for Nickg from the other thread just closed and biblical accuracy

[MadduckUK]

fallacious reasoning: Do Natural Disasters Like Katrina Prove There is No God? - Come Reason Ministries

I have been trying to figure out why God created the hurricanes that devastated the gulf coast,

well they are approaching that one from the wrong direction from a start. dont think that will be worth reading

[fuddam]

Dangel, he is right there is no fundamental difference between Scientology and any other religion (Except maybe Buddhism, which I feel fall's into a category of its own due to the lack of a deity).

The only difference between Scientology and xtianity is that one is a bit older than the other.

They both idolise a 'prophet'
They both have a deity
They both indoctrinate and evangelise
They both steal/have stolen money from their membership
They both require members to set aside all logic and critical thinking
They both have 'miracles'

The only other differences I can think of are that, well Scientology has not been used as justification to kill anybody. Not yet at least.

Of course there will be no difference to the casual observer. To anyone who is seriously interested in the differences, they will be blatant, whether Christian or not. Oh, and I completely reject (as you would expect) the dismissal of logic and critical thinking. You need to read more

[fuddam]

well they are approaching that one from the wrong direction from a start. dont think that will be worth reading

ok, try this one for size:

Southeast Asia Earthquake and Tsunami: Where was God?

and this: There is Too Much Evil and Suffering For God to Exist?

[TheAnimus]

Of course there will be no difference to the casual observer. To anyone who is seriously interested in the differences, they will be blatant, whether Christian or not. Oh, and I completely reject (as you would expect) the dismissal of logic and critical thinking. You need to read more

care to give us a difference which can un-disputably prove that?

You need to read more, is subjective, and probably just insulting.

[TheAnimus]

ok, try this one for size:

Southeast Asia Earthquake and Tsunami: Where was God?

Thats odd, to me that proves god dosen't exist.

ie, he accepts its perfectly okay to kill many humans, just because he liked the idea of plate techtonics. Surely some kind of god would of had an idea that didn't involve that mass mansluater? (which is effectivly what that artical classifies it as)

or does that mean that manslaughter is ok, as long as its for a greater good?

Can i slaughter my neighbours so i can expand my land into their flat?

[fuddam]

oh, here is a rebuttal of young earth creation from a Christian source:

Biblical Creation

[fuddam]

Thats odd, to me that proves god dosen't exist.

ie, he accepts its perfectly okay to kill many humans, just because he liked the idea of plate techtonics. Surely some kind of god would of had an idea that didn't involve that mass mansluater? (which is effectivly what that artical classifies it as)

or does that mean that manslaughter is ok, as long as its for a greater good?

God created a perfect earth. We messed it up and brought in corruption. It was never God's plan for anyone to die, to suffer, to be killed. We brought it on ourselves by choosing not to be with Him.

so, the earth is a mess.

It will be done away with, eventually, and peace/harmony restored, but it's up to us, insofar as Christ says he will return when his church is united etc etc.

In the meantime, God runs around trying to save as many people as will allow Him. And He is perfectly just.

Can i slaughter my neighbours so i can expand my land into their flat?

of course you CAN (you have free will), but should you?

[fuddam]

care to give us a difference which can un-disputably prove that?

You need to read more, is subjective, and probably just insulting.

oh, no insult intended, thus the smiley. My point is that it is easy to jump to conclusions, but not healthy, so more reading is required to avoid embarrassment.

here's a source, albeit not specific to scientology: Nothing Unique About the Teachings of Jesus Christ?

and:

and this one IS scientology specific: Probe Ministries - Scientology: Religion of the Stars

the last one summarised:

As a result, those who have not benefited from Scientology’s auditing process are possessed by a collection of dysfunctional thetans trying to control their every thought and action. Once cleared by Hubbard’s auditing, all the confusion supposedly disappears. There is more to this “history according to L. Ron Hubbard,” but it quickly becomes obvious that Scientology and its founder are teaching another gospel.

Either one can be saved via Hubbard’s auditing process, which promises to give people “total spiritual independence and serenity,” or we are saved by placing our faith in what Jesus Christ did on the cross, but not both.{7} Either we are divine-like beings who can overcome all our moral and mental deficiencies in the Church of Scientology, or we are creatures that were created “good” but are fallen due to rebellion against a holy God. To argue that the two systems are compatible doesn’t make much sense.

more available......

[fuddam]

Fuddam:
Does god love us or is he omnipotent?

no contradiction. I could do anything to a new born baby but choose only to love it, etc etc.

He cant be both and dont use the free will rubbish.

to be ABLE to do anything and CHOOSING to not do something is not contradictory.

Otherwise please explain how Saddam Hussein's free will was more important then the lives and slow suffering deaths of the 5000 odd kurds he gassed.

he made you. what did you do about it? or anyone else in proximity to the man? each soldier involved chose to carry out those orders. at what point would you start / stop people doing things? after all, God says that to THINK something is the same as doing it, so should God stop you thinking? No facetious answer, please.

A mother loves her children, and also wants them to have free will, however when one of them starts being nasty to the other, she stops them.

She doesn't stop their will, she stops their actions. It's up to us to stop the actions of the irresponsible, or would you deny our responsibility for our neighbour?

Also, what are your thoughts on the validity of Scientology? You can't dismiss it without dismissing all of the shakey foundations that any organised religion is built on.

see: Probe Ministries - Scientology: Religion of the Stars as a better position than I have time to create. Briefly, it's man-made, and so is bollocks. Like ALL man-made religions. In fact, am not a fan of religion. Am a fan of truth. Always have been, always will be. Go on, that's just ripe for you to laugh, eh?
God is about truth. Nothing more or less. and the Truth will set you free......... hah!

[TheAnimus]

God created a perfect earth. We messed it up and brought in corruption. It was never God's plan for anyone to die, to suffer, to be killed. We brought it on ourselves by choosing not to be with Him.

so, the earth is a mess.

Wooh, you've flipflopped faster than a CMOS D-Type.

that link, clearly stated why god made the disasters that resulted in people dieing necessary. You're saying those who died brought it on themselfs now?

What i'm saying is you can't have it both ways, it was not free will of man, that created plate techtonics, even now we don't begin to possess the technologies required to be blamed for that.

[G4Z]

Of course there will be no difference to the casual observer. To anyone who is seriously interested in the differences, they will be blatant, whether Christian or not. Oh, and I completely reject (as you would expect) the dismissal of logic and critical thinking. You need to read more

Read more what... the bible? No thanks, I think I get my fill of bronze age mythology directly from your posts. As it happens, I spend an awful lot of my time reading and the scope of my reading is quite varied. I have read a fair bit about and watched quite a few videos on Scientology and I was also indoctrinated into Christianity like every kid in the country so I think I have a reasonable understanding on both subjects, certainly far better than your understanding of evolution which you feel perfectly qualified to comment on.

If there are differences, I trust you will post them in clear language so that I can debate the matter with you properly. If you give me just another post of flowery nonsense about 'its all about the love' (I really take issue with you describing xtianity in this way considering that really, the whole thing is about fear, the fear of being judged, the fear of death and the fear of going to hell) I will not bother to respond, but if you can come up with something substantive I will remain engaged in this.

[G4Z]

I just thought of another striking similarity between Scientology and other religions.

They both insist they are right and what they are telling you (no matter how insane) is the truth.

[G4Z]

see: Probe Ministries - Scientology: Religion of the Stars as a better position than I have time to create. Briefly, it's man-made, and so is bollocks. Like ALL man-made religions. In fact, am not a fan of religion. Am a fan of truth. Always have been, always will be. Go on, that's just ripe for you to laugh, eh?
God is about truth. Nothing more or less. and the Truth will set you free......... hah!

Frankly, that's another similarity right there. Scientology and Christianity are both man made. Who would have thunk it???

[fuddam]

I just thought of another striking similarity between Scientology and other religions.

They both insist they are right and what they are telling you (no matter how insane) is the truth.

ironic. never heard an evolutionist talk like that now, have I?

[fuddam]

Wooh, you've flipflopped faster than a CMOS D-Type.

that link, clearly stated why god made the disasters that resulted in people dieing necessary. You're saying those who died brought it on themselfs now?

What i'm saying is you can't have it both ways, it was not free will of man, that created plate techtonics, even now we don't begin to possess the technologies required to be blamed for that.

no flipflop/contradiction:

1) God made the world perfect, with no intention for anyone to suffer and die
2) there would therefore have been no disasters, death etc
3) we made it a mess, through our free will
4) God ALLOWS the mess to continue, just as He ALLOWS sin without being sinful Himself.
5) we pay the consequences of our sin
6) we can be freed from our sin
7) we can live in paradise for eternity

tell me, what is your conception of the ideal life on earth? To live in with all your needs catered for, no death / illness / violence, just life centred around meeting your every need?
Hedonism with altruistic overtones? Procreate and die?

Sounds............sad. No compassion, no sympathy, no need to focus on anyone else other than self.

Suffering brings us closer to each other, and closer to God. Like it or not.

anyway, that's just my assumption of your idealised life. presumably it's not that self-centred.

[TheAnimus]

What i'm saying is you can't have it both ways, it was not free will of man, that created plate techtonics, even now we don't begin to possess the technologies required to be blamed for that.

no flipflop/contradiction:

1) God made the world perfect, with no intention for anyone to suffer and die
2) there would therefore have been no disasters, death etc
3) we made it a mess, through our free will
4) God ALLOWS the mess to continue, just as He ALLOWS sin without being sinful Himself.
5) we pay the consequences of our sin
6) we can be freed from our sin
7) we can live in paradise for eternity

tell me, what is your conception of the ideal life on earth? To live in with all your needs catered for, no death / illness / violence, just life centred around meeting your every need?
Hedonism with altruistic overtones? Procreate and die?

Sounds............sad. No compassion, no sympathy, no need to focus on anyone else other than self.

Suffering brings us closer to each other, and closer to God. Like it or not.

anyway, that's just my assumption of your idealised life. presumably it's not that self-centred.

So your saying man brought about techtonic plate activity? Please explain how. This is from statement 3, which makes little sense to me, and 4onwards are pretty much irrelivent to this.