The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1914-11-25

Christian doctrines and practice. The
 theology which he thought and prac-
 used cuIninated in the healing of the
 sick as well as the transforming of the sinner He appealed to the hearts
 and minds of men, and all of his argu-
 ments, parabIes. and ad1nonitions were
 projected with the sole purpose of cor recting errors which dominated the thought of his time To undo the n11s- takes of preceding generations. he re- aeaIedly taught the peoFSss and Eeas- oned concerning spdrftIHa1 trtrehs aIfd
 the things pertaining to God and Ills being, His universe, its government and law.
 Mrs Eddy has followed faithfully in the way of the Master, and, 1t must be conceded. has innTneasura:b1y aided in enlightening tI1e nations. of the earth, as Jesus boId his followers to do. wdth
 respect to what the gospel of Truth is and what it can and must accom- plish on their behalf. In a single statement our Leader indicates in substance that a misunderstanding of the Bible teaching as to the creation of man 4ds responsible for all human discord: that is, that the preva.lenee | of a false sense of mans origin and E11atu1e has led to theories and errors which have been pr6ductfve of 11n- E told misery and sll lffe7in Creation is a subject which should be more gener- Eally understood because it is gener- ally niIsunderstood. At the preaen1 time p1rbThcaty Is bedng widely given that portion relating to creation Much | of this effort is only serving to ex- tend further the beIief i'm material rather than spiFitl1a1 creative power and universe. hrdst5an Scientists recog1ige that they nave t41sfr reason able part to perform in 1a1ninnd zing the effect Of this erroneous effort by ac- ql1iTing a, more specific k1lOwIee5Ee Of the Scriptures. on this very subject. & SPIRITUAL VERSUS MATERIAL, MAN.
 Tnasrnuch as the successful dernoR1- |stratioT Of Cshristian Science involves the rejection> e9 the 4naAerfaI CT false standard of man, and the acceptanca Of the spiritual and tFIae standard the
 iInpor4ance of becoming more fa1a1ir-
 far with this question must be a1- Epanent Affa glance. Indeed Mrs ES7- dy has well saftl that 1t WAS the cor rect view of man which FesulEed in
 hea lin g the sick in Jesus day. The contention of Christian Science as to the ysdEity, perfection and spirit tusI 1sst- lure 1.-the un5versas ltlgiafsey the real and only anaIa there is Is based VI holly upon the Seriptua-es@ ;aad it's claims Tn tiils rsspects Are readily conceded
 
 Two separate and widely x564ferf7le. 2. accounts of creation are found in I1e
 Bible, the contradt tory and cozr4fct- ing texts of which appear to have escaped he attention oR many stu
 dents. MoEeover, the true nature azld character of Deity is erToneoelsly in : vofyed in this history, because or a. change by the historian of the name of the Supreme Being from God to tzlaf of Lord GodA We're 1t not for the or fginal meaning or these terms, this change might appear Of trivial moment to the student of Sc1dp ture However it was of sufficient hnDor tance to at- tract the attention Of Jossphus. the kceEebFated Jewish hEatorfar who re- fers to it in his History oR the He- brew nation NTDreoNer; 1t Is Of npe- cial signEficances tc us, since the change
 rity of God. the creator of man E by
 confusing Finn with the Izoz.d God who, one of these records States is The supposed creator sof Adam GOD CHEATED sPTEsaTUAT. MAN
 It should sbe thoroughly rzrld er.sbood that the Scriptures plainly te that distinction exists and is to be made between man as the offstrinsz of God, and Adam. who has long. been referred to as our first parent That man and Adam bear mo relation to each other, and should not be, confused. fs very apparent. Inasrnuch as the Bi- ble history does not confuse +hayn we certainly aGe without authority for so doing Tn thfs connection the hon
 e.st 1nestfgator will find that Chris
 tan Science sustafns and proves true to the text the purest teaching Of the Scrptures relative to God and the signfdlcance of His being and creation It points out the error Of the practice of confoundfng the teeun God 6Fslohin11 or Spirit, with that of Lord God (Je- hovah- Elohim). or even Lord It holds with the very best authority thai these terms, with their varying shades of meaning, are not synonyn The original Hebrew term for God that of Elohin. is always understood as meaning the creator and supreme
 ruler of the universe the one Of whom
 St. John said, sAI1 things were made by him :and without hdTn was not any thing made that was made,s We. sfsf,- serve that the term csod Us l.ssea5a alfo gether in the record Of creation uI.ic1a appears in the first chapter of Genesis. concluding with the third verse of the second chapter. This first record cnron1cEes the completeness and per- fectfom o6 all of Goai's sy works Chris
 tzan Science supports this record in It's e11 tld'ety. and by it readily justi- a1es it's claims and teaching as teJ inc perfection of man. It is interesting to note that Jesus Of Nazaretdl who rounded true Christianity. endorsed
 this record, for on one occasion he re-
 feTTed to ft in these words: tsHave ye
 not read. that he which made them at the beginning made them male ard
 fernal ?s Where the terms male and
 fem le'' occur in the Bible 1t is observ- ed that their use is in connection with that which God created
 l THE PE1RF11CT MAN.
 There frequently occurs in this first
 record of creation relative to that
 which God created. the observation, s4And God saw that9it was good. ' This eyldence Of divine approval was also
 uttered with respect to man. Man having been made in the image and likeness of God, as the record states, it is within the bounds sof reason to