#DanMcClellan has just reminded me of how when I was young the King James Version of the #Bible was regarded as archaic and incomprehensible gibberish in places. ("Help meet"? What's a "help meet"? And why are there Sith in Ezekiel?) But the modern translations were viewed at the time in certain quarters of the CoE as a bit sus. Some of the ones that are well respected nowadays hadn't even been done yet.
McClellan points to 2 Corinthians 2. I haven't really bothered with the KJV for decades, but I just compared the KJV's version of that to the NET, the NIV, the RSV, and the NRSVUE.
My goodness! The KJV is even worse than I remember from my childhood.
The sad truth is that the KJV was already archaic in 1611. There's stuff in there that an Elizabethan English speaker would have had difficulty with; let alone me approaching 4 centuries later.
