English-speakers will always be able to understand the English of KJV

Opponents of the Authorised Version (KJV) have frequently used the unreasonable 'old English of the KJV too difficult to understand' excuse to reject this most accurate and faithful translation of the Word of God in the English language. I have proven that the English of the KJV could be understood by modern English speakers in my article: Bethel: Is the old English of KJV too difficult for modern readers? (bethel-sg.com). 

Those same opponents of the KJV would then insist that we must instead read modern English versions such as the NIV and ESV. They would also very strongly insist that the KJV is no longer suitable for the modern English speaker. Are modern English versions much easier to understand? Clearly not. The same people would then recommend us to read more than one modern English version. You can also read my article: Bethel: Why KJV readers do not read other versions while modern version readers do (bethel-sg.com). In reality, those same opponents actually hate the KJV. To them it is 'any version but KJV' and they do not want to hear the KJV read to their ears again.

Why such extreme antipathy towards the KJV? The Word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart (Hebrews 4:12). Opponents of the KJV are pricked in the heart because they subconsciously know that the KJV is the Word of God.

We must remember that William Tyndale's New Testament and the KJV revolutionised the English language in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, transforming mediaeval English into the modern English we understand today. From 1611 onwards, the KJV has always been the standard of the English language and therefore, there has been no major changes in English over the previous 400 years. It is also reasonable to be confident that with the KJV continuing to be the standard, there will be no major changes nor revolution in the English language in the future.

Therefore, English-speakers will always be able to understand the English of the KJV.      

Why KJV readers do not read other versions while modern version readers do

The answer is simple:

1. The Authorised Version (KJV) represents a fixed authoritative text.

2. The KJV is very accurately and faithfully translated from the true representatives of the Word of God in the original languages - the Hebrew Masoretic Text of the Old Testament and the Greek Textus Receptus of the New Testament.

3. The KJV is majestic, easy to read and memorise.

4. The KJV (despite complains about old English) can be very clearly understood.

5. Theology is very clear in the KJV.

6. True English-speaking Christians will love the KJV because they know this Bible is the Word of God in the English language.

7. Readers of false bibles such as the ESV, NIV, CSB, NASB read more than one version (normally excluding the KJV because they complain about the old English) because those false bibles despite in modern English, could not be easily and clearly understood.

8. One reason why readers have difficulties understanding the false bibles is that in cases of textual variants, the editors of the false bibles and the false Arian Modern Critical Text from which the false bibles were translated, deliberately chose the difficult and unlikely reading because of their questionable and illogical methods of unbelieving textual criticism.

9. The false bibles represent an ever-changing and uncertain text, to be adjusted to suit the needs of the reader who becomes the authority.

10. Some false bibles such as the NIV use the thought-for-thought translation philosophy, meaning that they are inaccurate.

11. Readers of ESV, NIV, CSB, NASB, and other false bibles are confused.

The true reason traditional hymns were modernised

I uphold Exclusive Psalmody - the practice of singing only the biblical Psalms during personal and congregational worship. Therefore, I do not participate when uninspired songs are sung during worship services.

However, I am not completely against the singing of uninspired songs. They can be sung during Sunday School or during other occasions. They are only not to be sung during worship. My position is consistent with the Regulative Principle of Worship.

I have noticed a trend in modern Evangelical churches across England where the modernised versions of traditional uninspired songs (commonly called hymns) are increasingly being sung. The editors of new hymn books such as Praise! actively modernised traditional hymns by removing all second person singular pronouns (thou, thee, thy, thine), often claiming that they are making the hymns more suitable for modern English speakers. My observation is that in reality, the whole modernisation project is actually driven by some modern Evangelicals’ extreme antipathy towards the use of the old English second person singular pronouns.

Why is this extreme antipathy? Well the old English second person singular pronouns are the main representatives of the English of the Authorised Version (KJV). Their use in hymns reminds the singer of the KJV. Therefore, the extreme antipathy mentioned earlier in reality, originated from the extreme antipathy towards the KJV - the most accurate and a faithful translation of the Word of God in the English language. 

You can read my article Bethel: Is the old English of KJV too difficult for modern readers? (bethel-sg.com) to understand the reason for the extreme antipathy towards the KJV shown by some modern Evangelicals.

In my view, the so-called ‘modernisation of traditional hymns’ is effectively vandalism. The well known hymn normally sung on Easter Sunday ‘Thine be the Glory’ has been changed to ‘Glory to Jesus’, and clearly the meaning has been changed.

In conclusion, I absolutely reject the vandalism (modernisation) of traditional hymns. I also reject hymn books such as Praise! that actively vandalise (modernise) traditional hymns.

Is the old English of KJV too difficult for modern readers?

        I have heard white people in England and America such as Mark Ward, rejecting the Authorised Version (KJV) on the grounds of old English, complaining that the KJV is not suitable for modern English reader and a barrier to evangelisation. The attitude and facial expressions they displayed while making the criticism actually betrayed the true reason of their rejection, that is their personal unreasonable and illogical antipathy and even hatred towards the KJV. Why is this hostility? We shall explain the reason later in this article. 

        ‘Old English too difficult to understand’ is not a logical reason but an excuse used by opponents of the KJV to reject the most accurate English translation of the Bible. We shall prove to the reader that this ‘old English’ excuse is both illogical and unreasonable.

        Firstly, the KJV revolutionised the English language, transforming mediaeval English into the modern form. Therefore, any modern English speaker would have little problem understanding the KJV. Read for example Psalm 1:1-2 and John 3:16 from the KJV, can you honestly say you have difficulty understanding?

Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.

But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.

(Ps. 1:1-2)

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

(Jn. 3:16)

        A modern English reader could quickly familiarise himself with the old English second person singular pronouns (thou, thee, thy), second person verb form (-est), and third person verb form (-th) by reading some verses of the KJV a few times.

        Secondly, the popular use of the second person singular pronouns (thou, thee, thy) was already decreasing when the KJV was first published. The same old English pronouns would gradually be replaced by the modern second person pronouns (you, your) during the seventeenth century. However, the translators of the KJV made the wise decision to keep those old English pronouns because both Hebrew and Greek differentiate between the singular thou and the plural you. This very reason would make the KJV more accurate than modern English versions. Consider Luke 22:31-32:

And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:

But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.

(KJV)

31 “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you,[a] that he might sift you like wheat, 32 but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.”

(ESV)

       Can you see a very significant difference in understanding should you miss the following ESV footnote that is usually placed at the bottom of the page? 

1. Luke 22:31 The Greek word for you (twice in this verse) is plural; in verse 32, all four instances are singular

       

        Thirdly, the English of the KJV was already becoming ‘old English’ by the end of the eighteenth century. That was long before universal education till the age of 16 was introduced in England in the twentieth century. If the KJV could be understood by the illiterate people and others who did not receive much education and who were living at a time before the introduction of universal education, the ‘old English too difficult to understand’ excuse made by those highly educated modern English readers is proven to be unreasonable and false.

        Fourthly, there would be no end if we go down the ‘easy modern English’ route. There would still be people who do not understand the English of the ESV, NIV, NASB, and other modern English versions. Should we use the NIrV in church so that the five year-olds attending the service could understand? And even if this is done, there may still be some immigrants who find the English of NIrV too difficult to understand. Therefore, the use of modern English versions clearly is not a logical and reasonable solution to the ‘old English too difficult to understand’ excuse.

        Fifthly, the KJV continues to be used by non-White Christians living in Asia and Africa. If the old English of KJV is not difficult for these Christians to understand, why are white British people living in England complaining?

        Sixthly, the KJV is well known for being easy to memorise. If modern English is really easier to understand, modern English versions should also be easier to memorise. However, it is also known that it is relatively more difficult to memorise verses from modern English versions. In fact, while the number of different modern English versions and their sales have massively increase over the last few decades mainly because of marketing, Bible literacy rate among Christians and church attendance have actually decreased during the same time. This point again prove that the claim ‘old English too difficult to understand’ is false.

        Therefore, it can be logically and reasonably concluded that the ‘old English too difficult to understand’ statement is an illogical and unreasonable excuse. 

        What is the true reason of the antipathy towards the KJV then?

        The KJV is the most accurate English Bible, faithfully translated from the Hebrew Masoretic Text of the Old Testament and Greek Textus Receptus of the New Testament, the true representatives of the Word of God in the original languages. The KJV represents an authoritative text, rightfully and majestically commanding us to conform to biblical teachings. The glorious light of the Word of God shines very brightly from the KJV.

        In absolute contrast, the New Testament of most modern English versions such as ESV, NIV, and NASB are translated from the ever-changing false Arian Modern Critical Text. Although the Old Testament of the same modern English versions are also from the Masoretic Text, the edition of the Masoretic Text they use is the work of Kittel, an antisemitic unbeliever. Meanwhile, the mentioned Modern Critical Text is a text constructed by unbelieving scholars using methods of higher criticism based on texts and manuscripts that were effectively lost for 1,400 years before they were discovered in the middle of the nineteenth century. For more information about the Modern Critical Text, read my article: Bethel: A treatise on the theological reasons to reject most modern Bible versions (bethel-sg.com). Modern English versions represent a flexible text, adjusted to suit the reader who is the authority. Therefore, many modern English versions such as ESV, NIV, and NASB are in reality, false Bibles that cannot be trusted.

        The Word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart (Hebrews 4:12). Opponents of the KJV are pricked in the heart because they subconsciously know that the KJV is the Word of God. This is the true reason why opponents of the KJV are showing an extreme antipathy towards the KJV to an extent that can be summarised by this statement 'any version but KJV'. 

        In conclusion, the old English of the KJV is certainly not difficult for modern readers.