions.

I fail to see how anyone believing in the claims of Scientology isn't stupid. — LD Saunders

There are three main religions that occupy the minds of billions of people: Christianity, Hinduism and Islam. At least two of them are wrong, which means billions of people are accepting false claims. However statically there are some very smart people who accept the claims of the ones that are wrong. One can't blanket-insult Scientology as idiots and be in any way productive or accurate.

These claims have no credible evidence backing them up and are as outlandish as hell, and there is no credible way for the founder of Scientology to have any knowledge of such claims either. — LD Saunders

You don't know the claims, at least you know very few, a lot of Scientology is plagiarized from widely acceptable claims and practices. It works to prevent people from learning methods of critical thinking by labeling them as "False Data" and there is a brain washing technique called "False Data Stripping' Which is used to get people to eat crow and revert to Scientology's thought processes. Not to mention one of the first things you learn in Scientology is "what is true is what is true for you." The concept is constantly hammered in and because you live in a closed community the only ideas you consume are Scientological in nature.

Religion isnt about consistency, tho. It is never going to be consistent, really, because by nature an overarching sets of ordering beliefs about the world is going to be as diverse and rich as the culture which created it. — Akanthinos

But if the religion was consistent wouldn't it be less likely for members to doubt because of contradictory claims?

When you say a soul is the soul of an alien who died 76 million years ago... that means nothing. Say what you will about Christianity, Judaism or Islam, but they generally do effectively sets meaningful behavioural guidelines to vast populations, and still have those cultures either maintain themselves or thrives. — Akanthinos

That concept is from a comedic South Park episode. Thetans can't die, they are eternal, ethereal god-like beings. Scientology claims that every person is a Thetan occupying a body. Scientology does not claim to know where Thetans derived, only that the current state started down-spiraling about 76 trillion years ago.

There is no lack of religious euphoria and meaning in Scientology. Some processes can drastically alter the personality (usually for the worst) but the subject feels euphoric and spiritual. Also when they finish they get showered with praise and have the option to get lambasted during a Graduation Ceremony for every step they complete. Within the church you are required to spread positive feedback otherwise you have to be "corrected" so a lot of Scientologist lie to themselves about the degree of help whatever process or course they just completed was. The placebo effect of self deception, the community support and the processes themselves create enormous meaning and work to maintain the religions and cultural structure.

If you look around on this forum, you'll find plenty of evidence that people can say stuff pretty consistently, and yet only ever say stuff that doesn't make any sense. — Akanthinos

Scientology does not make sense, unless your in, and then it is intensely correct.

has a list of 'suppressive persons' (of which my brother and I are proud to be on) — fdrake

Congrats on making the list.

People who believe in a literal interpretation of Christianity, etc., are stupid. Even if there are a large number of such people, that does not make them any less stupid. There was no Noah's flood, and the story, taken literally, requires a person to ignore basic common sense even. As if two penguins would have gotten off a mountain top in the Middle East and successfully waddled up to a polar region?

-But if the religion was consistent wouldn't it be less likely for members to doubt because of contradictory claims?

Religious belief doesnt work like other sets of beliefs, where each proposition will be weighted against the whole to rate the overall set consistency, and then compare different sets before adopting them.

Story time : i grew up in a Catholic school, and my class was interviewed for a french religious TV show about 20 years ago. The theme of the show was how young people were living their faith. When asked on camera if I was religious, I said no, because there was no basis for prefering Catholicism over Islam or Hinduism. Its a dumb gamble you have to make your choice on way too early, and have to wait until after you died to figure out if you werent wrong or taken for a fool. My fellow student all laughed at how stupid they tought my answer was, and my nun teacher really wasnt happy with me.

Point of the story is, 'lacking faith' is just refusing, or not understanding that specificity of sets of religious beleifs to not worry about internal or external consistency. And you can lack faith in more than just religious beleifs, since not only religion fuels on faith. Bright kids dont believe in Santa for very long, if they do at all. And Santa makes a whole lot more fucking sense than Scientology. But what differentiate the bright kids from the pleb kids is not that they realize Santa's story doesnt make any fucking sense, but that his story is not magically exempt from having to make some sense.

-But if the religion was consistent wouldn't it be less likely for members to doubt because of contradictory claims?

Religious belief doesnt work like other sets of beliefs, where each proposition will be weighted against the whole to rate the overall set consistency, and then compare different sets before adopting them. — Akanthinos

I'm aware but I still think as beings who strive for rationality, consistence would benefit, not hinder, a belief.

No problems, that I see, with the rest.

People who believe in a literal interpretation of Christianity, etc., are stupid. Even if there are a large number of such people, that does not make them any less stupid. — LD Saunders

Stupidity by definition is different from ignorance. Stupidity is lacking ability to process information not lacking information (ignorance). Also we have to take into account cognitive dissonance, which is a normal function of the human brain.

If you have any specific questions ask away. — Grey Vs Gray

I read The Bare Faced Messiah (which 'the church' bent over backwards to prevent from being published) in the late 1980's, it depicts Hubbard as a charlatan, pathological liar, and possibly a paedophile. Around the same time Time Magazine published a cover story, The Cult of Greed, which triggered decades of legal harassment from 'the Church', costing Time hundreds of millions of dollars.

From everything I can see, Scientology is an evil cult with no redeeming features. But it's true that in a liberal democracy, such organisations may be allowed to exist as a matter of freedom of conscience, even those who sole purpose is to enrich themselves at the expense of innocent victims. But as they sell their material then they certainly should be taxed at the maximum corporate rate, as they are in Germany.

And 'there would be no fool's gold, if there were no gold' (attributed to Rumi).

it depicts Hubbard as a charlatan, pathological liar, and possibly a paedophile. — Wayfarer

First two are true the last is likely. When he created the Sea Organization there was a subsection called the Commodore Messenger Organization. Is was comprised mostly of teenage girls at the time.

sole purpose is to enrich themselves at the expense of innocent victims. — Wayfarer

The sad part about Scientology is most of the money goes right back into the machine. Not even David Miscavich is living in extreme luxury, although he lives relatively well. That's also why it's been so successful thus far. Hopefully spreading the message will help prevent other victims.

But as they sell their material then they certainly should be taxed at the maximum corporate rate, as they are in Germany. — Wayfarer

While I agree, so should other religions. Not taxing religions in my opinion is counter to "keeping religion out of government." If anything, with the amount of property and money churches throw around, all tax-free Churches are right there in the pockets of government.

Not taxing religions in my opinion is counter to "keeping religion out of government." — Grey Vs Gray

Well, if you want to forego the obvious advantages of having dedicated care-givers who act from a sense of duty to God and mankind, in favour of them being salaried professionals like everyone else, then I'd guess you would be right.

Well, if you want to forego the obvious advantages of having dedicated care-givers who act from a sense of duty to God and mankind, in favour of them being salaried professionals like everyone else, then I'd guess you would be right. — Wayfarer

I'll have to think about it a bit more then.

I don't think the tax status of an organization really changes the fact that there are already churches who are run by salaried professionals, just as there are for-profit hospitals which employ nurses that are dedicated care-givers out of a sense of duty to God and mankind.

Religious organisations who print religious books and hand them out for nothing; charitable orders who create soup kitchens and provide services to the poor - should they be taxed? It's a different matter when you literally charge money for your so-called 'scriptures'. Anything that is sold for a price ought to be subject to tax, although in the case of charitable organisations, allowance ought to be made for the services they provide for free i.e. they engage in profitable businesses but then dedicate the profit to charity.

Fundamentally Scientologists believe that everyone is a 76,000,000,000,000 year old soul called a thetan — Grey Vs Gray

:rofl: