“Legacy of the King James Bible” Leland Ryken (ESV literary stylist)

“Legacy of the King James Bible”
Leland Ryken (ESV literary stylist)

• “If I were forced to choose between the King James Bible and a modern colloquial translation, I would choose the KJV” (p. 14)
• “It is because people like Lancelot Andrewes flourished in the first decade of the seventeenth century—and do not now—that the greatest translation of the Bible could be made then, and cannot now.” (p.33)
• “This is not to deny that a modern reader can be educated into what words meant for the translators and their contemporary audience....I find myself looking far and wide to find examples in the King James Bible of words whose meanings have changed so drastically that the translation can be called inaccurate. Perhaps the number of these is statistically insignificant. But for readers unfamiliar with the King James Bible, the mere presence of archaic language and constructions is usually interpreted as evidence that the King James Bible is inaccurate. This is a false impression (p. 63)
• “literary excellence” (p. 117)
• “ultimate touchstone” (p. 121)
• “the gold standard for a literary Bible” (p. 122)
• “literary excellence of the KJV is nothing short of miraculous” (p. 123)
• “variety and flexibility” (p. 130). “prose rhythm” “matchless” (p. 139)
• “oral book whose excellence shines brightest when we hear it read aloud” (p. 140)
• “the poetry of the King James Bible is rhythmically the best among English translations” (p. 146)
• “the King James magic” (p. 149)
• “the most aphoristic book in the English language” (p. 155)
• “the virtually unanimous preference of the literary establishment for the King James Bible over the other Bible translations” (p. 159)
• “It will come as no surprise that English and American authors as well as literary critics, prefer the King James Version. I suspect, though, that the vehemence with which they prefer the KJV will come as a mild shock. The problem that I faced in composing this chapter was avoiding overkill. I have accordingly kept the chapter brief. I will note in passing that I do not remember ever having encountered a member of the literary establishment who preferred any English Bible other than the KJV” (p. 160)
• “we should celebrate a victory (success and influence), lament a loss (common English Bible, decline of biblical literacy), and resolve to hold on to what is excellent” (p. 229)
• “Claims by modern translators and Bible scholars that the Christian public is fortunate to have been delivered from the archaisms and occasional inaccuracies of the KJV turn out to be hollow. If Bible knowledge in our day has declined across the board, where is the alleged gain from modern translations? (p. 230)”