• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Scientology abandoned by Hubbard's granddaughter & Miscavige's father

They are real questions, I assure you. I tend to think in terms of common sense and if I was running that group/religion I would do it entirely differently if the main goal was to spread the message and tech. If I wanted to make some money I might keep it the same. That's all. The goal vs the methods are confusing to me.

I'll respond to the rest later...

I can think of a few reasons for the difference. Unlike Christianity, which can be spread by way of "the good news" and a conversion experience, Scientology requires individual training in the methods. Money does two things in the set up. The first thing it does is separate the pretenders from the serious students. The second thing it does is support the organization.

Rather than rely on a broad pool of people who generally support the church, it focuses on a smaller elite. You might think of it as akin to priests or pastors -- those who are more highly trained. Certainly, other religions do charge to become elites in their practices.

I have recently come across a couple who have applied to get missionary training in the Protestant/Baptist tradition. They have to raise enough money to pay for the schooling and then, afterwards, they have to raise money to fund whatever mission they are assigned to go on. There is a great deal of money involved, at least thousands of dollars. They could, I suppose, come up with this money themselves instead of asking for donations. The point is that money is necessary except for those who are not really committed.

This is not to say that everything Scientology does costs people money. I'd encourage you to investigate free programs and charitable works. I think they receive little press.
 
Rather than rely on a broad pool of people who generally support the church, it focuses on a smaller elite. You might think of it as akin to priests or pastors -- those who are more highly trained. Certainly, other religions do charge to become elites in their practices.

Yes, but they don't generally charge for the benefits those elites offer. I can walk into any Catholic church and have a priest hear my confession (auditing without the e-meter) at no charge to me. The same priest will also council me and give me advice and even pray for me without my having to come up with one red cent. Most other churches are the same way.

As to the trained professionals you keep going on about, you have yet to demonstrate that said professionals are really any better at this kind of thing than the people who just bought Dianetics and tried it out themselves back in the 1950's. I've suggested clinical trails be used to test the validity of this tech, but no one on the CoS side of things seems interested in such things. It's almost as if you'd prefer to take Scientology as an article of faith.
 
Justinian, how does it feel knowing you have anger issues after having spent forty years of wages on Scientology?
And you still can't audit properly?
 
Yes, but they don't generally charge for the benefits those elites offer. I can walk into any Catholic church and have a priest hear my confession (auditing without the e-meter) at no charge to me. The same priest will also council me and give me advice and even pray for me without my having to come up with one red cent. Most other churches are the same way.

I have to agree the analogy isn't spot on. I distinguish it as formal training rather than advice or counsel. As you point out, there are other ways to finance a religion. I understand tithing is popular. Is it Mormons who have compulsory tithing?

As to the trained professionals you keep going on about, you have yet to demonstrate that said professionals are really any better at this kind of thing than the people who just bought Dianetics and tried it out themselves back in the 1950's. I've suggested clinical trails be used to test the validity of this tech, but no one on the CoS side of things seems interested in such things. It's almost as if you'd prefer to take Scientology as an article of faith.

Would you at least grant that it's been active for at least 50 years? You could take that as an epidemiological study. I'm comfortable with the idea of a faith practice.

I'd also like to make a distinction between Scientology the practice and Scientology the organization. It is difficult to explain the FreeZone as people who are involved in an active cult, offering nothing.

But as to a study to prove claims, I agree, it is of little interest. Why? Because those who already participate have all the proof they need. Who else would fund such a thing, and for what purpose?
 
Last edited:
Justinian, how does it feel knowing you have anger issues after having spent forty years of wages on Scientology?
And you still can't audit properly?

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Two incorrect assumptions don't make a right.
 
Last edited:
Yes, but they don't generally charge for the benefits those elites offer. I can walk into any Catholic church and have a priest hear my confession (auditing without the e-meter) at no charge to me. The same priest will also council me and give me advice and even pray for me without my having to come up with one red cent. Most other churches are the same way.

As to the trained professionals you keep going on about, you have yet to demonstrate that said professionals are really any better at this kind of thing than the people who just bought Dianetics and tried it out themselves back in the 1950's. I've suggested clinical trails be used to test the validity of this tech, but no one on the CoS side of things seems interested in such things. It's almost as if you'd prefer to take Scientology as an article of faith.

Book one auditing can be learned and applied in one week. The COS currently charges $100 for the week long book one course.

Professional auditing takes 6 months at the foundation (nights and weekends) to learn how to audit. Then one has to be an intern for a few months. The COS charged me $2000 for the academy courses which teaches the levels. That was 1973 prices. Imagine what it costs now. In the Freezone it is about the same now as it was for me in 1973.
 
Last edited:
Justinian, how does it feel knowing you have anger issues after having spent forty years of wages on Scientology?
And you still can't audit properly?

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Two incorrect assumptions don't make a right.

1. You yourself said you were not a professional auditor.

Doctors, lawyers and engineers get paid for their exchange. Should not other professionals, like professional scientology auditors, get paid as well? They have to study and practice for years to become good enough at their profession to get paid. They had a thing called co-auditing in the Church of Scientology. I co-audited a few times before realizing that a professional auditor was desirable if I wanted the proper end phenomena to the process.
As for skepticism as a method for spiritual gain, it depends on who the co-skeptics are. Like co-auditing, it would be best with professionals. When skepticism becomes bullying or nasty criticism, it is harmful.

2: You keep responding to civil questions with hostility:

Justin, can you not see what a trap this kind of thinking is?

What you basically believe is that scientology (or at least the "tech") works in a somewhat magical way, unless it doesnt, in which case the person wasnt doing it right.

Do you understand the concept of confirmation bias?
These three insults and can't be responded to without breaking the rules.

Edited to remove breach of Rule 12.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL

And you have deleted replies I can only assume would have breached the civility rules.

So my questions were correct.

How does it feel knowing you have anger issues after having spent forty years of wages on Scientology?
And you still can't audit properly?

Let me guess. It makes you angry, which you unleash on others, instead of on Scientology for wasting 40 years of your life.
 
1. You yourself said you were not a professional auditor.



2: You keep responding to civil questions with hostility:





And you have deleted replies I can only assume would have breached the civility rules.

So my questions were correct.

How does it feel knowing you have anger issues after having spent forty years of wages on Scientology?
And you still can't audit properly?

Let me guess. It makes you angry, which you unleash on others, instead of on Scientology for wasting 40 years of your life.

The code of an auditor is that he does not EVALUATE or INVALIDATE. When I was on my internship many moons ago, I did neither and got good results. With my children too, I've have good results prefering to listen than to interject any evaluation or invalidation.

Point out a person on these threads that listens and duplicates without evaluation or invalidation and I'll show you a good potential auditor.

On the other hand, a good auditor does not continue the session if the Emeter needle and other manifestations indicate that the person has an upset that he doesn't wish to discuss. Since auditing doesn't work if a person doesn't communicate his areas of pain and upset, it would be folly to continue. The session is ended and the PC is sent to the examiner. The PC folder is sent to the case supervisor. This is, perhaps, an unavoidable invalidation.
 
Argh. And you're supposed to be an OT?
It's worth repeating (it came up in the last Scientology thread) that it is legitimate to point out Justinian2's numerous spelling, grammar, and syntax errors because he claims superiority in these areas from Scientology.
 
Justinian-

If I do not wish to divulge my sexual partners and what I did sexually in my past or present, is the auditing session ended or is it ok to keep private things private??
 
I remember reading about the first clear. It was a female, I cannot remember her name. But Hubbard wanted to show her off and did so in front of an audience. She performed poorly. Only THEN did the issue of OT come up...and then OT2, OT3. Is it not safe to assume two things from this, after Hubbard had talked up CLEARS so much?

1. By continually adding a "new level" that you need to get to, there is always an out clause. You'll never be this perfect paragon of society, because you have another level to achieve. Any shortcomings you have in life, no matter your level, can be blamed on needing to reach that "next level."

And more importantly 2. By always having another level to reach, you have to pay for services for life. This is a lot like chiropractors. There is never a permanent state or fix. You have to keep paying for services until you die.
 
Justinian-

If I do not wish to divulge my sexual partners and what I did sexually in my past or present, is the auditing session ended or is it ok to keep private things private??

If it reads on the meter, you have to divulge the information or the session will go to hell.

However, not all things read. I've worked on classified stuff before and it has never read and never been discussed. Classified stuff has no charge.
 
I am not auditing anyone here, so I do not always follow the code of an auditor.

Including this delusional paranoid . . . um . . . stuff?

Hubbard sent the bulletin HCOB 30 March 1960 to all South African Auditors. It was titled Interrogation (How to read an E-Meter on a silent subject). In it, Hubbard describes how the Sec Checks can be used as an interrogation tool on involuntary subjects:
"When the subject placed on a meter will not talk but can be made to hold the cans (or can be held while the cans are strapped to the soles or placed under the armpit), it is still possible to obtain full information from the subject."
​
Hubbard concluded, "The end product is the discovery of a terrorist, usually paid, usually a criminal, often trained abroad."
Is this included in the 6,000 page, 600 pound Book of Truth?

ISTR that it was Mark Twain who said that reading the Bible is the most eloquent argument against Christianity.
 
Last edited:
I remember reading about the first clear. It was a female, I cannot remember her name. But Hubbard wanted to show her off and did so in front of an audience. She performed poorly. Only THEN did the issue of OT come up...and then OT2, OT3. Is it not safe to assume two things from this, after Hubbard had talked up CLEARS so much?

1. By continually adding a "new level" that you need to get to, there is always an out clause. You'll never be this perfect paragon of society, because you have another level to achieve. Any shortcomings you have in life, no matter your level, can be blamed on needing to reach that "next level."

And more importantly 2. By always having another level to reach, you have to pay for services for life. This is a lot like chiropractors. There is never a permanent state or fix. You have to keep paying for services until you die.

The OT levels are value added. They don't diminish the negative things from your case, they help you increase your abilities in ways that are ignored by this society. Before each OT level, anything on the case is audited so that your dial wide floating needle is established before the OT stuff begins. Your previous level of attainment has to be reestablished before you resume processing towards a new, higher goal.

You have to be realistic, however, you aren't going to be superman/superwoman. Spiritually you may fly, but your body isn't going to fly without help or magic.
 
It's worth repeating (it came up in the last Scientology thread) that it is legitimate to point out Justinian2's numerous spelling, grammar, and syntax errors because he claims superiority in these areas from Scientology.

Thank you for your invalidation and evaluation. Thank you also for your specific examples.

Have you ever read recent popular trilogies like "Hunger Games"? They are fraught with grammatical errors.

It was never my intention to be grammatically perfect. You'll note also that 'Word' is quite the beast for reporting non-existent spelling and grammatical errors

By the way, I sometimes post and then proof read. I hate to lose what I've just written because the site or my computer freezes.
 
Last edited:
Including this delusional paranoid . . . um . . . stuff?



Is this included in the 6,000 page, 600 pound Book of Truth?

ISTR that it was Mark Twain that reading the Bible is the most eloquent argument against Christianity.

The needle usually will just rise and not move under those conditions. You have deviated from the normal stuff here. I can't defend everything LRH has said anymore than I could defend everything you've said. I can't defend everything I've said either.

George Zimmerman can't defend everything he's just said on TV either, and as a result is going to be in big trouble in court. He just confessed to the crime on public TV. He's an idiot and then some.
 
The needle usually will just rise and not move under those conditions. You have deviated from the normal stuff here. I can't defend everything LRH has said anymore than I could defend everything you've said. I can't defend everything I've said either.

George Zimmerman can't defend everything he's just said on TV either, and as a result is going to be in big trouble in court. He just confessed to the crime on public TV. He's an idiot and then some.

So, LRon, the discover of the Great Truth of Scientology says one thing and you say he is incorrect. In a perfect world, who would anyone believe?

:boggled:
 
So, LRon, the discover of the Great Truth of Scientology says one thing and you say he is incorrect. In a perfect world, who would anyone believe?

:boggled:

It's well known that people can 'fool' lie detectors and the like. The TRUTH is that a lie detector doesn't even detect lies. Not only that, but the Emeter work best at times and very little at others. During the self-auditing course you learn how to produce the proper conditions for the Emeter to work.

If you don't want to read on a lie detector or emeter, then go for a swim for a long time, lie out in the sun and get sun burnt, get tired, and get dehydrated. I assure you, neither a lie detector or an emeter will read through that.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom