The Ancient War On Women

by MJSmith


     A few months ago I received a Jehovah’s Witness publication for September 1, 2012, called The WATCHTOWER.  In it was an article called “Does God Care About Women?”  I would like to quote from it, as I feel that it is a good article, especially since there has been the claim that there is a war on women being waged in this year’s politics.  The article begins with two quotes that are not from the Bible.
     “Sin began with a woman, and thanks to her we must all die.” – Ecclesiasticus, Second Century B.C.E.
     You are the devil’s gateway:  you are the unsealer of that forbidden tree:  you are the first deserter of the divine law…You destroyed so easily God’s image, man.” – Tertullian, on the Apparel of Women, Second Century C.E.

     I do not exactly agree with the J. W. article 100%, but I will quote it as it reads for the most part (there may be some things I leave out that I feel are not of importance).  The article is as follows.  I will put my comments in brackets that look like this: {Hi.}.

     Those ancient verses are not from the Bible.  For centuries, they have been used to justify discrimination against women.  Even today, some extremists still cite religious texts to legitimize the domination of women, claiming that women are to blame for mankind’s ills.  Did God really purpose for women to be scorned and abused by men?  What does the Bible say?  Let us see.

Have women been cursed by God?
     No.  Instead, it is “the original serpent, the one called Devil,” who has been “cursed” by God. (Revelation 12:9; Genesis 3:14)  When God said that Adam would “dominate” his wife, God was not indicating his approval of the subjugation of woman by man. (Genesis 3:16)  He was simply foretelling the sad consequences of sin on the first couple.  {I actually have a different take on verse 16, that God was telling the divine woman that her true husband was the Christ Mind.}
     Thus, the abuse of women is a direct outcome of the sinful nature of humans, not of God’s will.  The Bible does not support the idea that women must be subjugated to men in order to atone for the original sin. — Romans 5:12.

Did God create women inferior to man?
     No.  Genesis 1:27 states:  “God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.”  So from the very beginning, humans—both male and female—were created with the ability to reflect God’s qualities.  {Mary Baker Eddy says that because the woman was last on the creation list that she is the higher idea.}  Although Adam and Eve had their own unique emotional and physical makeup, they both received the same commission and enjoyed the same rights before their Maker. — Genesis 1:28-31.  {I disagree that Adam and Eve are the man and woman mentioned in Genesis 1:28-31.  What God revealed in Genesis 1:28-31 was the idea of man and the idea of woman.}
     Prior to Eve’s creation, God declared:  “I am going to make a helper for him [Adam], as a complement of him.” (Genesis 2:18)  {I am not sure what Bible translation the author is using, the King James version says, “help meet.”  But I do like the idea of replacing “help meet” with “complement.”  Complement is a quality of the Christ.}  Does the word “complement” imply that the woman was inferior to the man?  No, because this Hebrew word can also be rendered “counterpart” or “a help corresponding to” man…

What shows God’s concern for women?
     Foreseeing what fallen, sinful men would do, God early on expressed his intention to protect women.  {I have a problem with the last sentence, but I have included it anyway.}  Speaking of the Mosaic Law, instituted in the 16th century B.C.E., author Laure Aynard, in her book La Bible au feminin (The Bible in the Feminine Gender), notes:  “For the most part, when the Law covenant speaks of the woman, it is to defend her.”
     For instance, the Law commanded honor and respect for both father and mother. (Exodus 20:12; 21:15, 17)  It also required that due consideration be shown to pregnant women. (Exodus 21:22)  Even today, the protection provided by those laws of God stands in sharp contrast with the lack of legal rights that some women experience in many parts of the world.  But there is more.

A Law That Reflects God’s View of Women
     The Law that Jehovah God gave the nation of Israel provided the people – men and women – with boundless physical, moral, and spiritual benefits.  As long as they listened and obeyed, the nation was “high above all other nations of the earth.” (Deuteronomy 28:1, 2)  What was the woman’s place under the Law?  Consider the following.

1.  Individual freedom.  Unlike women in many other nations in ancient times, the Israelite woman enjoyed a great measure of freedom.  Though the husband was given the role of the head of the family, the wife, with her husband’s full trust, could ‘consider a field and obtain it’ and ‘plant a vineyard.’  If she had skills in spinning and weaving, she could even run her own business. (Proverbs 31:11, 16-19)  {Okay, this author may be right about this section of Proverbs, but I feel that the Scripture is not speaking of women in ancient times, but rather that it is a prophecy of the second coming of Christ, it is about Mary Baker Eddy.  But Mary Baker Eddy made it possible for all women to have individual freedom.  (See Proverbs 31:1)}  Women under the Mosaic Law were seen as individuals in their own right and not as just an appendage to man.
     In ancient Israel, women were also free to have a personal relationship with God.  The Bible speaks of Hannah, who prayed to God about a personal matter and secretly made a vow. (1 Samuel 1:11, 24-28)  A woman from the city of Shunem used to consult the prophet Elisha on Sabbath days. (2 Kings 4:22-25)  Women, such as Deborah and Huldah, were used by God as his representatives.  Interestingly, prominent men and priests were willing to seek advice from them. — Judges 4:4-8; 2 Kings 22:14-16, 20.

2.  Access to education.  As party to the Law covenant, women were invited to listen to the reading of the Law, which provided them with opportunities to learn. (Deuteronomy 31:12; Nehemiah 8:2, 8)  They could also receive training for participation in certain aspects of public worship.  For example, some women likely did “organized service” at the tabernacle, while others performed in a mixed choir of singers. — Exodus 38:8; 1 Chronicles 25:5,6.
     Many women had the knowledge and skill needed to run a profitable business. (Proverbs 31:24)  Contrary to the culture in other nations at that time – in which the father alone taught his sons – the Israelite mother was to share in educating her male children until adulthood. (Proverbs 31:1)  Obviously, women in ancient Israel were far from being uneducated.  {Again, Proverbs 31 is about the second coming of Christ, however, it was the mother who taught her prince-son the prophecy.}

3.  Honored and respected.  The Ten Commandments clearly stipulated:  “Honor your father and your mother.” (Exodus 20:12)  {This is true, but since this Commandment is the Fifth Commandment it has to do with man’s relationship to God, hence, the father and mother to honor is God.  However, we should also honor our human parents as well.}  In the proverbs of wise King Solomon, we read:  “Listen, my son, to the discipline of your father, and do not forsake the law of your mother.” – Proverbs 1:8.
     The Law included detailed regulations regarding conduct among unmarried persons, showing respect for females.  (Leviticus 18:6, 9; Deuteronomy 22:25, 26)  A good husband had to take into account his wife’s physical and biological limitations. – Leviticus 18:19.

4.  Rights to be protected.  In his Word, Jehovah portrays himself as “a father of fatherless boys and a judge of widows.”  In other words, he was the Protector of those whose rights were not safeguarded by a father or a husband. (Psalm 68:5; Deuteronomy 10:17, 18)  Thus, in one case when the widow of a prophet was treated unfairly by a creditor, Jehovah intervened with a miracle so that she could survive and keep her dignity. – 2 Kings 4:1-7.
      Before the Israelites entered the Promised Land, the family head Zelophehad died without leaving a son.  His five daughters {one of these daughters was named Noah} therefore requested Moses to give them “a possession” in the Promised Land.  Jehovah’s response went far beyond their request.  He told Moses:  “Give them the possession of an inheritance in the midst of their father’s brothers, and you must cause their father’s inheritance to pass to them.”  From that time on, women in Israel could receive an inheritance from their father and pass it on to their offspring. – Numbers 27:1-8.

God’s View of Women Misrepresented
     Under the Mosaic Law, women enjoyed an honorable status, and their rights were respected.  However, from the fourth century B.C.E. on, Judaism started to be influenced by Greek culture, which regarded women as inferior.
     For example, Greek poet Hesiod (eighth century B.C.E.) imputed all mankind’s ills to women.  In his Theogony, he spoke of “the deadly race and tribe of women who live amongst mortal men to their great trouble.”  This idea gained ground in Judaism early in the second century B.C.E.  The Talmud, compiled from the second century C.E. on, gave this warning to men:  “Do not converse much with women, as this will ultimately lead you to unchastity.”
     Throughout the centuries, this distrust has had a profound effect on women’s role in Jewish society.  In Jesus’ day, their access to the temple precincts had already been limited to the Court of Women.  Religious education was solely for men, and women were likely separated from men in the synagogues.  The Talmud quotes one Rabbi as saying:  “Whoever teaches his daughter Torah [the Law] teaches her obscenity.”  By misrepresenting God’s viewpoint, Jewish religious leaders instilled a contempt for women in many men.
     When on earth, Jesus noted such prejudices, which were deeply rooted in traditions. (Matthew 15:6, 9; 26:7-11)  Did such teachings influence the way he dealt with women?  What can we learn from his behavior and attitude?  Has true Christianity brought relief to women?

Discrimination Against Women in Ancient Writings
     From the first century C.E. onward, writers such as Philo of Alexandria began to use Greek philosophy to reinterpret the Genesis account.  For Philo, Eve was guilty of sexual sin and was therefore condemned to a life that “utterly deprives her of her freedom and subjects her to the dominion of the man who is her companion.”  Such contempt for women infiltrated Judaism, as well as the writings of the Church Fathers.
     In the Midrash Rabba, a second-century Jewish text, a rabbi explained why he felt women should wear a veil, saying:  “She is like one who has done wrong and is ashamed of people.”  Theologian Tertullian, whose writings were influential as early as the second century C.E., taught that women should walk about “as Eve mourning and repentant.”  Such teachings, often wrongly regarded as coming from the Bible, have contributed to much discrimination against women. (End of article.)
     Women of today, do you think that you are safe?  Do you think that you will not loose your freedoms that you have come accustomed to?  Are women today really as equal with men like they have been led to believe?  If so, then why do some women still receive less pay for doing the same work as a man does?
     Chances are that you can loose your freedom if one woman fails to be acknowledged throughout the world.  It is very important that this woman be acknowledged and accepted as the second coming of Christ.
     Women of today, do you think that it is your “privilege and duty as a woman” to have children for your husband?  Do you think that sex is spiritual?
     Mary Baker Eddy wrote a chapter called “Marriage.”  Many Christian Scientists seem to ignore or gloss over the last paragraph.  This is probably because they are not willing to give up sex!  It reads:  “If Christian Scientists educate their own offspring spiritually, they can educate others spiritually and not conflict with the scientific sense of God’s creation.  Some day the child will ask his parent:  ‘Do you keep the First Commandment?  Do you have one God and creator, or is man a creator?’  If the father replies, ‘God creates man through man,’ the child may ask, ‘Do you teach that Spirit creates materially, or do you declare that Spirit is infinite, therefore matter is out of the question?’  Jesus said, ‘The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage:  But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage.’” (S&H 69:17)
     Now, let us examine the conversation in this paragraph.  What is the child asking the parent?  They are asking the parent if they believe in one Mind only.  Does the parent accept that spiritual creation of idea is the only creation there is (as in Genesis 1), or does the parent believe that God created a material creation too (as with Adam a mortal man)?  Does the parent accept Mind as the only creator, or do they actually believe that God creates children with the help of the female egg and the male’s poisonous sperm?  If Mind, the only creator, is the only power, the only God there is, then why does the father reply that, “God creates man through man”?  Does Mind need help from a material man/woman to actually create more men (many minds or many gods)?  Notice too that it is the “father,” the male, who believes that God needs the help of “many gods” to create mankind!
     The child thought is right on point!  It comprehends the Truth of creation (Genesis 1).  For he asks, as if to get the parent to actually do some thinking, “Do you teach that Spirit creates materially, or do you declare that Spirit is infinite, therefore matter is out of the question?”  A true Christian Scientist teaches that “Spirit is infinite, therefore matter is out of the question!”
     Finally, we come to Jesus’ statement, “The [mortal] children of this [material] world marry [one another], and are given in marriage:  But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world [of Spirit], and the resurrection from [awakening of] the dead [those who are asleep in the belief of matter, the Adam dream], neither marry, nor are given in marriage.”  Jesus never married and he resurrected himself from the dead!  Do we actually listen to what he is telling us, to what Mary Baker Eddy is telling us, or do we read their words and let them slip away as if the words are not correct or important?  Or perhaps we think we know better than God’s two witnesses?  Or perhaps we feel like the words are for the future and do not apply to us?  Why did I decide to get married and get pregnant?  I certainly knew better!  I think it came down to being selfish.
     While it is true that my Christian Scientist mother never “educated” me properly on this topic, I had the words from the Textbook.  And I could have obeyed the Textbook.  But I did learn a lesson from it all, and I have tried to educate my own offspring that it is unnecessary for him to get married or to have offspring of his own.  Some people ridicule me for making this decision, but I feel that he should at least know that he has the option NOT TO GET MARRIED in this world.  He has the right not to feel guilty if he does not get married too.  If he goes out and does it then it is his decision.  At least he cannot say that his mother did not warn him.
     I know that sex is physical sensation; it is not spiritual at all.  People who believe sex to be a spiritual thing are just making excuses for themselves, so they do not have to follow Jesus’ words on the topic of marriage.  I have overcome any supposed sex drive I ever had.  And guess what, it was easy to do.  I understand that sexual desire, although it seems to be a physical desire, is actually mental desire.  We desire someone mentally.  We think we have to be with them in order to be happy!  And then we can live “happily ever after” like all those fairy tales teach us.  But they are really just fairy tales and I know that this girl was disillusioned by the idea of living happily ever after in a marriage.  It just does not happen that way.
     Most people will think that you are silly, or that you are nuts, or perhaps even dislike you for telling them that sex is of the devil.  But it is, it is sex, sex, sex – or rather six, six, six.  Why is sex of the devil?  It is simple.  It is of the devil because sex is a belief in having more than one God.  The end result of having sex is having children (creation of many minds).  “Children…Sensual and mortal beliefs; counterfeits of creation, whose better originals are God’s thoughts, not in embryo, but in maturity; material suppositions of life, substance, and intelligence [in matter], opposed to the Science of being [the Scientific Statement of Being].” (S&H 583:1)
     Women you need to wake up!  Stop believing that you need to have sex in order to feel complete, stop believing that you need a man in order to make you feel complete.  My husband does not make me feel complete, we are married, but my completeness comes from God.  You will never be happy with yourself until you turn to God for your every need.
     Today gay marriage seems to be in the forefront.  I do not care if you are heterosexual or homosexual – sex is wrong, it is erroneous, and the human society needs to wake up to that fact.  Do I like to see men kissing men or women kissing women?  No.  But I do not even care to see men and women kissing; if no movie or television show ever had sex scenes in them I would be happy!  I do not want to see that sort of thing.  Maybe people think there is something wrong with me because I feel that way.  But I think I feel this way because I have proved sexual desire to be nothing.  I have no need for it.  I did not need to crank out two children to discover it either!  I stopped with one.
     During the 2012 election campaign there was this side and that side.  There were the topics of planned parenthood, getting rid of Roe v. Wade, and abortion.  The answer seems so simple to me.  STOP HAVING SEXUAL INTERCOURSE!!!  Most certainly the children in schools should not be encouraged to have sex.  If you want planned parenthood then turn to God to do your planning.  There is no reason for a woman to have an abortion unless a man rapes her or perhaps she finds out that her child will be handicapped in some way.  And let us handle this topic right here and now.  Some religious MEN think that a woman should have the child if she was raped or if the child is physically handicapped because it is God’s will.  They corrupt the Scriptures to prove their viewpoints, their dogma (human opinions).  After reading the last paragraph of “Marriage” and what I have written on the topic of procreation, do you really believe it is God’s will to create a child through hate and lust?  Of course, it is up to the woman to decide.  I knew a white woman who had been raped and became pregnant.  She was very careful not to tell me that her daughter was black, and she never showed me any pictures of her.  But God gave me the insight that her child was the daughter of the black man that had raped her, so I was not surprised when I saw her daughter.  I admired my friend for raising her daughter as a single mother, and I knew that she loved her daughter very much even because of the vile circumstances surrounding the child’s birth.
     Would God create a deformed child, an imperfect child (what sort of God creates imperfect idea)?  Well, these men think this way do to their religious upbringing via scholastic theology (by the dogs, the Judaisers).  Mary Baker Eddy does make it very clear, in Science and Health, that it is the mother’s thinking that is of up most importance during the gestation period.  She says that it is the mother’s thinking that forms the embryo and this is why the mother’s thoughts should be spiritual.  It is mortal thinking that deforms the child.
     “Paul called these Judaisers [the ones who refused to be poor in racial pride] ‘dogs.’  ‘Dogs’ was a Biblical term describing homosexuals, and the intent seems quite obvious that Paul spoke of them as religious homosexuals embracing and supporting only men, but denying the place of women in the church.  But this group of Jewish Christians never ceased trying to undo the words and works of Paul.  Because of the Judaisers, Paul had to go back a second and third time to prop up areas already converted to Christianity.  There was a strong effort to subvert Paul’s work with the women in the early Christian church; and we will discuss these efforts and why they have been so successful in a negative sense by destroying the basis of genuine Christianity.  The statements of female inferiority mistakenly attributed to Paul have given weight to that same claim in Genesis 2.  The world has accepted these claims and now they must be dealt with.
     “Throughout the book of Acts, Paul preaches to women, baptizes and heals them, and accepts them in full membership along with the men.  In Acts 1:13, 14, we find women accompanying the disciples.  Both men and women listened to and followed Paul.  Aquila and Priscilla, husband and wife, were both heads of the church at Corinth, and Priscilla was known as the principle teacher of Apollos, one of the early evangelists.  While visiting in the Gentile areas, there was no reason for Paul to speak of the Judaic concept of female inferiority, as women already had a sense of equality with their male counterparts.  The Jews were the ones primarily handled by this claim.
     “In Romans, chapter 16, we read that Phoebe is a servant of the church; here the word servant means ‘deaconess,’ a head of the church.  In verses 3, 6, and 12, we find women mentioned as workers in the church.  Persis is a woman whom Paul says is beloved because she labours much in the Lord.  Verses 13 and 15 also include women, and there is nothing here about women keeping silent in the churches, — the inference is exactly the opposite.  It was Paul’s teachings of the equality of women with men that galvanized the insidious word of the Judaisers.
     “In I Corinthians 7:1-6, Paul preaches perfect equality to both wife and husband in the area of conjugal relations; there is no hint of domination by the male.  In other statements purported to be Paul’s, the exact opposite is expressed, words or phrases added by the Judaisers.  In 1 Corinthians 7:32-34, there is again an equality in service expressed and also equality in being unmarried in enjoined.  Inserted in I Corinthians 11:3 we read, ‘But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.’  If Paul broke with every other observance of Judaism, why do we find this inserted in a writing that has already expressed the equality of man and wife?  It is not Paul’s statement.  Verse 4 is a tenet of Judaism and is not Paul’s view; verses 5 and 6 are too harsh to be from a loving character like Paul’s.  Verse 7 is completely opposed to Paul’s teaching and there is neither male nor female in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28)  The entire section is inconsistent with the inspired teachings of Paul and is most definitely the work of the Judaisers.”[1]
     Paul Smillie continues with more on this topic for the next few pages.  But to help you understand further tampering with Paul’s writings read 1 Corinthians 14:34, 35 (these two verses are inserts and they interrupt the flow of the letter).  I Corinthians 16:19 – why would Priscilla be kept quiet in her own church?  If verses 34 and 35 are of Paul then he must be considered as a hypocrite (and he was not one).  In I Corinthians 15:4, 5 alludes to Peter as being the first to see Jesus after he resurrected, but it was Mary who saw him first.
     “In II Corinthians 11:3 we read, ‘But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.’  Paul relates how easily it can happen to us all.  Would he in another section damn all women as responsible for the fall?  Of course not!  He even said of himself, ‘For the good that I would I do not:  but the evil which I would not, that I do.’ (Romans 7:19)  Paul makes no distinction between male and female in the formation of a church, in gathering together in prayer, in holy work for the church and mankind and, therefore, these harsh quotes were inserted by the Judaisers.”[2]
     Paul makes it clear in Galatians 11:3 that his preaching was a revelation from God, this means that his ideas on womenhood did not vary from Jesus’ teachings.  Paul said, “But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law.”  He is saying with “made of a woman,” that Jewish law is incorrect in its assessment that “the child is of the man.”  He did not believe that women were inferior at all.
     Ephesians 5:22-29, 33, I Corinthians 7:1, 4-6 are also violations of Paul’s writings.  I Corinthians 7:1 states, “It is good for a man not to touch a woman.”  This probably has to do with the time when the woman is bleeding, she was considered to be unclean.  However, if it were interpreted in a spiritual way there really is nothing wrong with it, for it is good not to touch (have sex) with a woman.  Smillie writes, “In I Corinthians, both wives and husbands are to submit to each other, but in Ephesians the wife alone is to submit.
     Years ago I was working with the word “submit.”  It came to me that the word simply means “to make suggestions to” or “to give suggestions to someone.”  But what is important about this is if someone submits an idea to you, you should be willing to listen and consider that submission.  Taken in this way we do not have to be ashamed of being submissive because it really has nothing to do with being less powerful than someone else.  It is male ego, however, that ignores the wife’s suggestions!
     “In Philippi, Paul gathered his converts from the constituency of intelligent and pious Gentiles (more often women than men).  Dummelow tells us that women took a leading part in the Philippian church from the outset.  Greek society was distinguished by the greater freedom and influence allowed the female sex.  Nothing was added to or detracted from the epistle (letter) because women ran the church.  If Paul felt that women were inferior because of Biblical admonition and standards, he was morally bound to correct and change the existing practice of women running the church in Philippi.  This once again shows us that the statements detailing female inferiority are not Paul’s statements.”[3]
     “Male superiority is based in sexual exploitation and domination.  Paul handled this claim in I Thessalonians 4:4, 5:  ‘That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour; Not in the lust of concupiscence [sexual desire], even as the Gentiles which know not God.’  Every one of you (men and women) should know how to possess his vessel (control his body) in sanctification (consecration) and honor.”[4]  This is telling us that everyone has the ability to overcome sexual desire!
     That being said, it is the woman’s responsibility not to get pregnant, and she can best do this by not having sex.  Men grow up!  You do not need sex either.  You only believe you need sex.  Are you really a man or are you going to allow yourself to be whipped by sexual desire?   If any man or woman realizes the Truth, that there is no sensation in matter, then they will not have any sexual desire.  Eventually men (and women) must become like the angels – having no sex, no copulation.  This will happen when we accept “the unity of male and female as no longer two wedded individuals, but as two individual natures in one; and this compounded spiritual individuality reflects God as Father-Mother, not as a corporeal being.  In this divinely united spiritual consciousness, there is no impediment to eternal bliss, — to the perfectibility of God’s creation.” (S&H 577:5)
     I know of a Christian Scientist man who is against circumcision because (he says) it dulls the sensation a man feels in his pointer.  Well, this man is not being a Christian Scientist if he says such things.  Why?  Because, Christian Science tells us, “There is no sensation in matter.”  Is not a man’s pointer made up of matter?  Can a Christian Scientist enjoy sex, having sensation in matter, and be able to cast out pain (a different type of sensation in matter)?  You cannot have it both ways.  You cannot get rid of pain (evil in matter) and keep pleasure (good in matter).  Both must be excommunicated from the body or else you remain a member of the organized body.  And perhaps this is the real reason why Christian Scientists refuse to give up organized church?
     “The eastern empires and nations owe their false government to the misconceptions of Deity there prevalent.  Tyranny, intolerance, and bloodshed, wherever found, arise from the belief that the infinite is formed after the pattern of mortal personality, passion, and impulse.” (S&H 94:12)
     As mentioned earlier, Paul’s work was a revelation and based upon the works of Jesus Christ.  So his teachings must have reflected the teachings Jesus had about women.
     Women of the world, it would not take very much for you to loose what rights you have today.  There is still a war being waged against Womanhood.  You may ask why?  It is because the second coming of Christ came as a woman!  She was the fulfillment of Bible prophecy.  But this Truth has been hidden, obscured, and lied about for over 100 years now.  And much of the lies have been told via the woman’s own Church followers.  “Either we stand with our Lord’s concept of womanhood or we stand with [what the false Scripture puts forth about womanhood] what seems to be Paul’s.  If [what seems to be] Paul’s is true, Jesus’ is false and vice-versa; then the only obvious answer is that Paul’s words were tampered with.  Insertions and deletions that change the meaning were not in the original.  There are many such things in the Bible and we can all look forward to the time when all that is false is removed and the original text will stand alone.
     “All of the additions, changes and deletions in Paul’s writing show us the lengths to which mortal mind will go to take away references to the spiritual seed of the woman and deny her place.  Do not think times have changed and that the Judaisers are quiet.  The ‘dogs’ are howling more now than ever before.  The woman on the Sentinel has been removed.  Mary Baker Eddy’s place has been suppressed.  The Board calls themselves leaders and successors to Mary Baker Eddy [they sit in her high chair or her place].  The graphic art on the cover of the Quarterly, placed there by Mrs. Eddy, has been removed.  There is almost no gratitude in the Sentinel or [The] Journal for our Leader.  Most churches desire male First Readers and some openly refuse to have a woman as First Reader [who read from Science and Health].  These are just a few of the violations but a long list could be compiled.  It will take great love on the part of us all to successfully heal this dangerous condition that has developed in the bosom of our church.”[5]
     During the time of Jesus and Paul, Greece was replacing their female goddess with the male god Zeus and women’s roles in Greece were also becoming subordinate to men, which was a reversal of what they had been previously.  The Romans were also being falsely influenced in this direction.  Apollo is noted for saying, “The mother is no parent of that which is called her child; but only nurse of the new-planted seed that grows.  The parent is he who mounts.”  Jesus saw what was happening, he understood, and so he stood up for women and their rolls in society, he included them in his group as deacons.  Paul also understood this trend.

The Two Witnesses of Bible Prophecy

     There are two witnesses mentioned in Revelation 11.  These two witnesses are the two Christ advents; they are the two great lights in Genesis 1.  They are the bringers of spiritual Light.  Jesus was the first witness and Mary Baker Eddy was the second witness.  “Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world:  he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.” (John 8:12)  Dummelow says, “The idea of the Messiah as ‘the Light’ was familiar to the Jews[6] and was especially appropriate at the Feast of Tabernacles, during which the two colossal golden candlesticks in the Court of the Women were lighted.”  During the Feast of Tabernacles Jesus said, “I am the light of the world.”  He understood his place in Bible prophecy as one of the two great lights in Genesis 1.

     Zechariah 4:11-14 speaks of these two witnesses as being two olive trees.  “Then answered I, and said unto him, What are these two olive trees upon the right side of the candlestick and upon the lift side thereof?  And I answered again, and said unto him, What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves?  And he answered me and said, Knowest thou not what these be?  And I said, No, my lord.  Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.”
     It is interesting that Isaiah 53 is not read, by the Jews, during the holy days, as it once was.  It is called “bad conscience of the synagogues” because it provides Scriptural prophecy of Jesus.  “Isaiah predicted that his people would reject the very one they eagerly looked for; he would not defend himself at his own trial; he would make ‘his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death….’  The events of Jesus’ life fulfilled this prophecy of Isaiah and fit exactly so the Jews would accept his position and place, yet they would not.”[7]
     Zechariah 11:12, 13 also describe the Messiah (the first coming of Christ).  The main reason that Christianity fell in 325 a.d. is because the disciples had a hard time accepting Jesus’ place in Bible prophecy.  Today we stand the same risk of falling into another Dark Age because Christian Scientists are rejecting Mary Baker Eddy’s place in Bible prophecy.
     We must ask ourselves if the disciples were faithful to Jesus, if they loved him.
     “The ignoble conduct of his disciples towards their Master, showing their unfitness to follow him, ended in the downfall of genuine Christianity, about the year 325, and the violent death of all his disciples save one.” (Mary Baker Eddy’s Message of 1902; 18:25)
     Peter knew women had rights, but he did not care.  He was disloyal to Jesus, remember he denied him three times!  Check out I Peter 3:1, 7.  And what church was founded upon Peter the man?  Need we say any more as to why women have been denied rights in the Roman Catholic Mother Church?  John was the only disciple (of the twelve) that understood the importance of womanhood’s status and it is for this reason that he was chosen to write the book of Revelation.
     Why did the male author of the Gospel make Jesus’ genealogy be of Joseph instead of Mary?  Was this not an attempt of “male ego” to deny the virgin birth of Jesus?  Perhaps it was also because at that particular time you were not considered a Jew unless you had a human father (the one on top during sex), because the woman could not possible be the mother.  In Matthew 15:12 the disciples question Jesus, “Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying [that it is not what goes into the mouth but what comes out of the mouth that defiles a man]?”  In Matthew 16:22, Peter rebukes Jesus!  In Matthew 26:7-13, the disciples are upset that the woman with the box of precious ointment pours it on Jesus’ head.  They thought she was wasting it.  Did these men see it as Jesus’ acceptance that he was being anointed as the Christ-King?  Is this not what they were really objecting to?  They wanted Jesus to send away the woman of Canaan, in Matthew 15:22-28, as fast as possible.  This showed their hatred for womanhood.  They did not like the fact that he even spoke to a woman Samaritan in John 4:27.  Originally, the Israelites lived in Samaria, this was before they were taken into Assyrian captivity and then called the “ten lost tribes.”  Samaria, being a part of Israel, represented womanhood.  Yet, those who took over the land were not Israelites, and that is why a  “Jew would not address a Samaritan, a heathen race of people, and a man, particularly a rabbi, would not speak to a woman in public.”[8]  But Jesus initiated his conversation with the woman by the well.  “She understood what he was doing, and saw the importance of both points, for she asked, ‘How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria?’ (Emphasis added.)  Speaking with a woman was considered to be much more of a violation of Jewish law than speaking with a Samaritan.  For the first time in his ministry, Jesus announced to a woman of Samaria that he was the Messiah.  This was a very important point and those who wrote the New Testament understood its importance or would not have included it.  The Samaritan woman had had many husbands and lived with men; thus showing that women without a husband, were unable to make a living outside of prostitution.”[9]
     The disciples were unable to stay awake in the garden (Matthew 26:40).  They did not support Jesus, and then Peter cuts off a soldier’s ear.  Peter’s male energy betrayed Jesus three times before the cock crowed.  The four Gospels are full of accounts where the disciples objected to what Jesus did.  And it is this same mentality of male energy that defies the second witness – the woman God-crowned – Mary Baker Eddy.
     One thing the men despised about Jesus was that he was women’s advocate.  Jesus was sent to set the women free.  The Jews saw their women as chattel.  “The Pharisees held all women as inferior and placed them in mental bondage.  Jesus never said one word which indicated his approval of women being treated as inferior beings and as chattel, slaves.  In fact, evidence in the Gospels points to exactly the opposite viewpoint.  Jesus was constantly refuting and overturning the limited claims of the scholastic theology of his day, and the primary point of this limited theology was the second chapter of Genesis, — a humanistic God, supremacy of men and the inferiority of women.  Jesus put himself in danger, perhaps more because of his defense of women, than on any other issue.”[10]
     While Paul Smillie seems to think that the second account of Genesis is a “male-inspired document” I am not so sure that it was meant that way.  I think that it was spiritually inspired to teach us the counterfeit process of creation, the opposite of the way depicted in Genesis 1-2:3.  I think man needed the second creation story to understand the workings of the red serpent (animal magnetism).  I also think that Genesis 2:6 onward – with its material creation account – was misinterpreted in the way that Paul Smillie speaks of, not only by the Jews but also by the Christians.  He says that it “attempts to show that man gave birth to woman, and that she was a sort of miscreation because she was responsible for the original sin of disobedience.  This account allots to men a position they never had.  All maltreatment women have suffered through the centuries has been based upon this supposed Biblical authority, but this is the complete reversal of the first chapter of Genesis by scholastic theology.  It was Eve [it was actually the woman, later misidentified by Adam man to be renamed Eve] who saw the nature of the serpent; it was she who uncovered it.  Adam was ‘with her’ when she was tempted and did nothing to dissuade or protect her [what a failed hero!].  The Lord God had spoken directly to Adam about the forbidden fruit, but not to [the woman, later misidentified as] Eve.  Therefore, through [the higher idea known as woman] Eve would become the remedy for the serpent. (Genesis 3:15[, 16])”[11]
     Another thing about Adam that most men fail to speak of is that if Adam’s rib was removed from his body then he became incomplete, at that very moment he became un-holy!  So how could this mud-man ever ascend to heaven?  And if that is the case, then is not the Lord God Jehovah (who is really Adam’s idea, Adam’s conception, of what God is or should be instead of Adam being God’s idea of what man is or should be as depicted in Genesis 1) really the culprit of Adam’s imperfection and his falling from Grace?  I think so, and I think the men of the religious churches should begin to take a different look at this story about Adam!
     Let it not be heard in Boston that woman, “last at the cross and first at the sepulchre,” has no rights which man is bound to respect.  In natural law and in religion the right of woman to fill the highest measure of enlightened understanding and the highest places in government, is inalienable, and these rights are ably vindicated and its moral and religious reforms.  (Mary Baker Eddy’s No and Yes; 45:13)
     “Palestinian women were accorded an inferior status and were held in about the same esteem as were the slaves in this country prior to the United States Civil War.  Women were not permitted to study the Torah (the Jewish Scriptures).  Eliezer, a vile first century rabbi, said, ‘Rather should the words of the Torah be burned than entrusted to a woman…Whoever teaches his daughter the Torah is like one who teaches her lasciviousness.’  Women, children, and slaves, could not recite the Shema, the morning prayer, nor prayers at meals.  There was a threefold thanksgiving recited by the Jews in their daily prayers:
     “Praised be God that he has not created me a gentile; praised by God that he has not created me a woman; praised by God that he has not created me an ignorant man.
     “By praising God for the first two, he is an ignorant man!
     “In the synagogues, women were separate from the men, and not permitted to read aloud or to take any leading function.  Many Christian Science churches will not elect a woman as First Reader.  Rabbis would not even speak to women in public.  Greetings from men to women were not allowed.  Some Jewish thinkers, if they could be called thinkers, believed women should not be allowed to leave their households except to go to the synagogue and fulfill their subservient role.  Girls were not allowed to cross the threshold that separated the male and female apartments of the household.  One rabbinical saying was, ‘Even the most virtuous woman is a witch.’  Christianity was woman’s greatest friend.  Jesus held women in equality with men, in society, and in religion.
     “Jesus taught women the spiritual meaning of the Scriptures, and the great truths that were to be learned from them.  Women followed Jesus and learned at his feet.  As women were not allowed to receive instruction from a rabbi, this did not go unnoticed.  In Luke, several women are mentioned by name in the same sentence with the twelve disciples:
     “And it came to pass afterward, that he went throughout every city and village, preaching and shewing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God:  and the twelve were with him.  And certain women, which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils.  And Joanna the wife of Chuza Herod’s steward, and Susanna, and many others, which ministered unto him of their substance.

Luke 8:1-3 (See also Mark 15:40)

     “The Greek word translated here as ‘provided for’ and in Mark as ‘ministered to’ is dickonoun, the same basic word as ‘deacon,’ indeed, the tasks of the deacons in early Christianity were much the same as these women undertook.  The significance of this should not be discounted.  Paul also spoke of women as being heads of churches.”[12]

“Did the Apostle Paul Forbid Women to Speak?
     “‘Let the women keep silent in the congregations,’ wrote the apostle Paul. (1 Corinthians 14:34)  What did he mean?  Was he belittling their intelligence?  No.  In fact, he often referred to the wholesome teaching of women. (2 Timothy 1:5; Titus 2:3-5)  In his letter to the Corinthians, Paul advised not only women but also individuals who had the gift of tongues and prophecy to “keep silent” when another believer was speaking. (1 Corinthians 14:26-30, 33)  Likely some Christian women were so enthusiastic about their newfound faith that they interrupted the speaker to ask questions, as was the custom in that part of the world.  In order to avoid such disorder, Paul encouraged them to “question their own husbands at home.” – 1 Corinthians 14:35.” (From the same Watchtower, page 9.)
     When Jesus raised Jairus’ daughter he was laughed to scorn because of scholastic theology.  Jesus had compassion upon a girl, a female.  No rabbi would have had compassion upon the girl, little loan have been able to raise her from the dead.  He touched the girl’s body, which made him ritually unclean, according to rabbinical belief, a.k.a., scholastic theology.  Jesus also raised Lazarus because of two other women, the sisters of Lazarus.
     In Leviticus’ fifteenth chapter women were considered unclean for at least two weeks of every month.  If they touched anything during their menstrual cycle and the week after it was said to be unclean.  And anyone who touched said items became unclean.  Leviticus 15 states that the woman is unclean after the birth of her children, because the woman bleeds for a certain amount of time after delivery.  But the time of uncleanness was longer if she gave birth to a daughter.  She could not touch anything sacred or go to the temple for fifty days after having a daughter it was forty days for a son.  I find it interesting that this chapter also says that a man and a woman are both unclean after copulating!  If this is true then sex is a bad and an evil thing.  Do people of today accept this as being so or do people just see this as being out dated religious rules?
     In Deuteronomy 22:20, 21, it states that if after being married that the husband finds no evidence of blood, which was the sign that the woman was a virgin, that he could return her to her parents.  Then her parents had to take her to the door of her home and the men of the city were allowed to “stone her with stones” until she died.  Deuteronomy 22:28, 29, deals with a raped woman.  The man who rapes the virgin female, if she is not already engaged, must go to her parents and pay her father silver and then marry her, he gets to become her husband!  Wow, is not it nice that the woman must live with a man who raped her?  He hated her so much that he commits a crime against her and then makes her his slave?  And this was legal by the law?  I do not believe that God is so cruel to want that for women.
     “Exodus 22:16, 17 states that any man who seduced a maid, not betrothed to another man, the seducer, according to the law, had to marry her.  However, if the woman’s father did not want to give her to the seducer, the father had to pay the seducer the required dowry anyway [“he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins”].  The woman had no voice in the matter.”[13]  This sounds to me like if a dishonest man wanted money and possessions all he had to do was to go find some virgin woman and rape her.  Why, such a man could even make a business out of it!
     Deuteronomy 24:1, 2, records that if a couple marries and the husband changes his mind and decided he did now want her as his wife, he only had to write her a “bill of divorcement,” put it in her hands, and tell her to get out of his tent.  Of course, it was up to the first husband’s judgment as to how his new wife was unclean (that was the stipulation for the divorce, that he found her to be unclean).  And it seems to get worse from that point onward.
     This one is really good, it sort of goes along with how people use to try and prove if a woman was a witch!  In Numbers 5:12-31, it is “recorded that if a man suspected his wife was sleeping with another man, he would take her to the priest for a trial which consisted of some bitter water that she had to drink.  When she drank the water, there was a prescribed waiting period for whatever the water contained to take effect.  If, after the time allotted, her stomach swelled and her thighs (genitals) became infected, the woman was considered adulterous.  She was then considered to be a curse among her people and not able to have any more children.  It was certainly an easy way to rid oneself of an unwanted wife and make it appear that you had just cause for the action.”[14]  Now, since the Scripture says that it was God giving Moses these instructions then I can only assume that God would have kept the woman from suffering the “curse” if she had been innocent.  But if this was a man made ritual and God had nothing to do with it, all I can say is that the woman put under this type of circumstance had better know how to demonstrate Christian Science!
     Jewish law and custom told women that they were not allowed to be where men were gathered.  When Jesus spoke to the woman at Simon the Pharisee’s dinner it was not well taken.  To address an inferior woman in public, an outcast, was unthinkable.  But Jesus spoke to her with Love.
     The rabbis brought an adulterous woman to Jesus for stoning.  “She was not a prostitute, nor was she married.  The death penalty for adultery, if a married woman, was by stoning, and for a woman betrothed it was by stoning.”[15]  However, the law from Deuteronomy 22:22-24 states that both the “man and the woman were to be stoned but, in this case, where was the man?  Jesus said to the woman’s accusers, ‘He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her,’ and, by this declaration, used their own conscience to convict them.  Jesus said to her, ‘Go and sin no more.’”[16]
     Jesus healed the woman with the issue of blood.  She knew that she was considered to be unclean because of the blood, but she had suffered from it for twelve years.  (See Matthew 9)    She did not wish to bring notice to herself, nor did she wish to bring attention to Jesus by touching his garment.  But she felt she must touch it, and if she did she would be healed.  “Scholastic theology, rabbinical tradition, taught that God was displeased with her, and anyone or anything she touched was also considered unclean or, for that matter, anyone who touched what she had touched was considered unclean.  Can you imagine having such a serious physical problem and society turns on you, in spite of the fact that you had broken no moral law?”[17]  Jesus, however, recognized her predicament.  He knew that she had mentally reached out to him “touched him.”  He was not ashamed or afraid of what others thought, so he brought to their attention this woman’s trouble and then healed her.  He did not care that she had touched him.  And was not this belief of becoming unclean after being touched by a woman just superstition?  Of course it was, and Jesus understood this very fact!
     Being unclean, however, must have been an idea in the ancient land before Moses even wrote the law.  It was because Rachel, Jacob’s wife, had stolen her father’s idols that he pursued after Jacob and his family.  When he went into Rachel’s tent she was sitting on her camel saddle.  Her father avoided searching the saddle because she told him that she was having her period.
     There is the fact that the Law was given to the Israelites by Moses because they did seem to need guidelines on how to act.  But eventually this Law became more of a hindrance to the people.  They were so concerned about being obedient to the Law that they ignored the Spirit of the Law.  And the Christ prophets came to help rise up the Israelites above the Letter of the Law to the Spirit of the Law.  It was because of their works that Jesus was able to come.  It was Jesus’ mission, in part, to help the people see a different viewpoint about the Law.  And it was Jesus who was able to break mortal law (physical laws) while yet being obedient to the Spirit of the Law.  Jesus understood that it was not the outside (or blood) that made a man unclean; he knew that it was a man’s innermost thoughts that made him unclean.
     Once when Jesus was in the temple, he called a woman to him so that he could heal her.  This violated the rules of Jewish law (the Letter of the Law).  In Matthew 19:9 we read:  “And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery:  and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.”  His disciples replied, “If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.” (verse 10)  They understood what Jesus was saying about women having rights and responsibilities equal to men.  But that does not mean that they liked what he meant!  Under Jewish law, men were allowed to have more than one wife, while the woman was only allowed to have one husband.  What Jesus said was that there really was no good reason for divorce, they could not just give the woman a writ of divorce and send her packing, nor could he initiate divorce without there being adultery involved.
     “Rabbinical lore stated that women could not be taught spiritual concepts or have a part in religious teaching, but Jesus refuted this.”[18]  When Martha complained about Mary hanging out with Jesus instead of helping her with womanly chores he “rebuked her by saying that Mary had chosen the better part and that it would not be taken from her.”[19] Mary had achieved a mastery over what scholastic theology claimed about female subservience, she became free from this dogma.  “Jesus was not saying or implying that housework was wrong or inferior but that there was a time for it, and not when the opportunity for spiritual enrichment was at hand.”[20]

Luke 11:27 – Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked.”

     The woman that said this to Jesus had been indoctrinated by scholastic theology into believing the false viewpoints about women throughout history as being sex objects.  “Jesus did not appreciate a reference to his life in terms of the female reproductive system and breasts.  He did not take this as a compliment, but refuted it.  He totally rejected this prevailing view of women.  ‘But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.’  Jesus rejected the role of women as progenitors of the mortal race and this as their sole function in life.  In this instance, Jesus was saying, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it rather than those men and women who see woman’s role as a sexual one.
     “Jesus could always be found defending womanhood and fighting against male energy.[21]  One Bible version reads:

Mark 12:38-40 – Beware of those experts in religion, for they love to parade in dignified robes and to be bowed to by the people as they walk the street.  And how they love the seats of honor in the synagogues and at religious festivals.  But even while they are praying long prayers with great outward piety, they are planning schemes to cheat widows out of their property.  Therefore, God’s heaviest sentence awaits these men.

     Hum, this is exactly what three men of The First Church did in 1910 to Mary Baker Eddy – they schemed to cheat her out of her property, her estate, and then sat in her high seat.

Luke 9:48 – Whoseoever shall receive this child in my name receiveth me:  and whosoever shall receive me receiveth him that sent me:  for he that is least among you all, the same shall be great.

     Who was it that cared for the children?  The women cared for them.  In order for the disciples to express greatness they had to adopt the qualities of Womanhood, like the women did.  One “definition of the term ‘least’ in the original Greek means ‘smallest in dignity.’  Here Jesus was saying, he that is ‘smallest in dignity’ among his followers will be great.  Women were accorded the least amount of dignity at that time, thus Jesus was announcing the importance and esteem womanhood deserved and would hold at a later date.”[22]
     It was also the woman’s way to pray in a humble manner, not publicly.  (See Matthew 6:1, 6)  This probably did not go over well with the male disciples.  They also objected when Jesus began to wash their feet because it was a woman’s job.
     It was Jesus’ building up of womanhood that made his accusers say, “He stirreth up the people.”
     Women had the same status as slaves and children.  When Jesus said, “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” (Matthew 18:20)  Jesus did not say that the two or three gathered were men.  This phrase included anyone – slave, child, woman, or man.

     During Jesus’ life it was customary to keep women (barefoot? and) pregnant.  Among many Christians this custom is still going on.  I have heard many Christian women (mothers) speak in public.  They sounded as if their sole duty was to their husbands and their sole purpose was to have children.
     In the times of Jesus men were show offs, they tried to prove their superior virility and masculinity by how many children they could crank out.
     It was man’s hatred for women, caused by the red dragon of ecclesiastical despotism that placed obstacles down to block mankind’s spiritual progress.  “Many men in the Christian Science Movement loudly proclaim their love for Jesus.  Let us see if they are like the disciples of old, or will they follow their Master and John, and accord women their proper place.  Is it any wonder why a woman’s humble leadership of her own Cause is resisted by men calling themselves Christian Scientists?  Has the thinking of mankind changed?”[23]
     Not much!  What woman is it most important to accord with her proper place?  It is Mary Baker Eddy.  All Christian Scientists must accept her proper place in Bible prophecy!

The Ten Virgins but Where is the Bride?

     One example, of this war toward one particular woman, the Bride, is given in the parable of the ten virgins.
     “We are all familiar with the parable of the ‘Ten Virgins’ in Matthew 25.  Dummelow tells us that the whole of this chapter is concerned with the Second Advent.  It is interesting to note that there is no bride for this wedding.  There was a bride in the original text, but the translators of the King James Version, all men, left her out as they could not understand why the bride should be part of the Second Advent.  (See Moffatt’s translation.)  It would seem that throughout the centuries and today, woman’s place in the Bible prophecies has been deliberately hidden, but those who understand the nature of the serpent know the reason for this obscuration.  (See Genesis 3:15[, 16].)
     “All of the ten virgins are considered good, but only five shall be able to enter the marriage.  Five had some oil, but not enough.  ‘Oil.  Consecration; charity; gentleness; prayer; heavenly inspiration.’ (S&H 592:25)  All the virgins, we can be sure, read their lesson, go to church, contribute monetarily and do the outward duties of a Christian Scientist, but only the consecrated ones with sufficient oil can enter—only those who see their Leader’s place and prepare for the wedding of Science and Christianity and the feast it brings.  ‘And Jesus said unto them, Can the children of the bridechamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast.’ (Matthew 9:15)  Note that Jesus identifies himself as the bridegroom.  So who is the bride?”[24]

The Most Important Woman

Proverbs 31:1 – The words of king Lemuel, the prophecy that his mother taught him.

Proverbs 31:10-31 – Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price is far above rubies.  The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil.  She will do him good and not evil all the days of her life.  She seeketh wool, and flax, and worketh willingly with her hands.  She is like the merchants’ ships; she bringeth her food from afar.  She riseth also while it is yet night, and giveth meat to her household, and a portion of her maidens.  She considereeth a field, and buyeth it:  with the fruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard.  She girdeth her loins with strength, and strengtheneth her arms.  She perceiveth that her merchandise is good:  her candle goeth not out by night.  She layeth her hands to the spindle, and her hands hold the distaff.  She stretcheth out her hand to the poor; yea, she reacheth forth her hand to the poor; yea, she reacheth forth her hands to the needy.  She is not afraid of the snow for her household:  for all her household are clothed with scarlet.  She maketh herself coverings of tapestry; her clothing is silk and purple.  Her husband is known in the gates, when he sitteth among the elders of the land.  She maketh fine linen, and selleth it; and delivereth girdles unto the merchant.  Strength and honour are her clothing; and she shall rejoice in time to come.  She openeth her mouth with wisdom; and in her tongue is the law of kindness.  She looketh well to the ways of her household, and eateth not the bread of idleness.  Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her.  Many daughters have done virtuously, but thou excellest them all.  Favour is deceitful, and beauty is vain:  but a woman that feareth the Lord, she shall be praised.  Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own works praise her in the gates.[25]

     Proverbs 31 has an interesting description of the ideal woman.  I also find it interesting that this description, called a prophecy, comes from the king’s mother.  In the footnote on page 412 of the Amplified Old Testament, the compiler makes this important observation:
     Most unfortunately this description of God’s ideal woman is usually confined in reader’s minds merely to its literal sense — her ability as a homemaker, as was Martha of Bethany.  But it is obvious that far more than that is meant.  When the summary of what makes her price “far above rubies” is given (verse 30), it is her spiritual life only that is mentioned.  One can almost hear the voice of Jesus (Luke 10:42) saying, “Mary has chosen that good portion…which shall not be taken from her.”  Notice how each of the verses that follow suggests a spiritual meaning…In verse ten this rare woman’s worth is set as “far above rubies or pearls,” and no wonder, for she possesses within her the pearl of great price—she has “sold all she had and bought it” (Matt. 13:46).  “Many daughters have done…nobly and well…but you excel them all.”  This is a very great deal to be recorded of her, a woman in private life.  It means she had done more than Mirium, the leader of a nation’s women in praise to God; Deborah, the patriotic military advisor; Huldah, the woman who revealed God’s secret message to national leaders; Ruth, the woman of constancy; Hannah, the ideal mother; the Shunammite, the hospitable woman; and even more than Queen Esther, the woman who risked sacrificing her life for her people…In what way did she “excel them all”?  In her spiritual and practical devotion to God, which permeated every area and relationship of her life. …[26]
     This one Bible commentary discusses the ideal woman.  The tone definitely indicates that the Bible chapter is specifically talking about some one and not just a concept.  This ideal sense of woman must be fulfilled, just as the ideal sense of manhood had to be fulfilled by Jesus Christ.  “This would be a woman to excel all others.  If it were meant to be a mere concept for observation, the superior nature of this woman would not have been compared to other living women; otherwise, no woman could hope to live up to its promise.  As this woman is recognized to be greater than all other women, evidently the writer of this Proverb knew that eventually the ideal sense of womanhood would be manifested humanly, just as John knew that his concept of the ideal woman had to be manifested to humanity.  The ideal woman must be the one to bring the Science of God’s motherhood; she must be the one to bring forth the Comforter; she must be the one sent to establish God’s Mother Church.”[27]  This woman would be Mary Baker Eddy.
     Mary Baker Eddy accomplished more than any woman I know.  She managed all of her accomplishments during a time when women had fewer rights than men in the United States of America.  She accomplished it all without having the right to even vote in elections.  She wrote several editions of Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, she was head of the Metaphysical College, she became Leader of The First Church of Christian Scientist in Boston, Massachusetts,[28] she wrote other books, she had a book of poems, there was also her illustrated poem Christ and Christmas, she created a publishing society that would publish The Journal, the Sentinel, Der Herold, the Bible Lessons with the Quarterly, her books, 88 editions of the Church Manual, and The Christian Science Monitor newspaper.  She eventually made a lot of money, much of it she donated.  And these are only the business accomplishments of her life.
     Business was not all that she did.  She Discovered Christian Science, she Founded the Church of Christ Scientist of which she was and still is Leader of.  But she also healed when she manifested the works that Jesus Christ manifested.  She followed the words of Jesus Christ, the Bible, and God.  She cast out sin, she healed the sick, she cleansed the lepers (the terminally diseased), and she raised the dead.  She calmed the storms (was not afraid of the snow) and walked on water.  And although she did not literally feed the multitude with physical food she did feed the multitude’s spiritual hunger with the “little open book.”  For this was its purpose, to feed the multitude’s famished affections.
     “Chapter forty of Isaiah concerns the latter-day restoration of Israel.[29]  Verse nine reads, ‘O Zion, that bringest good tidings…’ Dummelow, a noted Bible commentator, says this should have been translated, ‘O thou that tellest good tidings to Zion…., “Thou that tellest” is feminine in Hebrew.  The prophet in spirit sees a maiden, or company of women (Ps. 68:11), bringing the news.’  Psalms 68:11 relates to the above passage, for it reads:  ‘The Lord gave the word:  great was the company of those that published it.’  Moffatt says, ‘When the Lord sent news of victory, the women who told it were a mighty host.’  Notice how all references in the original to a woman and/or women were deliberately obscured by male translators.”[30]  I find this quote to be of most interest, as it fits in with the way things are today, for who is really publishing the Word about the woman?  It is not The First Church, run by a majority of men.  It is women.  Women like Sharon R. Smillie, Dorothy Grekel, Ann Beals, Julie O. Treadwell (based upon Helen Wright’s work), and Martha Jones-Smith.
     “Isaiah prophesied of a virgin who would conceive and bear a son whose name would be Immanuel.  [Jesus’ name was not Immanuel, it was Jesus, so was Isaiah really speaking about Jesus here?]  He saw God’s love for mankind manifested through a pure sense of womanhood.  Isaiah’s judgments against Judah are strong, but he also foretells the loving-kindness of God.  He saw the ‘rod out of the stem of Jesse [the father of David], and a Branch’ which would ‘grow out of his roots…’ (Isaiah 11:1)[31]  Foreseeing the terrible onslaught against Israel in the latter days, Isaiah also prophesied the victory of God’s saints and His Church; he saw only a small remnant but strong enough to claim the victory.  (Isaiah 16:14)  Isaiah said that God ‘will destroy in this mountain [nation in prophetic terms] the face of the covering cast over all people, and the veil that is spread over all nations.’ (Isaiah 25:7)  He understood that his Father would destroy the claim of mesmerism [which the woman would call animal magnetism] cast over all the people, and knew that it would be accomplished in God’s latter-day Israel through the teachings of the woman recorded in the little book, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures.
     “Isaiah saw Zion fulfilling its purpose in the latter days:”[32]

Isaiah 33:20 – Isaiah saw Zion, the city of our solemnities:  thine eyes shall see Jerusalem a quiet habitation, a tabernacle that shall not be taken down; not one of the stakes thereof shall ever be removed, neither shall any of the cords thereof be broken.

     Even Isaiah 33:24 speaks of Christian Science when the “inhabitant shall not say, I am sick….”
     “The first thirty-nine chapters of Isaiah are attributed to the Isaiah of the eighth century b.c., a prince of the royal house of Judah.  The fortieth chapter and those that follow are attributed to II Isaiah, the great unknown prophet of the Babylonian captivity, who evidently hid his work in the writings of the first Isaiah.  The second Isaiah saw very clearly the vision of perfection and all that pertained to it.  He defined the true mission of Israel—and realized this mission would be fulfilled through the daughter of Zion.”[33]
     It was Isaiah’s vision that Judge Septimus J. Hanna studied and he understood that it spoke of his Leader, Mary Baker Eddy as being the Daughter of Zion.

     “In a letter dated May, 1898, Mrs. Eddy speaks as follows of a vision she had:
     “… Twenty-one years ago, when the first revolt took place in our church, I had a vision, and uttered it.  We then had no funds, I no salary, and God few followers.  In this vision I prophesied great prosperity, plenty of money, blessings numberless, and the utterance was to the Daughter of Zion:  ‘She shall sit under her own vine and fig tree, and all peoples shall hear her gladly.’  That was when I had but one or two loyal students.  All had deserted in the darkest hour; the people scorned it, even those I raised instantly from the dream of death would shun me in the street.”[34]

Isaiah 54:1 – Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child:  for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the Lord.

     “Mary Baker Eddy had only one son born to her of the flesh, and in his early infancy he was surreptitiously taken from her and for years concealed.  He has always lived away from her, and yet so lives, although it was her intense desire that he should be with her and be her child in every sense of the word.  What mortal sense would call a strange and unaccountable fate has decreed otherwise, and neither son nor mother seems able to control the conditions which have separated them.  She is, therefore, to all intents and purposes, without a child of the flesh.  But what of her other children, — her spiritual children?  They are now numbered by the spontaneously and unanimously have they arisen and called her ‘Mother!’…Not in mockery or jest, but in the seriousness of profound conviction.  Yeah, her adherents call her their Mother and themselves her children as if by common impulsion, and that impulsion is known to them to be above the human.”[35]

Isaiah 54:2, 3 – Enlarge the place of thy tent, and let them stretch forth the curtains of thine habitations:  spare not, lengthen thy cords, and strengthen thy stakes; For thou shalt break forth on the right hand and on the left; and thy seed shall inherit the Gentiles, and make the desolate cities to be inhabited.

(The following is also from Hanna’s article.)

     The text book of Christian Science, “Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures,” is but a systematized amplification of the Mosaic Decalogue and the Sermon on the Mount.  The teachings of these constitute the groundwork of Christianity.  Were they fully understood and practised the Kingdom of Christ would have fully come.  To the extent that they are being understood and practised the Kingdom is coming into human consciousness, and the receiving of the Christ-Spirit into human consciousness is the true coming of His Kingdom.  Let it always be borne in mind by believers in the Bible that Jesus declared the evidence of the presence of the Kingdom to be the healing of the sick, the casting out of devils, the cleansing of lepers, and the raising of the dead.  Certainly these must be the evidences, for, carried to their ultimate effect, they comprehend the complete redemption of the human race.
     In so far as these evidences are being now brought into view through Christian Science, may it not be consistently claimed that the second-coming is here; and in so far as a single Woman has been the instrument of bringing these evidences into view, may it not be consistently claimed that she is the personal representative of that second-coming?  Is there anything far-fetched or unreasonable in this?
     Spiritualization of thought and action is love of God, and love of God is love of the brother.  The cords of this love are being rapidly lengthened through Christian Science; the stakes (solid foundation) of this love are being daily strengthened through practical works; literally are the demonstrators of this Science breaking forth on the right hand and on the left, and it requires not the eye of prophecy to see as the necessary result of this breaking forth that the seed “shall inherit the Gentiles (unbelievers), and make the desolate cities (barren aggregates of human thought) to be inhabited.”  If Christian Science is at all what it claims to be, this prophecy of Isaiah is even now in process of distinct fulfillment.  For the verity of its claims its adherents point with confidence to its works.

Isaiah 54:4, 5 – Fear not; for thou shalt not be ashamed:  Neither be thou confounded; for thou shalt not be put to shame:  for thou shalt forget the shame of thy youth, and shalt not remember the reproach of thy widowhood any more.  For thy Maker is thine husband; the Lord of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.

     When we recall the reproaches cast upon Mrs. Eddy because of her widowhood, especially by certain of the clergy, and think upon the irrepressible energy with which the tongue of slander has wagged against her, without any known or apparent reason, it is not strange that we read in the tender words of this prophecy God’s purpose to protect his child.
     Those who are in position to know of the inner life of Mrs. Eddy can most deeply appreciate the last of the above verses.  They know that she walks constantly with God, looking to Him for guidance in her every step, and relying upon Him alone for direction in the great religious movement of which she is the head.  Deeply was the writer impressed while sitting with her at her dining table in Concord not long since, when in childlike simplicity, yet with deepest seriousness, she said:  “I am learning more and more to take God with me into every detail of my life.”
     If it be possible for “a widow,” still living on this plane of existence, to make her “Maker her husband,” surely that widow is Mrs. Eddy.

Isaiah 54:6 – For the Lord hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou was refused, saith thy God.

     To those familiar with Mrs. Eddy’s life and career this is indeed literal prophecy.  None could be more so.  Alone, and often, in most trying times, forsaken by all but God, she trod the wine-press of her mighty endeavor, undismayedly yet with “bleeding footsteps,” fighting and wrestling and praying against the opposition of the world.  A “woman forsaken and grieved in spirit” at times, but rallying quickly in the majesty and might of the Maker who is her husband.  And well she might, for, whether she then knew it or not, God had said to her in explicit words, —

Isaiah 54:7 – For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee.

     To those who know, has there not been a startling fulfillment of this prophecy?  How often by some has that “small moment” been witnessed, and how quickly have they seen the gathering with great mercies.
     Not less literally have they witnessed the verification of this prophecy: —

Isaiah 54:8, 9 – In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the Lord thy Redeemer.

     For this is as the waters of Noah unto me:  for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee.
     If one who constantly walks with God, who lives the precepts of the Decalogue and the Sermon on the Mount, and who is giving her whole life to the work of enabling others so to live, does not come within these tender assurances, where shalt we find any who do?

Isaiah 54:10-17 – For the mountains shall depart, and the hills be removed; but my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed, saith the Lord that hath mercy on thee.

     Oh thou afflicted, tossed with tempest, and not comforted, behold, I will lay thy stones with fair colours, and lay thy foundations with sapphires.  And I will make thy windows of agates, and thy gates of carbuncles; and all thy borders of pleasant stones.  And all thy children shall be taught of the Lord; and great shall be the peace of thy children.  In righteousness shalt thou be established:  thou shalt be far from oppression; for thou shalt not fear:  and from terror; for it shall not come near thee.  Behold, they shall surely gather together, but not by me:  whosoever shall gather together against thee shall fall for thy sake.  Behold, I have created the smith that bloweth the coals in the fire, and that bringeth forth an instrument for his work; and I have created the waster to destroy.
     No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn.  This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord, and their is righteousness of me, saith the Lord.
     Could there be a more explicit fulfillment of this prophecy than the following, written by Mrs. Eddy to the writer, but with no reference whatever to the use we are now making of it, and not intended for publication at all, until by special request consent was obtained?  [See her letter above.]
     Millions are now hearing the “Daughter of Zion” gladly.  She is sitting under her own vine and fig-tree; God has prospered her and her Cause most bounteously in the financial and every other rightful way; she who was “afflicted, tossed with tempest, and (for a small moment) not comforted,” has literally witnessed the rich fulfillment of God’s promise to her:  “I will lay thy stones with fair colours, and lay thy foundations with sapphires.
     “And I will make thy windows of agates, and thy gates of carbuncles, and all thy borders of pleasant stones.”  Literally enough has this promise been redeemed in the material sense, but with overflowing abundance in the spiritual—present and prospective.
     But what of this material abundance?  To no selfish end is it being appropriated.  It is fast being converted into the Lord’s treasury.  Such use is being made of it as would be expected of one who in prophetic vision foresaw “prosperity, plenty of money, and blessings unnumbered,” for a sacred Cause.  (Hanna article to be continued…)
     Yet, the men who were businessmen of that time, before women had many rights or considered to be equals with men, despised the woman’s success, and wished to take over her Cause.  There is a joke I heard recently.  One woman asked another, “Do you consider women to be equal with men?”  The other woman said, “Most certainly not, women are superior to men!”  Of course, behind the joke is Truth, for woman is the higher idea.
     The Hanna article continues with an excerpt from an article from The Journal’s April 1898 publication.  The words are penned from Mary Baker Eddy herself.  “After four years from my discovery of Christian Science, while taking no remuneration for my labors, and healing all manner of diseases, I was confronted with the fact of no monetary means left wherewith to hire a hall in which to speak, or to establish a Christian Science Home for indigent students (which I yearned to do), or even to meet my own current expenses, and halted from necessity.
     “I had cast my all into the treasury to Truth, but where were the means with which to carry on a Cause?  To desert the cause never occurred to me, but nobody then wanted Christian Science, nor gave it a half penny.  Though sorely oppressed I was above begging,[36] and knew well the priceless worth of what had been bestowed without money or price.  Just then God stretched forth His hand.  He it was that bade me do what I did, and it prospered at every step…It was thus that I earned the means wherewith to start a Christian Science Home for the poor worthy student, to establish a Metaphysical College, to plant our first magazine, to purchase the site for a church edifice, to give my church the Christian Science Journal, and to keep the ‘wolves in sheep’s clothing,’ from preying upon my pearls, from clogging the wheels of Christian Science.” (Infuses added on the world “pearls.”  Hanna article to be continued.)

     The First Church of Christ Scientist was built during an economical depression.  It took nine months (of mental gestation) to build and finish the Church of Christ Stone.  Mary Baker Eddy knew that the deadline must be met and that it was mortal mind that was against the Church being completed on time.  But her faithful students, under her direction, finished the Edifice on time, before the deadline had come.  There was not one penny due to any vendor or building company!  Mary Baker Eddy was the one who sold the lot of land, for the Boston Edifice, at $1.00.  She also made countless contributions to indigent students and to charitable purposes outside The First Church.  She contributed “to branch churches and societies for building and other purposes, the transfer in toto[37] of the Publishing Society with all its property, prerequisites, and prospects, as well as her valuable residence on Commonwealth Avenue, to The Mother Church in perpetuity, and her latest donation in trust of four thousand dollars to the children of Scientists or ‘Busy Bees,’—these are some evidences of the sense in which this Daughter of Zion is sitting under her own vine and fig-tree and dispensing the wine of Life and the figs of Love to hungering and thirsting humanity.”[38]

     This illustration is a vignette.  It is Mary Baker Eddy’s “own vine.”  And what is more, it is her own trademark for Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures.  It was her legal copyright, yet the Boston Board of Directors throughout the years has erased her trademark from her book and replaced it with the Seal (of error) of the Cross and Crown.
     Can you see how Boston has been the dupes of the red dragon?
     I will follow with the rest of the Hanna article as follows in Smillie’s book.  The same article can be found in Bliss Knapp’s book, in the Appendix, Destiny of The Mother Church.
     This God-fearing, God-loving, and God-reflecting woman truly is witnessing the re-assuring and unmistakable evidences that her children are being “taught of the Lord.”  She can easily forsee that when they shall have imbibed and practiced the fulness of such teaching “Great will be the peace” of her “children.”
     Has not this Daughter of Zion also witnessed the fulfillment of this promise of God:  “No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper”?
     Every form of opposition has been made against her and her teaching possible to humanity, saving only attempts to murder her in the ordinary or physical sense.  The mental assassin has exhausted his ingenuity and resources in his vain efforts.  But no weapon raised against her has prospered.  So much so that it is challenging the wonder and awe of the millions.
     We shall not stop to enlarge upon the “mighty works.”  They are becoming well known and widely recognized.  Read of some of them in this Journal, and in the newspapers and magazines of the country.  Hear of them in the weekly testimonial meetings.  Hear how thousands have been raised from beds of sorrow, sickness, and pain, to joy, and health, and hope; how despairing sinners have been around from the lethargy of hades to a sense of their manhood in Christ Jesus and their childhood in God; how agnostics have become unquestioning believers in the Divine power to heal and save; how atheists have come to know that god is, and that in Him they live, and move, and have their being; how infidels have been reclaimed from all unbelief; how skeptics have become convinced by proof they could no longer dispute; how drunkards have been redeemed from hells of woe and made to rejoice in freedom from their dread tormentor; how licentiates and libertines have been made to blush for their sins and turned toward abstinence and purity; how dishonesty is being made to quail and cringe before the majority of truth and Right; how hate and selfishness are being supplanted by self-sacrifice and love; how all the blighting and damning qualities of human thought are being uprooted and destroyed to the purification and spiritualization of such thought; and how those who have only recently been the unhappy victims of some or all of these death-dealing trammels are now proving their disenthralment by healing their neighbors of sickness and pointing the way to their salvation from sin, whilst healer and healed, saver and saved, are alike coming into the temple of the New Jerusalem, literally “leaping and shouting, and praising God.”
     Observe too, how rapidly beautiful and stately church edifices, reared in the name of, and dedicated to, the God of the living, not of the dead, are springing into existence all over our land; how one common sermon, compiled from the Eternal Word, is preached in more than five hundred places in this country, England, and the continental countries each recurring Sabbath, while the number is being almost weekly added to; how reading, and hearing these sermons read, are healing sickness and awakening sinners every Sabbath day; how the reading of the Bible and the books whose writing was divinely entrusted to the “Woman’s” hand, is daily healing sickness and saving sinners; how the Spirit of God, through these manifold instrumentalities, is indeed moving upon the face of the troubled waters of mortal discord to the calming thereof, and how the Light whereof God said, Let it be, and it was, is shining athwart the world’s horizon and glinting into the darkest recesses of mortal thought, — observe and think upon all this, and say:  Is not “this the heritage of the servants of the Lord,” and is not “their righteousness” of him?
     While, in the foregoing, we plainly see the Woman, as in other Scripture we see the Man, we look beyond all personality and as plainly see the Male and Female, — the universal Manhood and Womanhood comprehended in the Divine scheme, — and know that the ideal Manhood and Womanhood of God’s Word personally typified as we have shown, is, — must in the Divine order be, — the heritage of every son and daughter of God’s creating; and He created all.
     Hence we recognize personality in type only that we may thereby understand the unified Individuality of Father and Son, and Mother and Daughter, in the fullness of that Godhead whose second-coming is upon us, wherein we see “a new Heaven and a new earth.”  We see the man who was “despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief, oppressed and afflicted,” and we see also the Man of whom God said:  “Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death; and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sins of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.” (Isaiah, 53).
     We see also the woman of travail, spoken of in Isaiah, as before shown, and of whom God further spake in Jeremiah, 4:  “For I have heard a voice as of a woman in travail, and the anguish as of her that bringeth forth her first child, the voice of the daughter of Zion, that bewaileth herself, that spreadeth her hands, saying, Woe is me now! for my soul is wearied because of murderers,” and we see also the Woman of whom God said:  “Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things?  Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children” (Isaiah, 66).  “Behold, the Lord hath proclaimed unto the end of the world, Say ye to the daughter of Zion, Behold, thy salvation cometh” (Isaiah, 62).  And we read of the man and woman:  “For your shame ye shall have double; and for confusion they shall rejoice in their portion:  therefore in their hand shall they possess the double:  everlasting joy shall be unto them…And I will direct their work in truth, and I will make an everlasting covenant with them.  And their seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and their offspring among the people:  all that see them shall acknowledge them, that they are the seed which the Lord hath blessed” (Isaiah, 61).
     By way of epilogue to this effort to “render tribute where tribute is due,” and, in some small part, meet the imperative demands of the history of our times, we present herewith what seems to us a remarkable prophecy; a prophecy in direct line with the Scripture prophecies to which we have above referred.  Not let us sneer at the author’s claim that this is prophecy came to him as a vision and by apparently supernatural means.  Until we know more of God and his methods let us withhold our feeble, finite judgment, — unless we are ready to acknowledge that God does, in these latter days, speak to His faithful ones through vision and voice as He did of old.  We refer to an article entitled, “The Church in the Wilderness,” contained in a little book written in 1838 by the Rev. Gardiner Spring, Pastor of the Brick Presbyterian Church of New York, the work itself being entitled, “Fragments from the Study of a Pastor.”
     We should like to make some comments on this, to us[39] wonderful article, but space will not permit.  Let it be observed, however, that some of the Scriptural quotations are from the 54th Isaiah.
     It may be interesting to know how this somewhat ancient little book came to light at this particular time, and we will mention how.
     A faithful student of Mrs. Eddy’s sent it us, saying: —
     “I would like to tell you how the book came into my hands.  It is interesting to know how it came to light.  Two years ago last winter I was living in furnished house which I rented of a dear friend.  There was in the house a large number of books which once belonged to an old uncle.  I used to sit by a window when reading; close to this window stood a small bookcase filled mostly with small old books.  Two or three times, perhaps oftener, when sitting there the thought came, I wonder if there is not something among those books that would give light on the Bible, or explain its truth, and would say, Sometime I will look the books over.  One morning I was sorely tempted; after the morning’s work was finished I sat down with Science and Health to dispel the seeming error.  I had read but a short time when the thought again came that there might be something in the bookcase of value.  I looked at the books, took one out; the first or second—I cannot remember which was ‘The Church in the Wilderness.’  I commenced reading in the middle of the chapter, but the little I read healed me.  The next day as soon as I returned from church I read the whole chapter.  I then invited the students up to read it.  When I read it a year from that time I saw far more than at first.
     “I am filled with gratitude that I reflected God sufficiently to bring to light this marvelous history of the appearing of Truth.  It helped me to realize what our Mother is, as never before, for I knew I was reading of her experiences.  Also those of The Mother Church.”
     The “Mother Church” is the material expression of that church universal implied in the second-coming; but we ask, in all sincerity, could that Church have been thus expressed but for the labor, toil, and self-sacrificing devotion of the Daughter of Zion to whom its building was entrusted?
     The prophet Isaiah clearly saw the personalized Woman.  The Bible commentators, not discerning the fact of a female appearing as the type of the second-coming, naturally enough saw in Isaiah’s prophecy only the Church of Christ, apart from any particular person.
     These are evidences presented to mortal sense of the universal idea of the Church and of the Woman embraced in Revelation.

(End of article by Judge Hanna.)

     It must be asked why the Christian Science Church has stopped spiritually progressing.  It was really taking off in the first decade of the twentieth century.  What happened?  It must have to do with the fact that the students of Christian Science have stopped following their Forever Leader, Mary Baker Eddy.  They have turned away from her Light.  Why would they turn away from her Light and why would they deny her as their Leader, as the woman God-crowned?  It is because of the hatred that the red drag-on of ecclesiastical despotism, led by male energy, has for the woman; and the hate that this erroneous type of mentality has for any woman.  Jesus repudiated this type of hatred for women.  We should too!


     Reverend means “revered leader.”  In the 88the (legal) edition of the Church Manual it lists the Church Officers.  The HEAD Officer is listed as “Rev. [for Reverend] MARY BAKER EDDY.”  Below this is her title of “Pastor Emeritus.”  So, if the Church Manual says that Mary Baker Eddy is a Reverend, then she is the Revered Leader of The First Church of Christ Scientist, in Boston, Massachusetts!  Yet how many Christian Scientists refer to her as their Leader?  I am also sure, even though it is hard to make out in the pictures I have, that she is given the title of Reverend on the open pages of the Textbook found in the center hub of Window of the Open Book.

Mary Moor Baker
     Marion Moor McNeil (McNeil – son of a champion) was the name of Mary’s grandmother, Mark Baker’s mother.  There is no doubt that little Mary was named after her grandmother.  Moor was one of Mary’s family names.  The Moors were descendants of Scotland.  Moor means “dark moor, marshland.”
     “The Charles River once overflowed much of the Back Bay region where the church lot is situated; and, so near the harbor, the water was affected by even the lowest tides.  Foundation piles for building had to be driven down far enough to remain permanently under water, so as to be unaffected by atmospheric influences.  It was at first thought that our piling must be driven eighteen or twenty feet below the foundation grade, but hard ground was struck much nearer the surface.  A gentle man familiar with Back Bay before the land was filled in, states that our site was part of a point which was not always submerged.  Be that as it may, solid bottom was found on which the piles could rest, thus insuring a firm foundation.”[40]
     Would it be a strange coincidence that Mary Baker Eddy’s Church in Boston would be built in a marshland like area?  The foundation piles for the Church reached a rock foundation, the Petra (feminine form) that Christ’s true Church would be built upon (not upon Peter, the masculine form).
     Would is also be of importance that July 16, 1892 would be Mary Baker Eddy’s 71st birthday?  The same year that the law was passed that would enforce the building of The Mother Church be, “fire proof”?  Could the 71 years be symbolic of Love (7) and Mind (1) – as Mother (Love) Hood (Mind)?
     Marion means Mary “bitter, sea of bitterness.”
     “The prophet Micah saw the woman of prophecy in travail.  The book of Revelation also uses the word ‘travail’ to describe the woman.  The name ‘Mary’ means ‘rebellion, bitterness, sorrowful, unhappy.’  Wasn’t this woman in rebellion against established systems and practices?  The first half of Mrs. Eddy’s life shows how bitter materialism was to her, and the sorrow and unhappiness it brought her.  Could there be a better name to describe the woman in travail?  [Many Christians believe the woman in travail to be either the Virgin Mary or Mary Magdalene.]  We learn from Jesus (Matthew 13:33), that this woman is to have the leaven of heavenly understanding and will place it in three measures of meal till the whole is leavened.  Who else but a “Baker” would have leaven and meal?  The materially minded, however, rebel at such a suggestion.  The women who were prominent in the life of our Master were all named Mary.”[41]

Genesis 9:13, 16 – I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth…And the bow shall be in the cloud, and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant…”

     Mary Moor Baker was born in Bow, New Hampshire.  “The term ‘bow’ is, figuratively, one of promise and victory.  Humanly speaking, the everlasting covenant would be revealed at the time of the Second Advent.”[42]  The angel of Revelation 10 has the rainbow upon his brow (his head).  “This bow comes from the Greek word translated, ‘Iris,’ who was the female messenger of the Greek deities.  So we have the promised Comforter, a female messenger, coming forth from the bow.”[43]  Divine messengers also went and came “in the clouds.”
     Even the Iris flower is depicted on the Tarot card of this angel messenger.

     Let us look at the word “portentous.”  Mary Baker Eddy says, in Science and Health 562:28, of the woman God-crowned, that “the travail” she goes through is “portentous.”  According to Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary portentous means:  “of, relating to, or constituting a portent.”  Portent means, “1:  something that foreshadows a coming event: omen  2:  prophetic indication or significance  3:  marvel, prodigy.”  So it is clear that Mary Baker Eddy is telling us that this woman in travail foreshadows a coming event, or if I may be so bold, it foreshadows the second coming of Christ advent!  How many Christian Scientists have even understood the meaning of “portentous”?  I know I did not bother to look up its meaning until 2011.  I had no idea what the word meant until then.
     Mary Moor Baker was born on a Monday, a Moon-day.  She was destined to have her feet upon the moon.  The date was July 16, 1821.  July 16, 1969 was the date that Apollo eleven launched from Earth and headed for the moon.  July is also the month for the signs of Cancer and Leo.  Mary Baker Eddy is born under the sign of Cancer, and the Word (the Bride) is the Lion (or the Leo).  Then number 69, on its side, is used for the symbol of Cancer.  July is also the seventh month of the year, and Mary Baker Eddy gave to us the rainbow synonymous terms for God (all seven of them).  The number 16 stands for the divine calculus (4 x 4 = 16).  There are sixteen main chapters in Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures.  These sixteen chapters follow the matrix structure for the divine calculus.
     Going back to Apollo 11, the number 11 is 7 + 4.  Again we have the seven synonyms and the divine calculus, or we could even say that the ‘4’ represents the four levels of Science.  The Mother Ship (the Mother Church) was called the Columbia (dove = divine Science).  The lunar module’s name was the Eagle.  The flying eagle is the fourth living creature, the one for Science.  During the seven moon landings a total of twelve astronauts (like the twelve sons of Israel = the stars in the woman’s crown) walked upon the moon, had dominion over material forces.

The Glover
     Mary Baker’s first married name was Glover.  Glover means, “one that makes or sells gloves.”[44]  An early glove was called a gauntlet, which was a “glove to protect the hand worn with medieval armor.”  Surly, the Science and Health Textbook was woven (written) without seam or rent by the Glover woman.  A baseball mitt (glove) uses webbing (a matrix) to help catch the balls.  Mary Glover’s hand wrote the Textbook and it is her hand that protects all other hands (workers or employees of the woman).  She is the hand – that which leads, guides, or assists all other hands.
     Her legal signature was Mary Baker G. Eddy.  The “G” was always used for legal purposes and it is found that way in her Church ManualNothing could be carried out in the Church, after December 3, 1910, without her “hand” her “manual” signing to give legal permission with Mary Baker G. Eddy.

The Patterson
     Patterson is Mary Baker Glover’s second married name.  Patterson means “son of Patrick” and Patrick means “nobleman.”  Well, if she is the daughter of Patrick then she would be the “noble woman.”  She is the Sentinel’s type of Nobel Woman.



The Eddy

Joshua 22:34 – And the children of Reuben and the children of Gad called the altar Ed:  for it shall be a witness between us that the Lord is God.

Reuben (Jacob’s son).  Corporeality; sensuality; delusion; mortality; error. (S&H 593:12)

Gad (Jacob’s son).  Science; spiritual being understood; haste towards harmony. (S&H 586:21)

     Why would this Bible verse say “the children of Reuben and the children of Gad” when the two names are defined as total opposites?  Could it be because the Second Witness of Bible prophecy was sent to all of Jacob’s sons whether they are based deep in the First Degree or whether they are founded upon the Third Degree while being of the Second Degree (being that they are Jacob’s sons)?  Could one reason be that Reuben being the first son spiritually typifies divine Mind and that Gad being the seventh son spiritually typifies divine Love?  The two together represent Christianity and Mother (Love) Hood (Mind).
     “One of Mrs. Eddy’s early students, Mrs. Carpenter, who loved Mrs. Eddy, began to delve into the meaning of the word Eddy, expecting to find significance in her last name to add to those already recognized with respect to the names Mary and Baker.  The following is what she wrote:
     “In the first edition of his dictionary, Webster thus defines the noun eddy: ‘I find this word in no other language.  It is usually considered as a compound of the Saxon, ed, backward, and ea, water.  It means a current of water running back, or in a direction contrary, to the main stream.’
     “According to the Anglo-Saxon dictionary, ed as a prefix denotes anew, again.  As a noun it means safety, security, happiness, restoration, regeneration.  The word occurs once in the Bible in Joshua 22:34, as the name given to the altar erected by the children of Reuben and the children of Gad.  According to Pott’s Dictionary of Bible Proper Names, its translation is witness, testimony, recorder.  In Science and Health the name Reuben is defined as:  ‘Corporeality; sensuality; delusion; mortality; error.’  Gad is defined as ‘Science; spiritual being understood; haste towards harmony.’  When the children of Israel heard of the erection of this altar, they came to punish the children of Reuben and the children of Gad for this evidence of having turned away from following the Lord.  The answer came back that the altar was not being erected for burnt offering and sacrifice but as a witness for future generations ‘that your children may not say to our children in time to come, Ye have no part in the Lord…And the children of Reuben and the children of Gad called the altar Ed:  for it shall be a witness between us that the Lord is God.’
     “The Anglo-Saxon dictionary translates ‘ea’ as running water, a stream, a river, water.  This definition conveys the thought of purity.  Ea found in the Bible is notably translated river.  See Genesis 2:10, John 7:38, and Revelation 22:1, 2.  In that connection, the definitions of the four rivers in Genesis as given in Science and Health seem significant.  Ea is also given as the name of the deity in the religious system of Babylonia who is the healer of the sick.
     “Mrs. Carpenter sent her findings to Mrs. Eddy and received her Leader’s reply:


     Speaking of river in the above definition we should take a look at one of the four rivers in Genesis 2.

Gihon (river).  The rights of woman acknowledged morally, civilly, and socially.” (S&H 587:3)

     Notice that the definition of the river Gihon says the “rights of woman” not “the rights of women.”  So, this definition is pointing us to a certain woman – our Forever Leader – Mary Baker Eddy.  It is her rights that must be “acknowledged morally, civilly, and socially.”
     “Did Mrs. Eddy ridicule Mrs. Carpenter’s findings?  No, her letter plainly shows that she appreciated the information and ended her note with thanks and love for her student’s inspiration and insight.  There was not one word of criticism but, on the contrary, she stated that the work was ‘quite noticeable in some directions.’”[46]
     Today, I have found that the meaning of eddy is even more important, especially in Science Fiction.  An eddy is a vortex, that which is like a wormhole.  Without the eddy travel through the Stargate (from the movie and television shows) would be impossible (if it really were to happen that is).  An eddy current also creates a perfect circle.  The circle I call a Stargate happens to be Window of the Open Book (on the southern wall of the Boston Edifice [Eddy-fice]) – Mary Baker Eddy’s window depicting her little open book in the hub.  The rotation of this window (from inside the church) is an eddy movement where the cycle moves in a counterclockwise movement.  Mary Baker Eddy did move in the opposite direction of mortal minded personas, she was an eddy current!
     Some other prophecies relating to the woman, in the Bible, are as follows:  the third chapter of Genesis which “relates the remedy for evil as coming through the lineage of”[47] the woman, later to be misidentified as “Eve and not of Adam, — that a woman would bring the final remedy, and not a man.  Isaiah 54 gives us a definite description of the life of this woman.  Matthew 16:18 infers that a woman will build the church of Jesus.  A lady with a lamp was to search her house (consciousness) and find the lost coin, the lost meaning of the First Commandment.  Mrs. Eddy explains Daniel’s dates that point to 1866 and 1875, two very important dates in her discovery of the Christ, Science.”[48]  I have found that the lioness that is in Ezekiel is a prophecy of Mary Baker Eddy too.
     Mary Baker Eddy had her Christ Healing on February 4, 1866.  Science and Health’s first edition (eddy-tion) was published in 1875.

[1] MARY BAKER EDDY The Prophetic and Historical Perspective ; by Paul R. Smilie, p. 106

[2] Ibid, p. 107

[3] Ibid, p. 107, 108 (more examples are given on pages 108 and 109)

[4] Ibid, 108

[5] Ibid, p. 109

[6] The Jews were comprised of the three tribes of Judah, Levi, and Benjamin after the twelve tribes split up.  After the ten tribes of Israel were taken into captivity by Assyria they became the ten lost tribes.

[7] MARY BAKER EDDY The Prophetic and Historical Perspective; by Paul R. Smillie, p. 83

[8] Ibid, p. 92

[9] Ibid

[10] Ibid, p. 90

[11] Ibid, p. 95

[12] Ibid, p. 90, 91

[13] Ibid, p. 95

[14] Ibid, p. 95

[15] Ibid, p. 91

[16] Ibid

[17] Ibid, p. 92

[18] Ibid, p. 93

[19] Ibid

[20] Ibid

[21] Ibid

[22] Ibid, p. 94

[23] Ibid, p. 95

[24] Ibid, p.101

[25] Infuses is added in bold lettering.  Mary Baker Eddy’s birthstone is the ruby.

[26] This excerpt is from MARY BAKER EDDY The Prophetic and Historical Perspective  (2011 edition); by Paul Smillie, pages 62 and 63

[27] Ibid; p. 63

[28] According to Joseph Armstrong, an additional law was enacted on July 16, 1892 (Mary Baker Eddy’s birthday), requiring such buildings to be fireproof.  So to build the church would now cost a third more than before that date.  (From building of The Mother Church, p. 9.)

[29] There was a break up between the twelve tribes of Israel.  The ten southern tribes became known as Israel, while three northern tribes (Judah, Levi, and Benjamin) became known as Judah, the Jews.  It was sometime after this division between the feminine Israel and the masculine Judah that Israel began to disobey God so the people were taken into captivity by Assyria.  This captivity was of necessity because the woman’s seed was to come out of Israel, not Judah.  After Israel was released from being held captive it became known as the ten lost tribes of Israel.  However, the Bible makes it clear that these people headed toward the northwest, to the British Isle.

[30] MARY BAKER EDDY The Prophetic and Historical Perspective; by Paul Smillie, p. 64 (The 2012 edition of Paul Smillie’s book is published by his sister Sharon and sold by The Bookmark [run by women] and the Gethsemane Foundation.)

[31] After the Jews were taken into Babylonian captivity the royal house of men, of David’s house, were killed.  However, the women survived.  And God’s prophet was told to take these women to the British Isles to join back up with the ten lost tribes of Israel.  Today Britain still has a royal line.  This royal house holds the scepter that was promised to the house of Judah.  [Editor’s note:  On July 22, 2013 the new royal prince was born.]

[32] MARY BAKER EDDY The Prophetic and Historical Perspective; by Paul Smillie, p. 63

[33] Ibid, p. 64

[34] Ibid (Judge Hanna’s article), p. 65

[35] Ibid. Judge Hanna’s article was pulled from being published because of the Woodbury suit.

[36] Gee, people of today could learn a lesson on this topic of begging (or taking government handouts)!

[37] I am not sure if this word is spelled correctly, I wrote it as it is found in the book.

[38] Hanna’s article from Smillie’s book, p. 73

[39] This is how the text is written in Smillie’s book.

[40] building of The Mother Church; by Joseph Armstrong, p. 11

[41] MARY BAKER EDDY The Prophetic and Historical Perspective; by Paul R. Smillie, p. 162

[42] Ibid

[43] Ibid, p. 163

[44] Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary

[45] MARY BAKER EDDY The Prophetic and Historical Perspective; by Paul R. Smillie, p. 161, 162

[46] Ibid.162

[47] Ibid

[48] Ibid