Watchman on Scientology
Rob Clark
By Rev. Kurt Van Gorden
Jude 3 Missions
Prepared and presented to the Society for the Study of Alternative
Religions at the 50th annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological
Society, Orlando, Florida (November 20, 1998)
This paper is copyright 1998 Kurt Van Gorden. All rights reserved.
The teachings of Mr. Lafayette Ronald Hubbard (1911-1986) and the
Church of Scientology1 are to be seriously analyzed by students of
biblical theology worldwide. The simple reason is that in Scientology
we face a twentieth-century religion that claims six to eight million
followers. Although active membership falls considerably short of
this figure, we nonetheless must not ignore this new religion that has
struggled for survival for half a century.2 Our message will mainly
focus upon the theological aspects of Scientology.3 But, for those
who are unaware of the person of L. Ron Hubbard and the church he
founded, I will take a few moments to briefly sketch its background.
In this paper I do not wish to be perceived as an enemy of
Scientology, but rather, my analysis is theologically based and is
intended to foster better theological understanding of Scientology by
Evangelical Christians.4
Scientologists may issue a “false report correction” on this essay,
since it is their practice to correct any perceived misunderstandings
of their religion. But in one way, this paper is a “false report
correction” on Scientology’s misinformation about historic
Christianity. What I found in reading Scientological material is that
they often ignore the greater weight of historic Christian teachings
in preference of the liberal Christian theologians, which branch is
less than 200 years old. I find it incumbent upon Evangelical
Christians, especially those apologetically minded, to defend our
faith and answer the attacks upon the historic positions of the Church
as found in Scientological writings. This paper is my defense of the
faith.
Brief Background Information
L. Ron Hubbard developed a religious system in which he claims that a
follower can be cleared of the root cause of overt actions in society,
called engrams. He likens engrams to picture-like images of one’s
surroundings when any sin, aberration, pain, or injury intrudes the
individual’s mind. These engrams are attached the human spirit,
called a Thetan or Theta Being in Scientology. The presence of
engrams on the Thetan causes various degrees of insanity and overt
action in society. Man, if he is going to survive, must eradicate
these engrams and gain control of his optimum mind. The individual is
pronounced Clear once all engrams are eradicated. Theta Beings are
free to progress beyond clear by taking courses to function as an
Operating Thetan (OT). Mr. Hubbard claimed to be both clear and an
OT.
If we compare his status to what he granted to Jesus Christ, Mr.
Hubbard claimed more success than the Son of God. He once wrote, “Two
and a half thousand years ago a handful of clears civilized half a
billion people. What if we were all clear? Neither Lord Buddha nor
Jesus Christ were OT’s [sic] according to the evidence. They were
just a shade above clear.”5 This would tell us, then, that Mr.
Hubbard has latched onto information that could have benefitted Jesus
but somehow eluded his grasp. Although he gives tacit acknowledgment
to Jesus’ success at mastering clear, he never defines how Jesus
obtained this status and what so-called evidence gave Mr. Hubbard this
insight. We also need to explore the ramifications of such a claim,
viz, implicit in Hubbard’s claim is either the concept that Jesus
apparently had engrams and understood them well enough to eradicate
them, thus becoming clear, or that Jesus was “naturally clear.”6 This
will be explored further in the christology section.
For a little background on Mr. Hubbard, he was a popular science
fiction writer of the 1930s and 1940s who made a sudden career change
in 1950 by publishing Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health.7
Some accuse Mr. Hubbard of predicting his career change during a
science fiction convention in 1949. While speaking at a New Jersey
convention, he reportedly said, “Writing for a penny a word is
ridiculous. if a man really wanted to make a million dollars, the
best way would be to start his own religion.”8 In 1951 Mr. Hubbard
published his first book on Scientology and subsequently incorporated
the Church of Scientology of California, February 18, 1954. These
quick moves by Mr. Hubbard helped Dianetics and Scientology become a
worldwide religion of 6,000,000 adherents. Many former Scientologists
point out that the number of active adherents is much less, ranging
anywhere from 200,000 to 2,000,000.9
Hubbard, whose abilities should not be underestimated, built a global
religion in two decades. His writing career included fifteen million
published words in science fiction, essays and articles. This was
superseded by another twenty-five million words published for
Scientology. Hubbard’s writing skills were quite successful. The
manuscript for Dianetics (180,000 words) was supposedly completed in
three weeks. Those who knew him said that he could type 90 words per
minutes with the old two-finger method. Although he accomplished
much, the biographical sketch found in their publications raises
questions. The highlighted points state that he traveled “extensively
in Asia as a young man . . .
“He studied Science and mathematics at George Washington University,
graduating from Columbian College. He attended Princeton University
and Sequoia University . . .
“Crippled and blind at the end of the war [World War II], he resumed
his studies of philosophy and by his discoveries recovered so fully
that the was reclassified in 1949 for full combat duty. It was a
matter of medical record that he has been twice pronounced dead and
that in 1950 he was given a perfect score on mental and physical
fitness reports.”10
While it is true that he attended George Washington University, he
did not graduate with a degree in Civil Engineering. He actually
attended George Washington for two years and was placed on academic
probation for poor grades. Never returning, he later claimed a C.E.
degree from Columbian College, for which we cannot find a location in
the United States. Furthermore, Sequoia University was discovered to
be an unrecognized degree mill in Los Angeles, which closed after a
1958 California legislative act more strictly regulated such
operations. We also question how Hubbard “attended” Sequoia
University when a telegram from the vice-president of Sequoia tells
Hubbard that they are bestowing honorary degrees upon him while he was
living in New Jersey.
Several competent writers gained access to contradictory evidences of
Hubbard’s life and have challenged his biographical sketch. Few were
so damaging to his credentials than Russell Miller’s Bare-Faced
Messiah: The True Story of L. Ron Hubbard;11 former Scientologist Bent
Corydon’s L. Ron Hubbard, Messiah or Madman?;12 and former
Scientologist Jon Atack’s A Piece of Blue Sky.13 Scientologists with
whom I have spoken quickly brush aside these authors, until, that is,
I ask specifically where they are incorrect. To that I have not
received an answer, so I encourage Scientologists to be open-minded
with the evidence.14
Miller showed that Hubbard was in an American high school while he
was supposedly traveling Asia. No medical records show that he was
crippled, blinded or wounded in World War II, let alone being twice
pronounced dead. Bent Corydon formerly headed one of Scientology’s
most successful missions (Riverside, California). His book references
court transcripts, affidavits, documentary evidence, and first-hand
testimonies that lay many of Hubbard’s claims to rest. The same can
be said of Jon Atack’s book on Scientology. It argues from compelling
evidence that L. Ron Hubbard, the man whom he once revered as leader
of his church, had fabricated his past in an effort to make himself
more likeable. Each of these writers painstakingly document their
research with indisputable resources to show, for example, that Mr.
Hubbard was involved in occult groups and black magic rituals during
the early days of Dianetics and Scientology. Such practices place Mr.
Hubbard in opposition to the work of Christ.15 The Bible condemns
unrepentant participants of the occult as abominable before God
(Deuteronomy 18:9-12). We find nothing in Mr. Hubbard’s writings that
demonstrate repentance from these activities, but rather, there
becomes an overlapping of some occult practices and Scientology.16
One may ask what difference this makes. I answer that it makes a
great difference, because L. Ron Hubbard renounced Christian orthodoxy
and esteemed himself spiritually higher than Jesus. If Hubbard’s
biographical sketch is untruthful and if he was involved in the
occult, then it wrecks his supposed spiritual equality to Jesus
Christ. I believe that the biographical comparison of Hubbard and
Jesus is important to determine basic truthfulness and trustworthiness
in Hubbard’s claims. Hubbard’s eclectic list of sources for the
Dianetics theory includes cults, mysticism, and spiritualism. In his
first article, he noted the following as his resources: “the medicine
man of the Goldi people of Manchuria, the shamans of North Boreno,
Sioux medicine men, the cults of Los Angeles, and modern psychology.
Amongst the people questioned about existence were a magician whose
ancestors served in the court of Kublai Khan and a Hindu who could
hypnotize cats. Dabbles had been made in mysticism, data had been
studied from mythology to spiritualism.”17 I particularly wish he had
elaborated more on which Los Angeles cults he referenced here, which
would not rule out Jack Parson’s Pasadena-based occult group. The
mysticism and spiritualism is also intriguing. While mysticism could
vary in meaning, spiritualism is more exacting, which usually involves
seances and necromancy.18 He later claimed that his work in
Scientology was an extension of the work of the Buddha.
He lived the last several years of his live as a recluse, his
whereabouts were shrouded in mystery. On January 24, 1986, he died
of a cerebral hemorrhage and his remains were cremated. The
controversial Mr. Hubbard is gone, but the church he founded
remains. This demands our attention in examining Scientology from the
perspective of biblical faith.
Apparently Mr. Hubbard would have sanctioned such an examination.
The seventh article of the Creed of Scientology states, “that all men
have the inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to write
freely on their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the
opinion of others.” Mr. Hubbard is correct here. I am exercising my
freedom to counter his opinions.
Dianetics and Scientology19
Hubbard was adept at coining new terms and redefined others for
special use in his writings. Nearly all Scientology publications
contain a glossary to clarify usage. Scientology eventually
published a technical dictionary to assist them in working through the
material.
The public readily received Dianetics upon its release. Anticipation
mounted through a pre-publication synopsis of his theories in
Astounding Science Fiction, May, 1950. The readers were familiar with
Hubbard as a spellbinding writer. His newest venture, Dianetics, did
not have the usual flowing style of his science fiction novels.
Rather, it was replete with scientific jargon, psychological
terminology, hypothesis about the mind, and mental health therapy. It
stormed the nation, according to Publisher’s Weekly, which reported
that 55,000 copies were sold in the first two months and over 750
Dianetics groups had been started.20
Hubbard’s therapy was termed a “science of mind,” which promised to
“clear” a person of aberrations, painful experiences, and mental
illness.21 The clear person, he said, “can be tested for all
psychoses, neuroses, compulsions and repressions (all aberrations) and
can be examined for any autogenetic (self-generated) diseases referred
to as psychosomatic ills. These tests confirm the clear to be
entirely without such ills or aberrations. Additional tests of his
intelligence indicate it to be high above the current norm.”22
Central to the Hubbardian motif is that man is basically good.23 The
goal of any man is survival!24 Evil,25 pain, psychosomatic illness,26
and aberrations (irrational behavior)27 all contribute to man’s
failure at survival.
The mind, according to Hubbard, is divided three ways. The
Analytical Mind is that which works like a perfect computer. It
analyzes data and is similar to Freud’s conscious mind. It is the
person, the “I.”28 The Reactive Mind is the “portion of the mind
which works on a totally stimulus-response basis.”29 It is the entire
source of aberration and irrational behavior.30 We could
liken it to the sub-conscious mind. The third is the Somatic Mind,
which is directed by the Analytical and Reactive Minds. It
places solutions into effect on the physical plane.31
The Dianetic theory states that the analytical mind controls and
commands the human being. This is the fully “conscious”
person. The analytical mind seldom uses its full potential because of
the interference from the reactive mind. Anytime the awareness of the
analytical mind is reduced through pain, emotional shock, or a similar
event, then the reactive mind takes over. This a moment of
“unconsciousness.”32 It is during these partially unconscious states
that the preclear (those not yet clear) receives complete picture-like
images of his immediate surroundings. This is an “engram,” which
Hubbard originally said was recorded on the protoplasm of our cells.
While the analytical mind has a computer-like memory, the reactive
mind does not have a memory per se, but only picture-like engrams,
which are filed in successive order.
Engrams are counterproductive to survival. They are the radix of all
insanity. They make us “mad, ineffective and ill.”33 The Dianetic
theory holds the engram responsible for our problems, so the solution
is to erase them through auditing. The auditor asks questions or
gives commands to the preclear, who is audited for engrams. Once all
the engrams are removed, the preclear is pronounced Clear.
The cleared individual becomes rather superhuman. The potential of
clearing engrams can raises one’s IQ,34 cure the common cold,35
generate recall of everything studied, and speed computations 120
times faster than normal.36 Among other potential benefits, being
clear can correct poor eyesight,37 remove calcium deposits, stop
ringing ears,38 and save marriages.39 Not everyone acknowledged such
sweeping payoffs for this unconventional therapy. The media spoke out
against it by interviewing Hubbard’s opponents. Dianetic parties,
though, became faddish among younger Americans, which sustained its
popularity amidst criticism.
Time magazine became the first national publication to cover the
effects of Dianetics. They dubbed it “a new cult” smoldering in
America.40 This fanned the flame of criticism, causing a glut of
articles on Dianetics for two years. Publisher’s Weekly reported that
the “first concerted action against” Dianetics was initiated by the
American Psychological Association, at their September, 1950 meeting.
A resolution, adopted unanimously by the organization’s 8,000 members,
said that Hubbard’s claims for Dianetics “are not supported by
empirical evidence of the sort required for the establishment of
scientific generalizations.”41 They cautioned against its use, unless
for scientific investigation. Apparently, few scientific
investigations followed the resolution.
Dr. Morris Fishbeck, former editor of the Journal of the American
Medical Association, went on record warning people about
“mind-healing cults . . . like Dianetics.”42 Psychologist Eric Fromm
aimed his comments at Hubbard’s techniques. “Dianetics,”
he said, “has no respect for and no understanding of the complexities
of personality.” Dr. Fromm divulged that Hubbard had
saturated Dianetics in “oversimplified truths, half truths and plain
absurdities.”43
Dr. Joseph Winter, a physician from Michigan, endorsed the first
release of Dianetics. His allegiance to Hubbard was
short-termed. He broke from Hubbard’s movement in October 1950 and
wrote a competitive, but unsuccessful, book on mental
healing. Dr. Winter seemed distraught over the lack of scientific
evidence and the fact that nobody had become clear through
Dianetics.
This most likely referred to Hubbard’s grandiose event held at
Shriner’s Auditorium in Los Angeles, August 10, 1950, where he
was to announce Sonia Bianca as the world’s first clear. Miss Bianca,
a physics major from Boston, was paraded before a full
auditorium of press representatives and curiosity seekers. Since a
cleared person should recall everything ever studied, the
journalists present were relentless with taunting questions. The
event, and thus Hubbard’s first clear, failed miserably. Miss
Bianca could not remember a basic physics formula nor the color of
Hubbard’s neck tie. It took until February, 1966 before
another clear was officially announced to the world, although in 1954
Hubbard had claimed fifty clears for himself and many times
more for other auditors. John McMaster, a South African medical
student, held the coveted official position in 1966 and led the
way for other Scientologists to follow.44
Scientology Grows into a Church
Hubbard was resourceful in discovering new technology in critical
times. He birthed the Church of Scientology, which bolstered
the unorganized Dianetics movement. Scientology introduces man as a
Theta Being. The physical universe is called MEST, an
acronym for Matter, Energy, Space and Time. Scientology offers
courses for survival through eight dynamics of life: self, sex,
group, mankind, other life forms, MEST, spirits, and a Supreme Being.
After a Scientologist becomes clear he can take courses to
become an Operating Thetan, which means that he has control over MEST.
Scientologists often experience “exteriorization,”
which is similar to out-of-body experiences. This experience has all
the marks of occultism in their religious practice.45 Past-life
experience, or reincarnation, is also a staple among Scientologists.
This belief heralded the search for engrams attached to
Thetans in previous lives.
In 1952 a new dimension was introduced to Dianetic auditing. Volney
Mathison, a practicing Dianetic auditor, invented a
galvanometric device, that compensated for earlier experiments Hubbard
had done with lie-detectors and electroencephalographs.
Hubbard, seeing the value of Mathison’s invention, promptly wrote a
book on using it for auditing engrams.
It went through two name changes before it was dubbed the E-Meter.
Nothing Hubbard had experimented with was as reliable
as the E-Meter.46 This transistorized galvanometer used ordinary tin
cans connected to the devise by wires attached to the cans.
The preclear holds the tin cans sitting opposite the auditor who
watches the E-Meter needle.
As they talk, the auditor gives commands to the preclear. Various
needle reactions cue the auditor to go to an earlier engram.
The goal of the session is to erase all of the engrams. This is
indicated when the needle “floats,” moving back and forth slowly
after the same command has been given with no apparent response
indicated. The E-Meter gave a scientific appeal to
Scientology, though its usefulness has been challenged by competent
analysis.
Scientology Becomes A Religion
Some people were surprised by the rapid developments of Dianetics and
Scientology in the early 1950s. Time magazine,
however, saw the writing on the wall when it suggested that “the cult
of Dianetics . . . has some of the features of a new
religion.”37 Exactly twenty-nine months later the Church of
Scientology of California was incorporated. There is no doubt that
their dabbling in the supernatural and occultic spheres with recall of
past lives, inter-planetary travel, exteriorization and other
phenomena, gave religious overtones to Scientology.
In July, 1954 Hubbard held a series of lectures in Phoenix, Arizona
for his new church. These, later published as The Phoenix
Lectures, revealed the Hindu, Buddhist and Taoist roots of
Scientology.
From the Hindu Vedic hymns, Hubbard related, “a great deal of our
material in Scientology is discovered . . ..”47 He added,
“Tao means Knowingness...it’s an ancestor to Scientology, the study of
‘knowing how to know.’”48 Hubbard associates the
status of Bodhi to Dianetics, saying that Bodhi, “[the] intellectual
and ethical perfection,” would probably be “a Dianetic
release.”49 Furthermore, Hubbard said that the Buddhist writings
Dhyana “could be literally translated as ‘Indian for Scientology,’
if you wish to do that.”50
Mr. Hubbard had difficulty convincing the world that Dianetics was a
genuine science. He had greater difficulty trying to
convince the world that Scientology was a genuine religion. The
Church of Scientology has entered into more court battles around
the world than any other new religion. The U. S. Supreme Court
declared Scientology a bona fide religion, which saved it from
IRS taxation. The question that concerns us here is not whether the
Church of Scientology is a religion, but whether it contradicts
the Bible and is incompatible with Christianity.
In its fight to establish its religious nature, it overstepped moral
boundaries. On July 8, 1977 the FBI obtained search warrants to
confiscate documents at three Scientology offices in Washington, D.C.
and Los Angeles. The collected evidence showed the
high ranking officials of Scientology had masterminded a covert
operation to break into several governmental offices and steal
documents from the U. S. Army, U. S. Navy, U. S. Customs, CIA, Federal
Trade Commission, IRS, U. S. Courthouse and many
others.51 Although attorneys for Scientology fought to have the
48,419 documents returned to them, the court declined the appeal
and released over 30,000 pages to the public. The confiscated files
provided enough evidence to put seven of the highest ranking
officials of Scientology in prison, including the founder’s third
wife, Mary Sue Hubbard. L. Ron Hubbard was named along with
twenty-four others as conspirators in the operation.52
Scientology has championed court battles to secure their religion
status. While they have proved that various governmental
agencies around the world have trampled their religious rights, they
must swallow a bitter pill in admission of planned criminal
activities by Operating Thetans against our government. In the
complexity of the battle it appears that neither party can claim
total innocense nor point to the opposition in total blame.
Authoritative Writings Compared
Every group has its standard for scripture and authoritative
writings.53 Evangelical Christians understand the Bible as the only
rule for faith and conduct. In Scientology the writings of L. Ron
Hubbard are held in higher esteem than the Bible. His writings
supposedly fulfill ancient Buddhist prophecy. One article states,
“[the] truth of the matter is that you are studying an extension of
the work of Gauthama Siddhartha, begun about 2,500 years ago . . .
Buddha predicted that in 2,500 years the entire job would be
finished in the West . . . Well, we finished it!”54
One of the strongest efforts to present Hubbard as the Maitreya or
Messiah of our age was the Hubbard’s Hymn of Asia. It
summarized the work of the western Maitreya in completion of Buddha’s
unfinished job. The Hymn of Asia described the
western Maitreya as, “a red-haired or golden-haired man [who] would
arise in the west to complete the job Buddha began.”55
Most interesting is that the supposed 2,500 year old Buddhistic
prophecy was said to be fulfilled in “roughly 1950,” which
coincided with the release of Hubbard’s Dianetics.56 Hubbard writes
throughout the Hymn of Asia in first-person, portraying
himself as Maitreya, “I come to bring you all that Lord Buddha would
have you know . . . Am I Metteyya? I am of the self[,] and
your own heart and eyes . . . Do I have Golden Hair? Is this what you
agree? . . . Lord Buddha then and I would have you know
. . . Even your own prophesies Centuries Old said I would appear in
the Western World. I appeared.”57
Scientology claims that it “does not conflict with other religions or
religious practices as it clarifies them and brings understanding
of the spiritual nature of man.”58 In support of this, Scientologists
may produce letters from people of various denominations who
say that Scientology does not conflict with their beliefs in
Christianity. The problem is that many of the people writing these
letters
do not believe in the supreme authority of the Bible. No faithful
student of God’s Word can say that there are no conflicts
between Scientology and the Bible. Basic verses about Jesus’ Deity,
Messianic fulfillment, death and resurrection lack authority
in their world view.
One of the creeds of the Church of Scientology is “that all men have
inalienable rights to their own religious practices and their
performance.”59 We wouldn’t disagree with one’s rights to practice
his religion. What we find disagreeable is when a religion
claims compatibility with Christianity. Part of historic Christian
belief and practice is to uphold the exclusivity of Jesus Christ and
his claims. Jesus excluded all others from receiving revealed truth
when he said that he is the door and all those before him are
thieves and robbers (John 10:1-8). Then he sealed it by stating that
all those coming after him are false messiahs and false
prophets (Matthew 24:3-5, 11, 23-24). If all before him are thieves
and robbers and all those after him are false, then he excluded
all other so-called religious leaders, including Buddha and the
Maitreya. This fits with Acts 4:12 as well, that there is no other
name given under heaven whereby we must be saved.
This message of exclusivity has irritated people throughout the
history of Christianity, but it is not intended to threaten them. It
should cause them to consider the claims of Jesus Christ, which if
true, then all others are false, and to be consistent, if the claims
of Jesus are false, then we are the most diluted of all people. The
bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ decisively confirms that he is
the Son of God and that his claims are true. The testimony
surrounding his resurrection is the bedrock of New Testament faith (1
Corinthians 15:14), therefore only the blind ignore it. Exclusivity
in Christianity is not an easy message to preach, and there have
been many defectors who have waffled and compromised the faith by
trying to please a world of toleration and equality for all
faiths. If Jesus were thrown into the arena with all world religions,
as perhaps one alternative of a number of equally true faiths,
then everything he said is utterly false and his crucifixion was vain,
and hence our faith is vain and we are still in our sins (1
Corinthians 15:17). If, however, his claims are true, then Christians
are truly the happiest of all people and rest in the confidence
that God intervened in this world to save lost sinners from eternal
destruction in hell (John 3:16; 1 Corinthians 15:1-3; Galatians
4:4). Loving our neighbor is telling him the truth about Jesus. If I
really love my neighbor, then I will tell him what Jesus said, “if
you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins” (John
8:24). Jesus exclusively singled himself out, which eliminates the
Buddha or Maitreya as alternatives to cleanse your sins. Without
Jesus, you will die in your sins.
Hubbard’s indignation toward the Church is shown in this statement,
“the bulk of the last 2,000 years the main western educator -
the Church - worked on the theory that Man should be kept ignorant.”60
On the contrary, though, many civilized countries of the
world were educated by Christian missionaries. People around the
world have been taught them rational thinking, agriculture, and
hygienic care. Written language has been developed by missionaries in
tribes where there was none and the Bible has been
translated in over 1,800 languages and dialects. Ignorance has never
been the plan of the Church.
Hubbard questioned the origin on the Bible in his Phoenix Lectures.
He wrote, “It is no wonder why we look into the Christian
Bibles and find ourselves reading the Egyptian Book of The Dead . . .
Now the parables which are discovered today in the New
Testament are earlier discovered, the same parables, elsewhere in many
places. One of these was the Egyptian Book of The
Dead, which predates the New Testament considerably.”61 Such
absurdities cry out for supporting evidence or footnotes, which
are destitute in Hubbard’s writings.
The Bible is a special revelation given by God, without error,
through man. The Bible acknowledges that the same God who is
the author of special revelation (the Bible), also is the author of
general revelation. Romans 1:18-32 gives us a picture of general
revelation. Even if it is argued that parallels exist between pagan
writings and the Bible, it subject often deals with the general
revelation which is given to all men. The Bible acknowledges that
pagan cultures discover some truth (Acts 17:28), but without
special revelation it lacks the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ (Acts
17:30-31). Parallel pagan writings part company with God’s
truth on special revelation, which outlines our theology, Christology,
and soteriology.
Contradictions abound between Hubbardian writings and the Bible, both
in doctrine and statement.62 Hubbard ridiculed the
biblical doctrine of heaven and he denied hell. “For a long while,”
said Hubbard, “some people have been cross with me for my
lack of co-operation in believing in a Christian Heaven, God and
Christ. I have never said I didn’t believe in a Big Thetan but
there was certainly something very corny about Heaven, et al. Now I
have to apologize. There was a Heaven . . . with rapidity
and a Meter it can be shown that Heaven is a false dream and that old
religion was based on a very painful lie, a cynical
betrayal.”63 Concerning Hell, Hubbard said, “Purgatory and hell is a
total myth, an invention just to make people very unhappy
and is a vicious lie.”64
These statements directly conflict with biblical doctrines. Jesus
taught that heaven and hell are real places (Matt. 5:21-30).
Furthermore, Jesus described the torments of hell in the story of
Lazarus and the rich man (Luke 16:19-31). If hell is a vicious lie,
then L. Ron Hubbard is saying that Jesus was so deluded that he
preached a vicious lie. This, without question, makes
Hubbardian theology incompatible with Christianity.
It is important to establish biblical authority while evangelizing
Scientologists. When Scientologists study anything, they are taught
not to go past any word they do not understand. This principle could
be applied to Bible study. The best way to establish
contradiction between Hubbardian writings and the Bible is to define
biblical words correctly in their context. By taking each
biblical concept and asking the Scientologist to study it with you,
they will have no excuse for denying its truthfulness. Some will
still deny the Bible, but they have no logical consistency for doing
so.
Theological Comparison
Some Scientological literature says that Scientology does not define
the nature of God. Hubbard wrote, “although the existence of
the Supreme Being is affirmed in Scientology, His precise nature is
not delineated, since the Church holds that each person must
seek and know the Divine Nature in and for himself.”65
The precise delineation has its value, but it is not necessary to
determine the scripturalness of one’s position. If what one states
concerning God is unbiblical, then a precise delineation does not make
it more palpable, it is unbiblical either way. Simply affirming
the existence of the Supreme Being is vague and ambiguous if left
undefined. Enough information is given in Hubbard’s writings,
however, to show that his affirmations contradict the Christian God.
His tolerance of polytheism separates Hubbardian theology from
biblical standards. Such toleration is clear, “There are gods
above all other gods . . . . there is not argument here against the
existence of a Supreme Being or any devaluation intended. It is
that amongst the gods, there are many false gods elected to power and
position . . . There are gods above other gods, and gods
beyond the gods of the universes.”66 In his earlier Phoenix Lectures,
Hubbard said, “Let us take up what amounts to probably ten
thousand years of study on the part of Man on the identity of God or
gods, the possibility of truth, the inner track mystery of all
mysteries.”67 Furthermore, in Hubbard’s Hymn of Asia, we find these
words adjacent to a drawing of a Hindu god, “There can
be love for gods.”68 The admonishment is given, “Behave[,] Obey[,] Be
Courteous[,] To gods[,] Lord Buddha[,] And myself . .
..”69 Scientology refrains from telling its followers whether or not
to believe in these other gods. Simply opening the alternative
path to gods is an offence to the true God, as he said, “Thou shalt
have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:3).
The Bible emphatically opposes any god other than himself. There is
but one God (Deuteronomy 4:39; 6:4). There can be no god
before Him and none after him (Isaiah 43:10). He does not know or
acknowledge any other god (Isaiah 44:8). The Bible
completely disavows polytheism, as seen in several New Testament:
Mark 12:32; Ephesians 4:6; 1 Timothy 2:5; and James 2:19.
It does not help much to claim that Hubbard said he does not deny a
Big Thetan. As we’ve seen in previous quotes, he rejected
the Christian God, Heaven and Christ. If his “Big Thetan” is
incongruent with the Bible, then it becomes self-condemning. He
directly denied the Christian view of God when he said, “The Christian
god is actually much better characterized in the Vedic
Hymns than in any subsequent publication, including the Old
Testament.”70
Contrary to his claim, the New Testament heavily depends upon the Old
Testament for its theology, since Christ is seen as the
fulfillment of all Old Testament prophecy. God is consistently
described in both the Old and New Testaments. In fact, we find
246 Old Testament quotations in the New Testament, which establishes
their consistency.
Another area in conflict with biblical truth is the idea that men and
women are a part of God or godlike. Hubbard describes
man’s composition this way, “A preclear is a precise thing, part
animal, part pictures and part God.”71 The next level for man in
Scientology’s evolution is “Homo Novis,” which Hubbard describes as
“very high and godlike.”72
Throughout the Bible there is an unclouded distinction between God
and man. It tells us, “God is not a man, that He should lie”
(Numbers 23:19). And, “I am God, and not man, the Holy One in your
midst” (Hosea 11:9). These passages bar man from
merging with God’s nature. The two natures have always been distinct.
God’s attributes also separate his nature from ours. He
is eternal, we are finite. He is omnipresent, we are localized
beings. He is omniscient, we know very little. He is omnipotent, we
are limited. There is no comparison between God’s nature and man’s.
Scientology says that it allows each person to discover the Supreme
Being for himself. The individual Scientologist may not
believe all of Hubbard’s statements about God or gods, but these false
teachings are nonetheless present in his church, and all of
Hubbard’s writings have been decreed as “scripture” for Scientology.
Evangelical Christians should treat each Scientologist
individually and inquire as about his belief in God or gods, before
assuming his believes. Showing the Scientologist biblical
passages about God along side of Hubbard’s unbiblical statements can
impact the soul with God’s truth.
Anthropological Comparison
Hubbard’s view of man apparently centers upon the statement, “I am
not this body.” He renamed the human spirit the Thetan or
Theta Being, which is often reincarnated in various interplanetary
life forms. In Christianity we recognize man’s nature as both
physical and spiritual (Ecclesiastes 12:7). This dichotomy is
necessary to human beingness (Genesis 2:7). To say that “I am not
this body,” is faulty because the body is necessarily to make the
statement. If a disembodied spirit said, “I am not this body,” then
that statement would be absurd, since disembodiment means it lacks a
body. The only way an individual can say “I am not is
body” is to be in the body that he claims he is not, which is why we
say the body is necessary to make the statement, which is also
why Christianity says the body is a necessary to what we call “human.”
Christianity is not Platonistic or neo-Platonistic, where
the individual considered complete without the body, but rather, the
resurrection in Christianity brings the body and spirit back
together to complete what God originally created as human nature.
The book of James says that the body without the spirit is dead
(2:26). In Christianity we believe that disembodied human spirits
to await the resurrection of the just and unjust (John 5:29),
whereupon they will be judged (Matthew 25:31-32). The person is
incomplete until the resurrection when the body is reunited with the
spirit. Life and death are offered once to the individual, as
Psalm 78:39 says, “it does not come again,” thus refuting
reincarnation.
The Theta Being has some amazing characteristics according to
Hubbard. It surpasses 80 trillion years and dwells somewhere
within the skull of the individual.73 When the organism dies, the
Theta Being “goes to the between lives area. Here he ‘reports
in,’ is given a strong forgetter implant and is then shot down to a
body just before it is born.”74 Implant stations are located
elsewhere in the universe, like Mars.75 Theta Beings have also been
known to fight with each other over the new body they are
about to inhabit.76 Thetans can be frozen and packed in ice for
transportation, or they may be dumped into the sea from a flying
saucer. This, Hubbard assures us, “is quite authentic.”77 Thetans
communicate by telepathy, they move objects by kinetics, and
travel at high rates of speeds.78
Hubbard also taught modified Darwinian evolution. “As the soul
develops,” Scientology propounds, “the body needed grows more
and more complex, so that the mind, body and soul can operate in
fullest unity.”79 Various life-forms are laid out by Hubbard in
his book Scientology: A History of Man, which he calls a “cold-blooded
and factual account of your last sixty trillion years.”80
In these evolutionary life-forms the preclear Scientologist discovers
the origin of many of his current engrams. The first evolution
is the Photon Converter, which apparently existed solely to convert
light into energy. The division of day and night gave the
Photon Converter nothing to do at night. This became the evolutionary
explanation for our need of sleep.
Evolution produced the jelly fish, but the jelly fish got tired of
being pressed against stones, so it compensated by forming a
protective clam-like shell. Clams had problems. Instead of
single-hinged shells, they had double-hinged shells, which fought over
which one would be opened or closed. This caused engrams. In
Hubbardian evolution, these double-hinges became mankind’s
jawbone. Small barnacle-like spores attached to the outer edge of the
clam shell. These later became the pattern for man’s teeth.
Another shelled organism was the Weeper, sometimes called the Boohoo,
whose main function was to adapt to the sea shore. It
had two small tubes for pumping salt water out of its shell. These
two holes later became the eyes for man. Many Scientologists
will cry or weep when they track the engrams received during this
stage. The reason for crying was determined to be sand
irritating one of the holes on the weeper, making the preclear often
cry when recalled.
Hubbard suggests that a number of problems besetting the human race
may be traced to former lives. Smoking tobacco may
result from smokers dramatizing volcanoes seen in previous lives.
Psoriasis may result from the digestive fluids of an animal that
ate you. Vegetarianism may be the consequence of being eaten by
animals. Fear of falling can be traced to being a sloth falling
out of trees.
Hubbard taught that the Piltdown Man was a part of man’s evolutionary
chain. He labeled it man’s first real manhood. A Theta
Being’s existence on earth, Hubbard tells us, is rarely before 35,000
year ago, but even more rare is 70,000 years.81 Eventually
we arrive at Homo sapiens. Hubbard projects that the next step in
evolution is Homo Novis, which nobody has yet seen. Homo
Novis is a “godlike” being.82
One would be hard pressed to find anyone outside of Scientology who
would believe that this is the history of man, as Hubbard
avowed. It lacks sound reasoning, historical validity, and rejects
biblical creation.
A greater problem is Hubbard’s acceptance of the Piltdown Man. The
Piltdown Man, discovered in a gravel pit near Sussex,
England in 1911, was supposedly the missing link between man and ape
in Darwinian evolution. Many scientists upheld it as
plausible and genuine, by which Hubbard was evidently persuaded. Only
a few writers braved criticism and published doubts.
In 1951, when Hubbard wrote his history of man, he and many others
thought Piltdown Man was genuine. He wrote how the
Piltdown Man recalled by Scientologists is not in actuality the “real
Piltdown Man,” but had similarities.83 Two years later the
so-called “real Piltdown Man” was declared a fraud by scientists, but
Hubbard was already on record as one who tracks the
Piltdown Man through Scientological auditing.
In 1953 British scientists had established the fraudulent nature of
Piltdown Man. It was a hoax perpetrated by Dr. Woodward.
The jawbone was altered from a chimpanzee, which was made to fit the
skull cap of a man. Now enters the problem for
Hubbardian evolution in A History of Man. There was no “real Piltdown
Man” for Scientologists to associate their “similarities”
during auditing. The question of validity surfaces. If
Scientologists experienced a “Piltdown Man” through auditing, which is
similar to the “real” Piltdown Man, which later was determined a
fraud, then just how valid is Scientological auditing or
Hubbardian evolution? It invalidates itself. The question remains
unanswered about how their Piltdown Man could be similar to a
hoax.
Man’s nature, according to Hubbard, is basically good. He abhorred
the idea that man’s nature is sinful. In one Professional
Auditor’s Bulletin, he said, “It is despicable and utterly beneath
contempt to tell a man he must repent, that he is evil.”84
Elsewhere it is stated that, “Sin is composed of lies and hidden
actions, and is therefore untruth.”85 Sins are recognized in
Scientology but not as a result of man’s inherent evil nature. They
say it is because of the “reactive mind” that we have irrational
behavior.
In contrast to this the Bible shows us that man’s basic nature is
evil. David, the Psalmist, wrote on his sinful nature that began at
conception (Psalms 51:5). The book of Romans tells us, “There is none
righteous, no not one . . . . for all have sinned and fall
short of the glory of God” (3:10, 23). Jesus, in recognition of
mankind’s sinful nature, told people to repent and called them evil
(Matthew 4:17; 7:11), which action Hubbard called despicable. The
statements of Jesus are incompatible with Hubbard’s.
A Scientologist who claims to be clear or an Operating Thetan becomes
living proof that their nature is not basically good. No
matter how many engrams they erase, they continue sinning. This was
forcefully brought home when the aforementioned
“Operating Thetan” Scientologists were imprisoned for crimes committed
between 1974 and 1977. If the top officials commit
crimes no different from non-Scientologist criminals, then there seems
to be no improvement in observing “man’s basic goodness”
through Scientology.86 We sin because we have a sinful nature.
Christological Comparison
Jesus Christ holds no great significance in Scientology. Biblically,
he is seen as an eternal, active person (Micah 5:2) who is one
with the Father (John 10:30), second person of the Trinity (Matthew
28:19). “In the beginning was the Word,” John 1:1 opens,
“and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Most people who
read John’s first chapter clearly see his intended
message. Jesus Christ is God, the Word, with us, “The Word became
flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the
glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth”
(John 1:14).
L. Ron Hubbard disagreed with the straightforwardness of John’s
gospel. He disregarded the context and redefined the Word
(who is Jesus) as “Survival!”87 In refutation to this, one only needs
to observe that John personalized the Word in the identity of
Jesus. Hubbard’s axiom for studying is,“never go past a word you do
not fully understand,” could have benefitted him in John’s
gospel. John defines the Word as Jesus in verse 14, just so we would
not miss the point.
Another position Hubbard took on Christ was, “You will find the cross
as a symbol all over the universe, and the Christ legend as
an implant in preclears a million years ago.”88 The word legend, when
applied to Jesus, only expresses ignorance of biblical
history. The Bible stands well confirmed in history. Jesus dwelt in
a verifiable historical setting (Acts 26:26); not legendary myth.
Peter emphasized the reliability of the eyewitnesses (2 Peter 1:16)
and debunked the idea that it was built on fable or mythology.
An important point is that the gospels were written and circulated
during a time when Christ’s enemies were still living. Had the
gospel accounts lacked veracity, it would have given Christ’s enemies
a forum for disputation. But they were silent in the face of
truth.
Hubbard redefined the Hebrew word for Christ: “Now the Hebrew
definition of Messiah is One Who Brings Wisdom--a
Teacher. Messiah is from ‘messenger’ . . . Now here we have a great
teacher in Moses. We have other Messiahs, then we
arrive with Christ . . ..”89 The word “Christ” (Greek translation of
Messiah in Hebrew) is from Christos, meaning “anointed one,”
in Greek. Messiah, in Hebrew, also means “anointed one.” Mr. Hubbard
was flatly wrong on the “Hebrew definition” of
Messiah, which even a common dictionary would have set straight.
Worse than that, he taught there are many Messiahs.
Scripture emphasizes one Messiah (or Christ). Jesus is not “a”
Christ, as if there are others. John tells us that Jesus is “the
Christ,” and anyone who denies this, is the liar and anti-Christ (l
John 2:22).
According to Hubbard, Jesus was confused on the origin of his
statements: “Christ . . . was a bringer [sic] of information. He
never announced his sources. He spoke of them as coming from God.
But they might just as well have come from the god talked
about in the Hymn to the Dawn Child . . . the Veda.”90 Any reading of
the New Testament dismantles Hubbard’s argument that
Christ “never announce his sources.” Jesus often quoted the Old
Testament, which refutes Hubbard’s claim. There are
approximately 100 quotations and allusions to the Old Testament in the
New Testament words of Christ. Besides this, the Jews
who confronted Jesus never made such a claim as Hubbard, because they
were well familiar with Christ’s Old Testament source.
In contrast to historic Christianity, Scientologists quote from
speculative liberal scholars. They postulate, “There is much
speculation on the part of religious historians as to the early
education of Jesus of Nazareth. It is believed by many authorities
that
Jesus was a member of the cult of the Essenes, who believed in
reincarnation . . .”91 The Bible provides for no gap in Christ’s
whereabouts between the ages of 12 and 30. He was called “Jesus of
Nazareth,” because that is where he lived (Matthew 2:23,
“And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth”). Nathaniel knew
Jesus dwelt in Nazareth (John 1:46). The family of Jesus
(brothers and sisters) were known as Nazarenes (Mark 6:3), which Jesus
referred to as “his own country” (Mark 6:4). This
leaves no room for education among the Essenes. In refutation to
reincarnation, Jesus predicted his bodily resurrection on several
occasions (Matthew 12:38-40; 16:21; 17:9; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 36:32,
John 2:19-21; and 10:17-18). The teachings of Jesus also
refute reincarnation. If people return to earth for other
opportunities, then why would Jesus preach repentance, the atonement,
his
crucifixion, his resurrection, heaven, hell, and eternal torment in
the lake of fire? This is incompatible with reincarnation and with
the teachings of Hubbard.
Mr. Hubbard places Jesus below the status of himself and other
Scientologists by saying, “Neither Lord Buddha nor Jesus Christ
were OT, according to the evidence. They were just a shade above
clear.”92 The dilemma seen here is that Jesus either had to
be a natural clear or he had engrams and had to eradicate them to
become clear. Hubbard does not help us here because he
never tells us which way it is. It would be interesting if
Scientology could show that Hubbard believed Jesus to be naturally
clear.
But, once such a claim is produced, we would argue that Jesus, if
naturally clear in Scientology, is superior to Mr. Hubbard.
Therefore, the claims of Jesus should be preferred over Hubbardian
theology. On the other hand, if they opt for Jesus having
engrams, then this makes him and Hubbard on equal footing in their
theology, which then does not say how Jesus got rid of his
engrams and how he became clear without an E-meter. This could imply
that Jesus’ method of ridding engrams in Scientology is
better than Hubbard’s, since Jesus did not need an apparatus.
Carrying Hubbard’s statement to its logical conclusion only creates
problems in Scientology, which continues to separate it from
compatibility with Christianity.
Scientology throws doubt upon the second coming of Jesus Christ, “The
Buddhist idea of a second Buddha filtered westward and
is itself the source of the later Christian idea of the second coming
of Christ.”93 In refutation to this we find the second coming of
Christ was first predicted in the Old Testament many years before
Buddhism began (Daniel 7:13, circa 606 B.C.). Since his
bodily resurrection was also predicted in the Old Testament, then
there is no room for a reincarnated second advent, but the same
resurrected being, Jesus Christ, would be the returning one (Psalm
16:10 with Acts 2:30; Psalm 68:18 with Ephesians 4:8; Jonah
1:17 with Matthew 12:40, and 1 Corinthians 15:5).
The Bible teaches us that Jesus is the Beginning and the End, a quote
from Revelation 22:13. Hubbard applied this to himself in
the Hymn of Asia, “I am the beginning[,] I am the end.”94 Reasonably,
Jesus and Hubbard cannot both be the beginning and end.
One party is not telling the truth.
In dealing with Scientological statements about Jesus Christ, we find
a disjointed Christology. Jesus was not a man looking for
salvation with the rest of the human race. He is the Savior of the
human race. He was a sinless person (John 8:46: 1 Peter 2:22),
therefore he had no need to become a “shade above clear.” He fully
announced His sources (Luke 24:44), and fulfilled the
Messianic prophecies of the Old Testament to show that he is worthy of
the titles of Christ, Lord, and Savior of the human race.
He resurrected from the dead, refuting reincarnation and providing
eternal life to those who believe upon him, his works, and his
grace for their salvation.
Soteriological Comparison
Salvation, according to Hubbard, is to be free from the endless cycle
of birth and rebirth, commonly called reincarnation.
Accordingly, the pursuit of this goal comes through erasing engrams in
auditing sessions. In satisfaction of this demand, some
preclears spend several years and tens of thousands of dollars trying
to become clear, others just quit or die before it is
accomplished. Scientologists consider auditing to be a personal and
“real” experience. Logically (and theologically), this does not
say everything a person experiences is valid, no matter how real it
seems. The least complicated way for a Scientologist to test
the validity of auditing experiences is simply by talking with someone
who was at the original event that he was supposed to have
recalled. An example of this was brought out in an article on
Scientology in Life magazine, where the preclear “recalled” a
specific date while on the E-Meter, only to find out that the date was
not valid when it was cross-checked.95 The experience was
“real” in that it occurred during the auditing, but when it is tested
in the external objective world, it was not true. A “real”
experience that bears no truth does not help us much, and the question
facing us is where fact is separated from fantasy in the
auditing experience.
Much has been recorded by Scientologists while on the E-meter. While
the impossibility remains for verification of so-called
interplanetary travel, galactic wars seventy trillion years ago, or a
visit to heaven a forty-two trillion years ago, we can, however,
test known incidents within our reach on planet earth. Hubbard
insisted on the E-meter tracking past lives. He called auditors
swindlers if they differed with him.. “The auditor,” he wrote, “who
insists on auditing the current lifetime only, when he has the
whole track technique available, is wasting time and effort and is, in
fact, swindling his preclear.”96
In search of further validation for the auditing experience, Mr.
Hubbard helped us by setting the parameters for a test. He
confidently believed that artifacts would validate reincarnation via
the E-meter. Such items as “gravestones, ancient vital statistics,
old diplomas and medals will verify in every detail the validity of
‘many lifetimes.’ Your E-meter will tell you.”97 In reality, this
has been proven false by a number of former Scientologists who thought
they were everyone from Julius Caesar to the biological
father of Jesus Christ. Contrary to Hubbard’s claim, gravestones and
vital statistics do not validate Scientologist’s reincarnation
experiences.
In a strange way, just as the E-meter is considered truthful about
past lives, Hubbard believed that lie detectors have the same
quality. According to Hubbard, the police have known for some time
that lie detectors prove past lives. Criminals evidently
confess to crimes committed two or three lives ago while on the lie
detector. Furthermore, he claims that it is proven to “the last
detail” in the police archives!98 Nobody knows what police department
he was speaking of with such astounding proof of
reincarnation. There simply is no evidence to confirm reincarnation
as Hubbard fosters through his books.
Scientology’s view of reincarnation is different from many others,
because it includes extraterrestrial life, evolution on other
planets, evolution on earth, implant stations, forgetter implants, and
engrams that bind one to reincarnation. In support of his
claims, Hubbard wrote a book about his personal past life experiences.
One would expect it to follow the documentation
suggested in his book Scientology: History of Man. But it lacked such
precision. It was a disappointing story with generalized
information that could have been obtained at a public library. It was
devoid of precise details and left a trial of ambiguity (which I
will bracket), “I was over in Carthage about the second or third
century B.C. [no exact date] . . . I knew a girl [no name] . . .
Sicily had, for instance, 160 huge cities [not one named or
documented] . . . regardless of what history books say [his experience
is right, history is wrong] . . ..”99 Notice how Hubbard, when
confronted with conflicts between his experience and history, opts
for the experience instead of historical fact. This quells his theory
that the E-meter will detail the validity of former lives.
It would be preferable, if the current leadership of Scientology is
as confident as what Mr. Hubbard was, to allow an unbiased
blind or double-blind control test to be conducted during their
auditing sessions by reliable investigators. Actually, Mr. Hubbard
invited a similar investigation. He wrote, “This work is honest
research, done with considerable care. And it will bear up under
survey by any competent auditor or investigator.”100 To my knowledge
no investigator took Mr. Hubbard up on his gracious offer,
but we would like to be involved in setting up such a test, if the
offer still stands.
During auditing sessions, another experience that Scientologists have
is the accompanying signs that assure them that engrams
have been released. “When one releases an engram,” Hubbard wrote,
“the erasure is accompanied by yawns,” tears, sweat,
odor, panting, urine, vomiting and excreta.101 As in the
reincarnation experience, one must not confuse an experience with a
valid
truth claim. Even though some of these signs may coincidentally occur
during auditing (which can last for long time periods, so the
chance increases for one or another bodily function), it no more
proves anything than people who may yawn, cry, or sweat during
a presidential speech.
Salvation through Scientology leaves one with a hopeless future of
repetitive incarnations if they do not clear everything. Many of
them die or quit before they reach clear. Those who clear are always
confronted with another course or a higher level to achieve,
since it is apparent that they still get engrams. Salvation seems to
always be slightly out of grasp.
In Christianity, however, salvation is not dependent upon the works
of the participant, but upon Jesus Christ. The Bible answers
the problem of objective assurance. His bodily resurrection was
witnessed by unbelieving disciples on twelve different occasions,
which converted them to believers (1 Corinthians 15:7). Consider the
number of eyewitnesses of his resurrection: The guards at
his tomb told the Jews about it (Matthew 28:11). Jesus appeared to
over 500 people at once (1 Corinthians 15:6). He appeared to
an enemy of Christianity, Saul (Acts 9:35-6). Peter preached the
resurrection openly to the Jews who could not refute it (Acts
2:14, 31-36). Paul preached it to Festus the governor and King
Agrippa without refutation (Acts 25:19, 26:23-26).102 Secular
sources and archaeological evidences also collaborate the eyewitnesses
of the resurrection.
The resurrection refutes reincarnation, in that the resurrection is
the raising of the same body we currently possess, but in an
immortal state. Reincarnation is dealt a severe blow with Hebrews
9:27, “It is appointed for men to die once, but after this the
judgment.” Reincarnation teaches the preexistence of souls, but Jesus
denied this in John 8:23, “You are from beneath, I am from
above: you are of this world; I am not of this world.” With this he
tells us that he alone is from above and everyone else is from
this world. The very mission of Jesus denies reincarnation. The
Bible tells us that he was the Lamb slain from before the
foundation of the world (Revelation 13:8), which means that his death
on the cross was God’s foreordained plan. God’s plan to
redeem man from his sins is incompatible with reincarnation. Both
cannot be true. The doctrines of heaven, hell, redemption, sin,
the crucifixion, the resurrection, the atonement, the incarnation, and
judgement, which permeate the Bible, stand in opposition to
reincarnation and Scientology.
Other Considerations
There are other problems I have found in Hubbard’s belief system.
Hubbard’s goal was to get the analytical mind to work at full
optimum. He wrote that the preclear can only use eighty percent of
his analytical mind, and he is prone to the “idiocies of his
reactive mind.”85 The question this presents is, since Hubbard was a
preclear when he made his “discoveries,” then how did he
escape from the “idiocies” of the reactive mind? There is nothing
that guarantees that “idiocies” did not creep into Scientology. If
one were to say that Mr. Hubbard was an exception, then what tells us
that there were not other exceptions besides him, which
may have better discoveries that refute him? Whereas the Hubbardian
system entraps him without a solution to this problem,
Jesus Christ is freed from such an entrapment through his Virgin
Birth. It would take somebody entering this world from outside
of the sins of mankind to objectively deal with them. This is exactly
what Jesus did. As God incarnate, he entered this world
sin-free and effectively dealt with our sins through his atonement.
His resurrection also solidifies his claims. Hubbard did not
resurrect bodily from the grave, as did Jesus, with many irrefutable
proofs (Acts 1:3), so his claims will forever be inferior to
Christ’s. Jesus had a unique entrance and exit from this world, which
separates him from the entrapments that we all face. He
has authority to speak objectively about our condition and how to
truly be free from it. Hubbard was enslaved by his sins and
Scientological engrams, while Jesus had neither.
Another enigma in Scientology concerns the apparent problem of no
guarantee for eternal release from engrams. If a Thetan’s
goal is to be free from reincarnation, but the engrams hold him in the
cycle, then we need to examine what began the cycle in the
first place. The purest state of any Thetan was before he had his
first MEST body, he was free from engrams. Once a
Scientologist is cleared and perhaps reaches the OT levels, he
believes he will be eternally free from MEST bodies. The problem
is that there is nothing that guarantees it, since he was supposed to
be free from MEST and engrams trillions of year ago, but
somehow became entrapped by them, then what is to say that sometime in
the distant future the whole MEST cycle would not
entraps him again? Since there is nothing in Scientology that
guarantees this, then the whole system seems self-defeating. In
contrast, the same charge cannot be leveled against Christianity. The
resurrection of our future bodies place us in a redeemed
status with God, eternally free from sin, since sin does not dwell in
God’s presence. Therefore, we need not be worried about
Adam (or anybody) disobeying God in heaven and resuming the problem of
sin. We will be truly free from sin for eternity, but
sadly, Scientology cannot make the same claim.
One day while I was discussing the E-meter and interplanetary travel
with a Scientologist, I stumbled upon an insurmountable
problem. Scientology has volumes of files of supposed recall of
extraterrestrial life. With the technology necessary for
interplanetary travel, space (implant) stations, flying saucers, and
the like, then why did it take the invention of the transistor on
earth to make an E-Meter in 1951? Transistors are now becoming
obsolete when compared to microchip technology. The
E-meter is continually upgraded with new technology. This seems to
contradict their idea (and recall) of superior life on other
planets. Do these planets have E-meters? And if they do, then why
hasn’t the universe of Thetans been cleared by now? Why
does it take trillions of years when extraterrestrial technology is
supposedly lightyears in advance of ours?
Another general problem is the final engram. If new engrams are
received by Thetans after clearing past ones, then they need
continual auditing so that they can be as free as possible upon death
and then have total freedom. What if they die a painful or
injurious death? By definition, this is another engram, but if it did
not get audited out, then they really are not leaving this life free
of engrams. Maybe death itself is an engram to Scientologists, let
alone the pain that may accompany it. Hubbard died of a
cerebral hemorrhage. How does anyone know whether he had engrams that
had not been audited before he died? No
Scientologist can say with certainty that he did not.
Scientology also lacks applicability by all human beings, which marks
it inferior to Christianity. Certain groups of people (drug
abuse, alcoholism, certain medications, and certain physical
handicaps) are barred from taking Scientological auditing until they
get
cleaned up first (which is only available in some cases). This
potentially bars a segment of society that is not ignored by the
gospel
of Jesus Christ. The gospel has been preached to drug addicts and
alcoholics freely and they have responded to Christ, many
times with an instantaneous purging of their addiction. The gospel is
preached to physical and mentally handicapped people with
the full understanding that they can respond to God’s grace. Although
Scientology is to be commended for its word among drug
addicts and alcoholics, it burdens them to first clean up their life
and then take Scientology courses. In Christianity, one comes to
the cross of Christ “just as I am,” and the personal cleansing follows
the conversion done by Christ.
Conclusion
Scientology is incompatible with biblical Christianity. It does not
good for Scientologists to produce liberal Christian statements to
the effect that it agrees with them. We would then say that liberal
Christianity is incompatible with biblical Christianity. In the
final analysis, Hubbardian theology is incompatible with historic
Christianity.
What every Scientologist is seeking is true Salvation. It can only
be found through believing upon Jesus Christ as one’s only Lord
and Savior. L. Ron Hubbard cannot provide salvation for anyone,
including himself. Scientologists must see themselves for who
and what they really are; they are sinners in need of the Savior Jesus
Christ. No one but Jesus lived a perfect sinless life
(Hebrews 4:15). Jesus was sinless because He was God, second Person
of the Trinity, in human flesh (Philippians 2:6-8). He
was pronounced holy from his birth (Luke 1:35). Though sinless, he
willfully took our sins upon himself at the crucifixion (2
Corinthians 5:21). He purged our sins, resurrected his own body, and
ascended to heaven, where He currently reigns (Hebrews
1:3, Revelation 1:18).
We are inherently prone to sin because we have a sinful nature
(Romans 5:12). Even though we try to do good, we eventually
will do bad (Romans 7:13-25). In our unholy nature, there is no way
we can stand in the presence of God, who is Holy. We must
have a covering for our sins to free us from the judgment and
damnation that we deserve. God will forgive us of our sins if we
cast ourselves upon his mercy and grace, trusting in the shed blood of
Jesus instead of our works (Titus 3:5, Ephesians 2:8-10,
Romans 5:1-2).
1 Scientology and Dianetics are trademarks of the Religious
Technology Center.
2 We have no real way to be assured of accuracy in the high or low
range of membership in Scientology. It is normal for many
religions to have far fewer active members. Most almanacs place
figures in the range of 310 million Buddhists, 1.7 billion
Christians, 960 million Muslims, and 800 million Hindus. Just how
many are active we cannot say. In Christian denominations
there are far more people on the membership rolls than what are
active, so I do not know how valid it is to be overly critical of
Scientology because fewer people are active than the number of
members. In some Christian denominations baptisms are one
way to count members. Scientology does not use baptismal records for
recording membership, so I am still working on finding out
how the 8 million member figure came about. It may be those who have
been counseled through auditing.
3 The Church of Scientology has published three books expressing
their viewpoint that Christianity is compatible with
Scientology. To date, few Evangelical Christian authors have
responded to Scientology.
4 In opposition to secular (and lately some Christian)
counter-cult organizations, I have stood virtually alone for over
twenty
years (with Robert and Gretchen Passantino, Frank Beckwith, Eric
Pement and a few others), against the unproved brainwashing
motif, deprogramming (whether forcible or voluntary), and so-called
exit-counseling. Scientology is unbiblical in its core, which
affords enough reason to separate it from Christianity. It seems to me
that many critics of Scientology spend too much time
focusing upon the subjective experience of one individual, which may
not be the overall experience of other Scientologists. I plan
to steer clear of testimonials, pro or con, that often shed little
light on the entire organization. If Evangelical Christians plan to
reach Scientologists with the gospel message of Jesus Christ, then a
step in the right direction is theological analysis. I have seen
Scientologists become Christians and it was the same way most others
do; they saw the need to be cleansed and forgiven of their
sins through the atonement of Jesus Christ. Charges of brainwashing
and other sensationalistic stories will not save them from
their sins, but the blood of Jesus will.
5 Certainty Magazine, Volume 5, Number 10, as quoted by Kevin
Anderson, Report of the Board of Inquiry into
Scientology (Melbourne: [Australia Parliament] Government Printer,
1965, 150). There is no reason to believe that Mr.
Anderson’s quotations are inaccurate. These early Scientological
magazines are difficult to obtain, but during the Australian
Board of Inquiry, Hubbard fully cooperated in having his church supply
original documents, therefore we reasonably believe that
they accurately reflect the original. Although Scientology has
debunked Mr. Anderson’s conclusions as prejudiced, there is no
evidence that his quotations were fabricated.
6 Scientology has a few people whom they claim are naturally clear.
There is not much information on these individuals, but
evidently Mr. Hubbard was not naturally clear, since he worked on
eradicating his engrams.
7 First published by Hermitage House, New York, 1950. Unless
otherwise noted, all quotations are from Dianetics: The
Modern Science of Mental Health (Los Angeles: Bridge Publications,
Inc., 1986).
8 Time, April 5, 1976, p. 57. Scientologists will normally claim
one of two things, either L. Ron Hubbard said this in a jocular
manner, or perhaps he did not say it at all. The weight seems to be
in favor of him saying this, since those who claim to have
heard it have no reason to fabricate the story and one explanation
offered by Scientologists lacks denial by changing the sense to
jocular.
9 Time, February 10, 1986, p. 86.
10 L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology Abridged Dictionary (Los Angeles:
American Saint Hill Organization - ASHO, 1970), pp.
36-37.
11 London: Michael Joseph/Penguin Books Ltd., 1987.
12 Fort Lee, NJ: Barricade Books, 1992. Corydon had an earlier
edition coauthored with L. Ron Hubbard, Jr. (Secaucus, NJ:
Lyle Stuart, 1987). L. Ron Hubbard, Jr., has since died, so Corydon
revised and released the book in the 1992 expanded version.
13 Secaucus, NJ: Lyle Stuart, 1990.
14 As the true picture on Hubbard surfaced, a noticeable change
took place in his biography. Suddenly, formerly stated incidents
disappeared in later biographies, which tells us the impact
researchers have had on Scientology.
15 Scientology claims that Hubbard infiltrated Jack Parson’s black
magick group (which had connections to Aleister Crowley’s
Ordo Templi Orientis) undercover as an agent of Naval Intelligence.
Contradicting such a stealth operation is Hubbard’s
unlawful bigamous marriage to Sara Northrup, a member of Parson’s
black magick group. No undercover agent would risk
discovery with a bigamous marriage. It is a matter of record that
Hubbard married Northrup a year previous to his legal divorce
from his first wife, Margaret Grubb Hubbard. More incriminating than
that is Hubbard’s statement from one of his lectures where
he refers to Aleister Crowley as his friend: “The late Aleister
Crowley, my very good friend” (Conditions of Space/Time/Energy,
1952, PDC lecture 18, as quoted by Atack, op. cit., 89). In letters
from the Parsons collection quoted by Miller, Corydon, and
Atack, there is scant reference to Hubbard. But nothing can be found
showing direct communication or friendship between
Crowley and Hubbard. This appears to be an imaginative embellishment
on Hubbard’s part to inflate his biography.
16 So entrenched was early Scientology in the occult that Richrd
DeMille (son of Ceicil B. DeMille), wrote a book called
Introduction to Scientology (Los Angeles: Counsel of Sceintology,
1952), wherein he repeatedly used the word “occult” in
glowing commentary about Mr. Hubbard, Dianetics, and Scientology.
Occultism was not embarrassing to early Sceintologists, it
was promoted as a confirmation of their experiences.
17 L. Ron Hubbard, “Dianetics, the evolution of a science” in
Astounding Science Fiction, May 1950, 48.
18 See Walter Martin’s Kingdom of the Cults (Minneapolis: Bethany
House, 1985), 227 ff.
19 Hubbard defined Dianetics as “through the soul,” and Scientology
as “the study of knowledge in its fullest sense.”
20 Publisher’s Weekly, September 16, 1950, p. 1124.
21 L. Ron Hubbard, Dianetics: The Modern Science Of Mental Health
(Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc., 1986), p. 7.
22 Ibid., 14.
23 Ibid., 26.
24 Ibid., 29.
25 Ibid., 26.
26 Ibid., 81.
27 Ibid., 56.
28 Ibid., 61.
29 Ibid., 577.
30 Ibid., 73.
31 Ibid., 56.
32 Ibid., 82.
33 Ibid., 84.
34 Ibid., 122.
35 Ibid., 125.
36 Ibid., 228.
37 Ibid., 17.
38 Ibid., 18.
39 Ibid., 411.
40 Time, July 29, 1950, 64.
41 Publisher’s Weekly, op. cit.
42 Newsweek, October 16, 1950, 59.
43 Paul Sann, Fads, Fallacies, and Delusions of the American People
(New York: Crown Publishers, 1967), 114.
44 The Bianca story is rarely mentioned by Scientologists.
Hubbard’s explanation for Miss Bianca’s failure was that he
accidently placed her in the “now” by calling her on stage with “come
out now.” Therefore, she could not remember anything
past. She was frozen in the present; only the “now” was available to
her. See Miller, op. cit., 165-6. Although most
Scientologists point to McMaster at the first clear in 1966, Hubbard
claimed in 1954 “that I myself cleared half a hundred, and
auditors I have trained many times more” (The Journal of Scientology,
January 15, 1954).
45 The command “be three feet in back of your head” is one of the
first experiences a preclear may have in Scientology. Since
the sensation experienced by those who exteriorize is that they are
actually three feet behind their head, then we see this that is
sensation as aligned with the occult that was so often condemned in
the Bible. James 2:26 tells us that when the spirit leaves the
body, then the body is dead. We conclude that such experiences as
“exteriorization” not from God, then, and are occultic in their
nature. For some, though, it may be hallucinatory. See footnote 16.
46 L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology: A History of Man (Los Angeles:
ASHO, 1968), 7.
47 L. Ron Hubbard, The Phoenix Lectures (Los Angeles: ASHO, 1968),
12.
48 Ibid., 16.
49 Ibid., 18.
50 Ibid., 19.
51 People Weekly, August 14, 1978, 23.
52 Reader’s Digest, May, 1980, 91.
53 Upon the death of L. Ron Hubbard, all of his writings were
transferred to the Religious Technology Center, a branch of
Scientology. Hubbard’s writings were officially called “scripture,”
which gave them authoritative status in their religion.
54 Advance!, December, 1974, 5.
55 L. Ron Hubbard, Hymn of Asia (Los Angeles: Church of Scientology
of California, 1974), [pages are unnumbered, so our
count begins with the first page of the introduction] 5.
56 Ibid., 10.
57 Ibid., respectively pages19, 35, 41, 47, and 201.
58 L. Ron Hubbard, Volunteer Minister’s Handbook (Los Angeles:
Church of Sceintology, 1976), xiv.
59 L. Ron Hubbard, Ceremonies of the Founding Church of Scientology
(Edinburgh, Scotland: The Publications Organization
World Wide, 1968), 32.
60 Hubbard, Volunteer Minister’s Handbook, op. cit., 177.
61 Hubbard, The Phoenix Lectures, op. cit., 9, 27.
62 For example, Hubbard denies existence of demons and attaches an
unbiblical definition the devil. See Dianetics: The
Evolution of a Science (Edinburgh, Scotland: The Publications
Organization Word Wide, 1968), 32 and Science of Survival (Los
Angeles: ASHO, 1951), book 2, 31.
63 Hubbard Communication Office Bulletin, May 11, 1963, as quoted
by Anderson, Report of the Board, op. cit., 151.
64 Ibid.
65 Anonymous, Scientology: A World Religion Emerges in the Space
Age (Los Angeles: Church of Scientology, 1974), 17.
66 L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology: 8-8008 (Los Angeles: ASHO, 1967),
73.
67 Hubbard, The Phoenix Lectures, op. cit., 3.
68 Hubbard, Hymn of Asia, 227.
69 Ibid., 241.
70 Hubbard, The Phoenix Lectures, op. cit., 31.
71 L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology Clear Procedure, Issue One (Los
Angeles: ASHO, 1969), 21.
72 Hubbard, Scientology: A History of Man, op. cit., 38.
73 L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology: Fundamental of Thought (Los
Angeles: Church of Scientology Publications Organization,
1972), 55.
74 Hubbard, Scientology: A History of Man, op. cit., 53.
75 Ibid., 66.
76 Ibid., 20.
77 Ibid., 64-65.
78 Ibid., 43.
79 Scientology: A World Religion Emerges, op. cit., 8.
80 Hubbard, Scientology: A History of Man, op. cit., 8. The
synopsis of Hubbard’s view was derived from pages 27-34.
81 Ibid., 35.
82 Ibid., 38.
83 Ibid., 33.
84 L. Ron Hubbard, Professional Auditor’s Bulletin, number 31, as
quoted by Anderson, Report of the Board, op. cit., 150.
85 Hubbard, Volunteer Minister’s Handbook, op. cit., 551.
86 No argument is intended here in comparing fallen Scientologist
leaders to fallen Christian leaders, who sin as well. The
difference, though, may be observed in that Christians expect their
kind to fall occasionally, because it is understood that our basic
nature is sinful. Scientologists, though, carry a counter view,
saying they are basically good, which burdens them to demonstrate
this through Scientology, but that has not happened.
87 L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology: Self Analysis (Los Angeles: ASHO,
1974), 19.
88 Hubbard, Professional Auditor’s Bulletin, number 31, as quoted
by Anderson, Victoria Report, op. cit., 150.
89 Hubbard, Phoenix Lectures, op. cit., 27-28.
90 Hubbard, Phoenix Lectures, op. cit., 27.
91 Scientology: A World Religion, op. cit., 15.
92 Hubbard, Certainty Magazine, Volume 5, Number 10, as quoted by
Anderson, Report of the Board, 150.
93 Advance!, December 1974, number 27, 5.
94 Hubbard, Hymn of Asia, 89.
95 Life, November 15, 1968, 100-114.
96 Ibid., 6.
97 Hubbard, History of Man, op. cit., 8.
98 Ibid.
99 L. Ron Hubbard, Mission into Time (Los Angeles: ASHO, 1973), pp.
33, 34, 45, and 51. Brackets mine.
100 Hubbard, History of Man, ibid.
101 Hubbard, Science of Survival, op. cit., 255.
102 A Bible study on Why Christians Believe in the Resurrection is
available through Jude 3 Missions, P. O. Box 780,
Victorville, California, 92393. We highly recommend Evidence that
Demands a Verdict, Volume One, by Josh McDowell
(Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1985), for a thorough analysis
of the resurrection.