Maybe they are appropriating the Roman symbol of crucifixion as a metaphor for overcoming body thetans? Maybe it was part of the symbol of those DC-10s when they dropped off the frozen aliens into the volcanos of Hawaii? Maybe it's just a sham and using an existing religious symbol gives legitimacy to a quasi-religious pyramid scheme? We all know LRH thought Jesus was a pederast and people only invented Christianity because of brain-washed body thetans.

Thank you for playing Slog.

The Romans can claim prior art.

Ah, best funny of the day. :)

Which means you're absolutely right. The scientologists using the cross is a little like Fascist groups wrapping themselves in the American Flag; it's only used to fool.

Not to mention the grand bazaar in Instanbul which has been operating since the 1400s. And every ad-hoc street market in the world where rural farmers would bring their goods for sale.

"Look it up!"

You all frighten me.

#16, you said "in spirit, if not in fact"

Usually that would mean it could be in fact, but if not, it's in spirit. Given that it's ambiguous and sloppy writing, though, who knows. So #5 was warranted, I think, and funny.

#12, you're a stenographer now?

Thanks for the follow-up on yesterday's post, though. Thanks for playing Slog!

Haven't you paid for your OTIII yet?!

Also, 5280, we may be in agreement as to your second post, when you clarified from "Jesus" to "'Biblical' Jesus" per my statements above.

Maybe more people should ask them...

They use the cross to show the "8 dynamics" and imply that it is a religion and not a self help study like Hubbard say it was at the start. And unfortunately I do not know what the eight dynamics are. It's something like family, friends, spouses/children, co-workers... I dunno. There's too much crazy stuff all mixed in to keep it all straight any more.

There are no contemporary or independent accounts of Jesus. The oldest known accounts were written down by followers who never met him or independent writers noting the emergence of a group calling themselves Christians who claimed to be followers of a man named Jesus.

It can be speculated and argued that he existed or not. I think there probably was a man behind the myth, but there is no way to establish this.

See chapter 7 of bare-faced messiah:
http://www.clambake.org/archive/books/bfm/bfmconte.htm

(No, I'm not a Scientologist. I just study this stuff, and appreciate any opportunity to make it useful...you can imagine.)

Hence, the wholesale theft of religious trappings. The cross, clerical collars, "youth ministers", Sunday services... And because the blatant theft of these generally religious traits made it difficult to say they WEREN'T a religion, they got tax-exempt status. Easy.

My personal opinion is that they pulled off a very neat trick in doing this, because what they essentially did was challenge the courts to not just figure out if THEY were a religion, but define religion in general. And no one wants to start thumping the Christian hive with a stick, now do they?

Blech to the whole thing.

It's nothing new for unpopular religious groups to adopt the trappings of more mainstream religions in order to gain social acceptance. (And, yes, most social scientists who study religious groups do consider Scientology a religion today, regardless of how it started.)

It's certainly legitmitate to criticize Scientology for this and many other things. But I wouldn't single them out as uniquely awful in this regard either.