The Christian Way Forums / The Christian Way Forums / Outreach to Loved Ones in Christian Science / Questions to Ask Christian Scientists / Latest Posts

Anonymous — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 05:31:45 GMT

followingHim,

Yes, I've had that fantasy too. But I think monasticism is kind of a cop-out for a Christian. It means that one isolates oneself from the challenges of everyday life and thereby doesn't grow spiritually as one might have done, or bless the community as one might have done.

Of course, monasticism may have been the best thing in some periods of history, e.g. the "Dark Ages", when civilization itself was under threat from barbarism and needed that kind of protection, if one version of history is to be believed.

I don't think there's any problem with demonstrating abundance as long as one shares it freely with others. Simply because a person is wealthy there is no reason to make assumptions about how charitable they are or are not being, since many people do not publicise their charitable actions, as Jesus told us we should not

Having said that, I do believe in living simply and sustainably, and taking care of my needs not my wants.

I think the key is to be "in the world but not of it". Someone (a Christian Scientist as far as I recall) once said that the problem with Christian Scientists is that they are "of the world but not in it". I think there is some truth in that.

Erol

<< This subject touches on what I believe to be my first consideration that something in CS was amiss.

It was in my grade school years, although I can't place it more precisely than that. I had learned that as CS'ists we were not to be concerned with out bodies, and that our physical existence was not "really Real." But I noticed that we CS'ists, for the most part, lived very comfortable lives--and quite a few of our numbers enjoyed considerable affluence--and without excuse or apology!

Now I was not one to give up his creature comforts, but I couldn't escape this nagging thought:

If, as "Scientists," we were to earnestly, completely seek a higher plane of existence and a more sublime metaphysical understanding of our selves as 'Immortal Man,' then we should abandon worldly wealth, flee to a remote area with our Bibles and Science and Healths, eek out a simple subsistence, and devote ourselves to the study of (Mrs.) Eddy & the Scriptures, and a radical practice of them!

I fantasized that someday I might endeavor to be some kind of CS "monk." I never heard of anybody's actually doing it! >>

followingHim — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 17:04:43 GMT

This subject touches on what I believe to be my first consideration that something in CS was amiss.

It was in my grade school years, although I can't place it more precisely than that. I had learned that as CS'ists we were not to be concerned with out bodies, and that our physical existence was not "really Real." But I noticed that we CS'ists, for the most part, lived very comfortable lives--and quite a few of our numbers enjoyed considerable affluence--and without excuse or apology!

Now I was not one to give up his creature comforts, but I couldn't escape this nagging thought:

If, as "Scientists," we were to earnestly, completely seek a higher plane of existence and a more sublime metaphysical understanding of our selves as 'Immortal Man,' then we should abandon worldly wealth, flee to a remote area with our Bibles and Science and Healths, eek out a simple subsistence, and devote ourselves to the study of (Mrs.) Eddy & the Scriptures, and a radical practice of them!

I fantasized that someday I might endeavor to be some kind of CS "monk." I never heard of anybody's actually doing it!

tmcl — Sat, 30 Sep 2006 17:54:39 GMT

Do Go,

Well, Mrs. Eddy says in Science and Health that she does not maintain that anyone can exist in the flesh without food and raiment, and the Bible seems to indicate that Jesus ate even after the resurrection, indicating how completely his human body had been restored.

From what I've read about healings in Christian Science in Mrs. Eddy's time, both Mrs. Eddy and other Christian Scientists would often, when the evidence of healing came, tell their patients to eat normally, and indeed, the patients often reported that a normal desire to eat returned to them when they were healed, and they ate without ill effects.

I think that while we are on earth, the issue is not to make a god of food, and also to find more humane and effective ways of supplying mankind with nutritious food.

tmcl

Do_Go_Be_Man — Sat, 30 Sep 2006 17:16:31 GMT

Erol,

I was thinking mainly of food. I think some people make a kind of idol of it, even Christians who should know better from the first commandment.

I know some people make a kind of idol of food, especially myself when strawberry ice cream, chocolate chip cookies, and/or brownies are about. Yes, I certainly know better. Thank God that He forgives all sorts of sin.

The issue under discussion, however, is whether there are or have been any CSists who have "grown out" of basic material needs such as food, water, air, etc. I was in CS for about 30 years, remain somewhat on the fringes, and do not recall even a rumor of anyone doing so.

Do Go Be Man
<><

Anonymous — Sat, 30 Sep 2006 17:13:32 GMT

These last few comments on the advancements in medicine remind me of very recent articles about doctors and even some nurses (probably of the male gender) who do not pay enough attention to hand-washing or glove changing while working in surgery, going from one OR to another, and the need for the patients be aware of this (supposedly if they're still awake and able to do so) and to remind the medical people, even asking them, to wash their hands. I find this hysterically funny.

Anonymous — Sat, 30 Sep 2006 16:19:18 GMT

Do Go,

I was thinking mainly of food. I think some people make a kind of idol of it, even Christians who should know better from the first commandment.

Erol

<< Erol,

In regard to food etc., I actually think we don't make enough of an effort to "grow out of" that one.

I would love to know of a community of CSists or even one who had truly "grown out" of basic material needs such as food, water, air, etc. I suppose it could be claimed that something such as the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, however, would prevent such an observance.

Do Go Be Man
<>< >>

Do_Go_Be_Man — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 14:07:25 GMT

Erol,

In regard to food etc., I actually think we don't make enough of an effort to "grow out of" that one.

I would love to know of a community of CSists or even one who had truly "grown out" of basic material needs such as food, water, air, etc. I suppose it could be claimed that something such as the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, however, would prevent such an observance.

Do Go Be Man
<><

Anonymous — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 13:18:53 GMT

Medicine as we know it was unknown in the Bible

Erol, one might also say that medicine as we know it TODAY wasn't known at the time of MBE. As such lots of babies died because germs have not been discovered and doctors thought it was healthier to go from one birth to the other without cleaning up thereby infecting baby after baby. We now know better and I'm thankful for that. I can only hope that CS believers will see that and turn towards the medical profession when there are so many things readily treatable and curable.

Anonymous — Sat, 23 Sep 2006 15:18:43 GMT

Hello John,

I think you have valid questions. I think the main problem has to do with drugs: the poisonous elements in drugs, their side effects etc. Because they operate at a more subtle mental level than e.g. surgery or the adjustment of broken bones, they would tend to counteract the effects of prayer more consistently than the latter. (Personally, I also have a serious issue with the use of animals in medical experiments, but that's just me.)

However, Mary Baker Eddy was known to have used painkillers herself when the problem was not being met through prayer; advised Christian Scientists to use whatever temporal means they were guided to when healing in Christian Science had not taken place; and insisted on full compliance with law by Christian Scientists.

I think a good analogy is if your car gets stuck in the mud: you can get a tow truck and pull it out forwards, or you can get a tow truck and pull it out backwards. What you can't do is pull it out forwards and backwards at the same time! (It's not fair either to the car or the tow trucks.) Similarly, it is inadvisable to use both CS healing and medicine (drugs) at the same time.

I'm not quite clear what you mean by "nowhere in the Bible are such views or requirements taught". Medicine as we know it was unknown in the Bible.

In regard to food etc., I actually think we don't make enough of an effort to "grow out of" that one. Indulgence in material pleasures should be minimized by anyone on the spiritual path. However, even Jesus ate food, and did so even after his resurrection (the breakfast by the lake with the disciples). So to accuse MBE of not having demonstrated over the need for food is a bit unfair I think!

The CS teaching is indeed that we are spiritual, but we have material limitations to overcome. This should be done through the refinement and spiritualisation of our everyday lives, as we grow in grace God-wards.

Erol

<< MM:

So, MBE can only explain why she and others in CS must submit to the reality of the material world by saying that eating will eventually"pass away". Exactlly when and how this will happen was never explained to me in CS Sunday School. Why she couldn't over come this via a demonstration during her own lifetime was never explained, either.

Indeed, MBE gave herself and all others in CS a pass when it came to accepting or succumbing to 99% of the negative material aspects of mortal mind. For example, I don't know of any CS homes or branch churches that don't have restrooms, or any persons in CS who didn't buy deoderant, toothpaste, heat their home, get a haircut, use eyeglasses if necessary, where a coat to stay warm, wear shoes to protect their feet etc, etc., etc. All of these are activities done on a daily or regular basis to deal with a disagreeable material world which reminds man that he is by no means exclusively a spiritual being. Indeed, there isn't one CS member on earth who doesn't through their daily routine prove conclusively that man is both spiritual and material.

The truth is, that MBE really demanded (and then quite insistently) that only one major negative or disagreeable aspect of the material world or mortal mind be overcome, and that was when it came to personal illness and injury (maybe 1% of material or routine life?) Ignoring or explaining away the other 99% is both irrational and illogical. It should also be noted that no where in the Bible are such views or requirements taught- they aren't in there!

John >>

Anonymous — Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:24:01 GMT

1) "If a tragedy were to occur this very instant, and the two of us were to experience instant bodily death, do you know where you would be the next instant? Would you:
A. Be completely and fully in Heaven,
B. Be at a more advanced/higher level of existence? Would this be a higher level of material consciousness, or a non-material state that is not Perfection (i.e. 'Heaven")
C. Be at the same level of existence, i.e. a consciousness that exists within the form/concept of a material body?
D. Be in a place of inescapable torment commonly known as 'Hell?'"

It's a combination of A and B. It depends where I'm at spiritually, but it's just my own personal opinion.

"If the material world is not real, why do you eat? As a perfect example of God's life, truth, and love would you not be free from the material world and not need to sustain your bodies with food?"

Eventually yes, but you cannot run until you learn to walk. But Jesus did say:

John 6
35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

Matt 4
4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Matt 5
6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.

Matt 6
11 Give us this day our daily bread.

"Wouldn't it be just a cruel joke if God created us and put us in the illusory world where sin, sickness, and death exists? I would not worship such a cruel God!"

God didn't do it, we did. The Original Sin was the creation of the belief in this error.

"If Christian Science is the true way to Christ, why was my mother (who was as devout as anyone to the teachings of Mary Baker Eddy) allowed to wither and die, while paying a Practitioner big bucks for healing?"

If medicine is the true way to Christ, why did my mother die from the very thing that was supposed to make her better, while paying a Doctor big bucks for treatment?

Though this may seem a little mean, but when you fail a test in school, who is to blame? The subject, the teacher, or yourself?

John,

"Exactlly when and how this will happen was never explained to me in CS Sunday School."

The How is to study, the When is up to you.

"All of these are activities done on a daily or regular basis to deal with a disagreeable material world which reminds man that he is by no means exclusively a spiritual being. Indeed, there isn't one CS member on earth who doesn't through their daily routine prove conclusively that man is both spiritual and material."

Matt 6
24 ¶ No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

Galations 5
17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

Romans 8
5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

"The truth is, that MBE really demanded (and then quite insistently) that only one major negative or disagreeable aspect of the material world or mortal mind be overcome, and that was when it came to personal illness and injury (maybe 1% of material or routine life?) Ignoring or explaining away the other 99% is both irrational and illogical. It should also be noted that no where in the Bible are such views or requirements taught- they aren't in there!"

Wrong!

S&H 382
If half the attention given to hygiene were given to the study of Christian Science and to the spiritualization of thought, this alone would usher in the millennium. Constant bathing and rubbing to alter the secretions or to remove unhealthy exhalations from the cuticle receive a useful rebuke from Jesus' precept, "Take no thought . . . for the body." We must beware of making clean merely the outside of the platter.

S&H 44
He met and mastered on the basis of Christian Science, the power of Mind over matter, all the claims of medicine, surgery, and hygiene.

Anonymous,

"This is not an impossibility if heaven is a mental state of consciousness rather than a physical locale."

Agree. Mind is the only reality.

Peter Frye

Anonymous — Thu, 14 Oct 2004 17:45:58 GMT

Do Go,

Jesus said himself said "the kingdom of heaven is at hand", and "the fields are already white...", pointing to
the fat that he himself declared that the kingdom of heaven is now. It is now because presently possible
to behold as John did, and not now because we have yet to fully realized that it is now, here, everywhere.
This is not an impossibility if heaven is a mental state of consciousness rather than a physical locale.

Do_Go_Be_Man — Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:53:32 GMT

Anonymous Thursday, October 14, 2004 12:08 PM,

MBE is not claiming anything different from what the Bible has already fortold (sic).

MBE did claim (or at least imply) something different from what the Bible foretold. She claimed the new Heaven and new Earth to be now. John was told in Revelation 1:19 to (w)rite therefore the things that you have seen, those that are and those that are to take place after this. (emphasis added)

Let me throw a couple of other passages into play, if I may:

Isaiah 65:17-25

Isaiah 66:15-24

Revelation 21 wasn't written about what is, but rather what will be.

So, what question can be asked of CSists to learn their Biblical basis for deciding the appropriate compromises to make regarding the material world?

Do Go Be Man
<><

Anonymous — Thu, 14 Oct 2004 12:47:40 GMT

Anonymous:

First of all, I am not an expert on Revelation, although I did read it from cover to cover years ago. Nothing I read in it, however, and the folks I know who read classical greek who are familiar with the book, would hold that it can be interpreted to be contrary to the Gospels and Epistles, or negate the message as was presented at face value in these prior books. Heaven and Earth will pass away when God judges the world. We will then be spiritually united with him or eternally separated from him spiritually. To accept MBE's teachings or the CS view, is to just accept more convenient poetic license on her part. The only way you can say that MBE's view of Revelation is consistent with the other books, is to, of course, accept her rewrite of those books using her 100 redefinitions of English words and places in S&H.

Secondly, why insist, as CS does, that a tiny part of this vision be accepted and practiced on this earth at this time, while the vast majority of it is ignored? Why have as a cornerstone that man is not material, so we shouldn't therefore go to physicians, but will liberally engage in every other activity that I cited in my previous post? If we're going to submit to the bodily functions on a daily basis, why not take kids to a doctor or hospital if they are seriously ill? Why not go to a doctor if we are sick, if in the end we have to wait you for all other mortal illusions to "pass away" anyway? A rational view would say this inconsistency doesn't make sense. In the end also, Metaphysics is either true or it isn't. It can either be applied to all aspects of the mortal or material condition or it can't on this earth at this time. It can't be applied, of course, because it isn't true.

John

Anonymous — Thu, 14 Oct 2004 12:08:21 GMT

John,

Even Scripture says that "heaven and earth shall pass away", this being what is termed the
material earth and heavens, but New Jerusalem spoken of in Rev is that new earth and heaven
which is not made like the former which has passed away, but is new, not of matter, but wholly
spiritual. MBE is not claiming anything different from what the Bible has already fortold.

Anonymous — Thu, 14 Oct 2004 11:53:57 GMT

MM:

So, MBE can only explain why she and others in CS must submit to the reality of the material world by saying that eating will eventually"pass away". Exactlly when and how this will happen was never explained to me in CS Sunday School. Why she couldn't over come this via a demonstration during her own lifetime was never explained, either.

Indeed, MBE gave herself and all others in CS a pass when it came to accepting or succumbing to 99% of the negative material aspects of mortal mind. For example, I don't know of any CS homes or branch churches that don't have restrooms, or any persons in CS who didn't buy deoderant, toothpaste, heat their home, get a haircut, use eyeglasses if necessary, where a coat to stay warm, wear shoes to protect their feet etc, etc., etc. All of these are activities done on a daily or regular basis to deal with a disagreeable material world which reminds man that he is by no means exclusively a spiritual being. Indeed, there isn't one CS member on earth who doesn't through their daily routine prove conclusively that man is both spiritual and material.

The truth is, that MBE really demanded (and then quite insistently) that only one major negative or disagreeable aspect of the material world or mortal mind be overcome, and that was when it came to personal illness and injury (maybe 1% of material or routine life?) Ignoring or explaining away the other 99% is both irrational and illogical. It should also be noted that no where in the Bible are such views or requirements taught- they aren't in there!

John

Anonymous — Thu, 14 Oct 2004 10:49:33 GMT

how about answer #20.7777 to the "why the need to eat?" question

mortals eat what is termed matter called food now to sustain the belief in material life, but this shall
eventually pass away and be replaced by immortal fruits/food which is drinking and eating the
blood and flesh of Christ, thus, living off a pure understanding of our spiritual life and body as a
child of God, this alone feeding us. Or in other words, "suffer it to be so now"

mm

Anonymous — Thu, 14 Oct 2004 03:40:07 GMT

Is anyone tired of hearing answer#20 (regarding questions like "Why do you eat..."?) I hate hearing the "suffer it to be so now." That has turned into a mantra for every unanswerable question! AND, I could find it only once in S&H... in the marriage section- I always wondered why it was in there.

Anonymous — Wed, 13 Oct 2004 21:15:54 GMT

A good question to ask a Christian Scientist...Let me see...

If the material world is not real, why do you eat? As a perfect example of God's life, truth, and love would you not be free from the material world and not need to sustain your bodies with food?

Wouldn't it be just a cruel joke if God created us and put us in the illusory world where sin, sickness, and death exists? I would not worship such a cruel God!

If Christian Science is the true way to Christ, why was my mother (who was as devout as anyone to the teachings of Mary Baker Eddy) allowed to wither and die, while paying a Practitioner big bucks for healing?

If I think of any more, I'll be back!

Bill Webb

Anonymous — Wed, 13 Oct 2004 20:57:52 GMT

Nyoka might appreciate this:

Plagiarism.

It's driving me crazy. Sorry.

followingHim — Wed, 13 Oct 2004 20:29:09 GMT

Deleted questions aside, here are two to ask:

1) "If a tragedy were to occur this very instant, and the two of us were to experience instant bodily death, do you know where you would be the next instant? Would you:
A. Be completely and fully in Heaven,
B. Be at a more advanced/higher level of existence? Would this be a higher level of material consciousness, or a non-material state that is not Perfection (i.e. 'Heaven")
C. Be at the same level of existence, i.e. a consciousness that exists within the form/concept of a material body?
D. Be in a place of inescapable torment commonly known as 'Hell?'"

2) "Since Jesus came back from the dead, we can probably agree that he is an authority, indeed the final authority* on the matter. Can you find me any verses where Jesus says anything definitive on any of the possible options listed above, especially 'B' and 'C'?"

Then, share the verses that Jesus preached 'A' or 'B' as the only two alternatives.

*pun intended!

Linda — Wed, 13 Oct 2004 19:44:56 GMT
I very clearly recall reading those exact questions on a different website. . . I recall from a post deleted recently by the administrator. . . that plagarism is not tolerated on this site.

That's right. It's fine to summarize other writers and to quote portions of other people's writings as long you reference them. It is not OK to paste large segments of other people's writings onto this site. Thomas, I hope you'll give us the information we need to find the material you were quoting.

Linda (Moderator)

Anonymous — Wed, 13 Oct 2004 17:56:29 GMT
Thomas,

I truly hope those are your questions, as I very clearly recall reading those exact questions
on a different website. Perhaps it is your website? I recall from a post deleted recently by
the administrator, one from macgregorinstitute website, that plagarism is not tolerated on this
site.

Susan — Wed, 13 Oct 2004 12:50:39 GMT
Well, Thomas, your questions are pretty much the same ones I asked myself before I made the decision to leave CS. The only way to understand that you cannot justify CS Biblically is to read the Bible without the CS definitions. I just keep praying for God to call my loved one still in CS, to open her eyes to His truth.

God kept pointing me back to the Bible: "Where in My word do I say that evil isn't real? Where did I say that sickness was an illusion? Jesus is God, sin is real, satan is real, hell is real, Jesus' blood cleanses your sins, your salvation is because of My grace, all these things I have told you in the Bible." That sort of conversation with Him. I'm ready for Him to talk to all who don't know Him.

Blessings,

Susan

Questions to Ask Christian Scientists

thomas — Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:55:19 GMT
[Uncredited material found on other web sites deleted by Moderator]