In my previous post, I wrote concerning Fundamentalism and the King James Bible. I simply supplied the reader with information. It is my intention that this post, like the previous one, be informational rather than confrontational. It is my aim to simply present my own observations on the King James Bible, comparing it to other versions, especially the English Revised and the American Standard versions.
The Production of the King James Bible
To begin, allow me to present a few facts concerning the King James Bible that will likely already be familiar to most of my readers. First, the Bible was not written in the English language, let alone in the King James Version. The Old Testament was written in Hebrew for the most part, and the New Testament was written in Greek. Second, the King James Version was not the first Bible to be translated in the English language. The title page in nearly any King James Bible declares that the King James Version was “Translated out of the Original Tongues and with the Former Translations diligently compared.” In the fourteenth century, Wycliffe’s Bible was translated. In the sixteenth century, the English language welcomed Tyndale’s translation, the Coverdale Bible, and the Geneva Bible. Then, in 1604, King James I issued an edict for a new English translation. Seven years later, it was completed.
Another fact to be noted concerning the King James Version is that the King James Version that is published today is not the 1611 edition, but is rather the 1769 edition. Most English-speaking people cannot read the 1611 edition. Since 1611, the King James Version has undergone a few revisions, the latest being in 1769. These revisions changed very little wording and focused mainly on updating the spelling and grammar.
The First Revisions of the King James Version (KJV)
For nearly three centuries, the King James Version was the prominent Bible translation in the English language. However, in the nineteenth century, a new set of manuscripts (copies of ancient scriptures) was found in the Vatican. With the discovery of these manuscripts, an English revision of the King James Bible was on the way. In England, scholars produced a revision known as the English Revised Version in 1885. This revision is commonly referred to as simply “The Revised Version” (RV). An American Revision Committee then went to work to produce the American edition of the Revised Version. This revision was completed in 1901 and is known as the American Standard Version (ASV).
I will mention other versions besides the RV and the ASV, but I want to focus primarily on these versions in comparison to the KJV for a couple of reasons. First, many prominent Bible teachers of years gone by have referred to these versions in their writings. Second, these revisions were the first versions to be offered as alternates to the King James Bible. Third, nearly all modern versions are revisions of the RV or ASV. Consequently, nearly all modern versions translate the Bible from the same manuscripts as the RV and ASV.
The English Revised Version and the American Standard Version Were Never Popular
The first Bible versions offered as alternates to the KJV, though used by famed Bible expositors, were never made popular. It is noteworthy that until recent years, the King James Version has been by far the most popular Bible translation. This is a remarkable fact for many reasons.
In 2012, the King James Version ranked #2 in sales, second only to the New International Version. Please consider a few things with me. First, when Bibles are ranked by number of sales, only the sales of new Bibles are counted. This is because publishers release how many new Bibles they sold in a given year. Used Bibles are not counted because used book stores do not order Bibles and books from the publishers. Please stay with me. Many Christian book stores that sell new Bibles have an extremely limited selection of King James Bibles. Plainly stated, it is becoming harder and harder to find King James Bibles in Christian book stores that sell new Bibles. Because of this, those looking for King James Bibles often buy them used. This is the case especially with those looking for King James Bibles. A considerable percentage of King James Bibles that were put into the hands of consumers in 2012 were used rather than new, but not a single of those Bibles were counted as sales. Secondly, there is a growing demand for digital Bibles today. Many people have Bibles on their phones, computers, and tablets. In most cases, modern versions that are downloaded to electronic devices are sold because they are copyrighted. Digital copies of the King James Version, however, are often free, because the King James text is not copyrighted. The free downloads of the King James Version are not included in the number of sales for 2012. Third, the Gideons International exists for the distribution of Bibles. They do not sell Bibles, but distribute an incredible number of Bibles in the United States annually. Because these Bibles are not sold, they are not counted as sales. The Gideons International publishes the King James Version and the New King James Version, but they do not publish the New International Version.
I am simply pointing out that, though the King James Bible ranked #2 in sales in 2012, it may actually be more popular than what is reported. But for the sake of discussion, let us take for granted that the King James Bible is #2 in terms of sales. This is remarkably amazing! For well over 100 years, the King James Version has been ruthlessly attacked by theological professors in Christian universities. For over 100 years, we have heard the common propaganda that the King James Bible is hard to understand; the King James Bible needs to be updated; the King James Bible is inaccurate and needs to be corrected; the King James Bible is obsolete. The modernist in the pulpit and the professor in the classroom would like nothing more than to push the King James Bible out of existence. But after more than 100 years of their efforts to do just that, they can’t even push the King James Bible off the top ten list, let alone out of existence!
In the midst of many Bible versions today, the King James Version is remarkably popular. But let us return to the turn of the twentieth century, when the American Standard Version was first published in the United States. It was realized very quickly that the ASV would not replace the KJV. The ASV would become, at best, a reference tool that would sit on the shelf of the pastor. It never made it into the hands of the common people. Its unpopularity was very promptly realized.
C.I. Scofield believed the RV and the ASV to be authoritative. However, when expounding upon why he chose the King James text as the text for his reference Bible, Scofield says:
After mature reflection it was determined to use the Authorized Version [King James Version]. None of the many Revisions have commended themselves to the people at large. The Revised Version, which has now been before the public for twenty-seven years gives no indication of becoming in any general sense the people’s Bible of the English-speaking world.
Why Was the ASV Unpopular?
Besides the KJV, the first English version of the Bible available to Americans was the American Standard Version. It never became popular. A question that is provoked at this point is “Why?”
I have thumbed through the American Standard Version, and I see a few characteristics that may have contributed to the growing unpopularity of the American Standard Version.
First, the ASV simply does not have the majesty in its words that is present in the King James Version. In other words, the King James Version has a “ring to it” that is absent from the ASV, and all modern versions for that matter.
Noel Smith, who commended the ASV for being an accurate and authoritative translation, admits:
The American Standard Version has not been generally accepted because it doesn’t have in it the music of cadence and rhythm that the majestic King James Version has. And the King James Version has been here for more than 300 years. Its long history with all its associations with the mighty events that have transpired among English-speaking peoples during the time, have given the King James Version a vast authority and dignity. And justly so. (Noel Smith, “Translations of our English Bible,” Baptist Bible Tribune, December 13, 1968)
I believe that any literary critic who will critique the King James Version will testify to the literary beauty of the KJV. The individual who cannot see the literary beauty of the King James Bible is illiterate, dishonest, or unqualified to critique literature. Anyone who can read and comprehend at a second grade level can notice the majestic tone in the words of the King James Bible.
Another characteristic of the ASV that, I believe, contributed to its eventual departure into obscurity is in its removal of familiarity. In 1901, when the ASV was published, most of the English-speaking world was familiar with phrases found in the KJV. The ASV took away some of these familiarities. For example, the revisers of the ASV replaced the KJV “LORD” with the word “Jehovah.” Most likely, this translation is not inaccurate. But do you know how many verses in the KJV contain the phrase “the LORD”? Most of my readers are probably familiar with Psalm 100:1, which states, “Make a joyful noise unto the LORD.” Can you imagine, after being familiar with that phrase, opening an ASV Bible, and finding, “Make a joyful noise unto Jehovah”? There are many verses that people located in the ASV, only to find the familiarity taken away.
Another characteristic that contributed to the fall of the ASV is that the text was printed in paragraph form. This is all right for casual reading, but it is very inconvenient for looking up references. The King James Bible lists verses in a column. It makes it very easy to look up a particular verse. If you are sitting in a church, however, with an ASV Bible, and the minister says, “Turn to Acts chapter 20 and verse 4,” you will soon find that verse 4 is in the middle of a paragraph. I can see where, even though this is a small inconvenience, people would lay their ASV aside and stick with their King James. It is noteworthy that many of the modern versions print the text of their Bibles in paragraph form.
Another characteristic that made the ASV unpopular, in my opinion, is its failure as an English translation. There are some words in the ASV that, instead of being translated, are transliterated. For example, in the ASV, Psalm 9:17 says, “The wicked shall be turned back into Sheol.” Now, the average American, in 1901 as well as now, does not know what “sheol” is. “Sheol” is a Hebrew word. The purpose of an English translation is to give us the English meanings of words in the original language(s). Leaving words in the original Hebrew language instead of translating it causes the ASV to fail as a translation. In the ASV, Psalm 9:17 is virtually unintelligible. In the KJV, however, Psalm 9:17 is understandable to a first grader – “The wicked shall be turned into hell.”
The ASV furthermore leaves the Greek word “hades” in the text, as well as the Greek word “anathema.” This would make the ASV an unpopular translation, in my opinion.
Closing Thoughts
The King James Version has a majesty about it that is missing in the RV, ASV, and other modern versions. In addition to this, the King James Bible has contributed more to the English language than any literary work anywhere. In December 2011, the National Geographic published a tribute to the King James Bible. In it, the National Geographic indicated how much the King James Bible has contributed to the English language:
The King James translation introduced 18 classic phrases into the English language and made famous some 240 more from earlier English translations.
No other Bible translation, no other holy book of any kind, and no other literary work, whether prose or poetry, has contributed to the English language as has the King James Bible. In this regard and many others, they all take a back seat to the King James Bible.
In terms of accomplishments, the King James Bible is superior to all others. Charles Spurgeon, who used the King James Bible in his sermons, built one of the largest churches ever. D.L. Moody used it to shake two continents for Christ. With it, Dr. Jack Hyles built the world’s largest Sunday School. Using it as his textbook, Billy Sunday held citywide campaigns that literally shut taverns down. With the King James Bible at his side, Lester Roloff rescued juvenile delinquents, pointing them to Christ.
Robert L. Sumner said, “I have never even preached from the NKJV, although I consider it a superior product because I have not wanted my congregations to be distracted by word changes.” Mr. Sumner believes the NKJV to be a superior product to the KJV. I would be interested in asking him, “On what grounds?” Does it have the majesty of the KJV? No. Has it enjoyed the widespread popularity that the KJV has? No. Has it contributed anything whatsoever to the English language? No, not even a syllable’s worth! Has it produced citywide revivals? Not one.
You can have Saul’s shining armor. It is shiny. It is new. It looks great. But it doesn’t fit, and it has never won a battle. I’ll take the sling and the stone – the old, black-back book – the translation that has, for over 400 years, been tried, tested, and proven.
