Hi, this is my first time on a forum. With interest I have read your experience. Having tried the Spiritualist Church and now Scientology, do you think you have all the questions answered about life? If not, what kind of questions are lurking in your mind?
Are you totally at peace with yourself?
What books have you been reading? ( I trust you like reading)
I look forward to your next installment. Beat
What Do You Believe?
What Do You Believe?
I have read your posts and must advise you to FLEE Scientology.
Go here and take a long look. www.theseason.org
Agape
d:-5
Go here and take a long look. www.theseason.org
Agape
d:-5
What Do You Believe?
Christianity has been turned into a religion by people. The Bible stands as the representation of our reality, sent to us through men God used for that purpose. No other way is valid at all. Not one. Time will bear this out.
What Do You Believe?
All I can say about Scientology is that Hubbard has made one hell of a pile of money.
I visited "theseason" and laughed. What more can I say. If one wants to accept what they say then go for it. I see it as nothing more than the bastardization of a great faith.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I visited "theseason" and laughed. What more can I say. If one wants to accept what they say then go for it. I see it as nothing more than the bastardization of a great faith.
Shalom
Ted:-6
What Do You Believe?
well said pinky
back to the question - what do i believe - when your dead, thats it, time up, i dont believe in ghosts
live well :-6
back to the question - what do i believe - when your dead, thats it, time up, i dont believe in ghosts
live well :-6
What Do You Believe?
Ted wrote: All I can say about Scientology is that Hubbard has made one hell of a pile of money.
I visited "theseason" and laughed. What more can I say. If one wants to accept what they say then go for it. I see it as nothing more than the bastardization of a great faith.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Ted is getting old and his vision isn't that good anymore.
d:-5
I visited "theseason" and laughed. What more can I say. If one wants to accept what they say then go for it. I see it as nothing more than the bastardization of a great faith.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Ted is getting old and his vision isn't that good anymore.
d:-5
What Do You Believe?
Ted wrote: I visited "theseason" and laughed. What more can I say. If one wants to accept what they say then go for it. One of the biggest piles of crap I have ever seen in one place on the web, though I have little doubt that bigger ones are out there if one turns over enough rocks. Here's a sample:There are a number of techniques that cults use to brainwash their victims....Both the catholic and Protestant mainstream churches can truely[sic] be classified as cults...If you go to their verse-by-verse 'Bible study' ('Bible stupidity' would be more accurate), you will see that most of their interpretation is downright bizarre. But this is typical of the outer fringe of Christianity: 'Every word in the Bible is literally true, but it doesn't mean what it says, it means something completely different'.
Note also that there is no statement of precisely who is responsible, or if there is, it's VERY hard to find. I was unable to do so. This reminds me of several recent exchanges betwixt myself and another poster who also refuses to reveal his affiliation, and makes nebulous, some might say meaningless statements, which, when questioned, he refuses to defend or explain, such as ...downag wrote: 1. Christianity has been turned into a religion by people.
2. The Bible stands as the representation of our reality,
3. ...sent to us through men God used for that purpose.
4. No other way is valid at all. Not one. Time will bear this out....but I'm willing to give him one more chance.
To down: 1. How has 'Christianity...been turned into a religion by people' and what exactly was it before it was 'turned into a religion by people'?
2. How does the Bible stand as 'the representation of our reality'? Who is 'our'?
3. If the Bible was 'sent to us by men God used for that purpose', why do those men contradict one another so often'? Why, for example, do Matthew and Luke give two contradictory genealogies for Jesus (through Joseph)? Surely God knew Joseph's true lineage.
4. What on earth are you talking about?
To helefra: The questions you pose at the top of the thread are all interesting and provocative, but not altogether accurate. I can speak only as a Christian. We do not seek a scientific explanation for the spiritual, nor do we question life after de ath. We accept these things by faith, belief in God by feeling His presence in our lives, and belief in another life because Jesus Christ promised it to ALL (not just Christians) who live their lives here on earth in God's service. That may sound simplistic to you, but to me it is the essence of my religious faith. Everything else is mere commentary.
Note also that there is no statement of precisely who is responsible, or if there is, it's VERY hard to find. I was unable to do so. This reminds me of several recent exchanges betwixt myself and another poster who also refuses to reveal his affiliation, and makes nebulous, some might say meaningless statements, which, when questioned, he refuses to defend or explain, such as ...downag wrote: 1. Christianity has been turned into a religion by people.
2. The Bible stands as the representation of our reality,
3. ...sent to us through men God used for that purpose.
4. No other way is valid at all. Not one. Time will bear this out....but I'm willing to give him one more chance.
To down: 1. How has 'Christianity...been turned into a religion by people' and what exactly was it before it was 'turned into a religion by people'?
2. How does the Bible stand as 'the representation of our reality'? Who is 'our'?
3. If the Bible was 'sent to us by men God used for that purpose', why do those men contradict one another so often'? Why, for example, do Matthew and Luke give two contradictory genealogies for Jesus (through Joseph)? Surely God knew Joseph's true lineage.
4. What on earth are you talking about?
To helefra: The questions you pose at the top of the thread are all interesting and provocative, but not altogether accurate. I can speak only as a Christian. We do not seek a scientific explanation for the spiritual, nor do we question life after de ath. We accept these things by faith, belief in God by feeling His presence in our lives, and belief in another life because Jesus Christ promised it to ALL (not just Christians) who live their lives here on earth in God's service. That may sound simplistic to you, but to me it is the essence of my religious faith. Everything else is mere commentary.
What Do You Believe?
The OP seems to be about the first sentence "Most of us question life after death", but if we look closer it was just a segue. The main thread topic was actually in the closing:
helefra wrote: Anyway, I'm not hear to promote Scientology or any other religion, I just want to hear what, if any, spiritual quest or religious journey you may have taken.
In response to the that point, thank you for not being here to promote a religion. There is an amazing story in this thread of another member's (telaquapacky's) journey. One of the best unpublished works I've read on the subject.
As I'm sure you know, L Ron Hubbard constructed Scientology from his discoveries while writing science fiction. He combined a number of things from various mystery schools. I think you would be fascinated to look for his sources. I bet it would give you an even deeper understanding of what you've read. One relieving thing about Scientology is that no one claims Mr. Hubbard was divine (more than human) or dictated to by an omnipotent force holding his pen captive. As such, like Siddhartha, you are free to take his teachings and seek enlightenment down your own path as well. None of the gurus became enlightened by following instructions. They delve into their own journey. And that is supposed to be the meaningful part of life. Even if you don't want to be a guru, it would be fascinating to see where all the ideas came from, would it not?
Aside - bravo, Pinky. Well said!
helefra wrote: Anyway, I'm not hear to promote Scientology or any other religion, I just want to hear what, if any, spiritual quest or religious journey you may have taken.
In response to the that point, thank you for not being here to promote a religion. There is an amazing story in this thread of another member's (telaquapacky's) journey. One of the best unpublished works I've read on the subject.
As I'm sure you know, L Ron Hubbard constructed Scientology from his discoveries while writing science fiction. He combined a number of things from various mystery schools. I think you would be fascinated to look for his sources. I bet it would give you an even deeper understanding of what you've read. One relieving thing about Scientology is that no one claims Mr. Hubbard was divine (more than human) or dictated to by an omnipotent force holding his pen captive. As such, like Siddhartha, you are free to take his teachings and seek enlightenment down your own path as well. None of the gurus became enlightened by following instructions. They delve into their own journey. And that is supposed to be the meaningful part of life. Even if you don't want to be a guru, it would be fascinating to see where all the ideas came from, would it not?
Aside - bravo, Pinky. Well said!
What Do You Believe?
Bronwen:-6
Good to "see" you. I can support your post completely. I too have very strong feelings about Scientology but was avoiding listing them other than the great accumulation of wealth that Hubbard enjoyed from his "home" in international waters.
I have read many comments from folks who left the church of Scientology and none were very flattering.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Good to "see" you. I can support your post completely. I too have very strong feelings about Scientology but was avoiding listing them other than the great accumulation of wealth that Hubbard enjoyed from his "home" in international waters.
I have read many comments from folks who left the church of Scientology and none were very flattering.
Shalom
Ted:-6
What Do You Believe?
helefra:-6
"Most churches have funding via charities." This a complete fabrication and error. I am acquainted with many churches and their funding is usually the congregation. Beyond that they contribute to charities they do not take from them. I know this for a fact in that I have been a church treasurer.
Here in Canada the federal government requires that churches divest 80% of their income, beyond operating expenses, to charities. If this is not done they lose their charitable organization status and can no longer issue income tax slips.
In fact I know of no churches that take charity for their funding.
Shalom
Ted:-6
"Most churches have funding via charities." This a complete fabrication and error. I am acquainted with many churches and their funding is usually the congregation. Beyond that they contribute to charities they do not take from them. I know this for a fact in that I have been a church treasurer.
Here in Canada the federal government requires that churches divest 80% of their income, beyond operating expenses, to charities. If this is not done they lose their charitable organization status and can no longer issue income tax slips.
In fact I know of no churches that take charity for their funding.
Shalom
Ted:-6
What Do You Believe?
Pinky wrote: That's totally uncalled for and below the belt. Do you think preying on someone's disability is a very christian thing to do? Couldn't you think of anything to come back with other than making fun of someone else's suffering? That makes you a hypocrite too!
You'll go straight to hell if you're not careful you know.Pinkperson, I have been pointing that out to downag through a number of threads, to no avail. He is an absolute archetype for those of the lunatic fringe of the Christian religion, and everything he posts here supports that.
I'm not saying he shouldn't have the right to post - I have no authority to make that determination, and as you may have noticed, these forums are rather lightly moderated and I suppose most posters prefer it that way. Still, I believe that downag violates the spirit and the purpose of the FG by posting insult, slander and false witness and then refusing to support or discuss his various ass-ertions.
But this is typical of the outer reaches of Christianity. Having absolutely NOTHING of their own to offer, nothing but ignorance, error, and folly, they attempt to go about undermining mainstream religious faith which has stood the test of time, in the case of 'mainline' Protestantism since the sixteenth century, and in the case of Catholicism since the earliest days of the Church. While chanting 'Jesus, Jesus, Jesus' and 'Bible, Bible, Bible', they convey a completely false (and easily proven so) depiction of Jesus' life and ministry, and their misuse of the Bible is, as I said in my previous post, downright bizarre. More to the point, tho', one simply cannot bear false witness as a matter of course and also claim to be a Christian. The two are completely irreconcilable.
Whatever else might be said about it, Scientology, as far as I know, does not profess to be legitimate Christianity as the slanderers of downag's ilk attempt (unsuccessfully) to do.
You'll go straight to hell if you're not careful you know.Pinkperson, I have been pointing that out to downag through a number of threads, to no avail. He is an absolute archetype for those of the lunatic fringe of the Christian religion, and everything he posts here supports that.
I'm not saying he shouldn't have the right to post - I have no authority to make that determination, and as you may have noticed, these forums are rather lightly moderated and I suppose most posters prefer it that way. Still, I believe that downag violates the spirit and the purpose of the FG by posting insult, slander and false witness and then refusing to support or discuss his various ass-ertions.
But this is typical of the outer reaches of Christianity. Having absolutely NOTHING of their own to offer, nothing but ignorance, error, and folly, they attempt to go about undermining mainstream religious faith which has stood the test of time, in the case of 'mainline' Protestantism since the sixteenth century, and in the case of Catholicism since the earliest days of the Church. While chanting 'Jesus, Jesus, Jesus' and 'Bible, Bible, Bible', they convey a completely false (and easily proven so) depiction of Jesus' life and ministry, and their misuse of the Bible is, as I said in my previous post, downright bizarre. More to the point, tho', one simply cannot bear false witness as a matter of course and also claim to be a Christian. The two are completely irreconcilable.
Whatever else might be said about it, Scientology, as far as I know, does not profess to be legitimate Christianity as the slanderers of downag's ilk attempt (unsuccessfully) to do.
What Do You Believe?
1. Many churches stress works and sacraments. Liturgy. Traditions instead of the word of God (ie. infant baptism as being invalid).
2. What is written is how it was and what is written will come to pass.
3. Joseph was also the name of Mary's father. One lineage is for Joseph, Mary's espoused husband and the other is for Joseph himself. By these two geneologies, one Judaic and the other Levite, Jesus legally, by Jewish law could be both High Priest and King.
4. Buddhism is invalid. Hinduism is invalid, etc, etc. Jesus said, no man can come to the father (God) but by me.
2. What is written is how it was and what is written will come to pass.
3. Joseph was also the name of Mary's father. One lineage is for Joseph, Mary's espoused husband and the other is for Joseph himself. By these two geneologies, one Judaic and the other Levite, Jesus legally, by Jewish law could be both High Priest and King.
4. Buddhism is invalid. Hinduism is invalid, etc, etc. Jesus said, no man can come to the father (God) but by me.
What Do You Believe?
downag wrote: 1. Many churches stress works and sacraments. Liturgy. Traditions instead of the word of God (ie. infant baptism as being invalid).
2. What is written is how it was and what is written will come to pass.
3. Joseph was also the name of Mary's father. One lineage is for Joseph, Mary's espoused husband and the other is for Joseph himself. By these two geneologies, one Judaic and the other Levite, Jesus legally, by Jewish law could be both High Priest and King.
4. Buddhism is invalid. Hinduism is invalid, etc, etc. Jesus said, no man can come to the father (God) but by me.You are, as usual, simply proving my point that those, like yourself, so far removed from the core of Christianity have no idea of what it is really about, which is, following Christ's teachings and the example of His life.
1. Many Churches stress those things because Jesus stressed those things. He said the way to eternal life is through love of God, love of neighbor, helping the poor, keeping the commandments, DOING what God wants and expects us to DO. That sounds like 'works' to me. Regarding sacramants, you need to read John's gospel. Christ Himself said that receiving His flesh and blood in the Eucharist is as important as Baptism.
Regarding 'Traditions', like most of your posts, your meaning is unclear. Are you saying that infant baptism IS or IS NOT a tradition of Christianity? Infant Baptism has been practiced since the earliest days of the Church. The restricting of Baptism to adults is relatively recent and rare, practiced mainly by what I have called the outer fringes. I can testify personally that, through my Baptism and later Confirmation I felt God's sanctifying grace, in quantities far greater than I could ever deserve, long before I was an adult.
2. I still have no idea what you're talking about. How about giving one or two examples.
3. This is what I mean by bizarre interpretation of Scripture. Neither Matthew nor Luke says anything of the kind. They both give genealogies of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and clearly labeled as such.
4. The two religions you mention, as well as others, have lots in common with Christianity. If they are invalid, then so is much of Christianity. If Jesus Christ said that, isn't it possible that some founder or early leader of other religions said something similar? What's the difference? If I had no principles I could make such a statement myself. What would that prove? What is your EVIDENCE that those other religions are 'invalid'?
The one thing we have in common is that we both profess to be Christians. I understand the religion; it is the guiding force in my life. You know virtually nothing of it, and you prove that, as I keep pointing out, not only by spewing slander and false witness, a direct violation of a commandment, but also by being so ashamed of your own particular sect or cult that you refuse to name it. That's not a very convincing position!
2. What is written is how it was and what is written will come to pass.
3. Joseph was also the name of Mary's father. One lineage is for Joseph, Mary's espoused husband and the other is for Joseph himself. By these two geneologies, one Judaic and the other Levite, Jesus legally, by Jewish law could be both High Priest and King.
4. Buddhism is invalid. Hinduism is invalid, etc, etc. Jesus said, no man can come to the father (God) but by me.You are, as usual, simply proving my point that those, like yourself, so far removed from the core of Christianity have no idea of what it is really about, which is, following Christ's teachings and the example of His life.
1. Many Churches stress those things because Jesus stressed those things. He said the way to eternal life is through love of God, love of neighbor, helping the poor, keeping the commandments, DOING what God wants and expects us to DO. That sounds like 'works' to me. Regarding sacramants, you need to read John's gospel. Christ Himself said that receiving His flesh and blood in the Eucharist is as important as Baptism.
Regarding 'Traditions', like most of your posts, your meaning is unclear. Are you saying that infant baptism IS or IS NOT a tradition of Christianity? Infant Baptism has been practiced since the earliest days of the Church. The restricting of Baptism to adults is relatively recent and rare, practiced mainly by what I have called the outer fringes. I can testify personally that, through my Baptism and later Confirmation I felt God's sanctifying grace, in quantities far greater than I could ever deserve, long before I was an adult.
2. I still have no idea what you're talking about. How about giving one or two examples.
3. This is what I mean by bizarre interpretation of Scripture. Neither Matthew nor Luke says anything of the kind. They both give genealogies of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and clearly labeled as such.
4. The two religions you mention, as well as others, have lots in common with Christianity. If they are invalid, then so is much of Christianity. If Jesus Christ said that, isn't it possible that some founder or early leader of other religions said something similar? What's the difference? If I had no principles I could make such a statement myself. What would that prove? What is your EVIDENCE that those other religions are 'invalid'?
The one thing we have in common is that we both profess to be Christians. I understand the religion; it is the guiding force in my life. You know virtually nothing of it, and you prove that, as I keep pointing out, not only by spewing slander and false witness, a direct violation of a commandment, but also by being so ashamed of your own particular sect or cult that you refuse to name it. That's not a very convincing position!
What Do You Believe?
In response to the personal journey question, I am not disposed to write an essay. I've had problems posting personal stories in the past. They accumulate and cause people to think they know you better than is possible in a format such as this.
I did come across dianetics in my teenage years but was impressed only by the (I shall call it) fact that he did not fully disclose his knowledge, either because he was holding key information back or because he did not fully know it himself. I also left the Rosicrucian Order for the same reason. Mr Hubbard shows a way to get results but it is incomplete information. Since my teenage years I have gathered all the core pieces of many religions and have found what feels like truth in all of them. If I had to name my religion I would say I'm a Hermeticist
If one chooses to belong to an organized religion then I believe it should be one that empowers the individual and not the organization itself. Unfortunately, when people organize themselves they create a leviathan which becomes their master. My choices are influenced by being more of a hermit. I work and learn best on my own. For more social people, belonging to a group is of greater benefit. Either way, the most important thing, IMO, is to question and actively seek. Becoming a passive receptacle for other people's ambition does not serve anyone's greater good. I hope your journey takes you far.
I did come across dianetics in my teenage years but was impressed only by the (I shall call it) fact that he did not fully disclose his knowledge, either because he was holding key information back or because he did not fully know it himself. I also left the Rosicrucian Order for the same reason. Mr Hubbard shows a way to get results but it is incomplete information. Since my teenage years I have gathered all the core pieces of many religions and have found what feels like truth in all of them. If I had to name my religion I would say I'm a Hermeticist
If one chooses to belong to an organized religion then I believe it should be one that empowers the individual and not the organization itself. Unfortunately, when people organize themselves they create a leviathan which becomes their master. My choices are influenced by being more of a hermit. I work and learn best on my own. For more social people, belonging to a group is of greater benefit. Either way, the most important thing, IMO, is to question and actively seek. Becoming a passive receptacle for other people's ambition does not serve anyone's greater good. I hope your journey takes you far.
What Do You Believe?
helefra:-6
Your quote from "Respect the Religious Beliefs . . ." clearly shows that the author has thrown the baby out with the bath water.
In addition your comments on the attendance at church every Sunday and the donation of money have rather negative connotations where in fact they are not negative. No one forces a person the go to church at any time. It is a free will choice. Secondly the donation of money is a free will choice.
As I noted above, perhaps you should do a little research before spouting off; ie churches receiving money from charity. I think that Bronwen is absolutely correct in what she has posted.
You talk about disparaging other faiths as a poor practice but you do the dame thing when you post, with a complete lack of knowledge, such comments that are complete falsehoods.
If you wish to be a Scientologist, go for it but refrain from such false comments. As I said before I see that Hubbard has found a great way to make a great deal of money. Does he contribute to charity? Does he engage in humanitarian activities either at home or overseas? Does he comfor the sick and dying? Does he bury people and comfor the grieving? In fact, how many people have seen this gentleman? Does he make the effort to help the poor, the oppressed and the down trodden? Just some questions to which I do not have the answer.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Your quote from "Respect the Religious Beliefs . . ." clearly shows that the author has thrown the baby out with the bath water.
In addition your comments on the attendance at church every Sunday and the donation of money have rather negative connotations where in fact they are not negative. No one forces a person the go to church at any time. It is a free will choice. Secondly the donation of money is a free will choice.
As I noted above, perhaps you should do a little research before spouting off; ie churches receiving money from charity. I think that Bronwen is absolutely correct in what she has posted.
You talk about disparaging other faiths as a poor practice but you do the dame thing when you post, with a complete lack of knowledge, such comments that are complete falsehoods.
If you wish to be a Scientologist, go for it but refrain from such false comments. As I said before I see that Hubbard has found a great way to make a great deal of money. Does he contribute to charity? Does he engage in humanitarian activities either at home or overseas? Does he comfor the sick and dying? Does he bury people and comfor the grieving? In fact, how many people have seen this gentleman? Does he make the effort to help the poor, the oppressed and the down trodden? Just some questions to which I do not have the answer.
Shalom
Ted:-6
What Do You Believe?
Ted wrote: As I said before I see that Hubbard has found a great way to make a great deal of money. Does he contribute to charity? Does he engage in humanitarian activities either at home or overseas? Does he comfor the sick and dying? Does he bury people and comfor the grieving? In fact, how many people have seen this gentleman? Does he make the effort to help the poor, the oppressed and the down trodden? Just some questions to which I do not have the answer.
Lafayette Ronald Hubbard died 24 January 1986. So he's not doing much of anything anymore.
edit to add: I might have seen him since then but that's a whole other story.
Lafayette Ronald Hubbard died 24 January 1986. So he's not doing much of anything anymore.
edit to add: I might have seen him since then but that's a whole other story.
What Do You Believe?
Yesterday I was a little short on time, so I'd like to take this opportunity to return briefly to the topic of the two contradictory genealogies of Jesus (through Joseph) in the gospels.
downag posted:downag wrote: Joseph was also the name of Mary's father. One lineage is for Joseph, Mary's espoused husband and the other is for Joseph himself. By these two geneologies, one Judaic and the other Levite, Jesus legally, by Jewish law could be both High Priest and King.
Matthew writes:...and Jacob begat Joseph the HUSBAND of Mary, of whom was born Jesus.
Luke writes:...and Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the SON of JOSEPH, who was the son of Heli...
Anyone see anything about Joseph being the GRANDFATHER of Jesus or the FATHER of Mary here? An ancient book, the Evangelion (or Evangelium) of James, gives the names of Mary's parents as Joachim and Anna, but that book, while written quite early in the history of Christianity, is not scripture, and may be fictitious, just as most contemporary Bible scholars, Catholic and Protestant, consider BOTH Matthew's and Luke's genealogies to be fictitious. Matthew's count of three groups of fourteen can be easily proven false. One need only be able to count from 1 to 45 - or is it 46?
In any case, there is no evidence whatever that Mary's father was named Joseph, and even if he was, he is clearly not referred to, directly of indirectly, in either of the genealogies. Also, I am not sure that a Levite could claim ancestry through King David, but as I am not an expert on Jewish lineage I leave that question open.
In any case, this is a perfect example of the folly of claiming that everything in the Bible is literally true. In order to do so, one must claim that on the one hand, everything in the Bible is completely factual, and on the other hand that HUNDREDS of passages in the Bible really don't mean what they say but mean something completely different. Does that make sense to anyone here other than downag?
Of course, those who have read the Bible and understand its history and its origins know better.
downag posted:downag wrote: Joseph was also the name of Mary's father. One lineage is for Joseph, Mary's espoused husband and the other is for Joseph himself. By these two geneologies, one Judaic and the other Levite, Jesus legally, by Jewish law could be both High Priest and King.
Matthew writes:...and Jacob begat Joseph the HUSBAND of Mary, of whom was born Jesus.
Luke writes:...and Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the SON of JOSEPH, who was the son of Heli...
Anyone see anything about Joseph being the GRANDFATHER of Jesus or the FATHER of Mary here? An ancient book, the Evangelion (or Evangelium) of James, gives the names of Mary's parents as Joachim and Anna, but that book, while written quite early in the history of Christianity, is not scripture, and may be fictitious, just as most contemporary Bible scholars, Catholic and Protestant, consider BOTH Matthew's and Luke's genealogies to be fictitious. Matthew's count of three groups of fourteen can be easily proven false. One need only be able to count from 1 to 45 - or is it 46?
In any case, there is no evidence whatever that Mary's father was named Joseph, and even if he was, he is clearly not referred to, directly of indirectly, in either of the genealogies. Also, I am not sure that a Levite could claim ancestry through King David, but as I am not an expert on Jewish lineage I leave that question open.
In any case, this is a perfect example of the folly of claiming that everything in the Bible is literally true. In order to do so, one must claim that on the one hand, everything in the Bible is completely factual, and on the other hand that HUNDREDS of passages in the Bible really don't mean what they say but mean something completely different. Does that make sense to anyone here other than downag?
Of course, those who have read the Bible and understand its history and its origins know better.
What Do You Believe?
helefra:-6
There may be some positive activities there.
However, are people expected to eat the courses or the books. Does this course or courses vaccinate them against the diseases or does it cure them of their ailments? Does Scientology supply clothing or food or medicine or just the so called spiritual guidance? Does this group look after the physical needs of the ill, the dying or the dead or their families?
Education is great but unless one has a full belly education is a waste of time. Visiting and comforting the sick is great but what does scientology contribute to the physical care of these folks and their needs?
Having trained these folks for some job does Scientology supply the necessare funds to get these people working?
Just some questions to which I do not have the answer.
Shalom
Ted:-6
There may be some positive activities there.
However, are people expected to eat the courses or the books. Does this course or courses vaccinate them against the diseases or does it cure them of their ailments? Does Scientology supply clothing or food or medicine or just the so called spiritual guidance? Does this group look after the physical needs of the ill, the dying or the dead or their families?
Education is great but unless one has a full belly education is a waste of time. Visiting and comforting the sick is great but what does scientology contribute to the physical care of these folks and their needs?
Having trained these folks for some job does Scientology supply the necessare funds to get these people working?
Just some questions to which I do not have the answer.
Shalom
Ted:-6
What Do You Believe?
BTW I did know that Hubbard was no longer with us.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Shalom
Ted:-6
What Do You Believe?
Helefra:-6
Does this particular organization run or support soup kitchens or food banks? Does it try to find housing for those in need?
Shalom
Ted:-6
Does this particular organization run or support soup kitchens or food banks? Does it try to find housing for those in need?
Shalom
Ted:-6
What Do You Believe?
helefra wrote: 1. Finally, I believe if anyone is against the betterment of man (for him/her to become more able) I only consider him or her to be anti-social.
2. You only have to see the millions of pounds that psychiatry is pulling in and the suffering it has plagued on innocent lives -
3. ...my mum is no longer the person I knew when she ended up in psychiatry hands.
4. Again, don't take my word for it but visit the website www.cchr.org.1. hel, there are lots of people, unfortunately, against the betterment of mankind, as all of the recent terrorist attacks are clear evidence.
2. Having started with a reasonable statement, you now go seriously astray, but then of course, if you believed otherwise, you would not be a Scientologist.
You seem to be trying to characterize psychiatry as some sort of cult or vast conspiracy. That is silly beyond words. Psychiatrists are medical doctors (M.D.'s) with special training in the medical aspects of human behavior. Of course the practice of medicine 'pulls in' millions - probably more like billions. So does banking. So do supermarkets. So do software manufacturers. You were expecting that doctors would spend a fortune and many years studying medicine and then work for nothing?
3. Well, here I will tread somewhat lightly because I do not wish to intrude into your private family affairs. Of course I know nothing of your mother's situation and I would not be so intrusive as to inquire about the details. I can only say that I have been - intermittantly - troubled by depression throughout my adult life, and I cope with it mostly through my Christian faith. At times when it is has been most severe, however, I have been helped enormously by psychologists and psychiatrists, as if they were sent by God Himself, and by the way, I did, for several months, take an anti-depressant, Serzone, which helped immensely, and with no discernable side-effects whatever.
I cannot imagine a competent psychiatrist making anyone with an emotional problem worse. I CAN imagine situations in which, for one reason or another, psychiatry was unable to help, and I can also imagine that less-than-competent psychiatrists, unfortunately, exist, but as they are M.D.'s they are, in most places, held to rather high standards by the appropriate professional organizations. I can also understand that psychoactive drugs can produce unwnted and even dangerous side-effects, which should, obviously, be reported promptly to the prescribing physician.
Of course, I wish your mom the best; if she were mine, though, the last place in the world I would send her would be to a Scientologist.The Aims of Scientology: A civilisation without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings have rights, and where man is free to rise to greater heights, are the aims of Scientology.Those are very nice 'aims'. How about starting with the criminals and the war? That would indeed allow mankind to 'rise to greater heights'. But even in such an improved society, people would continue to suffer from various ailments, physical and psychological, that would require medical intervention.
Let's start with the terrorists and the criminals, OK? When they are eliminated we'll talk more about the doctors.
4. I have not visited the website; if I have time to do so, I will report back. I think, however, that I already have a good idea of what I will find there
2. You only have to see the millions of pounds that psychiatry is pulling in and the suffering it has plagued on innocent lives -
3. ...my mum is no longer the person I knew when she ended up in psychiatry hands.
4. Again, don't take my word for it but visit the website www.cchr.org.1. hel, there are lots of people, unfortunately, against the betterment of mankind, as all of the recent terrorist attacks are clear evidence.
2. Having started with a reasonable statement, you now go seriously astray, but then of course, if you believed otherwise, you would not be a Scientologist.
You seem to be trying to characterize psychiatry as some sort of cult or vast conspiracy. That is silly beyond words. Psychiatrists are medical doctors (M.D.'s) with special training in the medical aspects of human behavior. Of course the practice of medicine 'pulls in' millions - probably more like billions. So does banking. So do supermarkets. So do software manufacturers. You were expecting that doctors would spend a fortune and many years studying medicine and then work for nothing?
3. Well, here I will tread somewhat lightly because I do not wish to intrude into your private family affairs. Of course I know nothing of your mother's situation and I would not be so intrusive as to inquire about the details. I can only say that I have been - intermittantly - troubled by depression throughout my adult life, and I cope with it mostly through my Christian faith. At times when it is has been most severe, however, I have been helped enormously by psychologists and psychiatrists, as if they were sent by God Himself, and by the way, I did, for several months, take an anti-depressant, Serzone, which helped immensely, and with no discernable side-effects whatever.
I cannot imagine a competent psychiatrist making anyone with an emotional problem worse. I CAN imagine situations in which, for one reason or another, psychiatry was unable to help, and I can also imagine that less-than-competent psychiatrists, unfortunately, exist, but as they are M.D.'s they are, in most places, held to rather high standards by the appropriate professional organizations. I can also understand that psychoactive drugs can produce unwnted and even dangerous side-effects, which should, obviously, be reported promptly to the prescribing physician.
Of course, I wish your mom the best; if she were mine, though, the last place in the world I would send her would be to a Scientologist.The Aims of Scientology: A civilisation without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings have rights, and where man is free to rise to greater heights, are the aims of Scientology.Those are very nice 'aims'. How about starting with the criminals and the war? That would indeed allow mankind to 'rise to greater heights'. But even in such an improved society, people would continue to suffer from various ailments, physical and psychological, that would require medical intervention.
Let's start with the terrorists and the criminals, OK? When they are eliminated we'll talk more about the doctors.
4. I have not visited the website; if I have time to do so, I will report back. I think, however, that I already have a good idea of what I will find there
What Do You Believe?
helefra:-6
Thanks for sharing the information. I am not convinced about Scientology but do commend their outreach.
Personally we attend church every week where we are usually taking part in the service in some way or another. I am often called upon to deliver the sermon. As Christians we support our church, help to support two foster children, visit and care for the sick and needy, comfort the dying, visit in hospitals etc, volunteer and support the recycling organization and the food bank (the church does as well), donate money to worthy causes, our church also supports African Technecal Survey through financial donations (this is an organization dedicated to helping villages obtain fresh, potable water, even supplying the pumps. We as a church also support the northern isolted communities here in Canada both physically and monetarily. We also support mission projects overseas in many countries, with no strings attached. One does not have to preach to evangelize.
Presently we are engaged in discussions with the First Nations in a spirit of truth and reconciliation and this included by physical and monetary actions. We are trying to make amends for the failures of some of the church people in the past.
I'm sure there are others that I have missed but that will give you a good idea.
My wife and I also help a family on disability allowance through donations etc. of various kinds including monetary. Disability allowance here is below the poverty line.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Thanks for sharing the information. I am not convinced about Scientology but do commend their outreach.
Personally we attend church every week where we are usually taking part in the service in some way or another. I am often called upon to deliver the sermon. As Christians we support our church, help to support two foster children, visit and care for the sick and needy, comfort the dying, visit in hospitals etc, volunteer and support the recycling organization and the food bank (the church does as well), donate money to worthy causes, our church also supports African Technecal Survey through financial donations (this is an organization dedicated to helping villages obtain fresh, potable water, even supplying the pumps. We as a church also support the northern isolted communities here in Canada both physically and monetarily. We also support mission projects overseas in many countries, with no strings attached. One does not have to preach to evangelize.
Presently we are engaged in discussions with the First Nations in a spirit of truth and reconciliation and this included by physical and monetary actions. We are trying to make amends for the failures of some of the church people in the past.
I'm sure there are others that I have missed but that will give you a good idea.
My wife and I also help a family on disability allowance through donations etc. of various kinds including monetary. Disability allowance here is below the poverty line.
Shalom
Ted:-6
What Do You Believe?
Ted :-6
You still haven't told the story of how your faith developed. (which was actually the point of the thread)
Considering your history as a scholar, your story should be quite interesting. Were you raised by a religious family or did you find your religion on your own. Has it always been the same or did you switch churches?
You still haven't told the story of how your faith developed. (which was actually the point of the thread)
Considering your history as a scholar, your story should be quite interesting. Were you raised by a religious family or did you find your religion on your own. Has it always been the same or did you switch churches?
What Do You Believe?
koan:-6
I wish I was a scholar.
I was raised in a very fundamentalist church where I heard every Sunday how this church and that church were going to hell because they did one thing or another. When I became old enough and began to question, read and observe that there was a big discrepency between what I knew about Christianity and what I heard and saw.
At that point I went to one of the mainline churches where I became a student minister for a few years. I decided to return to my original profession as I felt that is where I was called to be. I completed my undergraduate degree and followed that up with two post graduate degrees.
We moved to another and smaller town where we attended the same church. The only problem was that the clergyman was more like what I left so I soon few the coup. We decided to go to the Anglican Church where we met many fine folks and where I was fortunate enough to meet and discuss with scholarly folks. What a thrill.
I took early retirement and we moved to BC and the gulf islands. I have been fortunate enough to meet and have as friends some true scholars.
During the years I taught I continued to study and learn both formally and informally. Presently I attend courses at the Vancouver School of Theology every summer.
My studies, reading, thinking, meditation, discussions etc have brought me to the place where I now am in my religous faith. I often assist in the services and am even asked to give some Sunday sermons in which I am anything but a fundamentalist. I have explained my courses elsewhere but they did involve Biblical history, translation in both Hebrew and Greek, philosophy, logic etc. My personal reading generally has been from outstanding scholars in the fields of the Bible, Church history, interpretation, theology, the history of the Bible itself, history in general (especially the Middle east and the Mediterranian area.
Today I class myself as a Christian pluralist and the clergy know that and are comfortable with it.
I could tell you some horror stories of fundamentalism but will limit myself to one.
A young family had a female child born with spina bifada. The child died at about 5 weeks. At the funeral the "pastor" said to the parents during the service, that the baby died because the parents hadn't confessed all their sins. That little baby was my sister and that preacher was in no way displaying Christian behaviour. When I heard this story it only confirmed what I had come to believe about fundamentalism. I will say no more as it would be downhill all the way. LOL
I hope this helps.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I wish I was a scholar.
I was raised in a very fundamentalist church where I heard every Sunday how this church and that church were going to hell because they did one thing or another. When I became old enough and began to question, read and observe that there was a big discrepency between what I knew about Christianity and what I heard and saw.
At that point I went to one of the mainline churches where I became a student minister for a few years. I decided to return to my original profession as I felt that is where I was called to be. I completed my undergraduate degree and followed that up with two post graduate degrees.
We moved to another and smaller town where we attended the same church. The only problem was that the clergyman was more like what I left so I soon few the coup. We decided to go to the Anglican Church where we met many fine folks and where I was fortunate enough to meet and discuss with scholarly folks. What a thrill.
I took early retirement and we moved to BC and the gulf islands. I have been fortunate enough to meet and have as friends some true scholars.
During the years I taught I continued to study and learn both formally and informally. Presently I attend courses at the Vancouver School of Theology every summer.
My studies, reading, thinking, meditation, discussions etc have brought me to the place where I now am in my religous faith. I often assist in the services and am even asked to give some Sunday sermons in which I am anything but a fundamentalist. I have explained my courses elsewhere but they did involve Biblical history, translation in both Hebrew and Greek, philosophy, logic etc. My personal reading generally has been from outstanding scholars in the fields of the Bible, Church history, interpretation, theology, the history of the Bible itself, history in general (especially the Middle east and the Mediterranian area.
Today I class myself as a Christian pluralist and the clergy know that and are comfortable with it.
I could tell you some horror stories of fundamentalism but will limit myself to one.
A young family had a female child born with spina bifada. The child died at about 5 weeks. At the funeral the "pastor" said to the parents during the service, that the baby died because the parents hadn't confessed all their sins. That little baby was my sister and that preacher was in no way displaying Christian behaviour. When I heard this story it only confirmed what I had come to believe about fundamentalism. I will say no more as it would be downhill all the way. LOL
I hope this helps.
Shalom
Ted:-6
What Do You Believe?
Thanks, Ted
Can I ask another question?
Where did you first hear the term "Christian pluralist" and do you know many others who consider themselves to be as well?
Can I ask another question?
Where did you first hear the term "Christian pluralist" and do you know many others who consider themselves to be as well?
What Do You Believe?
koan:-6
Anglican Bishop Michael Ingham of Vancouver wrote a book called "Mansions of the Spirit" He gave me the language I needed.
I would say there are many who think like I do, even a Bishop or two, as well as several clergy. I'm not alone. Many theologians today are thinking along the same lines as are many lay people.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Anglican Bishop Michael Ingham of Vancouver wrote a book called "Mansions of the Spirit" He gave me the language I needed.
I would say there are many who think like I do, even a Bishop or two, as well as several clergy. I'm not alone. Many theologians today are thinking along the same lines as are many lay people.
Shalom
Ted:-6
What Do You Believe?
What do I believe? My sister has the perfect term for it: a militant agnostic. Meaning, "I don't know....and you don't either." :yh_bigsmi
[FONT=Arial Black]I hope you cherish this sweet way of life, and I hope you know that it comes with a price.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
What Do You Believe?
BabyRider:-6
That certainly is your position. I don't happen to agree but then that is life isn't it?
Shalom
Ted:-6
That certainly is your position. I don't happen to agree but then that is life isn't it?
Shalom
Ted:-6
What Do You Believe?
My heavens, the rapture must have occurred. I appear to be the only one left here. LOL. Either that or I am already in heaven and no one else made it.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Shalom
Ted:-6
What Do You Believe?
sixyearsleft:-6
Good grief that is either two of us left behind or the only two good enough to go above. LOL
Shalom
Ted:-6
Good grief that is either two of us left behind or the only two good enough to go above. LOL
Shalom
Ted:-6
What Do You Believe?
sixyearsleft:-6
Why not? You've never given me any reason not to and I am an inveterate optimist.
LOL
Shalom
T ed:-6
Why not? You've never given me any reason not to and I am an inveterate optimist.
LOL
Shalom
T ed:-6
What Do You Believe?
sixyearsleft:-6
Being and optimist I have to ask you what kinds of games do you play and books do you read as well as your discussion topics. After all if we are the only two here we're going to be here for a long time and we wouldn't want to get bored. One can only sing hymns so long before one's voice caves in and you need a rest. LOL
Shalom
Ted:-6
Being and optimist I have to ask you what kinds of games do you play and books do you read as well as your discussion topics. After all if we are the only two here we're going to be here for a long time and we wouldn't want to get bored. One can only sing hymns so long before one's voice caves in and you need a rest. LOL
Shalom
Ted:-6