The story goes that Ma Ferguson, Texas’ first woman governor, was infuriated by the suggestion that Spanish speaking immigrants would benefit from public school classes taught in their own native language. In a fit of rage, she picked up a copy of the King James Version of the Bible and exclaimed, “If English was good enough for Jesus, it’s good enough for Texas!”

Victor Hugo said ‘England has two books – the Bible and Shakespeare. England made Shakespeare, but the Bible made England.’

This year marks 400 years since the’”THE HOLY BIBLE, Containing the Old Testament, AND THE NEW: Newly Translated out of the Original tongues: & with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesties special Commandment” was completed in 1611. (It only became the King James or ‘authorised’ version in 1814).

You can have a look at that first published version at this website.

Some of the things being done to celebrate this anniversary include a reading of all 1189 chapters (31103 verses) and ‘66 Books’ , a piece of performance art in which well known writers, actors and artists respond creatively to one book of the Bible. And a lecture series at the Cathedral here in Napier.

A wide range of people defend the King James Version passionately, from some who see the KJV translation as the one true translation and all others as perversion, to well-known atheists Richard Dawkins and Philip Pullman who show a deep respect for this landmark translation.

This translation was commissioned by, not altogether surprisingly, King James VI of Scotland and I of England. One of his instructions was that the translation should reflect his beliefs about the divine rights of kings and the structure of the Church of England and to limit the influence of ‘puritan’ ideas, prevalent in some of the reformation translations.

Forty-seven translators, all members of the Church of England, and all but one of them clergy set about their task, translating ’ out of the original tongues, and with the former translations diligently compared and revised, by His Majesty’s special command.”

I Imagine that for some of its readers and hearers, the King James Version was the first version of the Bible that they held in their hands and read.
Nowadays, perhaps, we do not hear it with such freshness. Perhaps we hear it in a ‘holy bible voice’. Perhaps because of the 17c language we do not hear the difference between the lofty poetry of the Psalms or Job and the colloquial Greek of Mark’s gospel. This distinction may have been apparent to 17c ears but not to ours.

The translators of the King James Version were ‘opening the window, letting in the light that breaks the shell, so that we may eat the kernel’. And that is the constant task of those translating the Bible, whether into a more vivid, contemporary English, or into other languages so that all may hear God’s word.

Nicholas King SJ sums it up for me when he says: ‘ We should, in this year, admire the beauty of the King James Version; but our deeper task is to listen to the radical and subversive word of God. For that purpose, no one translation is any better than any other.’

Whatever version you like to read, may the Word of God spring fresh from its pages as you read.

All blessings,

Sally