Scientology: Good or Bad?

What is it about this topic that brings about a total lapse of scholarship and sense? Or does it just attract people who never had any? Like those with silly signatures and ungrammatical English

Let's stick to the subject and leave the person out of it.
The passage that Wil has quoted is taken from the translation by William Whiston, made in 1732 from the editio princeps of 1544 — in other words, of no scholarly value. I've just checked the Wikipedia article "Josephus on Jesus", which I'd not seen before. It seems a reliable presentation of current scholarship and a good reconstruction of the text. !
So I ask that we discuss the passages in question and post the translations to do so.

You simply say you don't like the translation yet don't post the one you'd like to discuss or the problems with the one posted?

How beneficial.
I found a 2 dvd set at a local good will thrift store 1/2 price sat. on how to use dianetics .The set was like $1.50 I could only get part way through the first dvd . The terms kept confusing me . I think I will play the dvds again after a few cans of beer , it might make more scense .
Scientology has it's good parts and bad parts. I think that it only gets demonized in the media because people don't like some of the celebrities who are apart of scientology.
Dont misunderstand my post the other day . I agree with some of the basic ideas on dianetics . That repressed memories will create problems . I see it as going way beyond one life time . There are better methods of letting go of these repressed memories are past life regression , deep breathing , the circulation of white light ,and yoga , ect.