Sample clip of my debate with an
atheist on the issue of morality.
Find the whole debate at this link
Religious Science - Science of Mind - Ernest Holmes, part 1 of 13
This is part of a consideration of the religion established by Ernest Holmes that is known as Religious Science and or .
This segment will serve as the Introduction and Ernest the Infallible
This essay will be parsed into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Ernest the Infallible
Part 2: Power of the Mind
Part 3: Religious Science Affirmations
Part 4: The Bible is One of Many Holy Books
Part 5: Virgin Birth Not Unique
Part 6: Jesus and the Christ
Part 7: Rewriting Christianity: Jesus, Mediation and Resurrection
Part 8: No Sin, Just Mistakes
Part 9: Jesus, One of the Saviors
Part 10: Jesus Got it Right and So Could You
Part 11: Scientific Proof that Hell is a Myth
Part 12: Cosmology and Theology
Part 13: An Appealing Religion
"Religious Science" is not to be confused with, yet may be somewhat correlated to, Scientology or Christian Science.
Science of Mind is a correlation of laws of science, opinions of philosophy, and revelations of religion applied to human needs and the and the aspirations of all.1
Science of Mind is not a personal opinion, nor is it a special revelation. It is the result of the best of the ages.2
Dr. [Ernest] Holmes did not claim that he had found the only answers to life's questions. He emphasized that 'it must remain open at the top for new insights.' Religious Science is not a cult because it does not require anyone to profess or denounce specific ideology, or follow a rigid set of rules.3
Religions such as Religious Science / Science of Mind often boast that they have no oppressive, ruling, hierarchy, authority over them. They teach that their doctrine is not a personal opinion, nor is it a special revelation…[it is] a correlation of laws of science, opinions of philosophy, and revelations of religion. What they do not realize is that they too are bound by strict authoritarianism and dogmas. For example, Ernest Holmes wrote that there is "no salvation outside of conscious cooperation with the Infinite."4 Consider the dogmatic nature of this statement written by Ernest Holmes:
…no form of race-suggestion, belief in limitation, subjective idea of limitation, thought of karma, fatalism, theology or hell, horoscope, or any other false belief, has power. Accept none of them. If you have ever believed in them, if you have ever believed that the stars govern you, or that your environment governs you, or that your opportunities govern you, recognize this as an hypnotic condition into which you have fallen, and deny every one of them until there is no longer anything in you that believers in them.5
Or consider this delineation between Christianity and Religious Science:
Throughout his ministry Jesus tried to show people the way to live by his own examples and his words. But as Christianity evolved, it chose to see a power in Jesus' death rather than in his life. Traditional Christianity has attributed a miraculous power of salvation in Jesus' death on the cross rather than seeing that the salvation lies in Jesus' life and teachings. As a student of Science of Mind, you would part company with the traditional Christian on this point. You would be more interested in how Jesus lived than in how he died, and you would know, too, that Jesus' crucifixion does not take away from you the responsibility for your own life and decisions.6 [emphasis added]
They claim that their doctrines must remain open at the top for new insights. But all that this means is that any new idea that comes along must be judged; accepted, rejected and or reinterpreted according to what Religious Science believes. They claim that they are not a cult because it does not require anyone to profess or denounce specific ideology, or follow a rigid set of rules. However, when our local Religious Science reverend was asked if, for example, they would allow an occultist to speak at their church he answered with an emphatic no! Neither would they allow a New Ager to do so, even though they endorse Sai Baba, one of the biggest Hinduistic-New Age gurus in the world.
Ernest Holmes is generally considered to have drawn from, been influenced by, and offered parallel teachings of, nineteenth and early twentieth century teachers of New Thought, medieval and early European thinkers and also by Eastern religions in the development of the Science of Mind:
"The Bible, and traditional Christianity, Thomas Troward, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Emma Curtis Hopkins, Phineas Parkhurst Quimby, Warren Felt Evans, Mary Baker Eddy, Horatio W. Dresser, Charles and Myrtle Fillmore, Emilie Cady, Michael Servetus Villanovus, Emmanuel Swedenborg, Meister Eckhart, Hinduism, Buddhism.7
Another source adds,
Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita, and in the thought of mystics of all ages.8
Yet another states that he was,
greatly influenced by the Gospels, the writing of Ralph Waldo Emerson, and his own studies of the great spiritual teachings and truths from religion, philosophy and science.9
Keep in mind that all of this, of course, was sorted and compiled by Ernest Holmes. And so Ernest Holmes became the infallible interpreter of all, the discerner of all, the one who set the foundation and who is the oppressive, ruling, hierarchical authority. The same is true of Mary Baker Eddy for Christian Science, Baha'u'llah for Baha'ism, and various other pseudo-syncretistic groups.
1. Glen S. Hayden, Viewpoints of Science of Mind concerning certain traditional beliefs (Item #0936, Los Angeles: Science of Mind Publishing, n.d.), p. 4
2. Ernest Holmes, The Essence of Science of Mind (Item #0909, Los Angeles: Science of Mind Publishing, n.d.), p. 1
It may be republished in part or in its entirety on websites, blogs, or any
print media for whatever purpose (in agreement or in order to criticize it) only as
long as the following conditions are met: