The difference between Christianity, as taught and practiced...

William T. Finney—Oshawa, Ontario, Canada

Canadian Watchman

The difference between Christianity, as taught and practiced by Jesus, and Oriental metaphysical philosophy is shown in the practical effects produced in the lives of men. The Founder of Christianity was the most practical teacher in the world's history. He was able to prove every statement he made. Christian Science relies on the teachings of Jesus and fulfills his commands, thus proving its identity with early Christianity and its superiority over mere philosophy. For proof of this Christian Scientists invite investigation of many thousands of cases of healing and reformation.

Christian Science fully accepts all that Jesus said about himself and his plan of salvation, even though it does not agree with many of the views thereof which have been taught by Christian theologians. Because of this full acceptance, and as a result thereof, in practice Christian Scientists present to the world the "signs following" mentioned in the sixteenth chapter of Mark.

Christian Science gives the correct Christian teaching about the atonement. It shows that the sinner cannot be reformed by relying upon the vicarious effort of another, but by overcoming sin through divine power. When sin is destroyed in the individual, the atonement (at-one-ment) is demonstrated in the fruits of righteousness. In this, again, results are shown as conclusive.

It is not correct to say that Christian Science rejects the second chapter of Genesis or any other portion of the Christian Scriptures. The Christian Science textbook, "Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures," by Mary Baker Eddy, gives the spiritual meaning in its interpretation of the Bible. In the book of Genesis there are two different and opposing accounts of creation. The first account describes man as made in the image and likeness of God, Spirit. The second chapter describes the human, material, imperfect concept of creation—the opposite of the spiritual. Science and Health points out that the two opposite statements cannot both be true and that the spiritual is the correct and scientific explanation. Regarding the position Christian Science takes toward the Scriptures, I quote from Science and Health (p. 497) the following tenet of our faith: "As adherents of Truth, we take the inspired Word of the Bible as our sufficient guide to eternal Life."

If Christian Science offered nothing more convincing than mere verbal denial of the reality of pain and other material manifestations of discord, your contention that because of this it is not a science, would be reasonable. But when Christian Scientist can point to multiplying instances of pain and disease absolutely destroyed, it must be admitted that the unreality of these manifestations has been proved, and that the method of abolishing them is effective and therefore scientific.

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit