LIBERTY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF DIVINITY
The King James Version
Submitted to Dr. James Sulfridge
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the completion of
DSMN 500
Discipleship Ministries
By
Anthony Bean
The King James Version
Tyndale’s powerful and idiomatic translation had a profound effect on English versions that
followed, including the Coverdale Bible (1535), Matthew’s Bible (1537), the Great Bible (1539),
and the Authorized, or King James Version (KJV), the most influential English version of all time.
The KJV arose in the context of two competing versions, the Bishop’s Bible (1568), the official
Bible of the Church of England, and the Geneva Bible (1560), which was the favorite of the
Puritans. King James I, who had recently ascended to the throne of Britain, despised the Geneva
Bible because of its anti-monarchial notes. When the Puritans proposed a new translation of
the Bible—without theological notes—James enthusiastically endorsed the idea. From his
perspective, a new translation endorsed by both the Puritans and Anglicans would likely result
in the demise of the Geneva Bible.
The KJV was commissioned in 1604 and produced in seven years by forty-seven biblical
scholars. It was first published in 1611. Although quickly accepted by many and destined to
become the most enduring English version of all time, the KJV at first face a mixed reception.
For example, the Pilgrims refused to take it on the Mayflower, preferring the Geneva Bible.
Hugh Broughton, a leading biblical scholar of his day, wrote, “Tell His Majesty that I had rather
be rent in pieces with wild horses, than any such translation by my consent should be urged
upon poor churches” (see Bruce, History of the English Bible, p. 107).
The KJV translators were not surprised by such criticisms, acknowledging in their preface
that their work was just one link in a long chain of Bible translations and revisions: “We never
thought from the beginning that we should need to make a new translation, nor yet to make of
a bad one a good one … but to make a good one better” (see “‘The Translators to the Reader,’
Preface to the King James Version”).
While the KJV became the dominant English version among Protestants, the Douai-Rheims
Version of 1582 (NT; OT from 1609) was the favorite of the Roman Catholic Church. Although
translated from the Latin, it’s wording is remarkably similar to the Bishops Bible and the King
James Version—perhaps owing to some dependence on Tyndale’s work.
Revising the KJV
The KJV remained the most popular English version for almost 400 years. Yet in time a
revision became necessary, both because of its archaic language and the inferiority of its Greek
text. In 1870, the Church of England commissioned a revision, resulting in the Revised Version
(RV) published between 1881–85. Its American counterpart, the American Standard Version
(ASV), was published in 1901. Neither version, however, challenged the supremacy of the KJV.
Both were overly literal and did not match the literary beauty of the KJV.
The next major revision in the KJV tradition was the Revised Standard Version (RSV; 1952),
a revision of the American Standard Version, published by the National Council of Churches.
Though widely praised by many scholars and clergy, the RSV experienced severe criticism from
some conservatives. Particularly irksome to fundamentalists was the translation of “virgin”
(ʿalm*h) as “young woman” in Isaiah 7:14 and the rendering of the traditional “propitiation” as
“expiation,” presumably to mute the idea of a wrathful God who needed to be appeased by
sacrifice. The RSV (like the RV and ASV) also adopted the methods of textual criticism
developed by B.F. Wescott and F.J.A. Hort, which treated the older (Alexandrian) manuscripts
as more reliable. This resulted in a New Testament text with significant differences from King
James Version, drawing opposition from those who viewed the KJV as the only “real Bible.”
In 1989 the RSV was revised again by the National Council of Churches as the New Revised
Standard Version (NRSV). The NRSV, which is especially popular in academic circles, was the
first Bible to consistently utilize gender-inclusive language. Other revisions in the KJV line were
produced in more conservative circles. The New American Standard Bible (NASB; 1971; rev.
1995), funded by the Lockman Foundation, was another revision of the ASV. It is perhaps the
most literal of recent versions. The New King James Version (NKJV; 1982) was a direct revision
of the KJV. The NKJV is unique among modern versions in that it follows the Textus Receptus,
the Greek text that lies behind the King James Version. Since the vast majority of scholars
consider this Greek text to be late and inferior, the NKJV provides in its footnotes variant
readings from the Critical Text. The Critical Text is the Greek text achieved by following the
rules and methods of textual criticism. There are two main editions of the Critical Text, the
Nestle-Aland (28th ed.) and the United Bible Societies (UBS; 5th ed.). Finally, the English Standard
Version (ESV; 2001) is an evangelical revision of the RSV. It is especially popular in Reformed
circles.
New Versions
In addition to revisions in the KJV line, there are many new versions produced directly
from the Hebrew and Greek. At the turn of the 20th Century a number of common language
versions began to appear. The majority of these were produced by individual scholars: The New
Testament in Modern Speech (R.F. Weymouth; 1903), The New Testament: A New Translation
(James Moffatt; 1913), and The New Testament: An American Translation (E.J. Goodspeed;
1923). Another important common language version, this one produced by a committee of
laypeople, was the Twentieth Century New Testament (1901).
Functional Equivalent Versions
The production of common language (or functional equivalent) versions continued
throughout the 20th and into the 21st centuries. The hugely popular Living Bible (1971),
produced by Kenneth Taylor, was a paraphrase (or simplification) of the American Standard
Version. Its revision, the New Living Translation (NLT; 1996; rev. 2004) was a committee work
and is the best-selling of the functional equivalent versions. The New Century Version (NCV) and
the International Children’s Bible (ICB; 1986)—two names for the same translation—were a
simple-language revision of a Bible originally designed for the deaf. God’s Word (1995), another
common language version, was produced by an organization associated with the Missouri
Synod of the Lutheran Church. Other common language versions of the late 20th century arose
in the context of the groundbreaking work of Eugene Nida and other international Bible
translators, who brought principles of linguistics to bear on the translation process. The Good
News Translation (GNT; also called Today’s English Version and the Good News Bible; 1976; rev.
1992) and the Contemporary English Version (CEV; 1995) were both produced under the
influence of the United Bible Societies and other international translation groups.
Mediating Versions
A number of translations have been produced that occupy a middle ground between
formal and function versions. These include Roman Catholic versions, such as the Jerusalem
Bible (1966), the New Jerusalem Bible (1985), and the New American Bible (1970; rev. 1991),
and versions produced especially for the British public, the New English Bible (1970) and its
revision the Revised English Bible (1989).
The most popular English version in the world today is the New International Version (NIV;
1978; rev. 1984; 2011). The NIV was a new translation (not a revision), the result of a trans-
denominational effort by approximately 100 scholars, sponsored by the New York Bible Society
(renamed International Bible Society; now Biblica). The NIV’s popularity was likely due to two
key factors. The first was its balance between formal and functional equivalence, resulting in a
Bible that was readable but also sounded like the “real Bible” (= the KJV). Second, because of its
conservative credentials and scholarly foundations the NIV was welcomed by a wide range of
evangelical leaders from across the theological spectrum.
A number of other mediating versions have appeared in recent years. The New English
Translation (NET; 2005) is distinctive for its extensive notes (60,000+), providing interpretive
insights, alternative renderings, and textual variants. The Holman Christian Standard Bible
(2004) was produced by the Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) and
intended as an alternative to the NIV for Southern Baptist curriculum and ministry. It was
recently revised as the Christian Standard Bible (2017) with a multi-denominational revision
committee and a more diverse audience in view. Finally, the Common English Bible (CEB; 2011)
is another NIV-like version, produced by 120 scholars from 24 different denominations and
geared toward a more ecumenical audience.
Conclusion
The task of translation is never finished. This is because languages change over time and
there are constant advances in biblical scholarship. Furthermore, the imprecision and ambiguity
of language itself means there is always room to improve a translation in terms of its accuracy,
precision and clarity. We are spoiled in the English-speaking world by the wealth of translations
available. Let’s celebrate this wealth by taking advantage of multiple versions for our personal
study and the public reading of the Word. And let’s pour our resources into finishing the task of
translating God’s Word into every language of the world.
Notes
John Beekman and John Callow, Translating the Word of God
Dewey M. Beegle, God’s Word into English
F. F. Bruce, History of the English Bible
D. A. Carson, The Inclusive Language Debate: A Plea for Realism
Gordon D. Fee and Mark L. Strauss, How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth. A
Guide to Understanding and Using Bible Versions
Bruce M. Metzger, The Bible in Translation: Ancient and English Versions
Glen G. Scorgie, Mark L. Strauss, and Steven M. Voth, gen. eds., The Challenge of Bible
Translation. Communicating God’s Word to the World
Moisés Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meanings: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics
Mark L. Strauss, Distorting Scripture? The Challenge of Bible Translation and Gender
Accuracy
Jan de Waard and Eugene A. Nida, From One Language to Another: Functional
Equivalence in Bible Translating
