The second of the letters against Christian Science written...

Omaha (Neb.) World-Herald

The second of the letters against Christian Science written for your columns by a Lutheran minister has disclosed the hiatus in his thinking. Evidently the crux of his whole contention is the unproved assumption that the Son of God is God. A member of the clerical profession who can fail to notice such a logical chasm as that has no license to speak against other people's religion. He needs to reconsider his own.

It is quite true that Jesus spoke of himself as the Son of God. In my former letter I cited John x. 36, where he said, "I am the Son of God," as a denial and correction of the charge that he claimed to be God. There is no process by which these words can be converted into a claim that he was God. Even the Jews who were trying to get proof of their accusation did not attempt to put that construction upon them. In order to understand the word "Son," as used by Jesus, we must consider his use of the word "Father," for each of these words is the counterpart and complement of the other. In the gospels we find that he spoke not only of "my Father," but of "the Father," "our Father," and "your Father;" and he used these titles interchangeably. This fact of itself proves that he did not regard himself as God.

It is also to be proved that Jesus spoke of other men as sons or children of God, and he expressed his whole aim and object in the words, "that where I am, there ye may be also." Furthermore, the words "Father" and "Son," as Jesus used them, expressed both kinship and likeness, both relation and kindred nature. They denoted that the nature of God is imaged or reflected by man; that is, by the real man. This is what Jesus meant when he said, "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father."

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.