Authorized: The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible

by Mark L. Ward Jr.

The King James Version has shaped the church, our worship, and our mother tongue for over 400 years. But what should we do with it today?

The KJV beautifully rendered the Scriptures into the language of turn-of-the-seventeenth-century England. Even today the King James is the most widely read Bible in the United States. The rich cadence of its Elizabethan English is recognized even by non-Christians. But English has changed a great deal over the last 400 years--and in subtle ways that very few modern readers will recognize. In Authorized Mark L. Ward, Jr. shows what exclusive readers of the KJV are missing as they read God's word.#In their introduction to the King James Bible, the translators tell us that Christians must "heare CHRIST speaking unto them in their mother tongue." In Authorized Mark Ward builds a case for the KJV translators' view that English Bible translations should be readable by what they called "the very vulgar"--and what we would call "the man on the street."

Genres: Theology, Christian, Religion, Nonfiction, History, Christianity, Audiobook

168 pages, Paperback

Published January 24, 2018

About the author

Mark Ward (PhD, Bob Jones University) is a video Bible teacher at Ward on Words who also teaches on RightNow Media and in assorted schools. He has written hundreds of Bible-nerdy articles for various publications; he is also the author of multiple books and textbooks including Basics for a Biblical Worldview (BJU Press, 2021), and Authorized: The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible (Lexham Press, 2018). His next books are Study to Shew Thyself Approved: How to Read the KJV When You Don’t Live in the 1600s and The Parallel King James New Testament, both forthcoming from Lexham Press.

Reviews

[Mark Jr.]

Mark Noll and the Pew Research Center tell us that of all the people in America who pulled an English Bible off the shelf today, 55% of them pulled down a KJV. I found this very surprising—and concerning. I love the KJV, I truly do. One tends to love one's mother's milk. But after many years using it exclusively and then many more using it alongside other good translations, I slowly came to realize how much I was missing through no fault of my own or of the KJV translators.

My book says not one negative word about the KJV translators' choices, but urges readers not to fail to take up the embarrassment of riches we have among English Bible translations.

Here's what I do in the book, chapter by chapter:

• I review what we're losing as the KJV ceases to be English-speaking Christianity's common standard.
• I question whether changes in English in the last 400 years are all noticed by contemporary readers.
• I explain the difference between "dead words" and "false friends"—words that have dropped out of the language and words that have changed meaning in subtle ways.
• I explain why Flesch-Kincaid analyses are not designed for archaic English, so the common claim that the KJV is at an X-grade reading level is in error.
• I define vernacular English and argue that it ought to be what English Bibles use.
• I answer ten common objections to using translations other than the KJV.
• I determine once and for all which Bible translation is best. =) (You'll have to read the chapter to see what I mean!)

I am earnestly praying that this little book will benefit the church.

[Jacob Aitken · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ward, Mark. Authorized: The Use and Misuse of the King James Version.

This is not an attack upon the King James Version. Ward probably spends more time praising and defending it. What it is, however, is a defense of the idea of translating, since our target language is always a moving target.

The KJV should be revered. As Ward notes, this version, like many older hymns, “bind generations together.” No one would dream of reading Psalm 23 at a graveside in any translation other than the KJV. We might as well anticipate one objection: is the KJV easier to memorize? No. Because it was a force of cultural osmosis, the KJV was reinforced through all media for centuries. That is why it “seems” easier.

The real difficulty with the KJV is not the obsolete words. You can pick up a book and figure it out. The true danger is in “false friends,” words that we use today but have changed in meaning. Ward lists several:

“How long halt ye between two opinions” (1 Kgs 18:21).

We use the word “halt” today. It means stop. That really does not make sense in Elijah’s speech, but we can still get the essence of what he means. At this point, we still have communication between the two languages. Halt, however, did not mean stop in this context. It means “limp,” as other translations note.

“God commendeth his love.”

We use the word “commend” today. Is that what Paul means in this passage? Is God putting forth his love as a good idea? Maybe. It kind of works. Is that what the word actually meant then, though? Not really. “Commendeth,” as noted by John Milton in 1644, is “to set off to advantage…to adorn.” That makes more sense.

Not only are the words misleading, but so is the punctuation. Elizabethan punctuation was not as defined as ours today. That is a very good point. Ward does not bring this part out, but have you read places in Jonathan Edwards where there seem to be “random” commas? Edwards is not guilty of comma splices. A few hundred years ago, commas often signaled “breathing spaces.”

“But fornication, and all uncleanness….is not convenient” (Eph. 5:3-4).

Does Paul really think that people think that filthiness is “convenient?” If you avoid fornication and the like because it is inconvenient, that is still a good life choice, but that is a rather odd reason for it. “Convenient,” obviously, means something else.

“Remove not thy neighbor’s landmark.”

Is God telling his people not to take away the boundary marker in their neighbor’s field? In a sense, yes. That is not quite what “remove” means. God is not saying, “Do not take it and get rid of it.” He is saying “Do not move it.” Do not change the property line. That makes more sense.

There are probably more “false friends” out there, but Ward establishes his point.

Is the KJV on a Fifth Grade Level?

No, it is not for the simple reason that what we call “a fifth grade level” is a moving target. As Ward notes, “Reading level assumes contemporary language.: No one, no matter how educated, and certainly no fifth grader, uses “besom when broom is available.”

Ward interacts with Joel Beeke’s otherwise excellent article on why one should use the KJV. Beeke has one comment that deserves some mention. Should we accommodate dumbed down English? Should we not strive for better? I like the idea. The problem is that such a standard means that C. S. Lewis, probably the finest prose stylist of the 20th century, wrote in a degenerated English. I am not willing to go that far.

At the end of the day, communication requires at least two things: understanding between you and me. The KJV, arguably the finest relic in the English language, does not always ensure understanding in communication.

[Jim · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is probably the most balanced take I’ve ever read on the usability of the KJV. Ward is a KJV guy, and he says we shouldn’t get away from it, but he also sees it’s shortcomings. His main point in this book is that we should all be using multiple Bible translations to study and teach.

He’s written it in a style meant to convert people to his point of view, though I don’t imagine there are that many people left who are KJV-only (and if they are they certainly aren’t going to read this book). But I didn’t enjoy it because of his arguments, I enjoyed it because of the history, and how he broke down some of the differences in translations, and his deep dives into KJV words.

The best part of the book for me was the look at the men who translated the KJV 400 years ago. In a preface they wrote for the KJV, they come across as incredibly humble. They considered the KJV to be a translation of the Bible, not the translation:

”We do not deny, nay, we affirm and avow, that the very poorest translation of the Bible in English set forth by men of our profession ... containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God: as the King’s speech which he uttered in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian and Latin, is still the King’s speech, though it be not interpreted by every translator with the like grace, nor peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, everywhere.”

In other words - the KJV is our attempt at this, but it’s not the definitive work.

I personally teach from the NIV, but study in the NIV, NASB, NKJV, and NLT. If you are reading this, leave your favorite Bible translation in the comments.

Really enjoyed this, and learned a lot.

[Z · Rating 5 out of 5]

A level-headed and winsome contribution to the discussion on English Bible translations — with an eye toward KJV-onlyism. Mark Ward managed to write a book that argues against KJV-onlyism while at the same time increasing my appreciation for the KJV and especially for the KJV translators. The “false friends” chapter is a linguistic insight worth the whole book. It’s a fairly short book, so that’s not saying much, but still.

Charitable, thorough, accessible, and just nerdy enough to be (quite) funny, this is the first book I’d recommend on the topic.

[Noah · Rating 5 out of 5]

Someone once said, if you can't question your convictions you shouldn't have them.

This was a very thought-provoking book on the KJV issue. As a KJV user myself this author did not turn me off by being hateful. He brought up several very good points that I'll need to chew on some more. Well done.

[Susan · Rating 5 out of 5]

I thought I had a pretty good grasp on the King James Version discussion. I thought I knew what I believed and I didn't think there was much else to be learned. This book proved me wrong.

Mark Ward handles this subject more graciously than anyone I have ever read or heard. He doesn't condemn anyone. He's not afraid to confront hard issues and answer real questions. He doesn't build straw man arguments, but instead walks the reader through a logical process in true "line upon line" careful study. He offers many, many examples to support his points and quotes such authorities as Bible authors and the King James translators themselves to demonstrate the value, the intent and the limitations of an English translation.

He's also not afraid to laugh at himself. Ward's book is immensely readable, with just the right touch of humor while not undermining the serious nature of his topic.

When you tell someone you're reading a book about the KJV, the reaction you usually get is: "Is it for it or against it?" The true value of Ward's book is that he is neither. He does not condemn the KJV, and in fact gives us many reasons to continue using it. But he also recognizes its limitations and, indeed, its significant shortcomings for today's readers. He builds his case around the idea that God's Word was intended to be read in the vernacular, and the Elizabethan English of the KJV is no longer the vernacular.

If you've ever heard arguments like the following, you'll find Ward's book enlightening:

- The KJV isn't too hard to read. It's written on a 5th grade level!
- KJV language is timeless. It's part of our cultural knowledge. We would lose so much!
- The KJV sounds more worshipful.
- The KJV is translated from the most accurate texts.
- The KJV is more literal than modern translations. It uses italics to denote additions by the translators and preserves the distinction between singular and plural pronouns.

Ward addresses each of these concerns carefully and thoughtfully. He does not attack; instead he teaches.

Here are my top five takeaways:

1. Because of language changes over time (and not just the obvious ones like obsolete words), we sometimes don't understand what we're reading--and we don't even know that we're not understanding.

2. The 5th-grade reading level argument is based on faulty analysis. Reading level computations do not consider obsolete words or the evolution of meaning. Instead, they are looking at length of sentences, number of words, and number of syllables. And that means you can't get an accurate reading level on Elizabethan English using modern reading level computation algorithms.

3. "Even when Elizabethan words are perfectly intelligible (and once readers get a tiny bit of practice, most are) they don't accurately represent what God said--because God spoke in the vernacular." (p. 79) Ouch.

4. From the KJV translators themselves: "For all that the godly learned were not content to have the Scriptures in the language which themselves understood, Greek and Latin...but all for the behoof and edifying of the unlearned which hungered and thirsted after righteousness, and had souls to be saved as well as they, they provided translations into the vulgar [i.e., vernacular] for their countrymen, insomuch that most nations under heaven did shortly after their conversion hear Christ speaking unto them in their mother tongue, not by the voice of their minister only, but also by the written word translated."

In other words, the argument that we can teach people what the KJV means is not good enough. People should be able to read--and understand--God's Word for themselves, not only in the English language, but also in the English that is spoken today, by the common person. They shouldn't have to rely on a preacher or teacher to explain the meaning of the words to them.

5. I love the KJV. There will never be a more beautiful rendering of Psalm 19: "The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race."

But I also have to recognize that my love of the KJV, its beautiful language, and its clear and significant impact on my life personally does not outweigh the value of understanding God's Word in plain language.

Ward concludes: "Stop looking for the best English Bible. It doesn't exist. God never said it would. Take up the embarrassment of riches we now have. Make the best of our multi-translation situation, because it's truly a great problem to have.

"What do we do with the KJV in the twenty-first century? We don't have to throw it out; I haven't...But it is a misuse of the KJV to ask it to do today what it did in 1611, namely, to serve as a vernacular English translation...We need God's Word in our language, not someone else's.

So which Bible translation is the best?

"All the good ones."

[Cbarrett · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was an absolute delight to read for several reasons. First, Mark is a friend and it is always exciting to see a friend's gifts on display for the glory of God and the good of his people. Mark loves God, loves God's people, and loves God's Word. And he loves to see people love God's Word. Second, I grew up, like Mark, on heavy doses of the KJV and have an appreciation for it. I grew up and ministered for 11 years in a denomination that used the KJV for public worship. I was raised in a home where the KJV was preferred for public worship, where other versions were valued, and was strongly encouraged to read and consult these other versions. In fact, Mark quotes my father a few times in his book. And he does so respectfully. All that to say, my background heightens my appreciation for Mark's work. Third, the book was a delight because of Mark's clarity of thought, pastoral sensitivity, respectful engagement, and timely humor in classic Ward fashion. I was able to read the pre-pub manuscript and enjoyed that. But holding this one in its final form brought a smile.

Mark wisely presents the question of the best translation by, in his words, changing the paradigm. Instead of asking which one is best, why not embrace the gift of "our multi-translation situation?" Pick up a Bible in your vernacular and read it. God's word is revelation. It is meant to be understood.

[John Uit de Flesch · Rating 4 out of 5]

This review is so tough to write. There are many truths and facts in this book that deserve attention. The author writes positively and graciously in his approach. His core point is well made, and that is that the text of the 1769 KJV is no longer the common tongue and needs to be updated. He makes this point abundantly clear through example and illustration.
Another point that he pushes is that believers should read a variety of translations. This point has merit, but is not completely embraced by me. Read on to see why.

The biggest flaw in his book is that he completely dismisses the varying Greek textual families in choosing a translation. We read the Bible to understand what God said. He emphasizes understanding, but dismisses the “what God said” part. I’m aware the Greek textual variances “only” reflect a few percentage points of the whole, but it definitely matters—and especially to those who read the KJV.

I felt like I was a part of a bait and switch. His ultimate goal is to get readers to leave the main use of the KJV-1769 for a list of modern versions he gives at the end—none of which are TR-based. For most people who have already left the KJV—they already are pro-critical text or don’t care. This ending switch reveals to me that the author had a goal beyond just getting people to read a more understandable Bible. If this were his only goal, he could have/should have recommended the NKJV and MEV in his conclusion. Instead, he gives his approved list—and every single one of them is based on a different Greek text of the New Testament! You can’t just dismiss the Greek Text argument. Then, having done that, to exclude TR based versions in his recommended list just didn’t sit well with me. (I contacted the author about this point. He assured me it wasn't intentional, and his updated edition will recommend TR editions.)

Is the KJV-1769 in the common tongue? No it is not. Do we need to understand our Bibles? Yes we do. Should we jump on the any version will do bandwagon? No, we must not. There are TR based options that are easier to understand. Don’t let the vital piece about understanding cause you to lose sight of accuracy—what God actually said. Accuracy and understanding make for a good translation.

(For scholars and pastors, I regularly consult a variety of versions when I study to preach. However, I can analyze the Greek textual variants with a glance or two, and know if it reflects the same text or not. The average person in the pew cannot, and therefore I don’t recommend critical text Bibles to those who can’t use Greek effectively.)

[Melissa Koser · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've been KJV-only because I've always been told it was the most reliable translation. And how could I know otherwise? I'm never going to learn Hebrew and Greek. This book is written for people like me, who will never get the opportunity to dig deeper (or maybe just don't feel like bothering). The author was very good at showing reverence to the fine old translation, while explaining that perhaps it's not the best version for today. After reading this book, I’m open to looking into other Bible versions. Ward has excellent arguments that dealt with (almost) every reservation I had:
1. When first published, the KJV was considered untrustworthy (just like modern translations) because it had been written in plain, “vulgar” English rather than the more elevated language of Latin. Sound familiar?
2. Many words (known as “false friends”) don’t quite mean today what they did back in 1611. Even though I was raised reading the KJV from day one, I discovered that I’ve been missing the deeper meaning of some verses due to how language changes. And I’d never know to go look into the deeper meaning, because these words are familiar and their current meanings fit the passage just fine.
3. God wants us to clearly understand His words. The original New Testament was written in koine Greek (“common”), because it was meant for all to read, rich or poor, learned or ignorant. And in 1 Corinthians 14, Paul states that plain speech is preferred over the spiritual gift of speaking in tongues; God wants His message to get across.

There were other persuasive arguments, but these made the most impact on me. That being said, I wish Mark Ward had gone into more detail on the differences between the Textus Receptus and the Critical Text; clearly he has done tons of research and gone where us plebs cannot. I’ve always been told that the CT omits some key verses and portions of verses that are found in the TR, but he dismisses those concerns on p.114 with the offhand comment that they are “minor differences. Ancient typos.” Still, he created a website that displays the differences at https://kjvparallelbible.org/ .(Sigh) I guess I can do some work on my own. ;)
Some quotes that made me reconsider my KJV-only stance:
“If God picked standard, contemporary, normal, common, vernacular Greek for the New Testament when he had other options (and he did), shouldn’t we choose to do the equivalent in English?” (p.97)
“The KJV translators had no qualms saying that even relatively poor translations don’t just contain God’s words but are God’s word.” (p.128)

[Josh John · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thoughtful, engaging, and persuasive. The author acknowledges his purpose is not to settle the debate over Greek text. He argues that the archaic English in the AV can no longer accomplish well the task that it accomplished in 1611. This work provided much to think upon for a KJV user who cherishes, reads, and loves the translation.

I especially appreciate the author’s charitable tone. Highly recommend!

[Joshua Rodriguez · Rating 5 out of 5]

The author clearly communicates the need for a newer widely-accepted translation rather than the archaic KJV. I would agree with him. However, although he briefly touches on textual accuracy, I think he skims over this topic rather quickly. I also understand that the point of this book is not to provide a complete solution for the textual debate but to cause the reader to delve deeper into what he believes or should believe about English translations.

Overall, he provides serious reasons to consider using other versions, especially for daily devotions and soul-winning. I definitely see myself using a variety of versions for my own personal study in the near-future.

[Nathan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Delightful read. I highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to know what English Bible they ought to use, for anyone who loves and uses the King James Version (and for those who neglect it), and to those who have been judged by or judgmental of others (or both) because of the Bible translation we or they use. Mark writes as a lover of the English Bible and the English language, irenic and respectful, full of a desire to help all in Christ's Church. His style is winsome and anecdotal, and he very kindly avoids technical discussions.

[Brian Koser · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ward has a lot of good to say about the King James Version of the Bible. He grew up reading it, memorized its verses, and still uses it for study. In Authorized, he argues against using it as your only translation. The main thesis is that the KJV is not in today's language, leading to misunderstandings with archaic words or words that have changed meaning. He addresses all the counter-arguments I've heard growing up in churches and attending a college that only used the KJV.

My position for the last few years is that I wouldn't give the KJV to someone not familiar with the language. But I continued to use it because I grew up with it, my church uses it, and I understood the language fine. This book showed me that there are a lot of words and phrases I thought I understood, but don't. I read the ESV a few years ago; I'll pick another translation for my next read-through.

[Chris · Rating 5 out of 5]

Just finished the book a few minutes ago.

The book commendeth Mark's obvious love for linguistics, the Bible, and Christians by presenting a clear argument with grace.

Two quick thoughts of praise:
- The book is the perfect length, which is not a common feature of many books. Books often feel like butter stretched over too much bread. But here, I needed each sentence and not one more.
- The structure of the book advanced with real clarity, covertly raising questions in my mind and then subsequently explicitly asking and answering them. It was nearly eerie and—dare I say—Lewis-like. But it caused a sort of push and pull between author and reader that generated interest and cemented retention.

While I came into the read agreeing with the thesis already, I realized my agreement was practically more like intellectual assent. Truthfully, this book is an argument against one-translation-onlyism or rather an argument FOR using all the good translations. Even if you are not (or never have been) a KJV-onliest, you probably actively use only one English translation. This book explains why that's not a good thing.

In Mark's words, "Which Bible translation is best? All the good ones." So use them all.

[Emily Wildt · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was a fascinating read. As someone who grew up reading only KJV until I was in my 20’s this was helpful in understanding how the English language has changed over the years, and how important it is to share the gospel, read the gospel and understand it in a language we can understand. Highly recommend for people that struggle to give up the beloved KJV Bible.

[Hillary Johnson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good book that might have been a wee bit over my head. But it gave me a sufficient answer in my quest to figure out this whole KJV only debate. I bought this book assuming it was KJV only and it’s not. The author asks, “which one is best?” The author answers, “the good ones.” I think he lays out clearly what a good translation is and what it is not.

“English speakers are looking for the wrong thing when we look for best. We need to look instead for useful… we need to ask: which translations are useful for preaching? For evangelism? For reading thru in a year? For memorization?”

[Megan · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was an absolute pleasure to read. Ward is a gifted writer whose love of language comes across clearly in the way he expresses himself.
As to the book itself, I was expecting Ward to overthrow the KJV-only crowd once and for all. Although he does clearly explain why the Bible in vernacular is important, I came away from reading with a desire to read the KJV myself! Ward’s view is balanced, gracious, and thought provoking.

[Meghan John · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wonderfully gracious and thought-provoking. I absolutely recommend this book.

A quote: The existence of multiple English Bible translations is a benefit to us all, not a justification for banner hoisting and wagon-circling. I hate to see Bibles becoming symbols of division: "I am of Crossway!" "I am of Zondervan!" "I am of B&H!"

[Ellie · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a well-argued and fair exploration of the debate on "what Bible translation is best" and what people who insist on only using the King James version are missing. The author's writing style is friendly and often funny. Would recommend to Christians unsure about the question, not that any of them would ever want my opinion LOL.

As a non-Christian who's interested in translation differences, I was already on board with the conclusion and didn't need to be persuaded, but enjoyed reading this anyways. What was most illuminating for me was how he addressed the most common pro-KJV-only arguments, since I'm not familiar with the common points of this debate. (I had no idea that computer analysis of "reading level" is purely based on word length and thus tells us almost nothing about how hard a text actually is to read! I always assumed that those algorithms compared text to a database of how common words are in English, or something.)

A summary of the key reasons:
• KJV is hard to understand for modern readers not just in obvious ways but in subtle ways ("false friend" words that have changed meaning, etc), so people often won't realize they're missing the meaning unless they can compare to a modern translation
• The KJV translators didn't intend their work to be the definitive English Bible forever, but wanted to write in language that the common uneducated people could easily understand
• The original New Testament was written in the vernacular of the time, and the founding Christians would tell us to use vernacular translations if we could ask them

At one point he answers the opposition point "you wouldn't translate Shakespeare, would you?" with the response that actually, why NOT, many people today would benefit from reading Shakespeare with the language updated to a modern vernacular -- I found this fascinating because I had to confront my instinctive negative reaction. Why do I read the NRSV but dislike the idea of modernizing Shakespeare plays? How much of a difference does it make that Shakespeare was originally written in English? Something for me to think about.

Anyways, the author's conclusion is the one that is to me obvious but may not be so to his audience, which is that the ability to compare multiple translations of a work will get readers closer to the "true" meaning of it in the original language than any one translation can on its own. Readers of the Bible are lucky in that they have dozens of good translations to pick from, all available for free online and with ready-made comparison tools!

[Shawn Durham · Rating 5 out of 5]

Authorized: The Use & Misuse of the KJV

What Bible translation is the best? Why are there so many different translations? Is the KJV the ONLY good translation? Are all other translations “bad?”.

In this detailed, yet fairly short book, Mark Ward gives us reasons why WE SHOULD still read the KJV, but he also gives us reasons why we SHOULD NOT be KJV Only!
•
•
In ch. 1-2, Ward informs us of what we would lose if we abandoned the KJV altogether. One of those being that we lose “scripture memory by osmosis”. When someone thinks of Psalm 23, for example, most think of the phrase “the Lord is my Shepherd I shall not want”. Many of the verses we have heard and memorized for so long will me meaningless if the KJV is abandoned altogether.
•
•
In ch. 3, Ward speaks of “dead” words & “false friends”. Dead words are words that are obsolete to us today, but was completely understandable in 1611, (collop, durst, pate, emerod, etc...). When Ward speaks of “false friends”, he is referring to words that, although we still use today, have a totally different meaning than it did in 1611. (The word “halt” 1 Ki. 18:21. The word “commendeth” in Rom 5:8, and the word “convenient” in Eph. 5:3-4, among others.
•
•
In ch. 4, Ward explains the reading level of the KJV, and how that the assumption that the KJV is at a 5th grade reading level is not only false, but deceiving. He explains that the computer method used for this test, seeing as it is a computer generated test, cannot actually show us the understanding of a certain age group. Rather, the “5th grade” reading level is based by how many syllables there are per word, not necessarily on the understandability of a certain word. Example: the word “wit” only has one syllable, while the word “coffee” has 2. This test would show that “wit” is easier to read than “coffee”, but what does wit mean? Just because something may be “easier” to read, doesn’t make it easier to understand.
•
•
In ch. 5-6, Ward explains the value of the English language, and offers 10 objections to those who believe that the KJV is the only trustworthy translation. 1 of those being the ever so popular question (which I have heard myself), “why dumb down the Bible)”.
•
•
Lastly, in ch. 7 Ward just speaks of differing translations, & their reliability.

[Chad · Rating 4 out of 5]

Helpfully and with kindness makes the case that because the language of the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible isn't easily understood by modern readers, they should use modern translations instead. Ward outlines his argument as follows:
1. We should read the Bible in our own language.
2. The KJV isn't in our language.
3. Therefore we should update the KJV to be in our language, or read vernacular translations.

His premise in the book:

"I therefore do not think the KVJ is sufficiently readable to be relied upon as a person's only or main translation, or a church's or Christian school's only or main translation.

Ward doesn't recommend one particular translation; he recommends that you read and study more than one translation, and he names 7.

Ward only briefly touches on the fact that the KJV is based on a different textual/manuscript tradition than modern translations; he says, "my focus in this book is English, not Greek" and "I am maintaining a studied neutrality on the question of textual criticism throughout this book" and "textual criticism has no bearing on my overall argument."

I read this because the author was interviewed on the podcast of Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary.

Notes
The Man in the Hotel and the Emperor of English Bibles
Main problem with KJV is that it's too difficult to follow; it's "foreign and ancient."

Dead Words and “False Friends”
Biggest problem with KJV vocabulary isn't dead, obsolete words; it's "false friends": words and phrases that have changed in meaning. None of these affect doctrine, but the impede understanding.

What Is the Reading Level of the KJV?
Readability tools such as Flesch-Kincaid aren't useful for evaluating Bible translations, because they measure a word's complexity by syllable count; they don't measure how understandable a word is.

A Bible that indents paragraphs rather than verses is better for grasping context.

The Value of the Vernacular
Bible itself requires that it be made available in vernacular (Matt 28:19; 1 Cor 14). NT writers quote Septuagint, which was vernacular translation of OT.

In Jesus' model prayer, the Lord's Prayer, He used the vernacular, not elevated language. We should do the same.

The KJV is itself a revision of Bibles that came before it, and the KJV was revised at least 6 times (the last being in 1769).

Ten Objections to Reading Vernacular Bible Translations

The New Testament in the original Greek is not a work of literary art: it is not written in a solemn, ecclesiastical language, it is written in the sort of Greek which was spoken over the eastern Mediterranean after Greek had become an international language and therefore lost its real beauty and subtlety. —C.S. Lewis

God didn't choose a grandiloquent or literary or archaic form of Greek. If God picked standard, contemporary, normal, common, vernacular Greek for the New Testament when he had other options (and he did), shouldn't we choose to do the equivalent in English?

We don't need "thee," "thou," and "ye," to determine singular or plural; context almost always tells.

KJV's lack of quotation marks make accurate reading difficult.

In 16th century, "thee," "thou," "thy" were informal ways of addressing one's equals, intimates, and inferiors (according to Oxford English Dictionary); they weren't exalted, reverential, or formal.

KJV inherited use of "thou" and "you" (and related words) from Tyndale, who used them for singular and plural, not formal and informal. This makes NT sound formal when plural 2nd-person pronouns are used, and informal when 2nd-person singular pronouns are used. This doesn't accurately represent original Greek.

Using italics to show words that aren't in original isn't helpful. Because a 100% word-for-word translation from Hebrew or Greek to English wouldn't make sense, it's necessary when translating from one language to another to add words. Italics are only beneficial to those who know biblical languages, or who compare multiple Bible translations.

KJV, NASB, ESV tend to be more formal. NIV, NET, NLT tend to be more functional.

Use formal and functional translations. Each type has its advantages.

Author created KJVParallelBible.org to show differences between Textus Receptus (used by KJV and NKJV) and Nestle-Aland/United Bible Societies text (used by nearly all other translations).

About differences between Textus Receptus and NA/UBS text: "In my judgment, the vast majority of textual differences are just this inconsequential, and usually less so. Whole chapters … contain no differences that even show up in translation."

"I am happy to recommend translations using any available edition of the Greek New Testament [NA/UBS text]."

Until exclusive readers of the KJV read a contemporary English Bible translation like the ESV all the way through, and until they study in depth some individual passages, they won't realize how much they've been misunderstanding.

Which Bible Translation Is Best?

The vast majority of differences between Bible translations have nothing to do with Greek and Hebrew textual variants—or flash points like gender ideology. Most boil down to differing audiences (poorer readers vs. educated ones) or to legitimate differences of opinion on the best way to communicate certain phrases.

Author calls the ESV, NASB, CSB, NIV, NLT, NET "good evangelical Bible translations."

"Stop looking for the 'best" English Bible. … Make the best of our multi-translation situation, because it's a truly great problem to have."

Epilogue
Recommended translations (more formal to more functional)
• Lexham English Bible
• NASB
• ESV
• CSB (Christian Standard Bible)
• NIV
• NET
• NLT

Use the Text Comparison tool in free Logos Basic Bible software.

[Vanessa M. Lee · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a very well-written book! There's thought provoking areas as well as moments that make you laugh. I do still enjoy reading my KJV bibles but also like the fact that we have so many other versions at our fingertips! Why not, get a broader and more richer view of the Bible!

[Johnny G · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great book! Simple and straightforward!
I love Mark's gracious attitude in this book!

[Loraena · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have never been a part of a church that believed the King James Bible is the only Bible, but I did grow up attending "KJV-preference" churches and sometimes "KJV-onlyism" wasn't very far away.

When I was a teenager, I remember a college student reading a verse during a Bible study and she prefaced it saying, "I have a NASB and it says it like this: ___". It was the first time I remember someone I looked up to using anything other than the KJV and I remember thinking, "We can do that?" And also, "Wow, that makes so much more sense." From then on, I had a preference for modern translations. It's been almost 20 years since I attended a church that used the KJV exclusively and I have never missed it, not even a little. Though I still have snippets of King James English in my head that I memorized as a child.

Back to the point, if you haven't spent time in KJV-loyal circles, you might not understand the need for this book, but it's worth reading as both a history lesson in Bible translation and a look at common Bible usage over the years. That might sound dry, but it's not. Mark is a phenomenal writer and he somehow manages to be extremely thorough while also being personal, humorous, and succinct at the same time. He opens by sharing his own history with the KJV and his esteem shines clearly. He then offers both logical and theological reasons as to why we need a Bible in our own language and why the KJV is no longer that for 21st century Americans, and he does so with much grace and care. He never finds fault with the translation or its original translators, but he does know his stuff.

In the spirit of full disclosure, Mark and I have been friends since we were teenagers at summer camp where we proceeded to discuss all the problems of the world, theological and otherwise, within our conservative Christian subculture. Our friendship continued into college when we ended up at the same university. I was honored he sent me a copy of his book and asked me to review it. All thoughts and opinions are my own.

[T · Rating 5 out of 5]

I wish every thinking person in the pew, every pastor, and every person who is serving in the church would read this book. I am surprised by how few reviews there are and how few people have read it! Mark Ward, Jr. is very gracious in his approach to the subject. I will be forever thankful to the friend who called the book to my attention!

[Jeremy]

MoS interview here. Logos interview here. GPTS podcast interview here. Faithlife TV film (trailer).

Related videos:
Part 1: "The Top Five Things We Lose as the KJV Goes Away"
Part 2: "Another KJV Verse I Never Understood"
Part 3: "Dead Words and False Friends in the KJV"
Part 4: "Is the KJV at a Fifth-Grade Reading Level?"
Part 5: "What Does the Bible Teach about Bible Translation?"

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

The book, written by Mark Ward who loves the Authorized King James Version, starts with the case for retaining the AV/KJV as the main English Bible. However, he goes on to make a strong case for the idea that the AV has had its day. There are not only words that have become archaic there are those which Ward calls'false friends' which have changed meaning although they are still used. These mislead to-day's readers into a misunderstanding of the text. He notes changes in grammar and punctuation that have a similar effect.

We live in an age where there are now non-church goers of the third or fourth generations, even here in Northern Ireland. The case that we need to use a more modern version such as the New King James Version or English Standard Version is strengthened by this work.

This book strikes me as tragic. Why? Those who do not need to read it will and those who do, will not.

[Todd Bryant · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good read on an important subject. This book is not a rebuttal of KJV-onlyism nor is it an explanation of Byzantine vs. Alexandrian vs. Eclectic (Nestle-Aland) manuscripts...though he does discuss those things. It's more of a personal journey by the author. He grew up reading the KJV and, although he still loves it, he has learned to appreciate modern translations, especially in study. We lose much as a Christian society when Christians don't study the same translation. The author admits this up front. The question remains as to whether there is a benefit in using a translation in our modern vernacular - and that's his main point.

As long as one isn't dogmatically KJVO, this is a good read.

[Jeremiah · Rating 5 out of 5]

Favorite book of 2019. Ward might be my Spirit animal. Half way through there wasn't any thing new or revolutionary if you get read anything on the subject. What is revolutionary is the tone. I have never read a more gracious book on any subject. The final "twist" was unexpected but earned by the extreme good natured chapters leading up to it.

If i cared about such things I would remove a star for using end notes. But I don't, so I won't.

[Shane Walters · Rating 5 out of 5]

Tremendous and well-written book

Excellent insight on a sensitive topic for many people. A valuable resource written in an excellent spirit and very balanced.