This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Does Scientology have just as much credibility as say Christianity?

#1Gryffindor1Posted 2/7/2013 9:37:08 PM
We know for a fact Scientology is fake. We know who created it, why he created it and how it was created. We can't say the same for Christianity though.
#2LastManStandingPosted 2/7/2013 9:37:41 PM
0 credibility
---
Divine Mercy - God Loves you as a sinner.
Christ Said: Before the Day of Justice, I am sending the Day of Mercy. (Diary 1588) Day of Mercy was declared in 2000
#3TheRealJiraiyaPosted 2/7/2013 9:40:41 PM
Excellent point, TC. 10 points for Gryffindor
---
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -Plato
http://tinyurl.com/JoinThisIRunIt
#4Lord_IchmaelPosted 2/7/2013 9:44:04 PM
Older religions are harder to disprove than newer ones. I think this is only because in older times it wasn't so easy to disprove outrageous claims and much easier to make outrageous claims, giving them an illusion of credibility to later generations.
#5darklaoPosted 2/7/2013 10:45:04 PM
Scientology just needs time and a few revolutions/schisms for internal competition and it will be basically the same thing. Plus a s***ty stress detector. So, as long as they don't cause any major wars they'll eventually come out ahead.
---
[agitprop]
come and play come and play forget about the movement
#6JonWood007Posted 2/7/2013 10:50:08 PM(edited)
Relevant.

http://imgur.com/9atnJ

Not sure how true it is in this context though. But um, yeah, scientology is more blatantly false compared to Christianity, especially due to the whole age thing. Christianity it's more difficult to flat out debunk it, although if we time traveled to 2000 years ago, we might see things in a much different light than we see them now. I think within the context, Jesus wasn't anything special. Apocalyptic prophets were common back then.
---
Desktop: Phenom II X4 965 | 4 GB DDR3 | GTX 580 | 1 TB HD | W7 | 650W Antec | 1600x900
Laptop: A6 3400m | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 6520g | 500 GB HD | W7 | 1366x768
#7UnfairRepresentPosted 2/7/2013 11:07:04 PM
JonWood007 posted...
Relevant.

http://imgur.com/9atnJ

Not sure how true it is in this context though. But um, yeah, scientology is more blatantly false compared to Christianity, especially due to the whole age thing. Christianity it's more difficult to flat out debunk it, although if we time traveled to 2000 years ago, we might see things in a much different light than we see them now. I think within the context, Jesus wasn't anything special. Apocalyptic prophets were common back then.


Being disprovable is part of the scientific method.

This makes Scientology MORE credible than Christianity.
---
^ Hey now that's completely unfair.
http://i.imgur.com/45yVrRr.jpg
#8bratt100Posted 2/7/2013 11:07:40 PM
JonWood007 posted...
Relevant.

http://imgur.com/9atnJ

Not sure how true it is in this context though. But um, yeah, scientology is more blatantly false compared to Christianity, especially due to the whole age thing. Christianity it's more difficult to flat out debunk it, although if we time traveled to 2000 years ago, we might see things in a much different light than we see them now. I think within the context, Jesus wasn't anything special. Apocalyptic prophets ARE common STILL.


FTFY
---
If you believe in the flying Spaghetti Monster and are 100% proud of it copy this to your sig.
#9bratt100Posted 2/7/2013 11:15:51 PM
UnfairRepresent posted...
JonWood007 posted...
Relevant.

http://imgur.com/9atnJ

Not sure how true it is in this context though. But um, yeah, scientology is more blatantly false compared to Christianity, especially due to the whole age thing. Christianity it's more difficult to flat out debunk it, although if we time traveled to 2000 years ago, we might see things in a much different light than we see them now. I think within the context, Jesus wasn't anything special. Apocalyptic prophets were common back then.


Being disprovable is part of the scientific method.

This makes Scientology MORE credible than Christianity.


It actually isn't disprovable though. His claims where about ancient events, the character of LRH plays no part in it's relevancy just look at the Mormons. They believe that a convicted conman was their prophet.
---
If you believe in the flying Spaghetti Monster and are 100% proud of it copy this to your sig.
#10darklaoPosted 2/8/2013 4:18:46 AM
Scientology mostly expects you to believe in a dictionary and galvanic skin response. It is of course a stupid oversimplification of a complex reality, but I mean... in comparison you have, what? Prayer, confession, hymns and lectures on morality, communion...?

I'm not sure where you place the credibility, but I mean scientifically one of them measures an actual physical/emotional response of some kind and the other goes on the honor system...
---
[agitprop]
come and play come and play forget about the movement