QUESTION: Why should Mrs. Eddy warn against teaching Roman Catholics?
ANSWER: Catholicism in general is the old-joke-book of Christianity: a lot is conveyed and conveyable by telling good-old-jokes, refreshing, inspiring, healing, understanding, loving admonitions, right-thinking. Mrs. Eddy encouraged Christian Scientists to tell jokes, and many of them are getting kind-of-old, now, too. She foresaw this when she referred to the "third, fourth, and final generation" of students being hers as well; then her Successor should take-up the humorous self's arrogance over matter (there should be no other), and prod-on. Roman Catholics must lose their Pope to Christian Science, and this stirs and upsets many waiting for new jokes, wallowing in the lees.
QUESTION: Why should the world have two factions, orientalism and occidentalism?
ANSWER: Science is not a faction, but includes properly the oriental mix-and-match ... but mix-and-match does not properly include Science, properly, as that would be redundant (Science includes itself, but not by mixing-and-matching). The occidental mind-set is as a four-course meal (complete, sufficient variety) ... the oriental mind-set is as a twelve-dish buffet where the chef matches wits with the party guests, and flatters them with a parade of new delights (the intents of central governments): the occidental chef does not like to work so hard (they tend to wallow in the wines, themselves), but, this ultimately allows (them) and (their) children to be done with daily chores, and spend more time in education on other subjects, moon travel, etc., whence more science (dip into mix-and-match, don't wallow). This will come as a surprise when the Chinese suddenly stop 'dumping' cheap color-television receiver-sets on the American market, and focus on something new! Orientalism looks to the past, occidentalism, to the future [and to its time-forward flow] - when the future becomes as predictable as the past, time will cease and eternity will be discerned and the only presence, Mind or Truth unfolding.
QUESTION: Why does Mrs. Eddy refer to Christ Jesus as the exemplar, or best example?
ANSWER: The usual inference draws to, why can't I be a best example in my own experience, or why is anyone else a better example? The best answer is two-fold: Jesus was the best at being an example of the Christ - that was greatly inspired by the expectations of the people in his era. And once that out-standing example was established, it grew and propagated into fruition, a virtual storehouse, no longer merely ex-ample. Jesus was not the first to heal the sick or raise the dead, or perform unusual or unexpected feats of salvation, recovery, conversion, buoyancy: his experience on record was much like that of Elijah who had Elisha as a disciple, but Jesus had twelve, and even the failure and quittal of one of those twelve was replaced by one much stronger than the quitter. What Elijah and Elisha did well, Jesus did an order of magnitude more and better (quicker) ... but then, there were an order of magnitude more people around wanting his service and science. St. John foresaw an era in which the faithful students would number four orders magnitude greater yet (cf. 12x12,000=144,000 of the Lamb's choir-army). And indeed proportionally, where Elijah might have made impression on thousands of hebrew folk, maybe even tens of thousands, Jesus reached tens of thousands of Jews, and maybe even hundreds of thousands, and today, Christian Science must reach hundreds of millions of religious thinkers, and maybe billions: fully four orders of magnitude more. On such simple numbers the reigning Jews may never believe the meshiach has come, except Judas (Iscariot) lead them. Elijah's last feat was his ascension in a chariot and whirl-wind of fire (he could have set himself ablaze with one of (his) famous bolts of consuming lightning, so confident in God's grace that it was not suicide), and his lone student did see (at least in the second sight) his mentor's success. Jesus had faith to endure the crucifixion (counted among the transgressors, not as a suicide), and his disciples subsequently saw him (at least in the second sight) several times after and ascending. Today's astronautic ascent is so common place we might expect the higher demonstration in the line of Christ-Truth to simply put away the discounting flames of the inward second sight (as we no longer shall imbibe spoils) and personally individually overcome the stolid gravitational drift of Earth habits.
QUESTION: This week's Lesson-Sermon included the story of the lasting cruse of oil. (2KING4:1-7) What really happened? We've heard scholars suggest it was a trick, that the pots had false bottoms.
ANSWER: Jewish stories, as this work plausibly shows, were common-place opportunities of inspiration. The actual pots were smaller than the cruse (despite storied enlargements), but the sequence shows that as a whole cruse of oil would not sell for a sufficient price but a volume-discount, nor likewise a collection of used clay pots as were such common things and cheap, it took an application of oil to each pot to prove their worth and increase the total marketability of both oil and pot, so Principle (or consecration) is not transferrable profitably, and human courtesies, like blank books, are hard-sells, yet the application and amplification of divine Principle (or Love) distributed in each individual demonstration (or moment) of Life (or Truth) is, and appeals broadly, and excels in the market-place of substantial thought-forces. Mrs. Eddy glossaries oil as consecration, and Jewish Genetic Scripture identifies clay with Adamic man; and we see that wholesale consecration is cheap concentration, and Adam, dirt-cheap, but the [true, anointed] consecration of every man is worthy ... whence Christian Science.
QUESTION: Also in this week's Lesson-Sermon was the story of the centurion who called upon Jesus to heal his dying servant. (MATT8:5-13) Did the centurion believe Jesus was a prince of devils?
ANSWER: Not necessarily: it was ordinary military procedure for a conqueror to make slaves of survivors, chase retreaters, and capture infiltrators ... but consider how that centurion loved his servant who may have been such a former enemy, fulfilling Jesus' injunctions to, love your enemies, and bless them that curse you: he believed in conquering empires of demons, good and evil, to be ruled individually.
QUESTION: The Jews of today make such a fuss over the coming moshiach - they don't seem satisfied just to see the divine spiritual qualities of Love expressed in all mankind, yet Mrs. Eddy says Christian Science cancels the disagreement between Jew and Christian (S&H360:28) - is there something more going on?
ANSWER: The question amounts to what constitutes a moshiach or messiah ... indeed Jewish discussions dig into whether or not the moshiach shall be a living man, or a reconstituted man [having new parents]. It is perhaps wisest to answer this question with a question: Was Jesus the moshiach? ... possibly not: for consider several curiosities: When asked whether John the Baptist were 'Elias', John denied it saying he was a voice crying in the wilderness (ISA40:3), yet Jesus, too, suggested it - that Elias should come first was famously known (MATT17:10-13) - Jesus was referring to the quality of thought and action expressed individually ... Jesus sometimes asked to not be called, Christ - before Pilate he said in effect his daily teachings took priority - and he specified that his student, Peter, should head [his] Church - now, that's a Jewish Moshiach: Peter's work was more like what the Jews expected: temple building, impetuous leadership, ready to wield his dirk. And if we then turn this around we see something Jesus may have hidden: Jesus was teacher to Peter, guarding, guiding, governing, exposing and explaining the Christ in the way it was to be discerned, as the light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world - standing-up for Peter, deflecting the beatings a young student should not endure, hiding Peter amidst twelve equally famous students [including two of John's the Baptist], proving the lasting worth of his teachings, but pointedly anointing Peter for the greater works he shall do - which included the teachings ... what think ye: Rebuilding the Jews' stone temple in three days is meet for a supercomputer operating a PERT data-base of architectural logistics specifications ... a feat fit for a modern educated Moshiach.
Now, the 'funny' stuff is how to reconcile a second coming of Peter when the Moshiach is supposed to live thousand(s) of years ... well, in Jewish theological pedantry, an irregular crucifixion does not have to be called a crucifixion, it does not have to be said, he died, but that they gave-up waiting for him to pass, because he lingered-on in the reputed upside-down crucifixion ... and Jewish doctors may say that that kept the blood freshest in his head, like a diver holding his breath, and that he may not have been clinically dead in the presumed end ... so, possibly he was yet alive when taken away. The Pharisees in Jesus' day argued over what constitutes a man - eye-for-eye, tooth-for-tooth, they said, and he was still a man - but the essential last piece they pondered, and Peter may have answered to their satisfaction: keeping the brain alive ... to effect escape.
QUESTION: In this week's Lesson-Sermon is Mrs. Eddy's statement that the spiritual essence of blood is sacrifice (S&H25:7) ... yet Jesus said taking a cup of wine, take, drink, this is my blood (MATT26:26-28) ... isn't that the opposite? when Jesus meant body and blood were merely the [humanly traditional preparation and preservation of food by mashing and] spoiling of wheat and grape - a kind of 'scape-grape' - not a sacrifice.
ANSWER: Exactly. Sacrifices were, as Moses' wave-offering, recognition that all good comes from God the Creator, and that men should acknowledge this by setting aside a little of man's highest concept [cooking] of that God-provided good to offer it back [not that the Creator needs this] in common worship. And we see again Mrs. Eddy's leading into her wilderness - and her method of reversing error to find spiritual truths ... she's not worshipping Azazel [the demon in the wilderness which eats the scape-goat] but recognizing every mental quality as finding its source in her everywhere present God - she qualifies God as divine Principle, Spirit, Life, Love, etc., rather than naming principal versions or national deities: this is the essence of divine Science as it applies to humanity [which needs this]. She elsewhere writes of Jesus' sinless career (S&H19:29), yet Jesus prayed intending forgiveness of others' debts as evidence of being forgiven his own debt of spoiling the Earth by body and blood. He also put upon his disciples to eat and drink his body and blood in commemoration, by eating and drinking that spoiled wheat and grape, called, bread and wine (ibid), as that was kosher [at Jesus' blessing] until that is discerned as unclean for the Father's kingdom (ibid), where and when he would drink new [fresh grape] vine juice (ibid:-29) - and, we may presume, unspoiled wheat [unleavened] bread - this would make an interesting communion in our modern Scientific insistence that the kingdom of heaven is here - in hand [not merely at hand] - and an acknowledgement that Jesus has indeed returned to this kingdom here. Shall we not then ask the major churches [denominations] to celebrate with us this return of Jesus to the Father's kingdom, by sharing cups of fresh grape juice at their Sacrament service, and no longer say the fathers have eaten spoiled grapes [wine] and the children are mocked, unto the third and fourth generations.
QUESTION: Is there a forbidden [one] man? St. Paul's Son of Perdition?
ANSWER: The parallel to the Garden of Eden, and Adam learning to tend fruit trees by excepting one scientific control tree, which he'd subject to comparison at harvest time to prove the worth of his tending .... The care for children demands more than leaving one child unnurtured - trees are fixed, and people move about ... better methods, sowing the word, watching, not proselytizing [Jesus didn't] avail humanity, but mankind has typically sanctioned certain human activities, often labeling them as sins, when the child-thought may not recognize any danger commonly associated with sin. If we look at the history of the Hebrews we see that indeed the other cultures were left-out from the attention they [Hebrews] gave themselves ... St. Paul's [Saul's] history shows how hardly the Jew-pedant converts - true Christians leave them out, save as Jesus indicated some seed falls on the less yielding soil - the Jew lineage had no dealings with the Samaritans, and yet Paul took the opposite course and proselytized to the gentiles: he himself was left-out as much as possible, except for the occasional letter, the comparison in harvest, by Peter and his fellow Jewish apostles - Christian Scientists are not to teach Roman Catholics (Manual/MBE) without their Church authority's permission .... Healings by Christ Jesus were often cases of letting the healed individual go his way: the fruitage was often one leper in ten returned giving thanks. We also find the opposite promoted: The Adam lineage was one among many on Earth, Moses didn't count the Levites for the army with the other tribes of Israel, counting Joseph's as two by his two sons, Peter was the chosen disciple to head Christ Jesus' church, yet he was trained-up as one among twelve. It is wise to recognize that no matter how much error claims anyone is left-out, we know that the divine Principle Love has not forgotten the idea by which It expresses itself best ... man is the highest idea.
QUESTION: In this week's Lesson-Sermon, Section VI, the citations from Science and Health seem to suggest that there is a hierarchical structure in Christian Science, emphasizing mostly people living this Science as Rev. Mrs. Eddy taught it, and over them the 'healers' [Practitioners] and teachers.
ANSWER: Yes, the best students are self-taught from their own studies - "the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain" (MATT4) - and from these come the best healers and teachers ... but importantly, she's saying that living without subterfuge this scientific Word of God endows individuals with the nearest to humanly perfect perception of just what this Science is doing when healing and teaching - whereas subterfuge would lead its lesser thinker astray, as to just what is [a] healing ... the most common error in the cults.
QUESTION: Are Hebrews [and now Jews] 'flat-land'ers? The Old Testament seems to include only those who stayed within the Fertile Crescent from Ur to the [lower] Nile - even in the diasporas: the Babylonian exile from Jerusalem is included, but the Lost Ten [northern] Tribes are not.
ANSWER: The concept of 'flat-land' is crucial in the Hebrew and Jewish Theology - so essential, that it is one more evidence of the spacer community from which Jehovah came with Adam. Indeed Jehovah established the world-cradle for the Sons of God, first the Garden of Eden, but essentially including all of Eden [steppe: shallow sloped 'flat-land'] that is Arabia and beyond, to the borders of the mountains, even pushing west to the lower delta [end] of the Nile. Any[one] climbing over the [mountain] edge of that cradle was 'grown-up' and no longer to be counted among the littlest children of God ... but there were distinct exceptions: Moses and the elders climbed the mount of God, and there saw the God of the Hebrews, and Moses came back down with The Ten Commandments [laws] of God; Daniel resorted at the court at Shushan [SIC: various spellings] high up the Karun [source for the Rud-Khaneh-ye, Gihon] river, and there [presumed] retrieved the insights of God's scientific astronomical millennial wisdom; Jesus took to a local mount to view all the kingdoms of the Earth [east and west of the Sea of Galilee], and brought down God's demonstrably practical Christ to humanity. The reason for avoiding the mountains generally is the mundane iconic disappointment, as each of these found, setbacks but necessary upon their present human development - Moses also returned to the mountains, [Daniel is unreported], and Jesus reputedly ascended - Jehovah's purpose though was to keep the dear little children of God growing most rapidly in the wisdom of obedience, before returning to outer-space: not by climbing mountains for mere human feeling of lordship over the Earth, but in actual demonstration of the directly upward ascending spacer Science - you get most out of the 'cradle' by growing-up loved, not by childishly climbing over the edge.
QUESTION: If Peter was selected by Jesus to head his Church, what was Paul's [Saul] message-mission to the churches throughout Asian Minor?
ANSWER: Paul was sent to the gentiles ... but we must see that this is not blind-faith, head-long busy-bodying. The gentiles then, and more-so today, are the diasporas of the Jews' Ten Lost Tribes of Israel, mixed by marriage and religion: the essential elements of being Jewish. Paul's condition of blindness was not a black-out but a white-out - he saw the necessity to broadcast, to reach all the rest of the Jews long-taken from the Davidian-Jerusalem fold - he saw the oneness of the world, not in flesh, but in scientific conversion of the fleshly thought to the newly anointed-Judaism ... and he saw the Christ in the lineage of Adam, not as a mere person, but as the light of truth-living disrupting the darkness of judaic pedantry about who-lives-where. Yes, outside Peter's Church of Christ [Science renewed] firmly entrained and entrusted in the Jew's most recognized history, Paul cast his net of contrition for past misdeeds drifting from the true-line of the truth-light, begun in Adam, leading to that last Adam, the quickening spirit of Godliness.
QUESTION: Some Jewish scholars today deprecate [Christ] Jesus' role in Jerusalem, AD 30-33, claiming he was a marginal Jew, a renegade from the school of Hillel.
ANSWER: A close comparison of both the Old and New Testament Scriptures concerning Jesus suggests more he was an excellent teacher who covered for his students, and no more a faction than any other of that era ... what Hillel said in the shadowy Mosaic-negative, eg. don't do to others what is abhorrent to you, Jesus put in positive light, same eg. do unto others as you would have them do unto you - both the 'unto' and the subjunctive 'would-have' keep the obedient thinker from obtruding on their neighbors' sensibilities - Jesus was not an ascetic [as the Essenes, or as John the Baptist], but a very out-going friendly sort of fellow who got into all sorts of troubles because of all those friends he made among the commoner Jews and sometimes gentiles, and mobs of little children, and defended by his compassionate reasoning with Judaism ... this very much distinguished Jesus among the cloth-and-cloistered priests and teachers of his day, who'd rather'd the people come to them, more orderly - he was getting-at and being the essence of a teacher of teachers: he wasn't looking for mere followers, but students who could forward the great work. Actually, Jesus was a fundamentally close adherent of Judaism - he understood and did what had been done before - walking across the Sea of Galilee, shallow water a foot deep, similarly as Moses walking the Hebrews across the Red [Reed] Sea dry sea bottom-land - he healed the sick, as did Elija and Elisha, and other prophets and priests - and when Peter slashed the ear of the high-priest's servant, at the arrest before trial, and Jesus touched the bloody ear and stopped it, Jesus may have then wiped that blood on his coat-shoulders and sleeves [a detail his disciples missed] as preparation for the passover under Pilate's doom impending upon his Jewishness: he was ready willing to live-on, to be passed-over: to resurrect, not pass-on.
QUESTION: This week's Lesson-Sermon, UNREALITY, cites, Oh that men would praise the LORD ... He turneth rivers into a wilderness, and the watersprings into dry ground; ... He turneth the wilderness into a standing water, and dry ground into watersprings. ... The righteous shall see it, and rejoice:.... (PSM107:31-42)
ANSWER: Unrealities indeed: this is not what's actually happening: The LORD is not so fickle, nor is this a suggestion that mankind imitate God by watering desert places - a technology within our grasp - but human sense presumes stability where there is none, and emotes change where there is neither: The righteous, however, see beyond the stance of a few years, even of millennia - and indeed over millennia the Fertile Crescent ranged from wet and flourishing, to sun-baked-dry desert - then again, it was in our century that men recognized the turning of galaxies, but the righteous see that this latter does not affect mankind within its span of knowledge: mankind, as perceived by the righteous, is mankind enwisened to God.
QUESTION: Why does Mrs. Eddy renounce, tea, as not consistent with Christian Science?
ANSWER: Coffee, tea, alcohol, tobacco, and opium - said Mrs. Eddy - tea may have been leaves fermented in warm water, in her day - it often is now - virtually flavorless apart from fragrant additives - requiring the subtlest criticism, which subtlety is most unlike Christian Science - having little to no food value: not even sugar. And, though we buy spices with our food, we do not need to wait for tea, to drink water. This last observation may lead us to the poignant understanding Mrs. Eddy intended - we should never hide the human thirst: not for ourselves, nor of our neighbors - Practitioners have had an exceeding troubled time over this: all human need must be met in Christian Science - not some by science and some by matter - thus we must be constantly alert to any thought which would deprive us of the rights of man to health and science - we wouldn't withhold food for too-costly spice, therefor, drink water whatever the price of tea. Her statement, more importantly than merely regarding food-values, indicates to the Christian Scientist the requirement to emerge gently from matter to Spirit (MBE), can be accomplished now: we can at once turn and do right - nothing can vitiate the ability and power divinely bestowed upon man by his Creator (S&H393:8) ... we must be imperatively purifying our own thought, not steeping it with material beliefs of shadowy flavor-sensations - daily we must form habits conducive to the practice of Truth, God, in our lives, reaching unto the very vaguest suggestion of any power opposed to Spirit - Spirit is not vague. And most profoundly, Rev. Eddy foresaw her Christian Scientists making steadfast progress passing, not removing these waymarks of Truth.
QUESTION: This week's Lesson-Sermon cites Mrs. Eddy's instruction that we must learn how mankind govern the body, whether through faith in hygiene, drugs, or will-power ... why does she leave-out obedience to good, avoiding error and leaving the body to God's control?
ANSWER: She's instructing Practitioners, and we must all be practitioners in this Church of Christ Scientist, for ourselves and our neighbors - though ultimately in Science man shall no longer say to his neighbor, know the Lord, but all shall know [the Lord] from the least unto the greatest. (JER31:34) There's a distinction between learning and doing: learning the method of error, we must see through it, and lift our thought to discern God's full authority over His man: we resolve these lower things to their metaphysical thoughts - but indeed we should not be involved in our learnings: we don't learn the hypnotism, the drug, the hygiene: we must do and be right, nothing less. Also cited is her phrase, now is the time ... cried the apostle ... we might ask, who's crying? John the Baptist was, a voice crying in the wilderness - the apostles were men of renown, not criers - we should be seeing them as men of renown, not criers - the turn of phrase suggests we are just barely perceiving the nature of man in Science, presently - we shall be seeing more of this turning as the centuries progress, until we see she was indeed holding that cup of the blood of the saints.
QUESTION: Mrs. Eddy says in this week's Lesson-Sermon that St. John's REVELATION of a new Earth without tabernacle meant there would be no body: all would be harmony. (Key/S&H) But, harmony can't lose it's manifestation: manifestation can't lose its reality: real body is omnipotence manifested.
ANSWER: Indeed her Key to the Scriptures exposes the fallibility of communicating by material language: her meaning is that with no more Earth-sea - no imperfect Earthy mirror - there'd be no way to see her own body: harmony, as in GENESIS ONE, depicts mankind impersonally. She may have taken this from the night-dream in which we do not see [our] nose: seeing more free of [our] body, though yet forwardly directed ... and this reminds us that human mental conditioning - inculcations of devoutly believed observations, envisionings - counts for naught: when we can forget in dreaming what we see daily, hourly.
St. John was also seeing man's true place was not among Earth-elements, but forever at-home, in-house built by the God of man's home, not merely God of Earth - he was seeing the Earth entirely subdued before this perfect ideal of home-dominion: the seas, the outdoor sun, and night-moon, gone, and woman's wandering (the transience-sense of harlotry) ended.
[We must note here in closing that the plausible actual would become speculative if we merely imagine what persons may have done, said, meant ... the importance is in the demonstration of the Christ Science: not to rediscover that which is today abundant, but discern and live it]
FUNDAMENTAL CONTROVERSES: Christian Science Class Instruction * RKPetry
The theory of measurement propounded in this work is not to be cited (as) considering contraband or corpses; Nor are the intellectual appurtenances hereļn to be used for or in the commission of crimes against persons, peoples, properties, or powers (States). May your tabernacle measure true.
COPYRIGHT: BASIC LIBRARY RULES: NONTRANSFERABLE: READ QUIETLY