who is lord xenu?

[nlwright]

hi, i am studying and writing a series of articles on comparative religions. due to the growing popularity of scientology i am naturally curious. i found it was much easier to find negative testimonies than positive testimonies about scientology and had difficulty enough to even find a forum that was not critical of this religion. in one of my searches i found references made to a being called "lord xenu" or "lord xemu" (the spelling seems to vary). who is this being? what does this being have to do with the beliefs of scientology? if this being has anything to do with scientology then why does the scientology website make no mention of him?

 

[Storm]

Well, due to the secretive atmosphere of Scientology, it's difficult to get reliable info. Still, here's the Wiki.

 

[3.14]

still don't get why its called a religion, i mean its just a "guy" who killed alot of other "guys" and trapped there souls on earth (wich means that there kind of souls are testable aka not beyond the laws of sience )

 

[themadhair]

hi, i am studying and writing a series of articles on comparative religions. due to the growing popularity of scientology i am naturally curious. i found it was much easier to find negative testimonies than positive testimonies about scientology and had difficulty enough to even find a forum that was not critical of this religion. in one of my searches i found references made to a being called "lord xenu" or "lord xemu" (the spelling seems to vary). who is this being? what does this being have to do with the beliefs of scientology? if this being has anything to do with scientology then why does the scientology website make no mention of him?

Start a thread outside the DIR and I'll give the entire story with all the gory details.

 

[nlwright]

i appreciate your offer to clear up who lord xenu is but, i have already read the wiki article on it. it sounds pretty crazy. i can't help but be skeptical. in order to be fair i was hoping to hear an actual scientoligist explain it from their perspective. i'm assuming you are not a scientologist or else you would not have offered me information outside of this forum. my apologies if i am mistaken.

 

[Storm]

i appreciate your offer to clear up who lord xenu is but, i have already read the wiki article on it. it sounds pretty crazy. i can't help but be skeptical. in order to be fair i was hoping to hear an actual scientoligist explain it from their perspective. i'm assuming you are not a scientologist or else you would not have offered me information outside of this forum. my apologies if i am mistaken.

Ah, ok. I don't believe we have any Scientologists active.

 

[themadhair]

Best bet if you want to talk to an actual Scientologist about this is to try some of the FreeZoner sites. I’ve been trying to talk a few FreeZoners into participating on this site but I’ve had no success so far.

Those affiliated with the Scientology organisation itself simply will not discuss this topic with you. This is due to series of policy letters called KSW (Keeping Scientology Working). One of the letters in that series, HCOB 15th Feb 1979 titled “Verbal Tech: Penalties”, flat out forbids any Scientologist from discussing the beliefs of Scientology.

One FreeZone site that springs to mind is the Galactic Patrol website:
Galactic Patrol Home Page. Free Zone. Dianetics and Scientology. Captain Bill Robertson (Astar Paramejgian, Deputy Sector Commander). Free Zone Library International.

The tenth lecture, titled ‘Assists’, from the Class VIII course is where Hubbard elucidates the Xenu story if you are looking for the doctrinal source of the Xenu story.

 

[nlwright]

thanks, i will try that but it sounds like it won't do much good. i would love to know why i ought to consider a religion when none of the practitioners will tell me about it? i wonder if i do go through all of the levels and spend all my money on their books and then find out that all the stuff i read about lord xenu on the internet is really what they believe....will i get my money back?

 

[themadhair]

i would love to know why i ought to consider a religion when none of the practitioners will tell me about it?

Most FreeZoners will have no problem discussion their beliefs with you. In fact you can download the entirety of the ‘Clearbird’ doctrines here.

But to answer your question with respect to Scientology proper – there is absolutely no reason whatsoever you should consider joining any group that, as a matter of policy, refuse to be open and upfront.

i wonder if i do go through all of the levels and spend all my money on their books and then find out that all the stuff i read about lord xenu on the internet is really what they believe....will i get my money back?

No. You won’t get your money back unless you are prepared to go into decades of litigation. Just ask Lawrence Wollersheim.

 

[southdetroit]

Scientologists honestly can't talk about Lord Xenu (or Xemu, as you noted--LRH's own handwritten notes use both) for one of two good reasons. The information about Lord Xenu isn't until OT III. If lower-level Scientologists hear about it, they will have been trained to discard it as lies spread by non-believers. Once you're ready for the OT III materials, you're locked into a room all by yourself with them, and told to never reveal what you read. By then, you've already drunk the Kool-Aid, and denial is easy. These things have all been confirmed by many independant ex-Scientologists.

 

[SkinnyCheruscian]

I can confirm that scientologists will refuse to discuss these questions. When I was a teenager, a relative became a scientologist and tried to proselytise. I challenged the concept of transmigration of souls as understood by scientology by the argument of logarithmic growth of the human population on earth: where do all the souls come from? My relative then said, there was answer, however this answer would be too hard to take for a non-scientologist. I would go bonkers if he told me the answer.

I personally think looking at stuff scientology says publicly is sufficient to show that it is some type of cult. The two books by Hubbard, Dianetics and Scientology, are pretentious (and boring), written as if Hubbard were the first human thinker to exist. Fundamental concepts in scientology ("engram" "e-meter") have scientifically been proven wrong. Thus the claim that scientology was an evidence based method for self improvement is without basis. The only responsce scientology has to this criticism is accusing everybody else to be in a anti-scientology conspiracy: psychology (all strains thereof), neurobiology, psychoanalysis etc etc etc seem to exist only to hide the truth, and scientology is the only system that has it.

just my personal opinion

 

[cybersurf]

i appreciate your offer to clear up who lord xenu is but, i have already read the wiki article on it. it sounds pretty crazy. i can't help but be skeptical. in order to be fair i was hoping to hear an actual scientoligist explain it from their perspective. i'm assuming you are not a scientologist or else you would not have offered me information outside of this forum. my apologies if i am mistaken.

If you're making a study on comparative religions, you'd have to verify with documentation or other means the Xenu story. There's a "Peter Forde's scientific scrutiny of OT III" (the Xenu story) that you can consult. The supposed scientific scrutiny sopposedlly ascertains that the Xenu story is not geologically verifyable. But if you are a more or less knowledbable geologist, you could see that geological data provided in Peter Forde's scientific scrutiny of OT III is a confirmation of the Xenu story. Since you're working with religion and are not necesarrilly a geoloigst, you would have to see the "scientific scrutiny of peter forde's scientific scrutiny of OT III" wich I'l try to post here:

 

[cybersurf]

Peter Forde sais that Meiji Guyot was "Hawaii 75 m.y. ago. The dating by kription is the most precise method of dating on tha range of time.

But Forde burries an important fact abotu Guyots. That they are flat toped mountains because they reached the surface:


Quote:
A guyot /giɘʊ/, also known as a tablemount, is a flat-topped seamount. It was named after the Swiss-American geographer and geologist Arnold Henry Guyot (died 1884). The term was coined around 1946 by Harry Hammond Hess. Guyots are most commonly found in the Pacific Ocean. Guyots show evidence of having been above the surface with gradual subsidence through stages from fringed reefed mountain, coral atoll, and finally a flat topped submerged mountain. Their flatness is due to erosion by waves, winds, and atmospheric processes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guyot

Link: http://exscn.net/forum/showthread.php?t=13097&page=4

 

[Magus Phoenix]

I'm a Scientologist and I, for one, have no problem discussing my beliefs with people, even though doing so can get one declared a suppressive person. But I believe in the Creed of the Church, which states that we have the right to speak and write our own opinions.

 

[Brinkman]

I would absolutely love to talk to you more, as would my friend. We're trying to learn a little more about Scientology, but all we get are the strong disapprover, and those who were in it and say it was horrible. Nobody is really a strong supporter yet open to debate in your religion. Can I have your email Magus Phoenix?

 

[Rakhel]

There's a Scientology DIR? I didn't know.

 

[kutulu]

Well, due to the secretive atmosphere of Scientology, it's difficult to get reliable info. Still, here's the Wiki.

that has to be the lamest idea for a religion ever...

people are stupid enough to pay money for that?