In a recent sermon a clergyman is reported as saying that...

Port Hope (Ont.) Times

In a recent sermon a clergyman is reported as saying that Christian Science is "a rival religion to the Christian religion," and that it is "opposed to the New Testament record of the teachings of Jesus." A careful study of Christian Science will show that its teachings are based wholly upon the Bible and the life and teachings of our Master. The Bible teaches that God is Spirit and that God is All-in-all, and every statement in the Christian Science text-book is a logical deduction from these premises. Christian Scientists, perhaps more than any other body of Christians, accept unreservedly all of Jesus' commands, and believe these commands were meant for his followers in all time. They not only believe his words, but they go farther, and actually rely upon God for their salvation from all ills, physical as well as mental. Is it establishing a rival religion to that of Jesus for a man to make Jesus' religion the standard of his life and conduct? Christian Scientists, by their work in healing the sick and sinful in the way that Jesus taught, are offering the very best proof that can be given that their religion is the very religion our Master taught and practised, and left for our guide.

The first tenet subscribed to by all who join the Christian Science church is as follows: "As adherents of Truth, we take the inspired World of the Bible as our sufficient guide to eternal Life" (Science and Health, p. 497), and one of the greatest changes made in the life of all Christian Scientists is the greater love they have for the Bible. They find, through the light thrown on the Scriptures by the teachings of Christian Science, that the Bible becomes a new book to them, and is made more practical, so that they understand its truths better than they ever did before. Is it a "dangerous" thing to create in men an increased desire to read and study the Bible and to endeavor to put its teachings into practice in their daily lives? Is it "dangerous" to teach the allness of God, the omnipotence and omnipresence of infinite Love, and the powerlessness of all that is opposed to God's law or that would attempt to usurp His power? Is it "dangerous" to rely upon God, infinite Love, for all our needs? Then the more we have of such "dangerous" doctrine the better the world would be.

Is it possible that Jesus meant his teachings to apply only to his immediate followers, and are we to discard his teachings because we have been taught that they were never meant to apply to us in this age? Where do we find in the Bible any authority to pick out certain commands as being meant for us, and arbitrarily set aside other commands equally as imperative and say they were not intended for this age? Is it reasonable to think that a large part of the Master's life-work was intended only for his own disciples? Jesus never intimated, either by word or deed, any such interpretation of his words. He said definitely and plainly: "He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also;" and he also said, "These signs shall follow them that believe," the signs mentioned including the healing of the sick. The words are unmistakable and the meaning is clear, and he would be a bold man who would presume to distort Jesus' command to preach the gospel and heal the sick, into the entirely different command to preach the gospel and let the doctor heal the sick.

Enjoy 1 free Sentinel article or audio program each month, including content from 1898 to today.

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.