What Did Mary Baker Eddy Teach, and How Does It Compare With Biblical Christianity?

Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Growing and Free for All

$5.00

Mary Baker Eddy’s Early Search and Founding of Christian Science

Mary Baker Eddy (1821–1910) is best known for establishing Christian Science, a religious movement grounded in her book “Science and Health With Key to the Scriptures.” Born in New Hampshire to a Congregationalist family, she encountered frequent health issues and pursued various paths for healing. In the mid-nineteenth century, she explored the teachings of Phineas Quimby, who championed mind-healing theories. In 1866, she fell on icy pavement and sustained injuries that she claimed were miraculously healed as she contemplated a Gospel account of one of Jesus’ healings.

Interpreting that experience as a revelation, she evolved a theology that cast sickness and sin as illusions of “mortal mind,” curable through “spiritual understanding.” By 1875, she published the first edition of “Science and Health,” which, alongside the Bible, remains central for adherents of the Church of Christ, Scientist (founded in 1879). Eddy taught that Scripture required her metaphysical “key” for correct interpretation. Yet from a conservative evangelical vantage point, many of her doctrines differ significantly from standard biblical teaching on creation, sin, Christ’s identity, and redemption. This article probes Eddy’s historical background, her core doctrines, her use of Scripture, and how her views align—or fail to align—with biblical revelation.

The Core Teachings of Mary Baker Eddy

While Christian Science references biblical material, it interprets fundamental doctrines in unorthodox ways.

It asserts that matter does not exist in objective reality. Eddy declared that the only true substance is Spirit (God) and that the material world is essentially a product of erroneous belief. This differs from the biblical portrayal of the created realm as genuinely existing, though fallen, and subject to redemption (Romans 8:19-23). Scripture calls creation “good” (Genesis 1:31) even after sin introduced corruption (Romans 5:12).

It holds that sin and sickness are illusions to be overcome by correct spiritual understanding, rather than real conditions requiring atonement or healing through natural or divinely provided means. Eddy explained that as one gains “the mind of Christ,” physical ailments and moral failings evaporate. By contrast, Scripture presents sin not as an illusion but a moral break from God (1 John 3:4), demanding real forgiveness, rooted in Christ’s sacrificial death (Romans 5:8-9).

It redefines Christ and salvation. Eddy saw Jesus primarily as the way-shower of “divine Mind,” not as God incarnate who shed literal blood for sin’s penalty. Salvation becomes an awakening to spiritual reality rather than deliverance from sin’s condemnation. Whereas biblical teaching insists that Jesus is fully God and fully man (John 1:1,14; Philippians 2:5-7), Christian Science portrays the human body and matter as illusions, thus making the incarnation and atonement symbolic. This sharply diverges from texts like 1 Timothy 2:5-6, where Jesus is described as the one mediator who gave Himself a ransom for all.

It encourages reliance on prayer rather than medical treatment, believing that acknowledging sickness as real only reinforces “false consciousness.” Scripture, though, does not condemn the use of physicians (Luke 10:34, 1 Timothy 5:23) nor does it consider bodily ailments illusions. Jesus’ own healings demonstrate compassion for genuine physical afflictions (Mark 1:40-42).

Thus, while Christian Science claims to glean insights from Scripture, it systematically spiritualizes or denies physical realities, undercutting foundational biblical truths such as the bodily resurrection (Luke 24:39) and the final redemption of creation (2 Peter 3:13).

Eddy’s Scriptural Interpretations

Mary Baker Eddy, though she exhorted her followers to study the Bible in conjunction with “Science and Health,” effectively placed her metaphysical framework above the normal sense of Scripture. She insisted that passages teaching creation’s material nature or Jesus’ atoning sacrifice must be re-read as metaphors for the triumph of “Mind” over illusions of sin or disease.

For example, the Gospels repeatedly emphasize Jesus physically healing people and rising bodily from the tomb (Matthew 9:20-22, John 20:27), yet Christian Science interprets those miracles as demonstrations of “divine Principle,” making them more about mental shifts than literal events. The same approach applies to passages on Christ’s death: “This is my blood … poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matthew 26:28) is read in Christian Science not as a literal atonement, but as a demonstration of God’s love. That stands contrary to the biblical emphasis on the necessity of bloodshed for remission (Hebrews 9:22).

Such interpretive methodology conflicts with the objective historical-grammatical approach, which upholds the text’s plain meaning as understood by its original audience. Luke 1:1-4 attests that the Gospels aim to present factual accounts. Eddy’s commentary, however, often elevates allegorical or spiritualized readings that overshadow the authors’ manifest intent.

Evaluating Matter’s Reality and the Doctrine of Creation

A keystone of Eddy’s theology is that matter is unreal. But Genesis 1-2 testifies that Jehovah truly created the heavens and the earth, not illusions or ephemeral mental constructs. The narrative details the successive days of forming light, seas, land, vegetation, and living creatures, each described as “good.” If these were illusions, such repeated affirmations of goodness, culminating in God’s rest on the seventh day, would make no sense. Romans 8:22 pictures creation groaning under sin’s curse—if matter were mere illusion, that curse would be moot. Instead, Scripture portrays a real, though marred, universe that God will ultimately liberate.

Additionally, the biblical accounts of Jesus’ resurrection highlight physical tangibility (Luke 24:42-43, John 20:27), further proving that matter is part of God’s plan, destined for renewal, not denial. If matter were intrinsically false or evil, Christ’s bodily resurrection would be contradictory, yet it is central to the gospel. John 1:14 proclaims that “the Word became flesh,” showing that the Son fully entered material existence. Christian Science’s stance, dismissing matter as a mental mirage, stands in direct tension with these scriptural foundations.

Christ’s Redemptive Work vs. Christian Science’s Metaphysics

One of the most consequential departures from biblical orthodoxy is the reinterpretation of sin and salvation. In Christian Science, sin stems from “erroneous thought,” and redemption entails awakening to the knowledge that we are already spiritual and unfallen. The biblical perspective, however, is that all have sinned (Romans 3:23), and the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). Sin is an act of rebellion, not merely ignorance. The remedy is not improved cognition but the atoning death of Christ, who satisfies God’s righteous requirement (Romans 3:25-26). Without a real atonement, no one can be reconciled to God.

Jesus testified that He came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). This ransom is not a metaphor for mental release; it is a sacrifice in which Christ bore sin’s penalty (1 Peter 2:24). Eddy’s teaching that Jesus primarily exemplifies the “divine Principle” fails to address the biblical notion that Jesus had to suffer physically to deal with sin’s real penalty. Galatians 3:13 affirms that Christ became a curse for us, referencing Deuteronomy 21:23, indicating an objective transaction in which our curse was lifted. Christian Science lacks a concept of that penalty, thereby diminishing the cross from a literal, salvific event to a demonstration of Mind’s supremacy. This overlooks that redemption is not a mere moral demonstration but a divine rescue from condemnation (Romans 8:1).

Healing: Miraculous Reality vs. Illusory Sickness

A hallmark of Christian Science practice is rejecting medical interventions, expecting that prayer alone suffices to “see through” sickness as a mental error. Yet the New Testament acknowledges sickness as part of our fallen condition, with the body’s redemption still future (Romans 8:23). James 5:14-15 calls elders to pray over the sick, but it also never forbids seeking ordinary remedies. In fact, 1 Timothy 5:23 urges Timothy to take a little wine for his stomach, an early example of practical treatment. These texts imply that Scripture sees affliction as genuine, not illusions to be undone by mental processes alone.

Christ performed actual healings: He made the lame walk, the blind see, the leprous clean (Luke 7:22). He never scolded them for believing in illusions. Instead, He responded to real needs with divine power. Matthew 14:14 shows that “he had compassion on them and healed their sick.” Compassion is unwarranted if those ailments did not exist physically. The biblical worldview balances the truth that God can heal supernaturally (James 5:16) but also endorses the legitimate use of material remedies as God’s provision.

Scriptural Approach to Interpretation vs. Eddy’s Method

Christian Science’s reinterpretation stems from Mary Baker Eddy’s distinctive hermeneutic, where she redefines biblical terms to fit her metaphysical system. She employs expressions like “Mortal Mind,” “Divine Principle,” and “error” to reframe sin, sickness, and the atonement. In a normal reading, the Gospels record historical facts, but Eddy reinterprets them. For instance, where Luke 24:39 details Jesus’ resurrected body—flesh and bones, not a spirit—Eddy reads it as a demonstration that matter is unreal or subjugated to Mind. This conflicts with the straightforward sense that the disciples physically handled the risen Savior.

Scripture repeatedly underscores the importance of historical events. Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:17 affirms that if Christ has not been literally raised, faith is futile. Biblical faith is anchored in God’s acts in time and space. By spiritualizing or denying the literal sense, Christian Science becomes more akin to Gnosticism, an ancient heresy that minimized bodily existence. The apostle John warns, “Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God” (1 John 4:2). Christian Science’s illusions-of-matter approach verges on contradicting that principle by effectively denying the significance of the incarnate and resurrected flesh.

Why Christian Science Falls Outside Orthodox Christianity

Given the radical differences, mainstream evangelical Christianity has not recognized Christian Science as a valid expression of biblical faith. Key points of departure include:

Jesus’ identity. The Bible proclaims Him the incarnate Son, fully God and fully man, who physically lived, died, and rose (Philippians 2:6-8). Christian Science interprets Christ as an impersonal principle or ideal, overshadowing the biblical emphasis on His bodily nature.

Atonement and sin. Scripture stresses that Jesus shed real blood for real sin. Christian Science views sin and sickness as illusions, hence no real atonement is necessary. This undercuts the central gospel message of redemption from a moral debt (1 Peter 2:24).

Reality of creation. The Bible affirms that God created matter and called it “very good” (Genesis 1:31). Christian Science denies matter’s reality, making biblical accounts of creation, the fall, Christ’s bodily works, and bodily resurrection all subject to allegorical reinterpretation.

View of healing. Christian Science teaches that physical cures come from understanding illusions, whereas Scripture acknowledges genuine bodily ailments, occasionally divinely healed, sometimes treated medically, but all real.

Hence, while Christian Science employs Christian terminology and references Scripture, it departs from crucial doctrines. It redefines the faith into something alien to biblical authors.

Lessons for Apologetics and Ministry

For Christians engaged in apologetics or pastoral care, addressing Christian Science requires gentleness and clarity (1 Peter 3:15). Many sincere adherents of Christian Science deeply revere “Science and Health” and believe they honor Christ. A prudent approach:

Stresses that Scripture’s central claims revolve around factual events—Christ’s real birth, death, resurrection—and that these events are recorded as literal truths, not metaphors. The gospel’s power hinges on historical reality (Luke 1:1-4).

Points to the biblical teaching that sin is not mental error but spiritual rebellion requiring atonement. Romans 3:23-25 reveals Christ’s sacrifice as satisfying divine justice, freeing believers to know true forgiveness and transformation.

Demonstrates that early Christians recognized sickness as real, trusting in prayer but also acknowledging medical help as needed. Luke himself was called “the beloved physician” (Colossians 4:14). No biblical text endorses shunning medical care in favor of purely mental solutions.

Affirms that God’s creation is real, albeit subjected to a curse, yet God’s plan includes final redemption and resurrection of the body. That physical hope is at odds with the notion that matter is illusory.

Ultimately, believers may encourage those in Christian Science to explore the plain meaning of Scripture, praying that the Holy Spirit would remove interpretive biases and draw them to the complete Christ—fully God, fully man, the only Savior (Acts 4:12).

Conclusion: Standing with Scriptural Orthodoxy

So, “What Did Mary Baker Eddy Teach, and How Does It Compare With Biblical Christianity?” By scanning her writings and core claims, it becomes clear that though Christian Science appeals to biblical language, it recasts fundamental doctrines about God, sin, Christ, and salvation in ways that diverge from the apostolic gospel. While Eddy’s teachings emphasize spiritual healing and mind’s power, they drastically reduce or negate central realities: the existence of matter, the gravity of sin, the necessity of Christ’s bodily atonement, and the physical resurrection.

In John 14:6, Jesus declares, “I am the way and the truth and the life.” For His earliest followers, that statement meant He is the incarnate Word, bridging heaven and earth, dealing with sin by His sacrificial death, and vanquishing it through His resurrection. The illusions-of-matter worldview proposed by Christian Science cannot accommodate the biblical emphasis on the cross and the empty tomb as literal events. By departing from historical, biblical teaching, Mary Baker Eddy’s system yields a faith that lacks the foundational essence of Christ’s saving work.

Believers, therefore, remain anchored in the truth that “God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son” (John 3:16), a giving demonstrated physically at the cross. They hold fast to the incarnate, crucified, and risen Savior, in whom alone forgiveness and eternal life are found. In so doing, they reject the notion that sin and sickness are illusions, embracing instead the sure hope that Christ is indeed “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29) through a real sacrifice with eternal implications.

You May Also Enjoy

What Does Justin Martyr Teach Us About Faith, Reason, and the Defense of Scripture?

About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).