The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1916-03-26
Voice Of the People
"a sn.u.~ :. Wr. Ren1sll.

To the Eaftos Of The Gate City
This "a answer TO Mr.. Esnda1rs 70
Ply 10 an article exposing by way OF
co.aysrzscu VITA fundamentals Of
scriptures The true S,as1s Of the 6oc~
TRIAL matter g the Christian Science
church
Had I not taken eogaizsrts Of ths
fact taa. che article was DrOsusssy IL
sersDerssd with personal references
10 zee, certainly should base been al
loss 10 detect So LIS stunning co1o-
pilatfo- ot convincing arguments from
Holy VIII. pafnt51 appeal TO my
prsrious comparisons Of fundamentals.
I assume. sir. Yoa really read the
article Yet ] fail 10 urderstsnd how
you ran conScisatfo'ts}y refer 20 IL as
Representing nay OWE personal views ID
4 the matter TO qEio.ec what ne real
Efy means rs that IL differs from ne
Z peculiar ideas as 10 what constitutes
fundamental! christianity" simply
a<duced quotations from both the
bible and Hrs. Eidyss Interpretation Of
the same. procedure 7 Intentionally
Observed, IN order 10 eliminate all
personal criticism and TO have only
these quoted portions carry their re
spectfye wsignt of argument, which
method f. not only highly recommend
ed for fairness, but fl also very enee-
tive, as / have since noticed. Tell
ne. how could any one have gone
abcut 4: in q fairer way? And then
YOU recommend application OF the
golden rule, . Temporal, o Enores.
Furthermore, shall your calling scrip
.ural passagsa peculiar" personal
ideas be4ray the esteem and rsspect
I YOU have Of the word Of Cod? Wers
you. probably. Just then thinking OF
"fnspired' Mrs. EDDY Again, IL, as
You gay, they really were nay own per
sonaI arguments, should IL not nave
/ been a trifiing matter for you TO com
ple.eIy refute them. since you claim
scripuraI basis for your "EcienceE
! Finally, IL the passages, az you assert
we're "ruthIessiy seTrarated' from tne'r
context and arranged 20 yield a iaife-
fed meaning. different from the one
/ intended by tho spirit Of God, why oin
you not bring the context and prove
your assertion, instead OF merely max
! ing so many sweeping statements. fo1
r,tIst hiring proof for the validity OF
such contentious, proofs from scrip-
ture. and not from some HoEtonian
fabrication.
! The real situation, though, n this:
These terse quotations spoke their lit
tie pieces 20 effectively that they
Knocked your much-heraided Science
into a cooked hat. Diligently. there
for. YOU circumvented the matter I'M
DER discussion in much the same way
as would a lawyer when confronted by
lbafriin2 situations, evaded the main
,Igsue, wriga1ed and coushed, taking TO
cover behind vain reiterations that,
nevertheless, Christian Science was
baaed on fundamentals as taught by
Christ and His disciples. n your art
IicIc embodies specimen OF your
Usual force Of argument, ! venture the
ramark that YOU would encounter en-
( barraggina difficulty In proving 10 a
Jury from goUthern Texas that Senior
Villa was some bandit. In fact, It re-
minded me OF a Russian offensive, lots
OF noise, but-nihil faciens! (Noth1n
doinD
| You said: Why omit from chistian
! practice that which Jesus gave as pos
| tive proofs of christianity In Hrs
statement, Mark 1s, II. 10: And
these signs shall follow them that be-
lieve: In my name shall they cast out
devils: they shall speak with new
tongues: they shall take up serpents;
and II they drink any deadly thing 1t
shall not hurt them: they shall lay
handG on the sick. and they shall re-
cover" SO you call these accompany
! ing signs. wonders and miracles.
| proofs OF christianity" Well, Sir.
sincerely stated. / should very much
dislike being tho one to demonstrate
such proofs" But since you, to-
gether with Mrs. Eddy e. Co. seem to
show special craving for such evil
dences apd proofs OF christianity, can't
we arrange for you to come to keo-
kuk, say 10 the tabernacle, and let us
see you drink a glass OF poison pre-
inarad by one OF our physicians. and