Talk:Space opera in Scientology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former featured article Space opera in Scientology is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Good article Space opera in Scientology has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 10, 2005.
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Space opera in Scientology:

To-do list is empty: remove {{To do}} tag or click on edit to add an item.

Aside from a mention in an church glossary[edit]

What about all the stuff in Scientology: A History of Man, Route to Infinity, and the Technique 88 lectures? There is a ton of space opera in there, a lot of which is even arguably precursors to the Xenu myth (such as Volcanos and Entities). Those books and lectures are all part of the publicly available doctrine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:18, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but such things aren't currently discussed in public by the church's leadership. The Call of Cthulhu (talk) 03:29, 4 March 2014 (UTC)


I’m pretty sure the claim that thetans go to Venus after death is wrong, but it would probably be OR to show such. The Forth Invader Force were the latest implanters to be specifically mentioned by Hubbard, and they had their implant station on Mars. Other than the scuffle with the Fifth Hubbard details little about them, and while the fifth occupied Venus there is no mention that they engaged in implanting. The only reference in what came after in the space opera chronology is the Espinol, who currently use earth as a prison but no reference is made to Venus. The claim that Venus is the location for the implant station doesn’t come from any of the Hubbard materials I have, and the only real viable location per Hubbard would be Mars.

I know the Venus claim is sourced, but it just doesn’t seem to match up with what Hubbard wrote unless I’m missing a reference somewhere.-- (talk) 19:56, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

The Afterlife for Scientologists / What will happen to Isaac Hayes' legendary soul?

"Hubbard was quoted (apparently from a lecture given in the 1950s) describing how, after death, a thetan is carried to a "landing station" on Venus, where it is "programmed with lies," put in a capsule, and then "dumped" back on Earth, where it wanders in search of a baby to inhabit." --Mknjbhvgcf (talk) 14:56, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Here's the LA Times story which Salon is quoting from:

Defining the Theology

"Hubbard said that one of the worst implants happens after a person dies. While Hubbard's story of this implant may seem outlandish to some, he advanced it as a factual account of reincarnation.

"Of all the nasty, mean and vicious implants that have ever been invented, this one is it," he declared during a lecture in the 1950s. "And it's been going on for thousands of years."

Hubbard said that when a person dies, his or her thetan goes to a "landing station" on Venus, where it is programmed with lies about its past life and its next life. The lies include a promise that it will be returned to Earth by being lovingly shunted into the body of a newborn baby.

Not so, said Hubbard, who described the thetan's re-entry this way:

"What actually happens to you, you're simply capsuled and dumped in the gulf of lower California. Splash. The hell with ya. And you're on your own, man. If you can get out of that, and through that, and wander around through the cities and find some girl who looks like she is going to get married or have a baby or something like that, you're all set. And if you can find the maternity ward to a hospital or something, you're OK.

"And you just eventually just pick up a baby."

But Hubbard offered his followers an easy way to outwit the implant: Scientologists should simply select a location other than Venus to go "when they kick the bucket."

So it looks like Venus is the default destination, but Scientologists (although presumably not non-Scientologists) can opt out of it. --Mknjbhvgcf (talk) 15:05, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok, what I have now is that "Hubbard taught that thetans left human bodies after they died and went to "implant stations", among which was a location on a planet near Earth, where their memories were erased." Mark Arsten (talk) 15:07, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Looks like some more details could be added from [1]. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:11, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Ok, added some more details. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:11, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

The word 'Scripture' in article title[edit]

Does the word 'Scripture', in the article title, perhaps contain the implicit assumption that Scientology is a legitimate religion? (something that's disputed) — in that, only religions have 'Scriptures' — it's a loaded word.

Suggested amendment: 'Space opera in Scientology'.

I'm a newbie so hesitant to make this change myself.

Someone else has made a similar point at: Talk:Religious_text#Scientology


--Mknjbhvgcf (talk) 11:23, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I usually have a very broad definition of what a "religion" is, so I don't think we should take action for that reason. I tend to agree that concise is better, though. And some of the space opera here isn't from Scientology's scriptures, they're about space opera details that come out while auditing. So, yes, I agree with your proposed change. Mark Arsten (talk) 13:34, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Ok, I moved it, turns out a previous version of the page was "Space Opera in Scientology doctrine", which made more sense (but was wordier). Mark Arsten (talk) 13:37, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
OK cool, nice one Mark. --Mknjbhvgcf (talk) 14:38, 13 September 2012 (UTC)