# Christian Science and Christianity **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [June 23, 2003, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829 "2003-06-23T18:02:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![WeRSauron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f19dbf/32.png) [@WeRSauron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WeRSauron)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2003, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/21 "2003-06-24T17:21:30Z")
Good point, **Marley23**. I guess documentation would be nice - my major point of curiosity is _how_ this happens. I’m sure there’s a scientific or rational reason for this occurring - whether we know this reason might be another matter altogether. WRS ---
**Author:** ![WeRSauron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f19dbf/32.png) [@WeRSauron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WeRSauron)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2003, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/22 "2003-06-24T17:27:51Z")
Another important part - the posts above refer a lot to praying. What is prayer in Christian Science? Is it communication with God? Is it telling God one’s desires and thoughts? Is it praising God? Is it sitting still to feel His presence? How does one pray? How does praying normally differ from praying for healing? WRS ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_H](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a5b964/32.png) [@Bill\_H](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_H)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2003, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/23 "2003-06-25T00:16:46Z")
Not to get mystic, but I think there is something to a positive attitude leading to medical healing with or without religion. It’s a tiny sample, but with the exception of the aunt I mentioned above, all of the Christian Scientists in my family lived into their late 80s and early 90s. Of course they were/are also all non-drinkers and rather non-aggressive personalities, both of which I suspect contribute to a longer life-span. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2003, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/24 "2003-06-25T02:03:53Z")
> [@](#): > > Not to get mystic, but I think there is something to a positive attitude leading to medical healing with or without religion. Agreed. There’s plenty we don’t know about the subjects involved - the mind, its influence on healing, medicine in general - but a positive outlook certainly doesn’t seem to hurt, and it can probably be said to have helped in a number of cases. ---
**Author:** ![BornOfStardust](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bc8723/32.png) [@BornOfStardust](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BornOfStardust)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2003, 5:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/25 "2003-06-25T05:52:20Z")
These are all excellent questions you’re asking, WRS…you strike me as very inquisitive and thorough and still open-minded on this, wonderful qualities all around. I’ll take a stab at it… Yes…I mentioned this in my earlier post, but there are many, many, many documented Christian Science healings. What I imagine is frustrating for an objective observer, though, is that you will find most of those healings in sources from the Christian Science Publishing Society such as the Christian Science Sentinel and the Christian Science Journal. This is not to say, however, that there are no objective, non-involved verifications out there. They’re just likely to be harder to come by. It’s not that surprising, really…the Publishing Society, and the Committee on Publication that corrects/responds to press about the church and Mrs. Eddy when necessary, have reasons for keeping good records of this stuff, and while some individual doctors or researchers might also, the larger, more skeptical medical and research community probably wouldn’t. Anyway, I’m sure they’re around, but I haven’t done extensive research into it myself. But the healings found in Publishing Society publications aren’t as shaky a source as you might think. For one thing, the Sentinel and the Journal have been around since the 19th century and have been publishing gobs of testimonies, healings and articles every week and month, respectively, for all that time. Testimonies of healing (or “demonstration,” as you’ll often hear CSers call it–the demonstration of the universal truths Mrs. Eddy put forth, the demonstration of the “science” of healing) must always be verified by two third parties. Sometimes they’re witnesses, sometimes they’re friends who can vouch for the person’s character, and in many cases they’re medical doctors. In fact, the Sentinel/Journal have published many corroborating letters from medical doctors that support testimony. Furthermore, the Publishing Society is a reputable source–The Christian Science Monitor, the newspaper that they publish, is known for its integrity and consistency by people in all walks of life. Something else that’s cool is that Harvard Medical School (I’m fairly certain about this one) now has Science and Health on its list of required reading, since it’s teaching tomorrow’s medical professionals a bit about holistic and alternative medicine and the mind-body connection–a sign that the field is progressing, I’d say. There’s also a Harvard Mind-Body Institute. So Harvard might be a place to start in looking for third-party verification, I don’t know. The Committee on Publication is also good to contact–I’m sure they’d be happy to hook you up with verification of healings and maybe even find an independent report of some kind. I know that doesn’t seem ideal from an objectivity standpoint, but it’s a place to start. So are these websites: [www.tfccs.com](http://www.tfccs.com) and [www.spirituality.com](http://www.spirituality.com). A good book that I’ve read bits of and that contains many testimonies, affidavits, and commentary on Christian Science in the world today is _Spiritual Healing in a Scientific Age_ by Robert Peel. Branching off of that for a second, what bothers me about most modern medicine today, CS or no CS, is the way that they approach a lot of things. Medical providers (to say nothing of insurance companies!) all too often look at the mind and the body as completely separate entities, and that’s simply not the case. I agree with what you said about positive attitudes, too, Bill. It’s not just a flaky cliche; there’s really something to it. Whether that’s a testament to the healing powers of the human mind or the powers of aligning the mind more with God is up for debate, but the important thing is that it’s true. And as far as verification is concerned, a final thought…I was discussing this with my mom in hopes of gaining some wisdom on it (she’s a lot more active with church stuff than I). She told me that the best proof of a healing out there is how the person who is healed feels inside…because only that person knows how the complete realignment of their thought (that may have also happened to manifest itself physically or in relationships or in other ways) felt like, and knows that it worked. Strong evidence can be gathered for it having happened, but no independent source can really verify matters of the personal heart and mind. Which brings me to the questions on prayer… > [@](#): > > Another important part - the posts above refer a lot to praying. What is prayer in Christian Science? Is it communication with God? Is it telling God one’s desires and thoughts? Is it praising God? Is it sitting still to feel His presence? How does one pray? How does praying normally differ from praying for healing? Well, it’s kind of all of the above, really. Prayer IS communication with God, and Mrs. Eddy writes that “desire is prayer,” although that doesn’t really mean you pray by going “hey God, I want a new bike” or something like that. God also knows your desires even before you ask. And sure, it can be praise, too…you’re acknowledging and affirming in your mind all the wonderful qualities that God possesses and deriving glorious joy from it and all. You can sit still to feel His presence if you want, but you don’t have to sit still or be silent or be loud or be anything in particular to pray. You just have to do whatever it takes to hear that “still, small voice.” Praying “normally” isn’t all that different from praying for healing, although if you’re praying for healing you might focus on specific spiritual concepts/qualities of God that you therefore possess as a perfect child of God…like if you have a broken leg, you might focus on the idea of wholeness, oneness, continuity…if it’s a relationship problem you think of divine love and seeing that person as a child of God…that sorta thing. The most important part of prayer is bringing your thoughts more in line with God and broadening your understanding. The best answer for this, really, lies in the first chapter of Science and Health, which is in fact entitled “Prayer.” So it’s obviously a pretty important concept in Christian Science. Here’s an excerpt from the first few pages: (you can easily get the full text online here: [http://www.aequus.org/online.html](http://www.aequus.org/online.html) ) > [@](#): > > THE prayer that reforms the sinner and heals the > sick is an absolute faith that all things are > possible to God, — a spiritual understanding of Him, > an unselfed love. Regardless of what another may say > or think on this subject, I speak from experience. > Prayer, watching, and working, combined with self-im- > molation, are God’s gracious means for accomplishing > whatever has been successfully done for the Christian- > ization and health of mankind. > > Thoughts unspoken are not unknown to the divine > Mind. Desire is prayer; and no loss can occur from > trusting God with our desires, that they may be > moulded and exalted before they take form in words > and in deeds. > > What are the motives for prayer? Do we pray to > make ourselves better or to benefit those who hear us, > to enlighten the infinite or to be heard of > men? Are we benefited by praying? Yes, > the desire which goes forth hungering after righteous- > ness is blessed of our Father, and it does not return > unto us void. > > God is not moved by the breath of praise to do more > than He has already done, nor can the infinite do less > than bestow all good, since He is unchang- > ing wisdom and Love. We can do more for > ourselves by humble fervent petitions, but the All-lov- > ing does not grant them simply on the ground of lip- > service, for He already knows all. > > Prayer cannot change the Science of being, but it > tends to bring us into harmony with it. Goodness at- > tains the demonstration of Truth. A request that > God will save us is not all that is required. The mere > habit of pleading with the divine Mind, as one pleads > with a human being, perpetuates the belief in God as > humanly circumscribed, — an error which impedes spirit- > ual growth. > > God is Love. Can we ask Him to be more? God is > intelligence. Can we inform the infinite Mind of any- > thing He does not already comprehend? > Do we expect to change perfection? Shall > we plead for more at the open fount, which is pour- > ing forth more than we accept? The unspoken desire > does bring us nearer the source of all existence and > blessedness. > > Asking God to be God is a vain repetition. God is > “the same yesterday, and to-day, and forever;” and > He who is immutably right will do right without being > reminded of His province. The wisdom of man is not > sufficient to warrant him in advising God. > > Who would stand before a blackboard, and pray the > principle of mathematics to solve the problem? The > rule is already established, and it is our > task to work out the solution. Shall we > ask the divine Principle of all goodness to do His own > work? His work is done, and we have only to avail > ourselves of God’s rule in order to receive His bless- > ing, which enables us to work out our own salvation. > > The Divine Being must be reflected by man, — else > man is not the image and likeness of the patient, > tender, and true, the One “altogether lovely;” but to > understand God is the work of eternity, and demands > absolute consecration of thought, energy, and desire. ---
**Author:** ![rumraisin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8e7dd6/32.png) [@rumraisin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rumraisin)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2003, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/26 "2003-06-25T06:00:57Z")
**BornOfStardust** :So, I’m not sure if I understand correctly, but CS doesn’t believe that Jesus came in the flesh-- he’s just a mystical “idea”. And that people are not _actually_ sick, so he didn’t actually heal them. And that people are not _actually_ sinful, so his death was merely a “lesson”-- it did not actually cause sins to be forgiven, since sin doesn’t actually exist. What I would like to ask is where does Christian Science get these ideas about Jesus from, since it’s clearly not from the Bible or even the apochyphal gospels? It seems to be based solely on the ideas of this 19th century lady, Mary Baker Eddy. And from your post, CS-er read the Bible like a devotional too. But how do CS-ers reconcile their beliefs with the Bible, seeing as in some places, it calls them lies, in no uncertain terms? ---
**Author:** ![gwendee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/35a633/32.png) [@gwendee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gwendee)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2003, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/27 "2003-06-25T20:23:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by rumraisin \* > \*\ ***BornOfStardust** :So, I’m not sure if I understand correctly, but CS doesn’t believe that Jesus came in the flesh-- he’s just a mystical “idea”. And that people are not _actually_ sick, so he didn’t actually heal them. And that people are not _actually_ sinful, so his death was merely a “lesson”-- it did not actually cause sins to be forgiven, since sin doesn’t actually exist. > \*\* I did not interpret what **BornOfStardust** wrote that way at all. Jesus the man demonstrated the Christ idea. His death and resurection showed that life is eternal (I am not preaching this idea to my fellow Dopers, just giving my interpretation of what I read.) > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by rumraisin \* > **What I would like to ask is where does Christian Science get these ideas about Jesus from, since it’s clearly not from the Bible or even the apochyphal gospels? It seems to be based solely on the ideas of this 19th century lady, Mary Baker Eddy.** Here is the _first_ tenet of Christian Science. 1. As adherents of Truth, we take the inspired Word of the Bible as our sufficient guide to eternal Life. There are 6 tenets and you can see all of them by clicking the link about 2/3 of the way down [this page](http://www.beliefnet.com/index/index_10123.asp) of [www.beliefnet.com](http://www.beliefnet.com). I find this site to be a great resource whenever I have question about a religion. ---
**Author:** ![WeRSauron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f19dbf/32.png) [@WeRSauron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WeRSauron)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2003, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/28 "2003-06-26T17:34:19Z")
In _Science and Health_, Mary Baker Eddy writes: > [@](#): > > It is plain that God does not employ drugs or hygiene, nor provide them for human use; else Jesus would have recommended and emoployed them in his healing. The sick are more deplorably lost than the sinning, if the sick cannot rely on God for help and the sinning can (page 143, lines 5-10). She also wrote: > [@](#): > > The various mortal beliefs formulated in human philosophy, physiology, hygiene, are mainly predicated of matter, and afford faint gleams of God, or Truth (page 144, lines 8-10). Does this mean that Christian Scientists do not brush their teeth, take showers, etc.? What does MBE mean by “hygiene”? WRS ---
**Author:** ![cadolphin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c37758/32.png) [@cadolphin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cadolphin)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2003, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/29 "2003-06-26T19:09:00Z")
\ I’ve been anxiously watching… when do we get to meet **Mrs. WeRSauron**? \ ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2003, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/30 "2003-06-26T20:50:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Does this mean that Christian Scientists do not brush their teeth, take showers, etc.? I have to admit that if Christian Scientists didn’t do this, it might’ve been a hindrance to my relationship with **Stardust**. But she does brush her teeth, and I imagine that Christian Scientists do this just like everyone else. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2003, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/31 "2003-06-26T20:50:11Z")
> [@](#): > > Does this mean that Christian Scientists do not brush their teeth, take showers, etc.? I have to admit that if Christian Scientists didn’t do this, it might’ve been a hindrance to my relationship with **Stardust**. But she does brush her teeth, and I imagine that Christian Scientists do this just like everyone else. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![WeRSauron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f19dbf/32.png) [@WeRSauron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WeRSauron)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2003, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/32 "2003-06-26T21:05:30Z")
But why would Christian Scientists brush their teeth and take showers? Why use material things - matter does not exist - to heal and take care of the body, instead of depending on Mind? WRS ---
**Author:** ![Beadalin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3be4f8/32.png) [@Beadalin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beadalin)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2003, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/33 "2003-06-26T22:17:41Z")
Some additional lines from _Science and Health_ that may shed some light: > [@](#): > > I do not maintain that anyone can exist in the flesh without food and raiment; but I do believe that the real man is immortal and that he lives in Spirit, not matter. Christian Science must be accepted at this period by induction. We admit the whole, because a part is proved and that part illustrates and proves the entire Principle. … Only by the illumination of the spiritual sense, can the light of understanding be thrown upon this Science, because Science reverses the evidence before the material senses and furnishes the eternal interpretation of God and man. This hits to the question of hygiene and maintenance-type stuff (and this is not the only time it’s addressed, but it’s the one I could find most quickly). The upshot of it is, of course you need to brush your teeth and wear clothes and remain clean. You are also expected to abstain from alcohol, tobacco and recreational drugs, and though they may not seem related on the surface, the underpinning idea is that by maintaining yourself physically, you free your thought from concerns of the body. _Thought_ is what is important, not the body. Who wouldn’t be distracted from prayer and right thinking by a rotten tooth, or shivering, or sunburn (or being wasted or drunk)? Knowing that, we clothe ourselves and eat and maintain hygiene, simply because most of us are not ready or able to understand ourselves as purely spiritual. If we could, we would ascend. Since we can’t, we cut distractions down to a minimum. > [@](#): > > While a course of medical study is at times severely condemned by some [Christian] Scientists, she (Mary Baker Eddy)feels… that all are privileged to work out their own salvation according to their light, and that our motto should be the Master’s counsel, “Judge not, that ye be not judged.” > [@](#): > > Sickness is neither imaginary nor unreal–that is, to the frightened, false sense of the patient. Sickness is more than fancy; it is solid conviction. It is therefore to be dealt with through right apprehension of the truth of being. If Christian healing is abused by mere smatterers in Science, it becomes a tedious mischief-maker. Instead of scientifically effecting a cure, it starts a petty crossfire over every cripple and invalid, buffeting them with the superficial and cold assertion, “Nothing ails you.” In other words, all Christian Science adherents work at their own pace, so to speak. It is up to each individual to decide their own course within the religion, up to and including being ready to heal themselves or others. I know many who, though devout, have sought medical treatment for ailments which were too much for them to deal with alone, or to deal with through prayer. Sometimes fear of disease is so overwhelming that medical treatment is the better choice. And that’s OK. It’s not what CSers hope for themselves or others, but it’s not a mark of shame or failure, either. Moreover, it’s not that CSers don’t acknowledge sickness, or pretend that those suffering aren’t really suffering. It’s that sickness is not and cannot be a fundamental truth about anyone. Instead of understanding my friend as “chick with cancer,” I understand her as a perfect, flawless child of God. I don’t pretend that she doesn’t have cancer, I simply don’t acknowledge that the cancer could ever be part of her identity, part of her real, immortal self. The idea, or identity, of her is constant. Cancer is powerless to destroy the true woman. ---
**Author:** ![WeRSauron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f19dbf/32.png) [@WeRSauron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WeRSauron)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2003, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/34 "2003-06-27T01:18:31Z")
Ah. I think I can see something. Everyone labels themselves - sick, well, gay, straight, male, female, single, married, tall, short, fat, thin, choleric, joyous, etc. None of these define what the person really is - the person’s spirit or soul defines what the person really is. So, I could be sick, but it’s just my body that is sick, not me. I am my spirit, my body is separate. I am not my body. Is this more along the lines of what Christian Science is trying to say? WRS ---
**Author:** ![BornOfStardust](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bc8723/32.png) [@BornOfStardust](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BornOfStardust)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2003, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/35 "2003-06-27T05:07:27Z")
I’d say that’s along the lines of what CS is trying to say. That’s an interesting way to put it, actually, I’ve never thought of it in terms of “labels” like that. And moreover–and most importantly–acknowledging your true self, which is a spiritual child of God and not an ailing mortal, causes the rest of your life to sort of naturally align itself with your purer picture of yourself. It’s very analogous to lots of things in life that I’ve always found to be true and that I’m sure many others have too: sometimes if you want a particular thing very badly, like to find the love of your life or to feel good about yourself or make friends, the more you try the less you succeed. Same goes for if you dwell too much on a negative label. But if you let go and focus on being yourself and expressing all of the good qualities that you know you possess, everything else sort of falls into place. So CS kind of takes that an extra step and says, that sort of clarity can be achieved through God. Going back to **rumraisin’s** Bible issue for a moment, since I haven’t been back on here to respond to it yet (thanks btw, **gwendee** –and of course **Marley** for vouching for my hygiene 😉 ). First of all, no, Jesus wasn’t a mystical being, he was a man, but he expressed divine ideas and showed us that life is eternal, which is why he was important. And showing us that we are always forgiven and can align ourselves with God to rise above mortal cares was nothing to sneeze at. So yes, he absolved us of sins and healed the sick–by showing us that we don’t have to submit to them in the first place. Anyway…I’ve gotten accusations thrown at me a few times about Christian Science not being based on The Bible. (Which is ironic, because CSers sure do study it a lot, and Mrs. Eddy sure did spend three years with the thing before writing Science and Health.) But I strongly question any assertion that The Bible would call CS beliefs (or those of many other religions) “lies in no uncertain terms.” Bible scholar I am not, but I do know this: if what you’re going for is a face-value, literal interpretation of the Bible, you’re going to get a very conflicting picture. Let’s face it: inspired Word of God, perhaps, but as told by man. Many, many different men. And then translated and who knows what else a bunch. So what’s important to get at is the underlying truths in the verses and stories, which is what CS does. It looks at a spiritual interpretation of the Bible; it tries to get at the broader picture. A good way to look at the Bible, I think, is as man’s spiritual journey. First he is created (as he remains today) in God’s image and likeness. Then there is a mist, and then the Adam and Eve parable (yes, I believe it’s a parable) pops up and you have a largely vengeful God and a sinful man for some time. There are periods of rise and decline–sometimes man is in touch with God and is therefore prosperous; other times he turns away and worships false idols, and then things go to hell. But gradually, understanding deepens, and finally Christ comes as the ultimate reconciliation of man to God. Furthermore, there are many parts of the Bible that show Jesus’ lack of reliance on material things and total reliance on God. The “take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, drink, put on, etc” part of the Sermon on the Mount comes to mind. There’s also the “flesh profiteth nothing, spirit profiteth all” bit. This is all off the top of my head, so sorry not to give references or exact quotes. And when Jesus healed, he didn’t say “Take two of these and call me in the morning” or “Hey God, heal this guy? Pleeeeease?” He said, “Father, I know that thou art with me.” He acknowledged God’s presence and understood that his prayers were already answered, and when he looked at his fellow man he saw absolutely nothing but a perfect child of God. This allowed him to heal, and this healing principle is demonstrated through CS. And when you can demonstrate something, you know there’s likely to be something to it. So those are my, uh, four and a half cents on that issue. 🙂 More exhaustive answers could certainly be given, but I’m not in much of a position to do it. Cheers! ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2003, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/36 "2003-06-27T05:18:00Z")
> [@](#): > > And when Jesus healed, he didn’t say “Take two of these and call me in the morning” or “Hey God, heal this guy? Pleeeeease?” In fact, he said “As a Jew, my mother always wanted me to be a Doctor. Let’s see what I can do.” 😉 ---
**Author:** ![BornOfStardust](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bc8723/32.png) [@BornOfStardust](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BornOfStardust)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2003, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/37 "2003-06-27T05:19:02Z")
Hehehe!!! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2003, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829/38 "2003-06-27T05:27:14Z")
Mwah. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-science-and-christianity/183829.md?page=1)