The Bible, the Koran, Dianetics - all three are the truth about religion?

[enoch]

I am mostly(edit) going to refer to the bible and dianetics b/c those are the two most familiar to me.

My basic question is, if, you are like me and you believe that everyone has the right to believe whatever they wish about religion as long as they to not try to impose their values on others through force (of legislation or other natures)

then Dianetics must be given equal respect as the bible

they both would be classified as fantasy/sci-fi if they were to appear in an editor's office

they both tell the "truth" about the purpose of humanity

they both have a large and devoted following, especially if you compare numbers
In relative terms, and this is not established fact, but if you think about how many Christians there were when Christianity had only been around as long as Scientology has been, I feel it is fair to say that Scientology has more adherents than early christianity did after the same amount of existence

one could even say that Dianetics and the Koran are more respectable than the bible, because they were both written by the prophets within the prophets' lifetime

while the gospels of the bible were not completed in their modern form for hundreds of years

comments?

[Ummon]

Dianetics is truth about making money on fools. An opinion, obviously.

[Chaigidel]

gonna have to go with ummon on that -- and scientologists should be persecuted like they are in germany :O (jk i dont care xenu for life son)

but yeah i think all books (great holy texts not dianetics) possess a way within them to reach an understanding of the supreme and our relation to it .

[Leonidas The Lion]

Most holy books basically say the same thing.
There is a god.

[Zenith Darksea]

while the gospels of the bible were not completed in their modern form for hundreds of years

Look, for the last time, that's not true. Modern translations of the Bible are taken from the earliest surviving documents, some of which date back to 125 BC. Guess what? They're almost exactly the same as the allegedly 'corrupted' versions of the Roman Catholic Church (differing only in the use of participles, spelling errors and so on); moreover, why is it that everyone accuses Latins of corrupting the Bible, but not the Eastern Orthodox? Are we not important enough to have tampered with scripture, or are people just too pig-ignorant to have even heard of the Orthodox?

[Chaigidel]

thats just the surface there is much more than the simplicity that seems so plain within the words .-- it helps if your mildly if not completely insane !!!

[Zenith Darksea]

Well, one difference between the Bible and Dianetics (and probably between the Koran and Dianetics as well, though I'm not an expert on the Koran) is that we know that the treatises on Dianetics were written in order to extort money from people. Indeed, L. Ron Hubbard is known to have said just this himself (though not on the record), and the proof of the pudding is in the eating - he became very rich indeed. The writers of the Bible on the other hand didn't make any money out of it.

[enoch]

zenith - as I have said - the majority of the academic community disagrees with you on the whole evolution of the NT - as far as the OT goes.... I agree

and the whole writers of the Bible thing - most of the included gospels were written for political purposes - but I do not disagree that dianetics is sketchy

I do however think it is pretty naive of you to think that the founders of the early churches had higher purposes in mind than L Ron

from the very beginning religion has been used to exhort something, just not always money --- nature of the game and all ---------- I find it the height of conceit that we think our religions are somehow better than past religions and that ours will somehow always exist, when the same evangelicals you (zenith) yourself have called shallow and skin deep, are changing Christianity into something far, far different even as we speak

[SovietDoom]

Actually, though I am an atheist, I'm actually quite certain that the founders of Christianity and Islam actually believed in their faith. The real problem with Scientology is that you have to pay vast sums of money to be accepted in the Church. Say what you will about the other religions, you don't have to pay to get high in the Church.

[enoch]

Actually, though I am an atheist, I'm actually quite certain that the founders of Christianity and Islam actually believed in their faith. The real problem with Scientology is that you have to pay vast sums of money to be accepted in the Church. Say what you will about the other religions, you don't have to pay to get high in the Church.

I don't know what Churches you have gone too, but I have never once gone to a Church service were they didn't ask me for money at some point

the Scientologists are just a lot more modern and up front about it

[Zenith Darksea]

zenith - as I have said - the majority of the academic community disagrees with you on the whole evolution of the NT

For some reason this has passed me, and my friends who are in the Oxford theology faculty (I'll admit that I'm just a classicist) by, actually.

[enoch]

For some reason this has passed me, and my friends who are in the Oxford theology faculty (I'll admit that I'm just a classicist) by, actually.

maybe they are secret commies

I got harvard divinity and vanderbilt divinity on my personal side (friends/family)