Mormonism & Scientology Compared

[bluebell]

10 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I'm currently watching Leah Remini's exposure on Scientology on A&E on Tuesdays. Then found out about the movie "Going Clear" and the comparison of the two religions, have yet to watch. But already see similarities such as ostracism (some LDS members do this), expectation of monies, climbing a ladder or a bridge (works based), exclaiming they are the only way to reach the highest level, to name a few. 

Both religions have a lot of good as far as the members wanting to better themselves. But I really see that one is evil IMO, and the other, LDS, is not. Too bad people see us as similar.  

 

I've watched Going Clear and I don't remember there being that many similarities at all.  In fact, i don't even remember that being an aspect of the show (comparing LDS and scientology).  Is it really in there and i've just forgotten?  It's been a while since i've seen it.  

I know you provided examples on how the religions are the same but I guess i'm still not really seeing it.  For one thing, you can't really compare what members do if their actions are actually against the teachings of the religion.  That's like saying that a family espouses theft because one of their kids is always in trouble for shoplifting.   The comparison should be between things or doctrines each religion actually embraces and not things that some of the members might do but which the religion itself does not condone.

Ostracism of people who stop believing in the religion doesn't seem to match.  Most people who stop coming or stop believing complain that the LDS church and it's members won't leave them alone.  In Scientology, ostracism is doctrine, in the LDS church it is specifically preached against.

As for works based, the LDS obviously has the Atonement as the major/main doctrine in their religion, as well as teachings on the absolute need of a Savior.  Does Scientology have anything comparable?

[Tacenda]

43 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I've watched Going Clear and I don't remember there being that many similarities at all.  In fact, i don't even remember that being an aspect of the show (comparing LDS and scientology).  Is it really in there and i've just forgotten?  It's been a while since i've seen it.  

I know you provided examples on how the religions are the same but I guess i'm still not really seeing it.  For one thing, you can't really compare what members do if their actions are actually against the teachings of the religion.  That's like saying that a family espouses theft because one of their kids is always in trouble for shoplifting.   The comparison should be between things or doctrines each religion actually embraces and not things that some of the members might do but which the religion itself does not condone.

Ostracism of people who stop believing in the religion doesn't seem to match.  Most people who stop coming or stop believing complain that the LDS church and it's members won't leave them alone.  In Scientology, ostracism is doctrine, in the LDS church it is specifically preached against.

As for works based, the LDS obviously has the Atonement as the major/main doctrine in their religion, as well as teachings on the absolute need of a Savior.  Does Scientology have anything comparable?

No, they sure don't include Jesus, in fact when they work up the "bridge" and spending thousands to do it, there is nothing left and the church leaders would need to add more. So you're definitely spot on.

Ostrasize is probably the wrong word. I think it's more that some don't want to be around the vocal ex-LDS that are spouting anti sentiments, or they don't want the doubt germ. But there have been negative comments about apostates in the church, surely you are aware of them through the years in the past. And you're right, some of the Scientologist members are told to follow these ex-Scientologists and scream in their faces, or go through their garbage and find something to make them look bad, they try to make them look like they're evil so their family and friends won't have anything to do with them. You should watch the show.

While single and working in SLC, on my way to work, I was walking down the sidewalk and they had rented out a small part of the building and asking people to come in and answer a survey and then offering tests etc. I didn't have time and turned them down, but it was really strange. Then years later while my children were young I received a phone call, a solicitation, asking me to come in and try Scientology. I asked them if they believed in God, and although the caller said yes, it didn't feel right. Something felt off about the whole thing. 

Edited December 15, 2016 by Tacenda

[Jeanne]

43 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

No, they sure don't include Jesus, in fact when they work up the "bridge" and spending thousands to do it, there is nothing left and the church leaders would need to add more. So you're definitely spot on.

Ostrasize is probably the wrong word. I think it's more that some don't want to be around the vocal ex-LDS that are spouting anti sentiments, or they don't want the doubt germ. But there have been negative comments about apostates in the church, surely you are aware of them through the years in the past. And you're right, some of the Scientologist members are told to follow these ex-Scientologists and scream in their faces, or go through their garbage and find something to make them look bad, they try to make them look like they're evil so their family and friends won't have anything to do with them. You should watch the show.

While single and working in SLC, on my way to work, I was walking down the sidewalk and they had rented out a small part of the building and asking people to come in and answer a survey and then offering tests etc. I didn't have time and turned them down, but it was really strange. Then years later while my children were young I received a phone call, a solicitation, asking me to come in and try Scientology. I asked them if they believed in God, and although the caller said yes, it didn't feel right. Something felt off about the whole thing. 

Ew....I have never had or heard of such calls...I would rather believe in the spaghetti monster than really get involved in Scientology...they must thrive on those surveys.

 

[bluebell]

Anyone who thinks that the LDS church is similar to the church of scientology needs to watch Leah Remini's show on A&E (it's on On Demand in my area so you can see past episodes).  She's collecting stories from former Scientologists and it's clear that our church and that church have very little in common.

[Tacenda]

On 12/30/2016 at 11:51 AM, bluebell said:

Anyone who thinks that the LDS church is similar to the church of scientology needs to watch Leah Remini's show on A&E (it's on On Demand in my area so you can see past episodes).  She's collecting stories from former Scientologists and it's clear that our church and that church have very little in common.

I've been watching Leah Remini's newer shows tonight, and you are so right about our church not being like this crazy group. In the episode I'm watching now, a couple left, but the church members are chasing the husband behind his motorcycle and trying to run him off the road. The wife who had been in since a 16 yr. old, had to lie and say she left him, while trying to figure out a way to escape. This is almost as bad as the FLDS group.

Edited January 2, 2017 by Tacenda

[Jeanne]

11 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I've been watching Leah Remini's newer shows tonight, and you are so right about our church not being like this crazy group. In the episode I'm watching now, a couple left, but the church members are chasing the husband behind his motorcycle and trying to run him off the road. The wife who had been in since a 16 yr. old, had to lie and say she left him, while trying to figure out a way to escape. This is almost as bad as the FLDS group.

I agree...when watching this, I realized that nothing speaks cult like this. 

[bluebell]

I thought the forced abortions were really sad.

[Tacenda]

32 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I thought the forced abortions were really sad.

I didn't see that, whoa, the complete opposite of the LDS church. I usually (i know i pick on our church though) try to not judge other churches, but this Scientology is pure evil. God's not in it anywhere.

[juliann]

Given that Mormonism has easily been turned into something I wouldn't recognize by angry former members who aren't making good money for it, I'm going to take Remini with a grain of salt. She has zero incentive to make anything look reasonable, understandable, or benign. Does she do anything else now? Is this now her livelihood? 

I don't know enough about scientology to make a judgment, it is not something that would appeal to me. But I'm sure not going to take a professional exit counselor's paid word for it without hearing from a lot of believers first.

 

[bluebell]

44 minutes ago, juliann said:

Given that Mormonism has easily been turned into something I wouldn't recognize by angry former members who aren't making good money for it, I'm going to take Remini with a grain of salt. She has zero incentive to make anything look reasonable, understandable, or benign. Does she do anything else now? Is this now her livelihood? 

I don't know enough about scientology to make a judgment, it is not something that would appeal to me. But I'm sure not going to take a professional exit counselor's paid word for it without hearing from a lot of believers first.

 

I was thinking the same thing until i watched her series.  Have you seen it?  It's very interesting.  I'm not sure if it's her livlihood, but she does mention that her goal is to get someone to pay attention to the illegal and semi-illegal things they do (such as harassment, and it is insane how they harass people.  Physical abuse is another).  

And her biggest goal is to get the church to stop their disconnect doctrine, which is that the second someone questions or leaves scientology their family absolutely cannot have any contact with them for any reason or they will be kicked out.  

 

 

[juliann]

I've seen some of a couple of shows. It just seemed to be a lot of well produced accusations and complaints. If there is something illegal, then use the law! That will stop it.. But no money in that. Or no proof which is probably most likely. 

This brings me back to my study of New Religious Movements, there is a credible field of scholars involved. They have debunked this kind of stuff (brainwashing, forced participation, etc.), with the earlier "cult" movements that scared everybody in the 70s.  People choose to cut contact with family over any number of reasons. Why is this one any different than any other poor excuse? 

There is a step by step formula for professional "apostates," and that is an academic term.  They make the same accusations for the same reasons. First, she has to explain why she colluded with the enemy so long...so there has to be the imprisonment stories. The atrocity stories. It is textbook. Literally. The only problem with this is that she walked out under her own power. (I mean really, it's not like they wall them all up in some remote country.) And not only that, she is making good money by leaving. 

I'm failing to see the difference between what she is doing and any other anti-Mormon/Jewish/whatever ministry. 

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, juliann said:

I've seen some of a couple of shows. It just seemed to be a lot of well produced accusations and complaints. If there is something illegal, then use the law! That will stop it.. But no money in that. Or no proof which is probably most likely. 

This brings me back to my study of New Religious Movements, there is a credible field of scholars involved. They have debunked this kind of stuff (brainwashing, forced participation, etc.), with the earlier "cult" movements that scared everybody in the 70s.  People choose to cut contact with family over any number of reasons. Why is this one any different than any other poor excuse? 

There is a step by step formula for professional "apostates," and that is an academic term.  They make the same accusations for the same reasons. First, she has to explain why she colluded with the enemy so long...so there has to be the imprisonment stories. The atrocity stories. It is textbook. Literally. The only problem with this is that she walked out under her own power. (I mean really, it's not like they wall them all up in some remote country.) And not only that, she is making good money by leaving. 

I'm failing to see the difference between what she is doing and any other anti-Mormon/Jewish/whatever ministry. 

This is going to be rambling, sorry.  I'm doing way to many things at once!

From what i've seen, they've tried using the law, but i think it's an issue of things that are shady but not illegal. Like sending people to picket the place where you work so that you get fired.  Or having people follow you around and video tape you every time you or a family member leaves the house because it would be intimidating (especially for spouses).  Or having you join an organization when you are 12, giving you no schooling, and then telling you that if you leave you have to pay back $40,000 as a 'freeloader debt' because of all the money they put into you.

But like i said, i had the same feelings that you did, but, after watching people's stories, i've come to the point where I'm starting to recognize that just because something is similar, doesn't mean it's always the same.  It's like how people have shown that placebos can actually make people feel better, but that doesn't mean that medicine is a hoax.

Just because some people lie about mormonism doesn't mean that every exmember of a religion is lying.  Like i said though, i had to watch about 5 hours of shows before I could see the bigger picture.

Having said that, i don't believe everything that is said.  And lastly, i think the main difference is the type of accusations that are being made.  These are people that aren't upset because the theology turned out to be a lie.  That's pretty much why ex-mormons are upset.

Edited January 4, 2017 by bluebell

[Calm]

Do you mean are not upset?

[bluebell]

17 minutes ago, Calm said:

Do you mean are not upset?

Yep!

[bluebell]

19 minutes ago, Calm said:

Do you mean are not upset?

Yep!

[juliann]

20 minutes ago, bluebell said:

This is going to be rambling, sorry.  I'm doing way to many things at once!

From what i've seen, they've tried using the law, but i think it's an issue of things that are shady but not illegal. Like sending people to picket the place where you work so that you get fired.  Or having people follow you around and video tape you every time you or a family member leaves the house because it would be intimidating (especially for spouses).  Or having you join an organization when you are 12, giving you no schooling, and then telling you that if you leave you have to pay back $40,000 as a 'freeloader debt' because of all the money they put into you.

But like i said, i had the same feelings that you did, but, after watching people's stories, i've come to the point where I'm starting to recognize that just because something is similar, doesn't mean it's always the same.  It's like how people have shown that placebos can actually make people feel better, but that doesn't mean that medicine is a hoax.

Just because some people lie about mormonism doesn't mean that every exmember of a religion is lying.  Like i said though, i had to watch about 5 hours of shows before I could see the bigger picture.

Having said that, i don't believe everything that is said.  And lastly, i think the main difference is the type of accusations that are being made.  These are people that are upset because the theology turned out to be a lie.  That's pretty much why ex-mormons are upset.

Well, I have to defer to someone who has actually watched it!

But as unpalatable as this religion seems,  I remain suspicious based on stuff like this:

http://www.scientologymyths.info/apostates/docs/bryan-wilson-apostate-study.pdf

Quote

Sociologists and other investigators into minority religions have thus come to recognize a particular constellation of motives that prompt apostates in the stance they adopt relative to their previous religious commitment and their more recent renunciation of it. The apostate needs to establish his credibility both with respect to his earlier conversion to a religious body and his subsequent relinquishment of that commitment. To vindicate himself in regard to his volte face requires a plausible explanation of both his (usually sudden) adherence to his erstwhile faith and his no less sudden abandonment and condemnation of it. Academics have come to recognize the "atrocity story" as a distinctive genre of the apostate, and have even come to regard it as a recognizable category of phenomena [A.D. Shupe, Jr., and D. G. Bromley, "Apostates and Atrocity Stories", in B. Wilson (ed.), The Social Impact of New Religious Movements, New York, Rose of Sharon Press, 1981, pp. 179-215.] The apostate typically represents himself having been introduced to his former allegiance at a time when he was especially vulnerable – depressed, isolated, lacking social or financial support, alienated from his family, or some other such circumstance. His former associates are now depicted as having prevailed upon him by false claims, deceptions, promises of love, support, enhanced prospects, increased well-being, or the like. In fact, the apostate story proceeds, they were false friends, seeking only to exploit his goodwill, and extract from him long hours of work without pay, or whatever money or property he possessed. Thus, the apostate presents himself as "a brand plucked from the burning," as having been not responsible for his actions when he was inducted into his former religion, and as having "come to his senses" when he left. Essentially, his message is that "given the situation, it could have happened to anyone." They are entirely responsible and they act with malice aforethought against unsuspecting, innocent victims. By such a representation of the case, the apostate relocates responsibility for his earlier actions, and seeks to reintegrate with the wider society which he now seeks to influence, and perhaps to mobilize, against the religious group which he has lately abandoned. 

I would have much more confidence in this apostate if she would use her considerable means to go after them legally.  

[Bobbieaware]

On 7/27/2015 at 2:55 AM, Joshua Valentine said:

 

I'm not sure if this is directed toward my points or not.  If so, the teachings that Heavenly Father is an entity originating in and dependent upon the universe or system of existence, that he is a result of eternal matter and its Eternal Principles or Laws, shows that, however one interprets Fac 2 of the BoA, LDS theology is critically different than non-LDS Christian theology that insists that there is only One Ultimate and it is God, everything else in existence is created by Him and is subordinate to Him. 

 

This makes the non-LDS Christian God quite different than a "space alien" and it makes the LDS God something quite like a "space alien".  So, in this regard at least, Mormonism and Scientology share a certain level of "space-exotic", as Tyson put it.

 

As for you take on Fac 2, despite it's description of the LDS Heavenly Father as semi-transcendent, it still does not take him outside of or above the system of existence, as non-LDS Christian theology insists is the fact, and thus is still more similar to Scientology's technologically transcendent space aliens.

Does the fact that Jesus Christ is God but that he was born on this material planet that's part of the Milky Way galaxy, and that he grew up here, lived here, died here, was raised from the dead here, and will return here to rule and reign during the millennium make God a space alien? 

[Calm]

3 hours ago, juliann said:

Well, I have to defer to someone who has actually watched it!

But as unpalatable as this religion seems,  I remain suspicious based on stuff like this:

http://www.scientologymyths.info/apostates/docs/bryan-wilson-apostate-study.pdf

I would have much more confidence in this apostate if she would use her considerable means to go after them legally.  

Interesting church response:

http://www.leahreminiaftermath.com/

[Calm]

According to this, she is suing them:

http://www.inquisitr.com/3743074/leah-remini-dishes-on-ludicrous-lawsuit-against-the-church-of-scientology/

[bluebell]

7 minutes ago, Calm said:

Interesting church response:

http://www.leahreminiaftermath.com/

She reads all their letters on the show and they put up links and stuff (including the link above) so people can read them for themselves. It's very interesting to see how the church responds. Their  go to maneuver is vilification. 

Edited January 4, 2017 by bluebell

[Calm]

Yeah, I wasn't impressed by that.  That tends to be rather convincing something's wonky.  Given they court celebrities and there are only about 50,000, unfortunately finding a 'normal' believer so one could get to know it on a more personal level would be hard for most people.

Edited January 4, 2017 by Calm

[bluebell]

9 hours ago, Calm said:

Yeah, I wasn't impressed by that.  That tends to be rather convincing something's wonky.  Given they court celebrities and there are only about 50,000, unfortunately finding a 'normal' believer so one could get to know it on a more personal level would be hard for most people.

It's kind of amazing how many pathological liars the church attracts.  If we believe what the letters say, ever person who leaves is one.  

[Tacenda]

Matrix of thought... it's so strong it sticks to you like glue...there is no logical explanation other than faith... These are a few comments from this short clip. These may align with our faith, I don't know. The one about faith sticks out.

[Calm]

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

It's kind of amazing how many pathological liars the church attracts.  If we believe what the letters say, ever person who leaves is one.  

Except we don't hear from all those who just leave the Church and have no problem with it.  I did a bit of reading last night and there are some articles about celebrities who were involved for awhile and a number said they just lost interest and didn't express any concern over blowback.

There is definitely something wrong based on the Church's public treatment of vocal dissenters.  There have been some weird 'not seen in public' stuff going on as well.  Both make me leery of the group, but I would really like to hear more from current low level members, their extended families as well as seeing what those exmembers who have not chosen to go vocal, etc. have to say.

[bluebell]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

Except we don't hear from all those who just leave the Church and have no problem with it.  I did a bit of reading last night and there are some articles about celebrities who were involved for awhile and a number said they just lost interest and didn't express any concern over blowback.

There is definitely something wrong based on the Church's public treatment of vocal dissenters.  There have been some weird 'not seen in public' stuff going on as well.  Both make me leery of the group, but I would really like to hear more from current low level members, their extended families as well as seeing what those exmembers who have not chosen to go vocal, etc. have to say.

From what i can see (and it's not much) the real problems come after you join the Sea Organization.  That is when you sign the billion year contract and basically agree that the church owns you and you will work for them 24/7 (this is why women are not allowed to have kids i guess).  They start accepting people into the Sea Org when they turn 12 but i don't think there's an age cap on it.

If you don't ever join that part of it, i don't think it's that big of a deal if you leave.  I could be wrong about that though.  The only stories i've read are from people who were in Sea Org.