The King James Version of the Bible has influenced countless writers through the centuries, and is arguably the most beautiful translation. I can't hear the 23rd Psalm in any other version. The KJV contains more idioms still in popular use than even Shakespeare, and is the most culture-changing collection of books in the history of the English language. For a quick overview of how it came to be, and a look at its importance, read Jon M. Sweeney's "Verily, Verily: The KJV - 400 Years of Influence and Beauty" (2011, Zondervan). Then make sure you have a copy on your bookshelf and read it. There's really nothing like it.

For my liturgical sensibilities: relevant only as to the Christmas Eve readings, and the 23rd Psalm for (most) funerals

I don't read it devotionally, but I do still read the Authorized Version frequently (and the Tyndale, but that's just to compare). Doing so reminds me of my childhood and makes me think, really think, about writing.

I love the KJV for the beauty of the language. I don't know that the version is relevant for church services, except from time to time, as a treat for folks like me. And I don't read it devotionally, except on rare occasions. Like Ana, I wouldn't have the 23rd Psalm in any other version at a service, if I had a say.

Our English language would, indeed, be the poorer without the many phrases so often written or spoken by those who do not even know they quote the KJV.

June Butler

I often have thought that it is a shame that, in church use, we surrendered the KJV to the fundamentalists. I know that the translation boom in conservative circles is eclipsing the primacy of the KJV now, so maybe it is time to "get it back" for the church.
Our Cathedral has been using Rite I for its regular Sunday Eucharist celebrations during lent at the request mostly of our younger Cathedral attendees. We have, however, still been using NRSV for the readings. I really was longing for the KJV to match the language of the Rite. The Healy Willan setting for Rite I is such a joy, I'm just regretful that we're back to Rite II for Easter, as I will miss singing the Gloria from that rite.
For my own "devotional" uses, I am beginning to find a certain preference for the KJV (in spite of the limitations that biblical scholars will tell us about in the translation). I find that the traditional language "slows me down" a bit and allows me to "savor" the words more. Sprinkling a little bit of the Vulgate on top for good measure for particularly memorable phrases also helps (e.g. iam foetet, already he stinks, from this past Sunday's Gospel). Taize has done a lot with Latin and the fact that it "bears up" better with repetition than the current vernacular. I wonder if the KJV might recapture a similar role?

The King James Version will be forever relevant in my life because it is the version of my childhood. It is how I learned Scripture. Whether my children know it or not, it is relevant to them because it is how I transmit Scripture to them from memory. The KJV, perhaps, is becoming an oral tradition more than a written one.