This is a science, and it is meant to be demonstrated.
The claim is not that God may grant a cure if petitioned but that the method Jesus used is repeatable, teachable and available now. That word — demonstration — is why the church publishes testimonies with verification requirements and why the failure of a case is read as a failure of understanding rather than of the system.
Eddy chose the word Science deliberately and defended it against every objection: the claim is that the principle is fixed, the method is teachable, and the results are reproducible, in the way that a mathematical rule is. The church's publishing arm has run verified testimonies of healing since the 1880s, and the current requirement is that a published testimony be corroborated by three people who can vouch for the account or knew of the healing. Independent researchers have not been able to evaluate these as clinical evidence, since diagnosis is usually absent by design. The consequence inside the movement is theologically severe and is acknowledged: when a case does not heal, the failure is located in the understanding of the practitioner or the patient rather than in the system, which puts the weight of a death onto the people who were praying.
The same ground, other faiths
claims that share this one's ideasSign in to open the first thread. Everything here is attributed.