What Christianity has to say about psychcis

I edited your post in order to make it clear which part I was referring to.

I have no response to the rest. I am not a Christian, as I have said before. I have quite different beliefs. I am happy to bow out now and leave the responses to those who both know and care more about Christianity.

A perfectly honest and sensible approach.

This is the part you snipped...

You criticize my posting style as being aggressive yet you edit my posts without explanation, I find that quite rude. If you insist on editing my posts please add a small note explaining why.
Anyway, what is your response to the claim that people died needlessly as a direct result of following the creeds of Mary Baker Eddy. The resurrection issue is clearly a little heavy at the moment but we can resurrect it later.

Hi Boson

You know many people have died as a consequence of conventional medicine. Even as a result of mistakes made in their treatments. The legal professions does very well out of medical insurance claims.
Unless one knows the full facts concerning any medical incident it is a little unfair to criticize it, or to rely on any second hand opinion, especially if it comes from a biased source..

Hi Boson

You know many people have died as a consequence of conventional medicine. Even as a result of mistakes made in their treatments. The legal professions does very well out of medical insurance claims.
Unless one knows the full facts concerning any medical incident it is a little unfair to criticize it, or to rely on any second hand opinion, especially if it comes from a biased source..

Thank you for the response scommstech.
The successes or failures of modern medicine is not the issue here. Modern medicine has indeed had some calamitous failures, thalidomide? It also has some spectacular successes. It's a long list, Smallpox? I could go on. Can you name a medical success attributable to MBE? I doubt it.
Now as for those contemptible swine in the legal profession perhaps that belongs in another thread.

Dear Boson,

My apologies for the delay in responding to the other questions you've raised - I have a busy life!

Regarding Mark Twain's thoughts about Mary Baker Eddy and the religion she founded, you might be interested to read some other excerpts from his book Christian Science:

“For the thing back of it is wholly gracious and beautiful: the power, through loving mercifulness and compassion, to heal fleshly ills and pains and griefs—all—with a word, with a touch of the hand! This power was given by the Saviour to the Disciples, and to all the converted. All—every one. It was exercised for generations afterwards. Any Christian who was in earnest and not a make-believe, not a policy-Christian, not a Christian for revenue only, had the healing power, and could cure with it any disease or any hurt or damage possible to human flesh and bone. These things are true, or they are not. If they were true seventeen and eighteen and nineteen centuries ago it would be difficult to satisfactorily explain why or how or by what argument that power should be non-existent in Christians now.”
(Christian Science, 1907 version, Book 2, Chapter 15)

“When we do not know a person--and also when we do--we have to judge his size by the size and nature of his achievements, as compared with the achievements of others in his special line of business--there is no other way. Measured by this standard, it is thirteen hundred years since the world has produced any one who could reach up to Mrs. Eddy's waistbelt.”
(Christian Science Book 2, Chapter 1)

Albert Bigelow Paine, Twain's biographer, recorded the following exchange with him:

“I was at this period interested a good deal in mental healing, and had been treated for neurasthenia with gratifying results. Like most of the world, I had assumed, from his published articles, that he condemned Christian Science and its related practices out of hand. When I confessed, rather reluctantly, one day, the benefit I had received, he surprised me by answering:
"Of course you have been benefited. Christian Science is humanity's boon. Mother Eddy... has organized and made available a healing principle that for two thousand years has never been employed, except as the merest kind of guesswork. She is the benefactor of the age.”
It seemed strange, at the time, to hear him speak in this way concerning a practice of which he was generally regarded as the chief public antagonist. It was another angle of his many-sided character.” (Albert Bigelow Paine, Mark Twain: A Biography, Chapter 239)

More below...

Hi again Boson,

I'd really rather not keep dragging this thread so far off topic, but since you keep repeating the same critical remarks, I just feel they need answering, for the sake of accuracy and fair play - which I'm sure are qualities that all HP members should value, don't you agree?

Regarding Mary Baker Eddy's money and her use of it, she was well known in her local community (Concord, New Hampshire) as a generous philanthropist. This is a list of some of the charitable organisations to which she donated in her lifetime:

• New England Society for the Suppression of Vice
• Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children
• Millville Orphans Home at St. Paul’s School, Concord, New Hampshire
• Soldier’s Aid Society
• Firemen’s organizations in Concord, New Hampshire and in Massachusetts
• Auditorium Fund of Concord
• Donated to Concord to surface Pleasant Street and the engineering work
• Wellesley College Education Fund
• Dartmouth College
• Pembroke Academy
• YMCAs in New Hampshire and Massachusetts
• Women’s Press Association

(see )

She also organised and funded a scheme to provide free shoes to impoverished children in her home town. Another beneficiary of her donations was the local hospital! 🙂

More below...

Scommstech has made the very valid point that medical treatment has had numerous failures, including so many that (with hindsight) could or should have been prevented. That is true of every kind of therapy, whether conventional or alternative. It's a reminder, really, of the continuous need we as healers all have for humility, and for constant dedication to deeper understanding and better practice, whichever particular path we follow. Again, I'm sure this is something everyone here on HP can understand.

But as you say, Boson, the question at issue here is whether there has been a single provenly successful case of healing attributed to Mary Baker Eddy, or indeed to Christian Scientists since her time. There are, in fact, tens of thousands of verified accounts of healing in the archives of the Christian Science publications, from more than 130 years ago right up to the present day.

It's worth noting that a significant proportion (though certainly not all) of these testimonies of healing involve a medical diagnosis of the condition and/or confirmation of its cure. There have been many instances of healing of conditions that were diagnosed as medically incurable, as well as some examples of healings that occurred at a speed or in a way that would not have been considered possible by medical means.

I'm very willing to go further into specific examples and verifications if requested, but I'm aware this particular discussion - now completely off topic - is not the best place for it. In the meantime, you may be interested to read this study that gives some insight into the range and content of testimonies of Christian Science healing published over a 20-year period: [DLMURL="http://www.johnsonfund.org/empirical.pdf"]An Empirical Analysis of Medical Evidence in Christian Science Testimonies of Healing 1969-1988[/DLMURL]

Best regards,
Charis

Dear Boson,

My apologies for the delay in responding to the other questions you've raised - I have a busy life!

Regarding Mark Twain's thoughts about Mary Baker Eddy and the religion she founded, you might be interested to read some other excerpts from his book Christian Science:

“For the thing back of it is wholly gracious and beautiful: the power, through loving mercifulness and compassion, to heal fleshly ills and pains and griefs—all—with a word, with a touch of the hand! This power was given by the Saviour to the Disciples, and to all the converted. All—every one. It was exercised for generations afterwards. Any Christian who was in earnest and not a make-believe, not a policy-Christian, not a Christian for revenue only, had the healing power, and could cure with it any disease or any hurt or damage possible to human flesh and bone. These things are true, or they are not. If they were true seventeen and eighteen and nineteen centuries ago it would be difficult to satisfactorily explain why or how or by what argument that power should be non-existent in Christians now.”
(Christian Science, 1907 version, Book 2, Chapter 15)

“When we do not know a person--and also when we do--we have to judge his size by the size and nature of his achievements, as compared with the achievements of others in his special line of business--there is no other way. Measured by this standard, it is thirteen hundred years since the world has produced any one who could reach up to Mrs. Eddy's waistbelt.”
(Christian Science Book 2, Chapter 1)

Albert Bigelow Paine, Twain's biographer, recorded the following exchange with him:

“I was at this period interested a good deal in mental healing, and had been treated for neurasthenia with gratifying results. Like most of the world, I had assumed, from his published articles, that he condemned Christian Science and its related practices out of hand. When I confessed, rather reluctantly, one day, the benefit I had received, he surprised me by answering:
"Of course you have been benefited. Christian Science is humanity's boon. Mother Eddy... has organized and made available a healing principle that for two thousand years has never been employed, except as the merest kind of guesswork. She is the benefactor of the age.”
It seemed strange, at the time, to hear him speak in this way concerning a practice of which he was generally regarded as the chief public antagonist. It was another angle of his many-sided character.” (Albert Bigelow Paine, Mark Twain: A Biography, Chapter 239)

More below...

“When we do not know a person--and also when we do--we have to judge his size by the size and nature of his achievements, as compared with the achievements of others in his special line of business--there is no other way. Measured by this standard, it is thirteen hundred years since the world has produced any one who could reach up to Mrs. Eddy's waistbelt.”

😀
Thank you so much for that reminder Charis. It is indeed refreshing to find someone who appreciates the biting satire of Mark twain. I am particularly enamored of the few lines immediately following that quote.

Figuratively speaking, Mrs. Eddy is already as tall as the Eiffel tower. She is adding surprisingly to her stature every day. It is quite within the probabilities that a century hence she will be the most imposing figure that has cast its shadow across the globe since the inauguration of our era.

Mark Twain at his best.

Hi again Boson,

If you're interested in Mark Twain, his conflicted feelings about religion, and his attitude towards Christian Science, the best account I have ever read on this topic is the introductory chapter of the book Rolling Away the Stone: Mary Baker Eddy's Challenge to Materialism, by Stephen Gottschalk (Indiana University Press, 2006). It goes into the subject in far more detail than anyone can here, and with a great deal of empathy for Twain and why he thought and wrote as he did.

Best,
Charis

Some respectful snipping for space.
But as you say, Boson, the question at issue here is whether there has been a single provenly successful case of healing attributed to Mary Baker Eddy, or indeed to Christian Scientists since her time. There are, in fact, tens of thousands of verified accounts of healing in the archives of the Christian Science publications, from more than 130 years ago right up to the present day.
I'm very willing to go further into specific examples and verifications if requested, but I'm aware this particular discussion - now completely off topic - is not the best place for it. In the meantime, you may be interested to read this study that gives some insight into the range and content of testimonies of Christian Science healing published over a 20-year period: [DLMURL="http://www.johnsonfund.org/empirical.pdf"]An Empirical Analysis of Medical Evidence in Christian Science Testimonies of Healing 1969-1988[/DLMURL]
My highlighting:
Charis it my be accidental but you have just referred me to a christian science website to verify the claims of christian science. That is circular reasoning. Ok in this instance I will grant you that. Now can you quote the specific entry verifying the veracity of MBE claim to have brought the deceased back to life.

Best regards,
Charis

eta, sorry about the formatting. Why is there no preview post option. 🙁

Charis it my be accidental but you have just referred me to a christian science website to verify the claims of christian science. That is circular reasoning.

Hello Boson,

If you wanted to verify the claims of quantum physics, you would refer to resources produced by qualified and experienced quantum physicists, would you not? In any field of enquiry, those who study and practice the discipline in question have as much right to speak about that discipline as those outside it - more of a right, in fact, when they are coming from first-hand knowledge and experience. Wouldn't you agree? 🙂

If you are interested in evidence for Mary Baker Eddy's own accomplishments in spiritual healing, including raising the dead, there are many published accounts by people who knew her personally and witnessed her healing work first-hand. One of the most detailed (and moving) examples I'm aware of is in a reminiscence by one of her secretaries, George H. Kinter. It's quite long, so I'm going to quote excerpts from it in a separate post.

In his reminiscence of his years of working in Mary Baker Eddy's household, her secretary George Kinter gives a very detailed account of the following incident that occurred late one winter night in early 1905. Eddy had rung her call bell repeatedly to summon her chief secretary, Calvin Frye, and when he did not respond, she called for Kinter and asked him to find out why Frye hadn't come.

As Kinter relates:

I hastened to her, and dreading to communicate what I feared, I told her [Frye] surely was sitting in his chair by his desk, and evidently sleeping very soundly, for although I shook him sharply, he did not waken.

She bade me go again, arouse him, and tell him to come to her at once. I went, of course, only to have my fears confirmed. Mr. Frye had passed on - he had no pulse, he was stone cold - and rigid. His closed eyes were fixedly set, and there were none of the common evidences of life.

Eddy, on being informed of this, went straight to Frye's room, where Kinter was "busy in vain trying to arouse him", and:

... she began at once to treat him [through Christian Science prayer].... Mrs. Eddy continuously denied the error and declared the Truth with such vehemence and eloquence for a full hour... She said, for example:

[INDENT]Calvin, wake up and be the man God made! You are not dead and you know it! How often you have proved there is no death! Calvin, all is Life! Life!! Undying Life. Say, God is my Life. Say it after me!...

Life is as deathless as God Himself, for Life is God, and you are His spiritual offspring. Calvin, there is no death, for the Christian Christ Jesus has abolished death...
[/INDENT]
... at last, after the lapse of an hour, he moved slightly and then spoke, at first in slow, low, guttural tones... until finally we could hear him say such things as "Don't call me back" and "Let me go, I am so tired"... Mrs Eddy responded:
[INDENT]
Oh, yes. We shall persist in calling you back, for you have not been away.... you know that divine Love is the liberator, and you are freed from the thralldom of hypnotism, alive unto God, your Saviour from sin, sickness, and death.
[/INDENT]
Another half hour was spent substantially as I have shown, in which period Mr. Frye conferred with us all quite intelligently.... Next morning... on going downstairs, we who knew of the unusual night work learned that Mr. Frye was down early and had already had his breakfast at 8:00.

This particular account is quoted extensively in the book Mary Baker Eddy: Christian Healer by Yvonne Cache von Fettweis and Robert Townsend Warneck, which I would also highly recommend to you if you want to read more.

I apologise again to everyone for going off topic, and indeed for writing so extensively about a healing practice that isn't related to the subject of the thread. I simply wanted to provide Boson Higgs with the information he is so persistently asking for.

Love to all,
Charis

Hello Boson,

If you wanted to verify the claims of quantum physics, you would refer to resources produced by qualified and experienced quantum physicists,

Snipped for space.

What claims of quantum physics? Quote me no quantum physics until you can find me a (Genuine) quantum physicist who is prepared to put his head on the block and put his name to this nonsense.
The subject at hand is MBE raising people from the dead. Yet again you refer me to christian scientists to establish the veracity of the claims of christian scientists!
Who did she raise from the dead? When, where, and where is this documented.
CS anecdotes are unacceptable as evidence.

Another example of Circular reasoning..
How do we know the bible is the word of god?
Because it says so in the bible.

Hello Boson,

If you wanted to verify the claims of quantum physics, you would refer to resources produced by qualified and experienced quantum physicists, would you not? In any field of enquiry, those who study and practice the discipline in question have as much right to speak about that discipline as those outside it - more of a right, in fact, when they are coming from first-hand knowledge and experience. Wouldn't you agree? 🙂

Quantum physics is a very narrow topic . I would expect OTHER branches of physics and other physicists to be able to look at the work of a controversial quantum physicist and see how it fits into their paradigm. They would agree or disagree based on how they interpreted the facts

But quantum physics is based on facts . Christian science is based on faith......and is just not subject to the same kind of critical peer review process that quantum physicists go through. With respect you are comparing apples with oranges.

It wasn't meant to be an exact analogy (if there is any such thing) - my point was simply that those who are directly involved in any field of interest most certainly have a right to speak for themselves and their knowledge and experience in that field. It's the same in any area. If I want to understand how Reiki healing works, I would ask a professional Reiki practitioner. If I want to know more about Buddhism, I would likewise turn to resources provided by those who follow and practice Buddhist teachings - and so on.

But Boson, your default setting seems to be something like "Christian Scientists don't have any right to speak for themselves about their teachings and healing practice, because nothing they say about themselves can be trusted." That's a strangely narrow and closed-off mentality to find anywhere, let alone in a community like HP.

I'd be very glad to carry on a conversation with you if anything I (or others) said was listened to with respect. However, if you'll pardon me, it's pretty obvious that you are not looking for answers to your questions, but simply aiming to attack and disparage a spiritual teaching and healing system that you neither understand, nor want to understand. That, too, doesn't seem at all in line with what these discussion forums are for. Here's an excerpt from the [url]forum guidelines[/url]:

[INDENT]Our members represent a wide variety of religious and spiritual people. When joining in discussions on our forums, expect to come across persons whose ideas, opinions and beliefs may be different from yours. Please approach such encounters with tolerance and an acceptance of others' faiths and beliefs.
[/INDENT]

Tashanie, I appreciate your point - Christian Science and quantum physics are certainly not the same thing, nor was I trying to compare them. I've explained above in my post to Boson what I meant by that particular analogy; it's just the one that came to me at the time.

I simply want to add, though, that Christian Science is not "based on faith", although it is often confused with faith healing (which I would define essentially as praying out of blind belief, hoping something will happen, and deciding it must be God's will if no results occur). Christian Science is based on spiritual laws that can be understood and demonstrated by anyone, and that have been proved over and over in many people's lives over the past century and a half. Faith does play a role in it - not, however, in the sense of clinging to something one doesn't understand, but in the sense of deep trust in something one can and does understand.

I come from a completely non-religious and very medically-oriented background myself, and I certainly would never have taken up the study and practice of Christian Science if it was all a matter of "we can't explain it, you just have to have faith and believe" - which, sadly, is an attitude I've found in some other religious and spiritual practices. But I've seen more than enough proof in my own experience, and in the lives of so many others I know, that Christian Science works - that it heals and transforms lives.

I'm sure many others in this community feel the same way about their own chosen life-path, which is why they follow it; they've seen it works for them and others, whether it's Reiki, massage, channelling, herbal medicine, or indeed pharmacy. And I would trust any others here, when questioned, to be able to explain the systems they practice, whether or not those teachings are ones I personally would want to follow. Again, it's a matter of respect and love for one's neighbour - which, sadly, seems to be in very short supply here in the HP forums lately. 🙁

and is just not subject to the same kind of critical peer review process that quantum physicists go through.

This is very true, Tashanie, and I just wanted to take this point up further for a moment - since I can understand why some take the attitude that Christian Science (or any other healing system) can't be trusted unless it's been subjected to medical-style double-blind testing and similar clinical studies. That's something that simply wouldn't work with a system like Christian Science, and for very good reasons.

Purely spiritual healing (which Christian Science is) relies on qualities that simply can't be measured in a laboratory setting - how can anyone quantify love, or measure inspiration, or weigh inward transformation? These qualities and experiences can't be given in set doses at particular times, and no two healings that occur through them will ever come about in precisely the same way. What's more, because the healing method is entirely mental and spiritual - although it brings about definite physical results - trying to measure and test it could actually interfere with its effectiveness. If either the practitioner or the patient is holding the thought that their communion with the divine Source of healing is an experiment or a test, that thought is going to have an impact on the process.

This quote comes from the 1940s, but to me it still sums up very well how scientific thought needs to be open to new possibilities that don't necessarily follow previously accepted laws. It's the kind of approach that is needed when considering the phenomena of healing by spiritual, non-medical means:

[INDENT]"The time has come when it is an urgent necessity that science should look at the pattern of life as a whole, taking every factor into account and excluding nothing from its inquiry… First, science must approach the problem in the spirit of relativity rather than of Newtonianism; it must look for patterns, with a readiness to recognize whole patterns, rather than for force-laws. It will no longer start with the presumption that certain events cannot happen, or must not happen, or ought not to happen, in the old force-law terminology; it will rather be content to ask simply whether the event did happen, or does happen, and if so, of what pattern it is the evidence. It will be on the look-out particularly for the evidence of faint patterns emerging into sudden prominence … Relativity rules nothing out a priori; it is not concerned with rules, it observes patterns - and if it sees them it does not shut its eyes."
Geoffrey Hoyland, The Resurrection Pattern, 1947 (emphasis added)[/INDENT]

Yes I agree you cannot measure love of inspiration. But what CAN be measured is outcomes.

I am a conventional practitioner who also does reiki...a very spiritual type of healing. I am TOTALLY open to the idea that science does not yet have an explanation for everything. I have been called a charlatan and a quack by some of my pharmacy colleagues....while others are much more open to the idea that drugs are not the only answer.

Science has not yet got to grips with the complexity of healing.

But I can only work within my own paradigm....and ANY form of healing that claims to perform miracles...or even bring people back from the dead is WAY outside my paradigm - and I am suspicious. I am going to want objective evidence from someone NOT involved in the process- so referring back to a christian science site just doesn't work for me because the site itself CANNOT be objective

Hi Tashinie,

I’ve been gobsmacked at what’s been going on during the past couple of days here. I totally understand where you are coming from however.

Let us all first of all remember that these are the CHRISTIANITY threads on the Religion/Faiths pages. This particular thread was started over a year ago by Happygirl after she and (I seem to remember) a friend had a bad experience with psychics and she started the thread to say something like she now understood why the Bible warned against them. Had Mrs S not “resurrected” this thread the other day, it probably would have remained sunk down wherever it was before – not upsetting anyone.

I really didn’t want to get involved in it, but it mentioned the Bible and (as I reminded everyone above), these are the Christian pages of HP. After 6 posts that seemed to be sympathetic to Happygirl’s feelings, I started off a post with this:

I have to say that psychic practices are a topic I’d prefer to avoid. To me, spiritualism in particular is about unhealed grief and I have great compassion for anyone who is desperate and though there are many charlatans, I also know there are many individuals (including here on HP) who are sincerely trying to help and comfort others and the last thing I would want to come across as, is disrespectful or insensitive.

Having said that, yes, the Bible is full of all sorts of warnings against psychic practices and there are also instances [in it] of practitioners of these arts being healed of the ability to practice them……….

I really haven’t had time to read all through the now 9 pages to remind myself of exactly what I and others said etc, but I certainly wasn’t writing in this thread in order to make claims about anything. I do remember that I had an enjoyable, polite and respectful conversation with Daz (among others) who is either a medium, or at least believed in Spiritualism. During the our conversation Daz was quite understandably putting across his/her beliefs in Spiritualism and (I felt) was expecting me to give up what I have learnt through the teachings of Christian Science about it, so I made a passing comment that I would rather take the word of someone (Eddy) who had actually proved what she wrote, through healing the sick and raising the dying to life (which she did).

But healing is not what Christian Science is all about – it’s actually all about growing closer to God and finding redemption and transformation in our lives as a result of following Jesus’ example in the highest way we can. CS is not an alternative health care system - it's a Christian denomination where healing is the normal and natural outcome of putting into practice the spiritual laws that Mary Baker Eddy discovered in the Bible. I wish more Christians would look seriously at healing, which was so large a part of Jesus’ ministry and the practice of original Christianity. And I wish more Christians would write on these pages – sometimes it feels like Charis and I are the only ones (apart from the odd fundamentalist who comes in to tell us that we’re all going to hell – but they never stay around for long.) 😳

Continued below

Cont.....It would be great if the medical profession or other scientists would look at Christian healing seriously and conduct independent analysis, but they haven’t (yet). No, we don’t have a 100% success record, but as has already been said, neither do doctors and hospitals, or other therapies, but what has been happening over the past 140 years does deserve to be taken seriously, rather than dismissed out of hand just because it doesn't meet the materially-based criteria. The church has on record many X-rays and the like and has a strict verification process before they will print any, but it is increasingly difficult to get medical records off doctors and hospitals when it is for a non-medical verification!

And often it’s the last thing anyone thinks of. For instance, I fell off a bicycle aged 8 and broke my arm, I was taken to hospital where it was set and put into plaster. The doctor said it would be weeks before the plaster could be removed, but within a couple of days I was going mad with itching (I can still remember sticking a knitting needle down the plaster to scratch it.) My mother took me back to the hospital on the 3rd day and asked them to remove the plaster and try to put a looser one on. She had been praying for me, so when it was off, asked the doctor to X-ray it again.

He was rather taken aback and said there would be no difference, but the second X-ray showed that the arm had completely knitted, so he put it in a sling and told me to wear it for a week. My mother looked out of the window that afternoon and I was playing with my friends, waving my arms around in the air, the sling hanging around my neck. Did she think to ask the hospital for a copy of the before and after X-rays so that skeptical people on HP could be placated? No, she was simply grateful to God to have a happy little girl again.

The link to [DLMURL="http://www.johnsonfund.org/empirical.pdf"]An Empirical Analysis of Medical Evidence in Christian Science Testimonies of Healing 1969-1988[/DLMURL] that Charis posted to (the Johnson Fund) is worth pausing skepticism for a while for and reading. It only lists healings where the condition was either medically diagnosed or medically confirmed (or both).

"The total number of physical healings recounted in this period is over 10,000. Of these some 2,337 involve healings of medically diagnosed conditions. The latter figure is limited to healings related firsthand by the individual healed or, in the case of healings of children, by a parent....

"Among the medically diagnosed cases, 285 made reference to specialists, 284 to X-rays, 453 to the involvement of more than one physician, 507 to the involvement of a hospital in the diagnosis. The medical contacts in these cases essentially involved diagnosis alone or else tangibly unsuccessful medical treatment, sometimes for an extended period, prior to the testifier's decision to turn to Christian Science for healing. In 623 cases healings were medically confirmed by follow-up examinations. In 222 cases ranging from extreme trauma caused by auto collisions to serious degenerative diseases, the testifiers referred specifically to terminal or life-threatening prognoses by physicians...."

The full list of diagnosed conditions* healed includes virtually all classes of disease – infectious, congenical, immunological, neurological, etc....

These healings do not fit what a physician in The New England Journal of Medicine called a “mechanistic and reductionistic” model of health, but as a church official has written, they “constitute evidence that can and should be taken seriously by rational people …. If the evidence doesn’t fit the model, the need is to reexamine the model, not arbitrarily deny the evidence!”

To me, a salient point is the last I copied:

QUOTE: "These healings do not fit what a physician in The New England Journal of Medicine called a “mechanistic and reductionistic” model of health, but as a church official has written, they “constitute evidence that can and should be taken seriously by rational people …. If the evidence doesn’t fit the model, the need is to reexamine the model, not arbitrarily deny the evidence!”

Love and peace,

Judy

To be fair , I haven't really followed this thread . I felt the topic was not one I would have sympathy with as I have issues with what some religious people teach about things like reiki and psychic things. I am a scientist, someone with a christian background, a very spiritual person who does some things I know science AND religion do not understand and in some cases strongly disapprove of.. I respect other peoples views - but hope they will respect mine and not try to convert me...or worse still demonise me. (I am a nice person honest I am ! 🙂 )

But I felt I had to challenge the view that referring back to a christian science site was the same as approaching other scientists for views on what another scientist has done. In MY world the two are not the same at ALL..

Tashanie, just to reiterate the explanation I gave in an earlier post:

[INDENT]It [the reference to quantum physics] wasn't meant to be an exact analogy (if there is any such thing) - my point was simply that those who are directly involved in any field of interest most certainly have a right to speak for themselves and their knowledge and experience in that field. It's the same in any area. If I want to understand how Reiki healing works, I would ask a professional Reiki practitioner. If I want to know more about Buddhism, I would likewise turn to resources provided by those who follow and practice Buddhist teachings - and so on.
[/INDENT]
Again, I was not intending to suggest that Christian Science and physics have anything much in common (although some of the discoveries in quantum physics certainly give food for thought!), nor indeed that the same methods can be used to prove what they each claim. My use of "If you wanted to verify the claims..." earlier was, I admit, misleading wording! :p I was up quite late at the time.

All I was trying to do was to use a simple spur-of-the-moment analogy to refute the notion - which was clearly being put forward - that Christian Scientists cannot legitimately speak for themselves about their own religion and its practice of spiritual healing. I might not agree with all the claims put forward by every form of science, religion or therapeutics, but I would never deny those in any field the right to put forward their own evidence and arguments, however controversial.

I too understand where you're coming from, Tashanie, and Principled has given another perspective on why medically verified evidence for Christian Science healing is very difficult to come by, especially in forms that would convince already determined sceptics. As has been pointed out, too, Christian Science is not about seeking healing for oneself, but about getting to know God. When this results in healing - as it frequently does - that's merely the outward effect (almost a side effect!) of something much, much deeper and more profound.

I'd be glad to drop this conversation here and let the thread either go back on topic or die down again. Please understand, too, that I am not in any way trying to persuade anyone to believe in or agree with Christian Science (or Christianity as a whole). All I've been asking for - in line with HP's ethos - is respect for it and its followers, especially here on the Christianity forum. That's all.

Tashanie, just to reiterate the explanation I gave in an earlier post:

[INDENT]It [the reference to quantum physics] wasn't meant to be an exact analogy (if there is any such thing) - my point was simply that those who are directly involved in any field of interest most certainly have a right to speak for themselves and their knowledge and experience in that field. It's the same in any area. If I want to understand how Reiki healing works, I would ask a professional Reiki practitioner. If I want to know more about Buddhism, I would likewise turn to resources provided by those who follow and practice Buddhist teachings - and so on.
[/INDENT]
Again, I was not intending to suggest that Christian Science and physics have anything much in common (although some of the discoveries in quantum physics certainly give food for thought!), nor indeed that the same methods can be used to prove what they each claim. My use of "If you wanted to verify the claims..." earlier was, I admit, misleading wording! :p I was up quite late at the time.

All I was trying to do was to use a simple spur-of-the-moment analogy to refute the notion - which was clearly being put forward - that Christian Scientists cannot legitimately speak for themselves about their own religion and its practice of spiritual healing. I might not agree with all the claims put forward by every form of science, religion or therapeutics, but I would never deny those in any field the right to put forward their own evidence and arguments, however controversial.

I too understand where you're coming from, Tashanie, and Principled has given another perspective on why medically verified evidence for Christian Science healing is very difficult to come by, especially in forms that would convince already determined sceptics. As has been pointed out, too, Christian Science is not about seeking healing for oneself, but about getting to know God. When this results in healing - as it frequently does - that's merely the outward effect (almost a side effect!) of something much, much deeper and more profound.

I'd be glad to drop this conversation here and let the thread either go back on topic or die down again. Please understand, too, that I am not in any way trying to persuade anyone to believe in or agree with Christian Science (or Christianity as a whole). All I've been asking for - in line with HP's ethos - is respect for it and its followers, especially here on the Christianity forum. That's all.

I apologise if you feel I am being or was being disrespectful. No disrespect was intended.

That's fine, Tashanie - no offence taken! 😀