Brad’s Comments (group member since Oct 16, 2009)

Brad’s comments from the L. Ron Hubbard group.

I use that once in a great while. I have'nt been very impressed with there prices or selections in the last few years.

Me too! I bought an original Triton last year. The local church library does'nt even have one. Lucked out on abebooks.com gave a small fortune for it.

Oh yes! back in 1972. It helped me get through high school. I own just about all his books. The basics of the book is for the person to live just in the 24hrs.

Yes glad were talking again. That test didnt suprise much. Did you take it yet?

ok. I took a quiz on facebook. It is called "What Religion are You?" I took the test and My religion is Islam.

I had no idea what that was until it was too late. I punished my sisters daughter for sending me that in facebook.

Not that I can find. And the Gospels were written alegedly around 300 years after being passed down by word of mouth. So you see, in my opinion, the Christian religion is more "faith" then they would care to admitt. There is only one thing that I actually enjoy reading in the gospel.

The Money Changers.

In the episode, Jesus is stated to have visited the Temple in Jerusalem, Herod's Temple, at which the courtyard is described as being filled with livestock and the tables of the money changers, who changed the standard Greek and Roman money for Jewish and Tyrian money, which were the only coinage that could be used in Temple ceremonies. According to the Gospels, Jesus took offense to this extorting profit from the people to hear the word of God. Creating a whip from some cords, "he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen, and poured out the changers' money and overturned the tables. But he said to those who sold doves, "Get these out of here! Do not make My Father's house a house of merchandise!"John 2:13-16

The church could use a little whipping today. (smile)

This was the Roman Govenor that sentenced Christ (at the advice of the Jewish leaders) to death (crucifixion). He is listed in the roman historical archives as a actual real person. The only thing in the Bible that can be proven as a historical fact.

According to the canonical Christian Gospels, Pilate presided at the trial of Jesus and, despite stating that he personally found him not guilty of a crime meriting death, handed him over to crucifixion. Pilate is thus a pivotal character in the New Testament accounts of Jesus.

According to the New Testament, Jesus was brought to Pilate by the Sanhedrin, who had arrested Jesus and questioned him themselves. The Sanhedrin had, according to the Gospels, only been given answers by Jesus that they considered blasphemous pursuant to Mosaic law, which was unlikely to be deemed a capital offense by Pilate interpreting Roman law. The Gospel of Luke records that members of the Sanhedrin then took Jesus before Pilate where they accused him of sedition against Rome by opposing the payment of taxes to Caesar and calling himself a king. Fomenting tax resistance was a capital offense. Pilate was responsible for imperial tax collections in Judea. Jesus had asked the tax collector Levi, at work in his tax booth in Capernaum, to quit his post. Jesus also appears to have influenced Zacchaeus, "a chief tax collector" in Jericho, which is in Pilate's tax jurisdiction, to resign. Pilate's main question to Jesus was whether he considered himself to be the King of the Jews, and thus a political threat. Mark in the NIV translation states: "Are you the king of the Jews?" asked Pilate. "It is as you say," Jesus replied. However, quite a number of other translations render Jesus' reply as variations of the phrase:"Thou sayest it."(King James Version, Mark 15:2); "So you say." (Good News Bible, Mark 15:2). Whatever degree of confirmation modern interpreters would derive from this answer of Jesus, according to the New Testament, it was not enough for Pilate to view Jesus as a real political threat. In the same Gospel of Mark, 15 verse 5 of King James Version we read, that "Pilate marvelled" ("was amazed" in Good News Bible).

Following the Roman custom, Pilate ordered a sign posted above Jesus on the cross stating "Jesus of Nazareth, The King of the Jews" to give public notice of the legal charge against him for his crucifixion. The chief priests protested that the public charge on the sign should read that Jesus claimed to be King of the Jews. Pilate refused to change the posted charge. This may have been to emphasize Rome's supremacy in crucifying a Jewish king; it is not unlikely, though, that Pilate was quite irritated by the fact, that the Jewish leaders had used him as a marionette and thus compelled him to sentence Jesus to death contrary to his own will (according to Mathew 27:19, even Pilate's wife asked him on Jesus' behalf).

The Gospel of Luke also reports that such questions were asked of Jesus, in Luke's case it being the priests that repeatedly accused him, though Luke states that Jesus remained silent to such inquisition, causing Pilate to hand Jesus over to the jurisdiction (Galilee) of Herod Antipas. Although initially excited with curiosity at meeting Jesus, of whom he had heard much, Herod (according to Luke) ended up mocking Jesus and so sent him back to Pilate. This intermediate episode with Herod is not reported by the other Gospels, which appear to present a continuous and singular trial in front of Pilate. Luke, however, made further reference to this involvement of Herod along with Pilate into Jesus' execution and linked it with the prophecy about the Messianic King found in Psalm 2, as we can read in Luke's other book, Acts 4:24-28. This explains why he counted this episode of importance.

Unlike the synoptic gospels, the Gospel of John gives more detail about that dialog taking place between Jesus and Pilate. In John, Jesus seems to confirm the fact of his kingship, although immediately explaining, that "[his:] kingdom [was:] not of this world"; of far greater importance for the followers of Christ is his own definition of the goal of his ministry on earth at the time. According to Jesus, as we find it written in John 18:37, Jesus thus describes his mission: " [I:] came into the world ... to bear witness to the truth; and all who are on the side of truth listen to [my:] voice", to which Pilate famously replied, "What is truth?" (John 18:38)...

Whatever it be that some modern critics want to deduce from those differences, the ending result was the same for Jesus and Pilate, as it was in all the other 3 Gospels (Mathew, Mark, Luke). In the same chapter of John 18 verse 38 (King James Version, compare with other versions) the conclusion Pilate made from this interrogation:"I find in him no fault at all".

The Synoptic Gospels and John then state that it had been a tradition of the Jews to release a prisoner at the time of the Passover. Pilate offers them the choice of an insurrectionist named Barabbas or Jesus, somewhat confusing because Barabbas had the full name Jesus Barabbas, and bar-Abbas means son of the father. The crowd may not have understood whose release they were asking for, and were particularly susceptible to suggestions from the Jewish leaders. The crowd states that they wish to save Barabbas.

Pilate agrees to condemn Jesus to crucifixion, after the Jewish leaders explained to him, ostensibly kindly[vague:], that Jesus presented a threat to Roman occupation through his claim to the throne of King David as King of Israel in the royal line of David. The crowd in Pilate's courtyard, according to the Synoptics, had been coached to shout against Jesus by the Pharisees and Sadducees. The Gospel of Matthew adds that before condemning Jesus to death, Pilate washes his hands with water in front of the crowd, saying, "I am innocent of this man's blood; you will see."

In all gospel accounts, Pilate is reluctant to condemn Jesus, but is eventually forced to give in when the crowd becomes unruly and the Jewish leaders remind him that Jesus's claim to be king is a challenge to Roman authority. Roman magistrates had wide discretion in executing their tasks, and some readers question whether Pilate would have been so captive to the demands of the crowd. Pilate was later recalled to Rome for his harsh treatment of the Jews.

With the Edict of Milan in AD 313, the state-sponsored persecution of Christians came to an end, and Christianity became officially tolerated as one of the religions of the Roman Empire. Afterward, in AD 325 the First Ecumenical Council at Nicaea promulgated a creed which was amended at the subsequent First Council of Constantinople in 381. The Nicene Creed incorporated for the first time the clause was crucified under Pontius Pilate (which had already been long established in the Old Roman Symbol, an ancient form of the Apostles' Creed dating as far back as the 2nd century AD) in a creed that was intended to be authoritative for all Christians in the Roman Empire.

As you can see. The whole ordeal revolved around money!

This is a very good question. I have read extensively about other religions. I have come up with an idea about the christian religion. They had mixed the pagan beliefs with there new concepts.

The holy trinity is not a new concept. It has been around for 1000s of years. It started with the sun worshipers. I have read Jung his theories on racial memory and symbolisms.

Humans are clanish animals. We have a need to be with others or groups. The groups we chooses are usually based on our environment and are education. Example of this would be if I grew up in your country. I doubt I would be a Jew or Christian or a Scientologist.

However, today we have the luxery of the internet and the information on many religions and there history. The fall of many religions is greed,lack of memborship or like here in America "corruption" as you have stated.

The mind is a very complex organic computer. The child mind is like a new computer. It needs correct updates and programming. If the child based on environment has bad programming this will effect the overall life of the computer and the person.

In my view. I woke up to Christianity at a very early age. I was 14. I realised the message of Christ was laced with historical inconsistancies. I further realised there was a 30 year lasp in his life. No writtings about this time frame? How come? The only documented proof of his possible existance is that there was a Pontcias Pilot based on Roman historical data. Thats it?

There are alot of things I do not agree with when it comes to relgion as a whole. The biggest one is if it is gonna cost me money. I dont want any part of it.

There are just a few religions that I believe are sincere and just. One is the Islamic religion. I have never thought that Mohummad "basterdized" his religion with Jewish and Christian aspects. If anything the Christain religion is the "king" of doing this.

The Catholics being the main ones for doing this. Suppress from the masses the truth and you end up with a cult. Knowledge is the key that seperates a good religion from a not so good one. Becuase of information via books and the internet. I can make that judgment call here in the confort of my home.

Im reading about an incident that involved this magician. I found it interesting that this fellow is credited with being the "father" of Gnosticism. The incident was where Simon Magus was in a contest in Rome showing his spritual superiority by floating in the air. Paul in the story called out to the demons helping him to float. To drop him. Which in doing so killed him. I find it interesting how this story came about in the early beginings of the church. This Simon Magus was considered a great Philosopher.
Here is a quote from him. "To you, therefore, I say I say, and write what I write. From what I have gathered. The entire Gnostic theory is based upon the hypothesis of emanations as being the logical connection between the irreconcilable opposites Spirit and Substance. Im wondering if this is how the early Christian church made the connection for the pagan religions to switch over to there beliefs? Its intersting how the early church was quick to blame Demons and the Satan for an incident happened that was unexplained. My thought in my younger years was that being a Gnostic was believing in something bigger then yourself, but not shure what that something is.

Yes, he was a very busy man. I think the fact that his family was very wealthy may of helped as well.

Ok, my question for you is this. From the Old Testament. There was a magician Simon Magus. He is suppose to be the founder of Gnosticism. Are you familiar with the name and the incident between him and St Peter?

I understand. Im busy as well. I have a few items of topics for us to discuss. When your finished watching the online videos.

Well, I can give you the website that has a little of the DVDs clips on it. I know that Hubbard in his later years felt that the "Jews" or international bankers had set out to destroy him. I think he was a little parinoid in his old age. I like reading about "conspiracy theories". I dont believe them. It makes for some excellent reading. I do love reading about mysticism and the magick of "will". Not that Harry Potter fantasy stuff.

well anyways I hope your doing well. Here is the website for your viewing.

http://www.scientology.org/#/videos/

Hi Mohamed,

I have been at work for the Railroad. I sometimes am gone from home several days. I would like to send you 2 DVDs that explain L. Ron Hubbard and the religion he started over 50 yrs ago. Im not shure if your country will allow me to send you this information. I would like your mailing address. If you would be most kind to email me that. I will ship them to your home.

I am always searching for enlightiment. On a daily basis as a matter of fact. I try to practice henotheism. So you see just because Im not a Christian doesnt make me a athiest.

Im looking forward to your next message and email.

No offense taken. I guess I didnt realise I was leading this conversation into religion and my beliefs.

Its very simple for me. I was a Christian. Now I am a Scientologist. As far as I know. No one in my religion has "killed" for there beliefs or has been killed.

I wasnt aware that my beliefs were being questioned here Mohamed. To be very blunt about my beliefs. I woke up to the dogma of the Christian faith when I was 14 yrs old. The tenets of the different denominations available in my country different to some extent. But, to look at them all. The bottom line is just a form of controlling the masses.

For the longest time. I didnt believe in God. I just believed in good. Now that Im older and have experienced life for 50 years. I can except others for what works for them. Christianity however
didnt work for me.

I do enjoy reading other religions though. I also like reading about "cults" as well.

here is my one email address afoundryrat2@yahoo.com

Its interesting that men of science and philosophy can seperate there beliefes. Knowing good and well that possibly there is a chance that we all could be wrong in thinking that there is a cosmic superior guiding our every thought and movement.

Scientology works for me. I enjoy the fact that man. If he has the proper training can acheieve perfection in mind body and spirit.

The nice thing about this is very simple. I dont have to join a holy war or see how much I can donate to be a "theta clear". I do practice and believe the 8 dynamics set down on paper by L. Ron Hubbard.

I can only imagine that time will place him next to the other great philosophers and religious leaders.

Mohamed have you read any of L. Ron Hubbards Dianetics or Scientology books? I have several brand new DVDs here that I would and could send you that explain both.

Goodmorning Mohamed, Please excuse my grammar and spelling as well. Im very spoiled by spell checkers. It looks like we do have some common ground on this topic.

"For how it comes that the lower begets the higher and how matter that is irrational begets rational beings like man"

This is the big question for me. {Why}. As a child, maybe I was 7 or 8 yrs old. I had decided that reincarnation was what my religious teachers were trying to put in to my head.

I would play in the back yard and imagine my death many times. The way I looked at it. Now, mind you I was just a child. That when death comes. I would go to the next level down the animal inteligence level.

Maybe, a dog or a cat. All the way down to an earthworm. This was to me now. Still is a puzzle. I cant for the life of me explain why I would think thoughts like that.

I had proper teachings of the Bible. I went to church on a regular basis. I always thought that there was more to the story. A big secret was awaiting me. If I dug into the subject or lived a decent life.

Now, 40 some odd years later. Im still searching for answers. Still waiting for my enlightenment. I look at todays world not as the child I once was. I look at the world and mans place in it. I dont like what I see. Based on my years of research into subjects like philosophy and the sciences . I come to realise what sorry shape man is in today.

I realise that men like you and me. Who see the world for what it is based on our background teachings and morals. Could and would save the world from man, and save man from himself. We also see men in power, who are able to do this and will not.

I practice this in my daily life. If I can just do one thing to better my neighbor. That will hopefully create a ripple effect. Because of my inability to change the world all at once. I am limited to attempt this one person at a time.

In my beliefs, man no matter how he is conditioned is directed by these 8 things:

Dynamic one: is the urge towards survival as an individual.

Dynamic two: is the urge towards survival through procreation; it includes both the act of sex and the raising and care of children.

Dynamic three: is the urge towards survival for the group.

Dynamic four: is the urge of the individual toward survival for Mankind.

Dynamic five: is the urge to survive as a life organism and embraces all life forms.

Dynamic six: is the urge to survive as part of the physical universe and includes the survival of the physical universe.

Dynamic seven: is the urge toward survival as a spirit.

Dynamic eight: is the urge toward survival as a part of the Supreme Being.

As, you can see survival is the common axiom. The 8 dynamics are not human reason. Its a fact of nature. Some men get stuck and never get past a certain dynamic. This is probably the majority of the human race today.

I hope that this explains someof my thought patterns to you.

Man {in my opinion} has the obtion to be either happy or un-happy. In my case for example. I will sit and ponder my daily planned activities. I use my 2 halves of my brain to analize and justify my actions.

We as humans (in my opnionofcourse) have 2 sides of the brain. The one side is the rational side or if you will the "analytical" this does the actuall computations. If its in perfect running order. I should be able to take life on my terms. And have many wins for that day.

The other side of the brain the "reactive side" This side is the "unconscience". Which is always on or conscience. A virtual tape recorder. If I let that have its way I tend to get into trouble. Its also very primative.

This is where the "meta-programming comes into play for me. If I can recognize a situtaion that I have either:

1. Experienced before

2. Have been taught by society the "good or bad" of the out come through Trainning Routines. (school, parental, advice or man-made or secular laws.

3. Have designed my own own programming. (Spinoza)

The concept for me always has been this. Since a very early age. I have always wondered this. How do we as humans. Decide or know what is really "right or wrong"? by whos standards? Who actually put pen to paper or chisle to stone?

I think for the most part. That it all comes down to the key action "survival". If I am in a situation that needs my brain to computate for the sake of survival. Time is the main factor. Then my "reactive side will 9 times out of 10 take over. Good or bad, right or wrong.

This can be a big failure if the machine is brand new and no data is actually involved. Like expecting a new born baby to rescue a person from a burning building. In this case training and experience are a factor.

If the brain is lets say in top woring order. Is like a computer. {defragmented, scan for bad sectors and is updated). Then the possibilities for endless happiness and pure logical funtion can take place.

So in my opnion. If the brain is in perfect working order. Then I can help my neighbor get his brain into pefect working order as well. It takes 2 people to help each other out. Then it goes on and doubles from there.

Then you will have men like. Descartes and Leibniz
come into the picture to offer up better ways to "program" or fine tune.

In closing. To me. Happiness is to survive without pain. To not have my reactive mind input or dictate to me the activities of the moment.

No bother here. Metaphysics has not out lived its usefulness here at my house. I have plenty of books on the subject. I have alot of books as you may know.
My books cant read themsleves. They cant protect themsleves either. But, my books have more power in them then all the man made weapons I own.

There just words. Just like "to be or not to be". Thats the reality of the subject. When two thinkers get together and well, just think. In my books some men took paths to gain scientific knowledge. Most had to pretty much either do it in secret. If not then get kicked out of there church or burned at the stake. Thats why we have to have Secularism.

The best way for me to express my thoughts as to how I think outside the box. Is this very simple way of looking at things. For a lack of a better term. I use the word Rational. Is it rational for man to want to better himself at the expense of or the safety of our world?

If we didnt believe in a higher power (god). Would we as people or men of science be so quick to destroy? The key to this is one simple word. "Survive". This is something that even an atomic particle strives for. Survival. So, now comes the age old question. Whats it all for?

A better "here after" life? I think that the creator-god-zuess who ever. Has given man a great bilogical computer for his use. The Brain. I do agree with you Mohamed that there is a lot of evil out there. But, its the human brain thats the weapon. And does that same brain set the standards of good vs evil?

But, Its also the brain that can heal, that can make inventions of wonder and all. You see in my opnion. You have to have both good and evil in equal ammounts. Theres your cause and effect. Cause and effect sounds so much more "scientific" then good and evil. (that was a joke sorry)

My last way of looking at the 2 sides of Metaphysics/philosophy. The puppet master has his puppet. The puppet was created in the Masters image. One day the Master knows he may cut the strings. The puppet already is trying to figure out how to cut those strings himself "now". So, the puzzle here is. Not who will cut the strings first. But, how will it all end up.

Well I tend to go with the rationalism side. Pure reason to me takes precedence over abstracts. For an example. This is how I like to tie modern science into philosophy. Back in mid January 1900 the inventor Tesla of the radio (NOT MARCONI) was experimenting with radio waves. This was when he was in the state of Colorado.

His report to the world was that it was not a natural thing like solar flares. His report of these patterns "in his opinion could possibly be "transmissions" from Mars or Venus. This idea didnt fare well with not only the philosophers of the time, but with the world leaders in religion.

Although, years later it has been proven the signals are "star transmissions". The great debate still goes on about who, what, how. The point remains. The signals are there and are still transmitting to this day.

What he discovered was a set pattern of clicks. A freak of nature? Absolutley not. What he was recieving was "star signals.". At first, he kept silent about this. Then when he did release his findings. This turned the world on its ear.

The philosophy world was set into a tale spin. Mr Descarte would of loved to seen this I bet. lol How ever Descarte tried to apply pure math to the main stream of his times. I have contemplated that had he a computer. He could of came up with a program that would of predicted out comes for societies and natural sciences to tie them all together.

Actually Gottfried Leibniz could be classified into this as well. Imagine these two gentelemen working side by side at Microsoft?

As for Spinoza in my opnion he is one of the greats for the rationlist side of philosophy. To ask questions of the Jewish faith and get kicked out of it. I imagine that if he was told to ask just one question of a spuper computer os today. It would be the simple question of "why". Ofcourse this wouldnt be answered. The circuits would "burn out". To be kicked out of your faith because you question the "ethics" of it. To me is a great stand on your applied reason of the world around you.

Now as I look at these men. I cant help but wonder what it would to have had them all together in one room with all knowledge of moder day in there hands what kind of computer software would they come up with for mankind?

I hope I havent went to far off the mark Mohamed?

I have been sitting here thinking back when I was in college. The authors that I really enjoyed in Philosophy were:

1. Immanuel Kant (my favorite)
2. Descartes
3. Leibniz
4. Spinoza

I would like your thoughts on these gentlemen?