Featured The King James Version Only Position

In reality that was not the case.

In his book In The Beginning Alister McGrath has an eleven page discussion of that topic. Here are just a few snips.

"One of the most interesting aspects of the King James Bible is its use of ways of speaking that were already becoming archaic in the standard English of the first decade of the seventeenth century. By adopting these older forms, the King James Bible had the unintended effect of perpetuating ways of speaking that, strictly speaking, were dying out in everyday English speech." (p.265,266)

"The inbuilt conservatism of the translation process, reflecting the concerns of those who sponsored and directed the three 'official' English Bibles, thus led directly --yet unintentionally --to the retention of older English ways of speaking in religious contexts, creating the impression that religious language was somehow necessarily archaic." (p.269)

"...the King James Bible would actually have been perceived to be slightly old-fashioned and dated even from the first day of its publication." (p.276)

 

Good points. :smilewinkgrin:

 

To me, it is extemely telling that even the translators of the 1611 neither saw that as being th final and [erfect english translation, as they sought to build on and improve prior versions, and would have supported additinal revisions and translations based upon their own work!

So even they did not hold to a KJVO position...

 

The KJVO myth, like other "This-Version-Only" myths, is entirely man-made. A difference is, in modern times, some authors saw a cash cow in KJVO and made an industry out of it. But its falsehood still remains.