Walt,
Cults are a sore spot with me. But that's a long story.
So far as there being intelligent Christian Scientists, even though, as you
say, their belief system seems to be a bit "Loony," I am sure you are right.
The same, for some odd reason, can be said of just about any religion, even
the absolute "looniest." Practicers of Voodoo, the Royal Order of tree
Worshipers, you name it.
Heck, who am I to call someone else's religious beliefs "unscientific"?
Christian Scientists tell us we are not really here, that the physical world
is all a dream. Germs do not cause disease. Disease is all in our head, as is
everything else. Loony? Who am I to call anyone else's religious beliefs
"Loony"? After all, I believe Jesus Christ while on earth was both fully God
and fully man, that He turned water into wine, restored sight to the blind,
raised the dead, rose from the dead Himself and ascended to heaven. Are any
of these religious beliefs of mine "scientific"? No. In fact they are
probably just as unscientific and just as "Loony" as anything Mary Baker Eddy
ever taught.
Why then are we here discussing science? Someone please remind me. So what if
the Bible conflicts with science? Why not believe it anyway? If Jesus could
simultaneously be both fully God and fully man, why could there not have
simultaneously been a worldwide flood and no flood at all?
If Mary Baker Eddy might have been right, and maybe the physical world does
not even exist, why are we here discussing physical science at all?
This all started because Stu offered the Christian Science solution to the
"two adams" in Gen 1 and 2. The first one was real. The second one was all a
dream, as is everything else we now see around us. I thought that "solution"
was ridiculous and totally unscientific and said so. But because it is a
teaching of an established "religion" it seems it is not politically correct
to here criticize this "solution."
I can't understand why "Christian Scientists" are here discussing the
physical sciences anyway. After all, the physical world does not really exist.
As you can see, this whole topic of discussion both confuses me and
frustrates me. Maybe someone else can make some sense of it.
Mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 25 2002 - 23:57:20 EDT