Ex or A.R.C. Broken

[Pip]

Most religions (or all) are a hodgepodge of pre-existing ideas, religions, rituals, stories, philosophies, what-have-you...

Somebody could take all the best parts (in their mind) of Scientology and mix it with all the best parts (in their mind again) of any other -ism or -ology.

Some personal form of Christianity can easily be mixed with some personal form of Scientology.

I think that as much as it might pain some people on this board, some people might draw strength and a better life from a more liberal and less literal version of Scientology either alone or mixed with other ideas, religions, rituals, stories, philosophies, etc..

Whatever gets people through the day without hurting themselves or each other is fine with me.

So, if Pip or whoever wants to be a Christian Scientologist and that helps them in life... The problem is?

Thanks for your post Hypnotarian. Incidentally it is ChristianScientology - no gap between the Christianity and the Scientology.

 

[Pip]

Ah, you got somewhat close to the point.

Right!

 

[Pip]

There IS no problem with Pip or whoever wanting to be a ChristianScientologist or whatever they want to be.

However there IS a problem imo promoting Scientology to others in ANY form without also warning ones audience about the "Church" of Scientology.

Promoting Scientology or the idea that Scientology is compatible with Christianity may contribute towards someone walking into a CoS and getting spiritually raped like so many others have.

Pip made it pretty clear that he doesn't feel the need to warn people about what might happen should they walk into a CoS. But he continues to promote "ChristianScientology, The Religion for the 21'st Century" on his website and now at the end of each and every post of his.

You said: "Whatever gets people through the day without hurting themselves or each other is fine with me."

Promoting Scientology in a way which may cause them to get entrapped by the CoS CAN hurt others.

The only people I would promote Scientology to would be "born again bible believing fundamentalist christians", because they should be the only people who are impervious to any curves that the CofS might throw them. However they would be the last people to even allow the word 'Scientology' to pass their lips.

As for promoting Scientology on this board, I can't think of anything more ridiculous. What I promote here is forgiveness, in fact not just forgiveness but radical forgiveness - the idea that everything that happens to us is ultimately for our own good, that in fact life is perfect just the way it is - praise God in all circumstances.

I will say it again Christianity and Scientology are not compatible, they are complimentary (that's just come to me). Last Wednesday I gave a talk at my local Unitarian Church entitled love and understanding, finishing off with how it ties in with ChristianScientology, but also pointed out that Scientology was a 'cult' as all man-made religions are, and that because Scientology sees itself as "the religion of religions" it then follows it must be 'the cult of cults'. So once again I promote neither Christianity or Scientology.

 

[Pip]

I see. I didn't know that. That is so irresponsible of Pip that I don't even know what to say... Wow.

If I didn't know better I would say you have just been "third partied".

 

[Pip]

It's really the only problem I have with Pip with regards his religion of ChristianScientology.

This came up as well last month in another thread. You can see what I said about it and Pip's response in this post here:
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...-SCIENTOLOGIST&p=593863&viewfull=1#post593863

Type4_PTS now you know that all problems have an undelivered communication, even your Avatar seems to be waiting for an answer!

 

[Pip]

Re: Not 'ARC broken' Pip ... just an amused and ever so slightly embarrassed Ex.

You know exactly what it means Pippy, it means he did his version of the empty scio smarm thingy by 'acking' you with 'ARC' (rather than suggest that you just relax and stop being so silly, which probably wouldn't have resulted in you being pacified).​

:wink2:​

I love it when you call me Pippy. (my sister also calls me Pippy) You know me ITYIWT I believe 'all things' (1 Corinthians 13 verse 7). Is that you in your avatar? if so you are very naughty!

 

[RolandRB]

What is an HO?

HO = Whore

 

[Gadfly]

Yes! for me Scientology is "knowing how to know" and I use it constantly in my life. In fact I am using it on this forum to get to know what other people think about Scientology and why.

An example would be - I employed someone to do some fibreglass repairs on my boat, because he said he had 10 years experience in the fibreglass moulding industry.

I soon became aware that my understanding of working with fibreglass was very different to his and ended up with quite some 'by-pass charge' over what he was doing. Then I realised my BPC was as a result of my own lack of knowledge of using this material, so I went and studied fibreglass and contacted various experts in the field and suddenly no more BPC.

I now know how it should be done and can now recognise that the man I employed is indeed not following standard tech with regard to repairing damaged fibreglass.

That's knowing how to know in the fullest sense of the word through study.

I am amazed how many 'experts' there are who don't really understand their subject, but have just learnt enough to get by. Talk about a "charade". The only thing that makes sense of this sort of behaviour is "the service facsimile" it is as if they are so paranoid of being wrong they wont or can't look at the possibility of seeing things a different way.

Pip, your example of studying fiberglass has nothing to do with Scientology.

It is common sense that when you want to understand a subject, then you STUDY and learn about it. Duh! :confused2:

"Knowing how to know" - my ass.

Calling your confusion or upset with what your employee was doing with the boat "BPC" is asinine. That is simply an example of how people stuck in some framework of ideas, in this case Scientology type ideas, tend to interpret and perceive everything in alignment with their own arbitrary mental models of reality.

The professional world is filled with successful methods and techniques that have been proven to get results. Calling these "standard tech", again, involves your obvious tendency to reframe all experiences and reality in accordance with Hubturd's definitions and explanations.

Simply, you were ignorant on this subject of fiberglass, your stupid and uneducated ideas in the area resulted in you getting upset because your judgments were unwarranted, and then you changed your view once you actually took some time to get familiar with the subject.

The idea of knowing how to know through study has nothing to do with Scientology. People everywhere have been getting to know things through study for centuries. The notion that "this is Scientology" or is unique to Scientology is ludicrous. But, Ron sure did brainwash his followers into accepting the notion that somehow Hubbard, and ONLY Hubbard, managed to figure out all of these "great advances" in knowing.

What you so perfectly displayed with this "example" is how any person firmly mired in some set of fixed ideas, in this case nonsensical Hubbard ideas, tends to only be able to view, interpret and understand the world through the limited and restrictive set of fixed ideas.

That is all you "proved" here.

Get out of your tight little box of (Scientology) ideas - it is liberating.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Is that what's referred to as dub in ?

No, it was an essay on a.r.s. that I wrote.

 

[Type4_PTS]

So once again I promote neither Christianity or Scientology.

 

[Soul of Ginnungagab]

Remind me . . . where's LOVE and UNDERSTANDING on the Tone Scale?

An interesting question. Approximately 20 years ago a friend of mine asked me "where is love on the tone scale?". And now 20 years later I see a similar question in this topic. My response at that time was that love is anywhere on the tone scale. I think that I would give a similar answer today 20 years later. My point is that love can be expressed through any type of mood, there is no restriction to that in my opinion. It would be wrong to place love anywhere on such a scale.

I think that it is great to put attention on the subject of love. Love is related to deep care and concern. Those matters can sometimes have gotten under immense pressure because of various conditions, but weren't a lot of people driven by deep care and concern? Don't that deserve recognition and appreciation?

Now including the term "understanding" by using the phrase "love and understanding" gives an extra twist to it. Or an extra dimension. Or an extra feel to it. Something great to strive for.

 

[Pip]

HO = Whore

Thanks for that!

 

[Pip]

Pip, your example of studying fiberglass has nothing to do with Scientology.

It is common sense that when you want to understand a subject, then you STUDY and learn about it. Duh! :confused2:

"Knowing how to know" - my ass.

Calling your confusion or upset with what your employee was doing with the boat "BPC" is asinine. That is simply an example of how people stuck in some framework of ideas, in this case Scientology type ideas, tend to interpret and perceive everything in alignment with their own arbitrary mental models of reality.

The professional world is filled with successful methods and techniques that have been proven to get results. Calling these "standard tech", again, involves your obvious tendency to reframe all experiences and reality in accordance with Hubturd's definitions and explanations.

Simply, you were ignorant on this subject of fiberglass, your stupid and uneducated ideas in the area resulted in you getting upset because your judgments were unwarranted, and then you changed your view once you actually took some time to get familiar with the subject.

The idea of knowing how to know through study has nothing to do with Scientology. People everywhere have been getting to know things through study for centuries. The notion that "this is Scientology" or is unique to Scientology is ludicrous. But, Ron sure did brainwash his followers into accepting the notion that somehow Hubbard, and ONLY Hubbard, managed to figure out all of these "great advances" in knowing.

What you so perfectly displayed with this "example" is how any person firmly mired in some set of fixed ideas, in this case nonsensical Hubbard ideas, tends to only be able to view, interpret and understand the world through the limited and restrictive set of fixed ideas.

That is all you "proved" here.

Get out of your tight little box of (Scientology) ideas - it is liberating.

Yes! I would agree Gadfly, but the study of studying fibreglass has everything to do with Scientology.

As Ron Hubbard has said the only problem with "common sense" is it is not common, and I am sure your backside is not a lot different to mine.

I could just as easily have referred to my "confusion or upset" as frustration, except by seeing it as BPC I can relate it to my 'mockup' and then address that.

As for 'standard tech.' that's just another word for that level of excellance necessary to produce an exact result every time, which when working with fibreglass is quite important.

I was indeed ignorant on the subject of fibreglass but not so stupid as not to be able to recognise my ignorance and do something about it. Whether the 'study techniques' existed before LRH is not my concern all I know is that I learnt about them in Scientology. Befofe I went to St.Hill I was considered dyslexic, but in word clearing I realised I did not know the difference between 'a' and 'the'. How come I had got to 26 before knowing the difference between a cat and the cat.

I got out of my "tight little box" the day I forgave Scientology and Scientologists, and that is why I recommend forgiveness for everyone.

Love
Pip

P.S. Congratulations on becoming a grandfather.

 

[Pip]

Methinks thou doth protest too much.

Your icon reminds me of a headless chicken but in his case he is all head and no chicken!

 

[Type4_PTS]

Methinks thou doth protest too much.

No, I'm just correctly pointing out that you DO promote Scientology as well as its compatibility with Christianity.

What you do is the equivalent of giving a small child a snake as a pet and failing to inform her that this particular snake is venomous in nature and that one bite might ruin her life.

And you see no problem with that at all.

 

[RogerB]

"positively processed" what is that? Please explain!

Here: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...he-Apollo-1973&p=610465&viewfull=1#post610465

Rog

 

[Smilla]

Re: Not 'ARC broken' Pip ... just an amused and ever so slightly embarrassed Ex.

You know exactly what it means Pippy, it means he did his version of the empty scio smarm thingy by 'acking' you with 'ARC' (rather than suggest that you just relax and stop being so silly, which probably wouldn't have resulted in you being pacified).




:wink2:​

That's the definitive answer

 

[Pip]

An interesting question. Approximately 20 years ago a friend of mine asked me "where is love on the tone scale?". And now 20 years later I see a similar question in this topic. My response at that time was that love is anywhere on the tone scale. I think that I would give a similar answer today 20 years later. My point is that love can be expressed through any type of mood, there is no restriction to that in my opinion. It would be wrong to place love anywhere on such a scale.

I think that it is great to put attention on the subject of love. Love is related to deep care and concern. Those matters can sometimes have gotten under immense pressure because of various conditions, but weren't a lot of people driven by deep care and concern? Don't that deserve recognition and appreciation?

Now including the term "understanding" by using the phrase "love and understanding" gives an extra twist to it. Or an extra dimension. Or an extra feel to it. Something great to strive for.

Thanks for your post Soul of Ginnungagab. I have heard it said that it is "love that makes the world go round" and think perhaps that everything is an expression of love, however inappropriate it might appear. Without mis-understanding all there would be is love so by changing mis-understanding into understanding makes the love more and more appropriate. I like to see the word understanding in the sense of to stand under and that sometimes takes a lot of confront and also humility.

 

[Pip]

No, I'm just correctly pointing out that you DO promote Scientology as well as its compatibility with Christianity.

What you do is the equivalent of giving a small child a snake as a pet and failing to inform her that this particular snake is venomous in nature and that one bite might ruin her life.

And you see no problem with that at all.

I love the way you say "I'm just correctly pointing out". Since when were you an authority on what is correct. It seems to me it was Scientologist pointing out what is correct that got it a bad name in the first place.

Of course you have every right to your own opinion but stating it as fact is going too far.

 

[Pip]

Here: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...he-Apollo-1973&p=610465&viewfull=1#post610465

Rog

Thank you Roger, most helpful.