A Christian GP told a vulnerable patient he would "eternally suffer" if he did not put his faith in Jesus, medical watchdogs heard on Tuesday.
Dr Richard Scott is alleged to have told the "psychologically troubled" 24-year-old he was not going to offer him any medication but he did have a cure for the patient's ills, the General Medical Council heard.
Andrew Hurst, counsel for the GMC claimed the medic then told the man, known only as patient A: "He did have a cure, which would cure him for good. His one and only hope of recovery was through Jesus.
"If he did not turn to Jesus and hand him his suffering he would suffer for the rest of his life."
The 51-year-old GP, who has worked as a medical missionary in Kenya and Africa, is also alleged to have talked about the "devil" and "belittled" his patient's non-Christian faith, adding: "No other religion in the world can offer what Jesus can offer.
Dr Scott denies proselytising and disputes the account given by the patient, described by the GMC's own lawyer as a man with a "troubled psychological history".
After discussing medical matters Dr Scott said, as a committed Christian, he simply offered the patient the chance to talk about the role faith may have in helping with his problems.
The case before the GMC began last September but was stayed after the witness refused to give evidence.
The GMC then adjourned the case to make further attempts to get the witness to co-operate.
Patient A finally agreed to give evidence on condition of anonymity and being able to give evidence over the phone and without the press or public present.
Dr Scott said he is being denied a proper hearing after the GMC agreed to the conditions on Monday.
But the doctor also says the GMC has an "anti-Christian bias" in pursuing the case against him.
Today Mr Hurst repeatedly stressed the GMC does not have any bias for or against any religion either way and medics can talk about faith - but Dr Scott simply "crossed the line" and went too far.
"The GMC's position is not one that is hostile or opposed or biased against Christianity or any other religion," he said.
"It is not hostile or opposed to the appropriate expression of faith issues or Christian faith in a clinical setting."