THE K I N G ' S B U S I N E S S
442
tu re, which is so glorious in its sp iritual significance (p. 545). The decision by vote of Church Coun cils as to w hat should and should not be considered Holy W rit; th e m anifest m istakes in th e ancient versions; the 'th irty thousand different readings in th e Old Testam ent, and th e th ree hun dred thousand in th e New,-“-th ese facts show how a m ortal and m aterial sense stole into the divine record, w ith its own hue darkening to some extent the inspired pages (p. 1 3 9 ).’’ . Mrs. Eddy comm itted to th e world th e one infallible book— Science and H ealth. Vouching for its infallibility she says: “ In th is volume of mine th ere are no contradictory statem ents (p. 345). If one of th e statem ents in th is book is tru e, èvery one m ust be tru e, for not one departs from th e stated system and rule. (p. 547). /T h e re is n eith er place nor opportunity in Science for erro r of an y so rt (p. 2 32 )." G radually our problem has been n ar rowed down u n til it forces th e conclu sion th a t to Mrs. Eddy alone God has en tru sted th e stupendous responsibility of correctly in terp reting th e Scriptures for humanity. This distinction she does no t h esitate to claim. She says: “Even th e Scripture gave no direct in-, terp retation of th e Scientific basis for dem onstrating th e sp iritu al principles of healing, un til our Heavenly F ath e r saw fit, through th e key to th e Scrip tu res, in Science and H ealth, to unlock th is mystery of godliness (R. and I., p. 551). Christian Science separates erro r from T ru th , and breathes th rough th e sacred pages th e sp iritu al sense of life, sub stance, and intelligence (p. 548). W hatever seems tru e, and yet contra dicts Divine Science * * * m ust be, and is, false (R. and I.J p. 128 ).”— From the Bible Scholar.
M AN ’S WORD
and GOD’S WORD
HATEVER may be a man’s elo quence, attainm en ts, fascina tions or apparen t virtue, if he speak no t “according to th is Word,” he is not an ambassa dor of God, b u t a m inister of Satan. P au l did no t scruple
to call such “ false apostles,” “ deceitful workers,” and “ grievous wolves.” Yet n eith er th e world a t large, nor profess ing Christians, nor even a feeble type of really Christian people, can ever bring themselves to believe it. The men whom th e Apostles« de nounced in the most scathing term s were doubtless good men according to moral stand ard s; religious men, even earnest and sincere men, else they would not have been tolerated in th e early churches; b u t they departed from the one and only Gospel of Chrigt to other gospels; gospels y h ic h were probably th e forerunners and coun terp arts of th e various “movements” of today; and by th eir zeal and plausibility tu rn ed away many from th e tru th , “ teaching for doc trin es th e commandments of men,” and thereby “making th e Word of God of none effect.” Today they have many successors, who seem almost able to deceive th e very elect. It m a tte rs little w hat views a man may hold w ith reg ard to God and th e Bible. He can always be sure of th e support of a certain section of the so-called C hristian Church. He may laugh a t and express contempt for the Bible, and deny th e very existence of God; yet, if he exert his influence to fu r th e r th e various gospels so much in vogue a t th e present tim e— social gos pels, brotherhood gospels, and th e like— he will receive the plaud its of those who
Made with FlippingBook HTML5