Why do so many people speak King James era English in church but modern English the rest of the time?

Question

It seems to be a waning a bit, but still, in hundreds of thousands of churches around the USA (I'm not positive about Europe, though I'd doubt it; they seem to have more sense) people pray, sing hymns and even sometimes address each other or "rebuke Satan" in Elizabethan English.

It's sometimes almost as if they believe God would prefer to be addressed in that manner. I've heard "tradition" as an answer, but it'd seem to me that modern Christians wouldn't want to hearken back to the days when members of their faith committed some of the worst atrocities in world history.

I've also heard it said that somehow it shows respect and reverence to God by recognizing the weight of years between then and now and the great impact the King James Bible had on the world; indeed, the oldest known book in print still intact is a King James Bible. It also separates matters of Scripture from secular matters, which could also be construed as a show of respect.

But isn't it a wee bit silly?

The Gutenberg Bible was the first substantial book printed with movable type. I'm not talking about handwritten parchment strung together with bamboo.

Answer 1

That's just the way lots of people were raised. When your grandparents went to church, there was only one English Bible. (There were already others, but they weren't in common usage.)

This is really dying out. I hear "thee" and "thou" in prayers only rarely. (BTW, in "King James English" "thee" is singular, "you" is plural.) And it's been years since I've heard somebody say, "I use the King James Version. If it was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me!" ;-)

Answer 2

PP, the Bible’s message is obvious for people who will examine it with an open recommendations and look for to understand its which capacity. the project comes while human beings attempt to make the be conscious in great condition their preconceived recommendations. that may no longer the fault of the Bible, yet of the folk who attempt to tension the Bible to assert regardless of they like it to assert. in many circumstances the disagreement isn't plenty with the translation of the Scriptures, yet with the applying.

Answer 3

Its not unusual in religious practice to use language different from the regular day to day speech. Its a way to seperate liturgical ritual, considered sacred, from secular activities. Its common in many world religions, not just christianity. I think this is why the dropping of Latin from the Catholic liturgy was upsetting to so many people.

Answer 4

Yes it is. I don't know why some people do that. You're right. It's almost like they think God will hear them better or it shows more respect by speaking that way which isn't the case at all.

Answer 5

NAH - what ever it takes to get into a worshipful frame of mind.

Have actually been in a service that was SOOOOOOO contemprary - I thought God may have been offended - but I believe He appreciated the effort.

By the Way - I read a New American Standard Bible - not KJV.

Answer 6

In every translation, misinterpretation is inherent. Translating an english version into a newer version would make these misinterpretations more apparent. Of course my reasoning is speculative.

Answer 7

for heavens sake, there are many books older than the bible that are still extant. where did you get such a silly idea? the oldest parts of the bible are only about 3,500 years old. check out China my friend. also India. and especially Tibet.

Answer 8

wee bit, I use the New Revised Standard Version, as does my priest in the Episcopal church

Answer 9

Not in Mav's church. Mav's church speaks plain old everyday English.

Answer 10

What doeth thoust mean