My World Opinions piece on using the King James Version of the Bible for Christmas has gotten some attention. It’s been an “editor’s pick” for a couple of days, and I was asked to make an audio version of it for their daily podcast “The World and Everything In It.” I found it interesting that the leadership class seemed to like it. They may not have agreed with everything, but it resonated with them. On the other hand, I did get a few negative emails and I noticed that most of comments were negative. That’s fine and to be expected. A person is more likely to take the time to leave a negative comment than a positive one. That’s just how the internet works. Still, I thought I would give a few reflections on some of the concerns.

First, I am not a King James Only advocate. Nowhere did I say that it was the only correct or allowable translation. I even conceded that most people would not be able to bring themselves to use it for their personal bible study. The argument was to use it for Christmas readings and for occasions of public liturgy and ritual. When I said that the KJV is the only bible that can be considered the English and American “family bible,” I was making a point about history and tradition. And it’s true. There are no other versions which hold the same place. Yes, of course there always were other versions out there. The Geneva existed (and the KJV is extremely close to it in language). The Book of Common Prayer itself uses the Coverdale text for its psalter. Still, it’s the King James which took root and stuck overall. Everyone knows this.

Now the point about accuracy was that most of the textual debates aren’t worth it. The change frequently ends up being either slight (and so unnecessary) or temporary (like with “only begotten” falling out of favor and then coming back in). It’s sort of like the “moron, midwit, master” meme. The character with advanced training ends up circling back to the position that the totally untrained guy holds because the various medium-grade arguments lose their force or appeal over time. The “moron” character defaults to what he was taught, which is usually the traditional position, the wisdom of the ages. And when there is some truly significant textual debate, you very frequently find out that the results are inconclusive. You have to pick between an A- ranking or a B+. Sometimes you get a C+ and a C-.

I do think that pastors and other lectors (that is, people who read the Scriptures in public) will need to learn how to read well. This involves pace and when to pause. But it can also involve knowing when to make a slight editorial “update” on the fly. We all do this with the Lord’s Prayer. The KJV says “Our Father, which art in heaven.” This is because it was thought more formal to use “which” rather than “who.” The hymn “Holy, Holy, Holy” does the same thing. But what’s funny is that basically everyone in the United States has shifted to using “who art in heaven.” They keep the “art,” and they also keep “thy” and “thine” which come later. But they change “which” to “who.” And what’s really interesting is that they do this more or less automatically and instinctively.

A KJV reader will need to pick up on when to do this in other ways. For my part, I don’t find all the “thees” and “thous” to be that important. They’re fine, but no big deal either way. Neither do I think the “eth” ending is necessary. Sometimes it sounds funny and can be dropped without losing anything much. One interesting case is how to pronounce “saith.” A lot of us today assume it should be “say-eth.” And that makes it sound very old fashioned. But a case can be made that is should be more like “seth.” And I’ve read that many people, even in the 18th century or so, already simply chose to read it as “says.” There’s not really much phonetic space between “thus seth” and “thus says.” So public readers should have the latitude to decide on how to read some of the older words. The goal is to preserve the ceremonial and elevated prose without being too distractingly foreign. But you won’t be able to figure this out right away. It will take time and practice.

And as you practice, you will notice that the KJV really was written to be heard. It was produced at a time when you had to assume that a great many people would not be looking at the text but instead would be listening to it. And this influences word choice and sentence structure. That’s why the King James sounds so much better than modern translations. It isn’t only the old language. It was written with a rhetorical philosophy about the spoken word. And so when you read your KJV, read it out loud. See if it isn’t better.

That’s it for now. I wish you all good tidings of great joy.