Letters May 26, 2008 Issue

LETTERS

with contributions from JACKIE ANDERSON, MICHAEL FLETCHER, NANCY M. STREET, NANCY MOOSLIN

I enjoyed reading comments in the April 21 issue ["You're not guilty"] regarding the use of translations of the Bible other than the King James Version (KJV). I am thrilled with what I feel is a progressive step. The way the Board of Directors of The Mother Church is approaching this, in a very thoughtful and gradual way, is a clear demonstration of their love for all of the members of this Church. Additional articles from Bible scholars may help us all better understand just what a "translation" is, as well as how and why the KJV itself, and other translations, have developed.

I believe the Board is making every effort to follow what Mary Baker Eddy set down in the Manual of The Mother Church. Why didn't she mandate the use of the KJV in the Manual? Could it be that she trusted the Board would know when the time was right for a change? At the time the Christian Science Bible Lessons were established, the KJV would have been familiar to those who heard it read. Are we today more concerned about our own comfort with the KJV than with reaching out to our communities with a translation more familiar to their ears?

In my Sunday School class, a visitor brought her own Bible to class. I had her read citations from her Bible, and then we compared them with the KJV and other versions. It gave us an opportunity to discuss this statement from Science and Health: "The divine Science taught in the original language of the Bible came through inspiration, and needs inspiration to be understood" (Mary Baker Eddy, p. 319).

Send a comment to the editors

NEXT IN THIS ISSUE

UPFRONT

Look to a spiritual forecast