Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1914-11-08

as quoted IN The Journal Row
Copper makes some very misleading
statements regarding Christian sci
ence. Ale uses the method. worn
threndbare By other ministers. OF
quoting isolated sentences. and In
three instances only parts Of SEN
teitea, 10 prove that Christian Science
IL not Biblical ~ the same meth0d
anyone can prove most startling
THINKS by the Bible Itself. Every fair
minded man knows that 10 get the
real meaning II any sentence Il must
be- taken with ita context. Only q few
Illustrations Will show how unfair our
critic has been He quotes. "Sin ia
not forgiven the complete sentence
reading Sin ia not forgiven. we
cannot escape its penalty" and the
context emphasizes the need Of ref
0rmation. On page five OF Science
and Health We rend. 'Sln Is forgiven
only as u Is destroyed by Christ
Truth and LIFE aud on page $3.50;
THE destruction of sin il the divine
method Of pardon" Again he quotes
Jesus never nnsomed man BY pay
Ing the debt sin incurs.s The COM
plete sentence reads: Jesus never
ransomed man by paying the debt sin
lncurs; whatsoever sins must suffer-
The context includes the following
sentence: Jesus taught the way of
escape from sin but he also taught
that sin must be destroyed; that God
Furnishes and destroys, instead OF par
dons sin" ON page 40 Of Science
and Health we read. Science re-
moves the penalty only By first re-
moving the sin which incurs the pen
atty" and on page 497 I'VE acknOwi-
edge God's forgiveness Of sin IN the
destruction Of ain -" Also.
on page i6i In the First Church Of
Christ Scientist and Miscellany. Mra I
Eddy writes. Christ Jesus paid our
debt and set Va free by enabling rs
10 pay H. for which We are still His I
debtors. washing the WayshOwers /
feet with tears Of JOY"
IN like manner each quotation Of 1
fered BY our critic can BE- answered, I
but this will suffice 20 show the I'M
reasonableness Of trying to prove any
thing by isolated phrases torn from
their contexis.
The explanation Of the whole mat
ter Is found IN Rev. Coopcr's intro
ductlon. IN which he states that ne
has read most uf Mrs. Eddys book,
Science and Health. but found It
laborious task, thus plainly inferring
that he could not understand her
teachings II IL evident. therefore,
that what he Is critlcising Is not
ChrlHtlnn Science itself but his own
mlscdnceptiOn at H. lie constructed
q man Of straw and then showed how
easy II was IA tear him 20 pieces.
The part, however, that seems to
most disturb our reverend friend is
the fact that Christian Scientists do
not believe In the same kind Of
personal God that he believes In. The
Westminster Confession Of Faith OF
the Presbyterian Church OF the United
States. 70 which our brother sub
scribed before entering the ministry,
defines God as follows. 81 quote al
most In fulll
There rs one liking and true God, ,
who is infinite In being and perfoc- !
iion, "a most pure spirit. invisible, !
without body parts or passions, inn I
immense. eternal, incomprc- s
almighty. most wise. most s
holy. most Tree, most absolute, most
loving. gracious, iong-sufferlng. album
liant IN goodness and truth, forgiving /
niauity, tranegresaiOn and sin.
'iOd hath al life. glory goodness, /,
9ltftfhfltFH III anu VI fiitfie'ftf tllh -
llone In and unto Himself all-suffi- :
lent He Is the alone fOun
ain Of all being, Of whom, through !
Ahom. and to whom are all things
Ills knowledge in infinite.
nfallible ana independcnt upon the
Feature so as nothing Is 10 Him con- /
lngent az uncertain.
Words could not define more Inn
PERSONAL God II we accept words at
heir ordinary meaning / ask any
air-minded man II this definition of
Tod Ia any less impersonal than the
Science definition, which we
ind on page 5S7 OF Science and
lealth Il
THE great / AN; the all-knowing. |
ll-seeing. all acting. all-wise, all-lov-
ng and eternal; Principle; Mind; /
oul Spirit Life; Truth; Love; all
Intelligence
Il is plainly evident that Rev.
'oopefs conception OF God does not
onform TO the teachings of his own
hureh and therefore It is not surpris- /
ne that he does not accept the Chris
ian Science definition Of God,
our critic says the lecturer on L
Science declared. III IL the
Understanding of religion that heals
lokness aud destroys SIM and chal-
'nges us 90 quote any Biblical ref
renee verifying this statement AS
he lecturer is misquoted, The chal- II
'nge is void. What he did say is: II
1T Is sometimes difficult for neo- II
le to understand how religion can Is
cal sickness and destroy sin, but the Il
'ords of Jesus make il plain. Since 4
Is through a knowledge of the 4
ruth that these results are accom- Il
Iished, the important thing for each 4
ne Is to gain an understanding OF n
ruth instead of being satisfied with |
ere belief about It, 4
our critic makes incorrect state y
ents when he says Christian Seient- d
Is are not concerned about saving :
nners. that they do not do any mis- :
onary work nor contribute TO char =
y. Every true Christian Scientist il e
missionary in the fullest sense of i
lie word doing daily everything with n
his power 60 spread the gospel Go II
4 the world. On the question Of y
iarity our critic is also incorrect. y
he ready and liberal response Of ~
tristan Scientists throughout the h
luntry to the sufferers at the San "
fire, at The Dayton flood, Il
"a more recently at the salem fire
Massachusetts, Is now a matter of II,
fhlic record and can easily be veri- III
ed by any one who desires to learn II
10 facts. At the time of the Dayton il
saster the Christian Science society Is
Albuquerque was the first local u
lurch organization to make a con- ~
ihation TO the flood sufferers. Some s.
ing over Slg was raised at "A Il