This year marks the 400th anniversary of the King James Version. Without controversy for most of those years, this Authorized Version has been the Bible of the English-speaking Protestant church. Although not on the Mayflower as the version of choice, it soon became the Bible that accompanied the advance of the church throughout the English-speaking world, and God has blessed its use for generations to the good of the church. In recent years, however, the King James Version has generated controversy, and its use or nonuse has become a divisive issue within the church. With a plethora of more modern versions available, some mark the KJV as a relic that after 400 years has become too old to relate to the current generation. Others have elevated the KJV to such a position that essentially limits the preservation of God's Word to its pages. Unfortunately, many defenders of the KJV employ arguments loaded with emotionally charged rhetoric that is factually misleading and often wrong. This kind of rhetoric does more harm than good to the case for maintaining the use of the KJV. These kinds of arguments may appeal to some who want easy answers but are unacceptable to those who are aware of the facts and are looking for reasonable explanations.

This year marks the 400th anniversary of the King James Version. Without controversy for most of those years, this Authorized Version has been the Bible of the English-speaking Protestant church. Although not on the Mayflower as the version of choice, it soon became the Bible that accompanied the advance of the church throughout the English-speaking world, and God has blessed its use for generations to the good of the church. In recent years, however, the King James Version has generated controversy, and its use or nonuse has become a divisive issue within the church. With a plethora of more modern versions available, some mark the KJV as a relic that after 400 years has become too old to relate to the current generation. Others have elevated the KJV to such a position that essentially limits the preservation of God's Word to its pages. Unfortunately, many defenders of the KJV employ arguments loaded with emotionally charged rhetoric that is factually misleading and often wrong. This kind of rhetoric does more harm than good to the case for maintaining the use of the KJV. These kinds of arguments may appeal to some who want easy answers but are unacceptable to those who are aware of the facts and are looking for reasonable explanations.