 Posted Friday, February 20, 2009 8:54 AM
|
|
|
|
For me it was very important to find out that others considered CS a cult. I found it very disturbing - I think the first time was when as a Christian Scientist I attended John MacArthur's church with my brother-in-law and he was speaking on cults. It did make me mad but motivated me to find out why I (we) were being attacked like that. For the first time in my life I went to a Christian book store and was fascinated with the section on cults and purchased a book just to find out what Christian's believed and what they were saying about CS. I also ordered some free tapes from "Firefighters for Christ" (Bob Vernon in particular) - while I would have been very reluctant to talk about (argue) my beliefs, I was willing to listen in private and it really affected me. I don't know about most Christian Scientists but I felt pretty safe in my little bubble because nobody knew what I believed and thus would never challenge me (at least for 30 some years).
I wish someone like you would have come along earlier in my life - it is a great ministry opportunity but of course the Holy Spirit has to do the work, all you can do is let Him use you ...... thank you for being willing because it will cause you some stress. I don't think anyone likes to be confrontational but at some point it takes that (hopefully as kindly and gently as possible) to get to the truth!
Brian
|
|
|
Posted Friday, February 20, 2009 9:28 AM
|
|
|
|
concerned friend,
Brian's post made me think you might be interested in my contributions to the Christian Science web forums, christianscience.com.
A current thread provides a good example of how Christian Scientists use words and perceive attempts to discuss matters of theology - God creates evil? How do I respond? I jumped in at #22, #28, and #33. If you click on my name, you can search for all posts I've contributed and see how Christian Scientists have responded.
Note that even when referencing the Bible that most Christian Scientists turn to Mary Baker Eddy's teachings even when their subsequent reference is a non sequitur to the Scriptural reference. They claim that Christian Science is drawn from the Bible, but push comes to shove they fall back on Christian Science sources alone.
Do Go Be Man
<><
|
|
|
Posted Friday, February 20, 2009 11:20 AM
|
|
|
|
Very interesting discussion on the CS site. it's interesting to me that the Bible is almost dismissed as the cultural history of the Hebrews, and the people who are on that site calmly discuss all the "incorrect" passages, i.e., all those that don't agree with MBE. Yet, all MBE's writings are treated as if completely infallible, even though she revised them hundreds of times.
I remember there were demonstrators on the other side of the Reflecting Pool when I was at the Annual Meeting at TMC one year (some time in the 70's). They were holding signs calling CS a cult and saying it was neither Christian nor scientific. Of course I felt very superior then, and felt sorry for so misguided a group of people.
Now it seems that they were right...
Things that make you go HMMMMMMMM...
Ann
|
|
|
Posted Friday, February 20, 2009 12:53 PM
|
|
|
|
Ann,
...it's interesting to me that the Bible is almost dismissed as the cultural history of the Hebrews, and the people who are on that site calmly discuss all the "incorrect" passages, i.e., all those that don't agree with MBE. Yet, all MBE's writings are treated as if completely infallible, even though she revised them hundreds of times.
What a great observation! I've written such messages for christianscience.com though the moderators there refused to post them. They threatened to "see the truth about me", so to speak, and permanently remove me from their understanding if I did so again.
As a Covenant Theologian, I believe in the continuity and infallibility of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation.
Do Go Be Man
<><
|
|
|
Posted Friday, February 20, 2009 10:34 PM
|
|
|
|
Hi. I've been out of Christian Science since 1992. I can tell you from experience that unless you have an agreement with your friend NOT to try to convert each other, she will be quietly working on reaching you and gently teaching you into Christian Science. It sounds like you're gung-ho into trying to help her. I assume you're ready for the biggest prayer battle you've ever seen. We were taught that whether we were awake or asleep, we were to be alert to reject any thoughts (ideas or teachings) that attacked Christian Science (or it's teachings). Anything that opposed C.S. was treated as if it were from the father of lies. (John 6)
Christians usually know about the Armor of God. If you're serious about reaching this person, prayer support AND fasting (doesn't have to be from food) are a key tool. Christian Scientists won't pray directly FOR you unless you ask them to. They can, however, pray in a general way. If you were trying to reach anyone, you'd do the friendly discipleship kind of behavior. YOu probably know all about setting the example, and lifting up Christ Jesus. Keep your eyes focused on Him too. Throughout the day, simply remember to pray, each and every time it comes to mind. Short or long, pray until you feel comforted and sure that things are right. Pay attention to that "burden" whenever it comes up. And pray for yourself and your family. Prayer is the meat & potatoes of evangelism. The words will fall on more receptive ears if the prayer work is done well. My mom used to agree with us, and sound like she'd understood or agreed with us (after my conversion), only to change back by the time I next spoke to her. Her quick but superficial agreement was a technique I was familiar with. It didn't mean she really took it to heart. One last recommendation: have a back-up plan for your transportation or trip, in case it gets to be too much for you (or her, which I doubt). You'll notice in your travels with her that her time with her study books will be an hour, and there will be more time with the magazines from the C.S. Church. There will be the quiet prayer time throughout the day that you won't notice, and there will be all those instances of her mentally (silently) "correcting" the thoughts that contradict anything C.S.
If you're going into the trenches, have a bevy of prayer warriors praying for you - in heaven and on earth, if you please. You won't be sorry. God's reward for converting one sinner to Jesus' way is huge - for a reason. The self-sacrifice it takes can be immense, but it will leave you a better person for it. Just take care not to fall in yourself, O.K.?
|
|
|
Posted Friday, February 20, 2009 10:55 PM
|
|
|
|
On a lighter note, when I met my husband (a staunch Roman Catholic) back in 1983, he suggested we find bridges, not build walls. He wanted to find out what we had in common. We agreed not to try to convert each other. (We married in 1984 and we're still on our honeymoon.) So if you truly care about your friend, you have to put the friendship first, and just be the kind of Christian friend she needs. Build it strong, so that when she has questions and is open to hearing what you believe, she trusts you.
One of the things that helped me evaluate my pillars of faith were points made by Josh McDowell (More than a Carpenter) and Walter Martin (kingdom of the cults)... But first I had to believe that Christians really lived their faith. You know, living the Sermon on the Mount, obeying the 10 Commandments, and so forth. I wouldn't listen to any hypocrites. That's a tall order. I like the thing some Franciscan Brothers have said, ""Preach the Gospel to every creature"... and if necessary use words." Living it is a stronger tool than talking it; and if there's something a CS student can't stand, it's someone who knows how to talk it, but can't live it to save their lives. You can know all about Salvation, but if you can't live the standard, they won't listen.
Ultimately, it isn't loving to tear apart someone's faith and leave them hanging. Arguing does no one any good. That's why I never liked it. I could get to the same ends in a constructive way, and no one got hurt or bruised. Love leaves a much more powerful mark on a person's soul than "being right." While it's true that Mrs Eddy wanted her words taken in context, it needs also to be true that the Bible should be considered "in context" as well. THAT will get their attention. All the spiritual interpretations in the world won't cover up that. And that NIV translation is a fabulous tool.
|
|
|
Posted Tuesday, February 24, 2009 2:00 PM
|
|
|
|
Do_Go_Be_Man (2/20/2009)
Ann,
What a great observation! I've written such messages for christianscience.com though the moderators there refused to post them. They threatened to "see the truth about me", so to speak, and permanently remove me from their understanding if I did so again.
Oh, no! See the truth about you? Remove you from their understanding? Not that!!! 
As a Covenant Theologian, I believe in the continuity and infallibility of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation.
Do Go Be Man
<><
I am not so biblically literal in my beliefs, but I certainly take the Bible OVER MBE as an authority. It's truly amazing to me to have been brought up believing that a 19th century, somewhat educated, rather neurotic woman had an authority above that of Jesus or the Bible. I was so skeptical when I read that Linda's book described CS as a cult, but wow -- she sure is right!
Ann
|
|
|
Posted Thursday, February 26, 2009 7:41 AM
|
|
|
|
I think it was the first Tenant that placated me, regarding CS and the Bible... way back when. If they truly accept that, as written, the Bible should be their supreme authority. End of story.
Nothing's that simple, of course.
My mom used to pray about what she read, phrase by phrase. Sometimes actual Christian concepts came to her in answer to her times of prayer. She immediately passed them along to us; and expected us to do likewise. So it is possible for the Light of Christ to shine through even the dark clouds of false doctrine. God can speak for himself, and still does.
The two challenges that are the most powerful for me have to do with taking things IN CONTEXT, and following Christ first, and measuring all other teachings up against what Jesus said.
Back a while, it was popular to appropriate Bible phrases into the vocabulary. The people doing this had no idea what they were alluding to. It just sounded good. Christian Scientists do this, because Mrs Eddy did it all over the place in her writings. If you're daring, you can go through S&H and highlight all those Bible-sounding phrases, in quotation marks as well as not. It will take a while, to look them all up for context, to check their usage, but the results will be electrifying.
There's nearly 1000 of them that I found. How many you find will depend on how much of the Bible you're familiar with. There are cases where she intends it as a quote, and cases where she's just borrowed the pretty words. Excusing the latter, you still need to carefully examine the uses of the ones she intends for teaching doctrines. Anything taken out of context, or in a way NOT intended by the original author, is twisting it. Mrs Eddy didn't like it when people did that to her works. In fact, I found where she spoke about it. (Can't remember it at the moment, and the notes I made are not easily accessible. If I have to, I can.) Anyway, it seems to me that if she wanted her works respected like that, she knew enough to respect the writings of others the same way, and above all, to treat the Bible with the same respect. At the very least other Christian Scientists can. Well, my findings were that too many of them were used out of context, or altered to change their meaning, to allow me to ever trust her writing again.
IF you can set a CSer on this kind of hunt or study, you might get somewhere.
As for that other bit, about following following her only as far as the follows Christ, a concordance for Prose Works can find the 2 places where she gave that challenge. So most CSers can be induced to look at it that way.
If Jesus was the authority, and No CSer will separate him from Christ, sooner or later, his words and Gospels will also carry complete authority.
IF you can use the book of John, more than the others, there's a lot more respect, since they regard him as the most spiritual and enlightened of the 12.
|
|
|
Posted Friday, February 27, 2009 1:18 PM
|
|
|
|
WOW thank you again for the wonderful responses to my question. I am a bit overwhelmed and fearful but I feel God has lead me into this relationship and I will be faithful with what He wants me to do. I have printed all your posts! and will re-read them many times.
Concerned Friend
|
|
|
Posted Friday, February 27, 2009 5:22 PM
|
|
|
|
I think it was the first Tenant that placated me, regarding CS and the Bible... way back when. If they truly accept that, as written, the Bible should be their supreme authority. End of story.
Nothing's that simple, of course.
There's always a loophole with words used in Christian Science. Here's the first tenent:
"As adherents of Truth, we take the inspiried Word of the Bible as our sufficient guide to eternal Life." (Science and Health, 497:3-4)
The loophole here is the word "inspired," which at face value seems to say that the whole Bible is inspired but could also mean that only parts of the Bible are inspired. Consider the following possible conclusions:
1- Mrs. Eddy says that the Bible was written by "dull disciples" and is full of mistakes, so only parts of the Bible are "inspiried." Mrs. Eddy tells us which parts are inspired and we take THOSE parts of the Bible as "our sufficient guide to eternal life." Mrs. Eddy spiritually interprets or just ignores the parts that are not inspired.
OR
2 - Mrs. Eddy's revelation gives spiritual interpretation to the words in the Bible (e.g., her Glossary), so we take Mrs. Eddy's spiritually interpreted "Word of the Bible as our sufficient guide to eternal life."
Either way, the first tenent allows Mrs. Eddy to interpret the Bible any way she wants to. |
|
|
|
|