Scientology is a creepy and weird cult, says Murdoch on Twitter

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
And then 16th hand accounts in books told of miracles.

Another genuine question: What do the believers (catholics in particular) think of the idea of canonizing modern figures (John Paul II, Mother Teresa) into Sainthood when one of the requirements is the performing of a miracle? Does this not cheapen the belief that actual miracles could have been performed in the past? Or are the two so far removed they have no bearing on one another?
 
nathan1977 said:
Jesus didn't hold up according to the prevailing media of the day either. He was a friend of prostitutes, heretics, the poor, and the outcasts. His followers were a motley ragtag group of fishermen and tax collectors. He was accused of blasphemy against Jewish moral codes and treason against the Roman Empire, and died the humiliating and embarrassing death of a commoner, surrounded by thieves and other petty criminals.



You're right, in a way. Fox News would have hated him, called him a hippie socialist occupy wall streeter.

But this does sidestep the question.
 
There were literally hundreds of would be Messiahs at the time, it was all the rage it seems. And for some reason the area around Galilee seemed to be the hotbed region for producing them. 'Radical extremists' is how Fox would gave portrayed them, snake oil salesmen is how most would have seen them, but the Jewish and Roman establishments took them seriously enough to kill loads of them. Jesus' message or abilities might have been unique enough to stand out at the time and pull a far larger crowd than most, with huge parts of the mythology built later on, or he might have been 'just another' Messiah, with the whole mythology built around him much later on. I'm surprised it's so easy to be a son of God and miracle and resurrection believer when there are details to the story that are clearly made up and done so for good reason . e.g being born in Bethlehem and the census and all that. Stuff like that is deliberately fudged for obvious myth building advantages, so of course the miracles must be real!
 
^something I've always struggled with. When he walked on water/turned water into wine, are these meant to be metaphors for something or parables or fanciful stories? Do Christians actually believe he did these things? I haven't read the sections of the Bible they come from, so I don't really know, but they're both impossible to do with the click of a finger. Otherwise people would be doing it all the time.

Another genuine question: What do the believers (catholics in particular) think of the idea of canonizing modern figures (John Paul II, Mother Teresa) into Sainthood when one of the requirements is the performing of a miracle? Does this not cheapen the belief that actual miracles could have been performed in the past? Or are the two so far removed they have no bearing on one another?

It's like when Mary MacKillop was canonised here. You can read her second miracle here (Cancer survivor Kathleen Evans speaks of Mary Mackillop miracle) but it seems like a woman with inoperable cancer was given a picture of Mary M and a piece of her clothing, she prayed, and then she got better. It doesn't make sense to me.
 
as for Scientology, here's what i don't get: why can't people leave? like, i get how, say, if certain hollywood stars were to, say, admit to fooling around with male masseurs in hotel rooms during an auditing session and this session were recorded, that the church could use that as blackmail against said celebrity. but there are, like, 40,000 members of the church, right? how do they keep ordinary people in the fold? or prevent them from spilling the beans in a way that Paul Haggis did? only more so? i assume the Church sues everyone for defamation?

it's all so weird to me.
 
I'm saying that stories about his importance and greatness will be much more limited because everyone has access to the media coverage of him. It's preserved, unable to altered by hand-me -down storytelling.

Are you suggesting that before TV, information was always altered by "hand-me-down- storytelling"?

Its true that the only way to record and pass information back then was through word of mouth or writing it down, but that goes for everything that occured back then, not just things in the Bible.
 
^ I haven't read the sections of the Bible they come from, so I don't really know, but they're both impossible to do with the click of a finger. Otherwise people would be doing it all the time.

Well, it wouldn't be a miracle if it wasn't impossible.
 
Edge425 said:
Are you suggesting that before TV, information was always altered by "hand-me-down- storytelling"?

Its true that the only way to record and pass information back then was through word of mouth or writing it down, but that goes for everything that occured back then, not just things in the Bible.



Right. So we take things with a grain of salt, and not literally.
 
Right. So we take things with a grain of salt, and not literally.

Well actually for a certain group of people, anything in the Bible like above is questioned, and scrutinized to the nth degree, while everything else written back then gets a pass.
 
There were literally hundreds of would be Messiahs at the time, it was all the rage it seems. And for some reason the area around Galilee seemed to be the hotbed region for producing them. 'Radical extremists' is how Fox would gave portrayed them, snake oil salesmen is how most would have seen them, but the Jewish and Roman establishments took them seriously enough to kill loads of them. Jesus' message or abilities might have been unique enough to stand out at the time and pull a far larger crowd than most, with huge parts of the mythology built later on, or he might have been 'just another' Messiah, with the whole mythology built around him much later on. I'm surprised it's so easy to be a son of God and miracle and resurrection believer when there are details to the story that are clearly made up and done so for good reason . e.g being born in Bethlehem and the census and all that. Stuff like that is deliberately fudged for obvious myth building advantages, so of course the miracles must be real!

Wow, were you actually there? In your view, who were the top 10 Messiahs of the time?
 
I don't know if there were literally hundreds or not, but there were a few. Simon Bar-Kokhba a century or so after Jesus was probably the next big one.
 
Wow, were you actually there? In your view, who were the top 10 Messiahs of the time?

How is this relevant to anything? Sounds like you at least accept parts of the bible as being true. Were you there for all that?
 
Oh, well that's it then I guess. The bible is real. What should we tackle next, gang?

I'm curious what other debates The Edge has conclusively settled through a personal endorsement. Is facial hair preferable to being clean-shaven because The Edge has a beard?
 
as for Scientology, here's what i don't get: why can't people leave? like, i get how, say, if certain hollywood stars were to, say, admit to fooling around with male masseurs in hotel rooms during an auditing session and this session were recorded, that the church could use that as blackmail against said celebrity. but there are, like, 40,000 members of the church, right? how do they keep ordinary people in the fold? or prevent them from spilling the beans in a way that Paul Haggis did? only more so? i assume the Church sues everyone for defamation?

it's all so weird to me.

They brand you a suppressive person and then your family (who are presumably mostly within the CoS) are no longer allowed to have contact with you. If you read accounts from people who have left, they commonly have no contact with their children, parents, siblings, even spouses in cases where they don't flee together. This is a really high price and not everyone is willing to pay it.

Super creepy organization, but seems like it's really coming undone. There is a reason Katie Holmes is trying to control the media reaction to the divorce.

Also :wave: STING.
 
Edge425 said:
Well actually for a certain group of people, anything in the Bible like above is questioned, and scrutinized to the nth degree, while everything else written back then gets a pass.

Who said everything else gets a pass?
 
Edge425 said:
Well actually for a certain group of people, anything in the Bible like above is questioned, and scrutinized to the nth degree, while everything else written back then gets a pass.


Right. Which is crazy.
 
PhilsFan said:
Who said everything else gets a pass?

And what is 'everything else' in reference to? The Bible is making some fairly heavy claims, to say the least, and is used by many in attempts to influence daily life still today. Why wouldn't it receive more scrutiny than other writings of the time?
 
i agree too! :applaud:

what i love about contemporary religions like Mormonism and Scientology is how much they remind us about the shaky foundations of all religions. it's *all* really hokey stuff. reading ancient tablets with magic glasses is only weirder than turning water into wine because of the veil of history. a story detailing how Xenu of the Galactic Confederacy murdered his people with hydrogen bombs near volcanoes is really no more or less realistic than a petty, spiteful, jealous god creating the world in 7 days and creating a woman out of a man's rib. it serves as a good reminder to all of us to be much more humble and self-aware when making claims about the supernatural because we're all on shaky ground. let's be non-literal, and inclusive, and most of all know how little we actually know.

amirite IH? :hi5:
 
Back
Top Bottom