What's scientology's view of Jesus?

Answer 1

If you look closely at the position of L. Ron Hubbard, the founder & "prophet" of Scientology, you'll see that while Scientology claims that its members are free to believe in God and be Christians, but it just doesn't make sense to be both. The fundamental beliefs are too much in conflict, and the "infallible" word of Hubbard teaches that Jesus didn't exist.

Christianity, as it's core tenet, teaches that Jesus Christ is our savior and messiah. Hubbard's teachings about Christ, however, deny this outright. In an earlier writing he states that Christ never existed but was only an idea electronically implanted in our minds (this implant is called "R6" by Hubbard).

"Somebody on this planet, about 600 B.C. found some pieces of 'R6.' I don't know how they found it; either by watching madmen or something. But since that time they have used it. And it became what is known as Christianity. The man on the cross; there was no Christ!"

Christianity teaches that, through Christ, one achieves redemption, making one worthy of heaven in the afterlife. Scientology, on the other hand, teaches that we are all immortal "Thetans", or spirits, which never actually die. According to Scientology, Thetans exist in many many physical bodies through time, but the death of the physical body never destroys the Thetan. Thus, the Thetan reincarnates over and over and never passes on to any "afterlife".

Christianity teaches that Heaven exists (and most denominations teach that Hell exists as well). Hubbard specifically denounced the idea of the existence of Heaven and Hell. Christianity also teaches that God (Yahweh) exists, and Hubbard was very skeptical of the idea of a "Big Thetan" ruling a place called "Heaven", a place he didn't believe exists.

Answer 2

I did listen to a lecture by L Ron Hubbard where he talked about Jesus. He said that Jesus was a great spiritual leader that brought civilization to the West. Before Christianity the Romans were having fun by killing people at the circus (hundreds at the time), slavery was the norm not to mention Caligula’s orgies. Christianity changed all that.
But Scientologist believes that the true teachings Jesus has been lost through time and political manipulation. There is very little left of his teachings….
There is nothing else than the most utmost respect by L Ron Hubbard toward Jesus.
Now that Jesus was the Christ (The Messiah, as foretold by the prophets of the Hebrew Scriptures.) is something to be debated.
L Ron Hubbard never said there was no Jesus; his is being misquoted if someone disagrees.
Scientology doesn’t believe in blind faith, Scientology believes in observation and spiritual understanding.
So to say that you have to believe in a God or a Christ blindly is something negative; something to control people, not what Jesus intended.
I don't believe that Jesus ever intended for people to have blind faith in him. I think that the church has played that angle to control people.
People don't grow spiritually by having blind faith. or by being forced into submition.
PS Zero Cool is an atheist that is anti-religion, just look at her answer and questions.

Answer 3

That the body thetans were sent to a movie theater to watch a movie and supposedly it starred all the religious icons of today such as Jesus, Moses, Buddha, Mohammed etc...
and that it was all lies.
Then the body thetans entered human souls and fed us these "lies"

Answer 4

That he was a man with a message, a teacher, like Moses,
or Guatama Buddha or Mohammed.
All had basic similarities in what they tried to teach us or show us. A way, or a path out of the trap of the material, towards spiritual freedom.

Answer 5

according to scientology we were put here by aliens... I think. Weird stuff!

Answer 6

Aside from literal interpretations, and assumptions of them being fiction, numerous other explanations of the events have been put forward throughout history. Beginning with the Gnostics, it has been suggested that the reports of alleged miracles were actually intended just as allegories, not as factual events.[citation needed] Healing the blind has been argued to be a metaphor for people who previously could not, or would not, see the truth being shown it;[citation needed] healing the deaf has been interpreted as simply meaning that people who could not, or would not, listen to true teachings were made to;[citation needed] similarly, healing paralysis has been interpreted as an allegory for rectifying inaction;[citation needed] and healing leprosy for removing the societal stigmatism associated with certain stances.[citation needed] It has also been argued that bar-Timai is a direct reference to Plato's Timaeus, a philosophical work, and that bar-Timai symbolizes the hellenic audience of Mark's gospel, and that curing his blindness is a metaphor for the Gospel giving a revelation to the audience. [2]

Other scholars have suggested that the Bible is more literal than that, but that the events can be scientifically explained by arguing that Jesus had a high knowledge of herbalism, as was common amongst the teachers of many mystery religions, and ascetic groups like the Essenes, and simply applied quite ordinary and scientific cures for the symptoms described.[citation needed] Though things like blindness and deafness may seem incurable without very modern medicine, it has been argued by these scholars that it is not true blindness, deafness, etc., being referred to, but more easily curable illness such as conjunctivitis, and glue ear.[citation needed] Out of the Canonical Gospels, Matthew adds several other episodes of Jesus healing people who are blind, deaf, mute, lame, or some combination of these four; many scholars see this as an example of the common trait of Matthew trying to portray Jesus as fulfilling an Old Testament prophecy, in this case Isaiah 35:5-6.[citation needed] Those who believe the miracles happened as literally stated also sometimes think there is a reference to this part of Isaiah, though in their case, these believers argue that Jesus was fulfilling the prophecy, rather than the author editing Jesus to fit it.[citation needed]

Some modern scholars dismiss exorcisms as simply being cases of mental illness and afflictions such as epilepsy.[citation needed] Some scholars typically see these exorcisms of such illness as allegorical, representative of Jesus' teachings clearing even the most troubled mind.[citation needed] Some critical scholars, however, have suggested that the events could have been real, though with the scientific explanation of the illnesses, and that the cures given were really just psychological drugs that Jesus, like many others in the era, would have been aware of; for example, Sage and Mistletoe were used in early times to treat epilepsy, and Snakeroot was used to treat schizophrenia.[citation needed]

A study by the Jesus Seminar of what aspects of the Gospel accounts are likely to be factual, held that while the various cures Jesus gave for diseases are probably true, since there were many others in the ancient world credited with healing power, most of the other miracles of Jesus are nonfactual, at least in their literal interpretation from the Bible. The veracity of exorcisms carried out by Jesus is questioned among some scholars, as according to modern science there is no evidence for demonic possession.

Concerning the resurrection, most non-Christian scholars point to the paucity of evidence,[citation needed] as well as the lack of evidence for other people having come back from the dead, and so reject the resurrection's historicity.[citation needed] The Jesus Seminar concluded: "in the view of the Seminar, he did not rise bodily from the dead; the resurrection is based instead on visionary experiences of Peter, Paul, and Mary." [1] Raymond E. Brown however argued that the seminar used an a priori bias against the supernatural and that events such as the resurrection had no chance of being admitted by the group as historical. [3]

**

In April 2006, scientists placed a controversial theory in which they claim that Jesus may have actually walked on thin ice rather than water [2]. Scientifically, the suggestion was controversial because it assumed the Bible was a fairly factual piece of evidence in recording this event. Religiously the suggestion was controversial because it argued that the Biblical event could have been just an illusion. Others have noted that the Bible never tells how deep the water was.

The effect of walking on water can be created by having the walker step onto an object that is submerged just below the surface of the water. One example of this is Ron Barassi's involvement in the 2006 Queen's Baton Relay, where he traversed the Yarra River on a pontoon that was just beneath the water's surface.

Under certain circumstances it is possible to actually walk on water. By distributing weight in such a way that surface tension does not break there will be sufficient buoyancy to avoid sinking below the surface. In nature, certain animals such as the Water strider insect and South American Basilisk lizard exploit the effect easily. These animals have optimized body shapes and weight-to-water distributions for the task.