Article May 20, 1916 Issue

If it be true, as an evangelist in his criticism said at...

Thomas E. Boland

Philadelphia (Pa.) Ledger

If it be true, as an evangelist in his criticism said at Atlantic City, that he does not understand "any two consecutive paragraphs of 'Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures,'" the Christian Science and Health gentleman's own statement would exclude him from consideration as a qualified critic of the teachings of this book. He proceeds, nevertheless, as reported in a recent issue, to discuss that which he declares he does not understand, and says Christian Scientists "are trying to get away from the fact of sin."

Christian Science does not teach that God created sin or sent sin into the world, or that sin is an eternal fact of being from which there is no escape. God is wholly good, therefore He could not create evil or send it upon mankind, for this in itself would be an evil thing, and it is unthinkable that God should sin. The Christian Science concept of this matter is indicated in the following excerpts from Science and Health: "Sin will receive its full penalty, both for what it is and for what it does." "The way to escape the misery of sin is to cease sinning. There is no other way" (pp. 542, 327). It then becomes evident that in the view of Christian Science the individual is not freed from sin and the suffering it entails until its power over him is broken. His release, therefore, is not hastened, but on the contrary is delayed, if he regards sin as an inexorable and eternal part of the scheme of things.

The full acceptation by Christian Science of the divinity of the Christ ought to be clear from the definition of Christ as given in Science and Health: "The divine manifestation of God, which comes to the flesh to destroy incarnate error" (p. 583). This definition does not "rob" the Christ of anything. Quite the reverse, it declares the Christ-mission to be the expression—manifestation—of God, divinity. If the critic, however, intends to find fault with Christian Science for not saying that Jesus is God, then the testimony of Jesus himself on this point ought to be considered. Jesus never said he was God; he spoke of himself as a man. He virtually denied that he was God, and several of his sayings are flatly inconsistent with the theory of his deification. Peter also spoke of him as "Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God." Christian Science, therefore, renders unto Jesus exactly what he desired, namely, not to be deified but to be glorified. Moreover, it accepts the Scriptural account of the conception which led to his birth, and attaches much importance to his origin and to his knowledge of it.

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit

If it be true, as an evangelist in his criticism said at...

We'd love to hear from you!

Sign up for unlimited access