Any of you people Scientologists?

[SlipAngle 10+ year member]

Everyone does not have a 'religion.' Some people actually scale their certainties about the world with the available evidence. This is called intellectual honesty; not claiming to know things that you do not know. Also, your definition of religion is oversimplified. Religion is more than just dogmatism, it's also art, rituals, moral codes, traditions, spirituality, etc.

Religion is convincing yourself that you understand something which you know you truly cannot understand.

 

[scottyk 10+ year member]

Scotty, I think you're kind of missing the point.
What I am challenging is the methods or guidelines for accepting whether a claim or a religion could be considered true. First, I sought to demonstrate that assessing truth by using the background of the writer works just as badly for Scientology as it does for any other religion. Second, I sought to demonstrate that plucking out historical accuracies, while ignoring historical inaccuracies or unproven claims, is not a good way to determine whether the entire text is truthful. So even if Scientology has some truth to it (like references to evolution) and the bible has some truth to it (like references to King Ahab), that still does not demonstrate that the text, as a whole, is true.

As for your claim that there are as many people that say it is verifiable as there are who say it isn't, I suggest that anyone professing that the bible is completely historically verified (in particular the character of Jesus), or that we know who the authors of the New Testament are, is being intellectually dishonest, because they are either talking about a subject on which they are ill-informed, or intentionally being deceitful.

Ahh, I understand now. Thanks for the clarification. Guess I was interpreting it wrong. That and I only quoted and was pertaining my posts toward your one post you quoted, not all of them.