 Posted Friday, July 11, 2008 7:46 AM
|
|
|
|
| I was talking with my personal CS the other day about a post I read titled "Where is God"? I was surprised as I read a response to this person that included another person refering to Christ as "it". This same person was quoting John chapter 1 and the fact that the Word was in God and was God. When I read this to my CS and then read through vs 14 where "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us" I asked one simple question. Who is the Word? My CS was not ineterested in answering the question, I'm guessing because the answer would be in direct conflict with the teachings in S&H. My nine year old grandaughter happened to have walked in while I was reading from the Bible and excitedly said "I know the answer". And she did know, she said Grandpa "Jesus is the Word and He is God". When the Bible was written it trully was for God's childern, people such as myself and children as a whole. Children understand that if God is real and the Bible is His word then what it says must be true there is no doubt. I think if we could learn to embrace the Bible on that level we might be better representatives of His teachings. May God Bless All Swingdancer
|
|
|
Posted Saturday, July 12, 2008 5:14 AM
|
|
|
|
| Swingdancer, Yeah, I think it's so much more wonderful that we find salvation in a Person rather than an "Idea". With a salvific idea, the burden is on us to understand the complexities of the divine; but by accepting a Person as our Savior, we let God Himself assume the onerous task of our salvation. Only then is our yoke easy & our burden light. "For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery" Gal 5:1 zoarean
|
|
|
Posted Monday, July 14, 2008 8:18 AM
|
|
|
|
Swingdancer:
Mary Baker Eddy didn't like the fact that the Bible states that the "word became flesh", so to deal with it, she simply changed the definition of the word "flesh".
On page 586 of S&H, Flesh is defined at "An error of physical belief; a supposition that life, substance, and intelligence are in matter; an illusion; a belief that matter has sensation."
Webster says in part "the soft parts of the body of an animal and especially of a vertebrate; especially : the parts composed chiefly of skeletal muscle as distinguished from internal organs, bone, and integument".
In order for Mary Baker Eddy to make Christian Science "fit" Christianity, she had to change the meanings of over 100 words so that they were in many cases the total antithesis of what the authors had intended, both Biblical (the authors of the scriptures) and historical . It's similar to what George Orwell did in 1984 in redefining "War is Peace" and "Freedom is Slavery", if you look at it from an standpoint of intellectual honesty and common sense.
It is truly sad that those in Christian Science have bought into this brainwashing, and that so many have died as a result of it. (My Dad almost did when I was 3, but pulled through thanks to a non-CS mother who insisted she be allowed to call an ambulance). This is is addition to the fact that they don't know Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, and that all reconciliation and understanding that is needed was done by Him for us. It is not something that we have to "prove" via healing which if we fail, the "mortal mind" fleshly condition that we have unsuccessfully addressed will be dragged into the next world with us.
Just some thoughts in Christ,
John
|
|
|
Posted Monday, July 14, 2008 11:56 AM
|
|
|
|
John,
In order for Mary Baker Eddy to make Christian Science "fit" Christianity, she had to change the meanings of over 100 words so that they were in many cases the total antithesis of what the authors had intended, both Biblical (the authors of the scriptures) and historical . It's similar to what George Orwell did in 1984 in redefining "War is Peace" and "Freedom is Slavery", if you look at it from an standpoint of intellectual honesty and common sense.
Now, now, John, you know you don't understand issues like this and shouldn't be discussing them. The Bible must be spiritually interpreted and contains no literal meaning. You cannot trust words to convey meaning. That's not to say the meanings are hidden. Christian Science is certainly not gnosticism ("hidden knowledge"). The words of the Bible just cannot be appropriately discerned without the keys to the Scriptures provided by study of Mary Baker Eddy's writings as illuminated by gnostic gospels and the unpublished, private teachings that Mrs. Eddy only shared with special students.
Oh, oh, sorry. Been reading too much on christianscience.com lately. I was confused for a moment.
Even Freud allegedly said, "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar". Assuming that the Bible substantially represents only allegory that always requires "spiritual interpretation" of common words and concepts sounds a lot like hidden knowledge a.k.a. gnosticism. If it quacks like a duck and looks like a duck ...
While I certainly have my differences with orthodox Christian Science, it's amazing to see what it has apparently become with the New Age Gnostic Christian Scientists. Glad I got out when I did.
Do Go Be Man
<><
|
|
|
Posted Monday, July 14, 2008 2:12 PM
|
|
|
|
Do Go,
My comments are certainly worthy of your chastisement!! I should not allow myself, nor seek to inspire others, to get confused by the facts.
I love your Freud quote!!
John
|
|
|
|