Unto thee will I pray
Psalm 5.2

For several hundred years English-speaking people in all parts of the world have been accustomed to address their prayers and worship to God in this manner, but in recent years there has been a tendency to relinquish the use of Thou, Thee, Thy, and Thine both in prayer and in modem translations of the Bible. Among the translations retaining these forms in speech addressed to God are found the Revised Standard Version and the New English Bible, which have both been the subject of critical reviews in the Quarterly Record from time to time. The promoters of the N.E.B. made their position clear in their “Handbook”, “It was thought that the public for whom the N.E.B. was intended was not generally ready for the use of ‘you’ in address to God, with all the overtones of familiarity and casual speech that this would bring with it”. This was the view expressed with reference to the New Testament of 1961, and evidently confirmed in 1970 when the complete Bible was published, retaining Thou, Thee etc.

Although several more recent modem versions, including the Good News Bible and the New International Version, have completely eliminated these forms of speech, there are no doubt many people, attending places of worship where these versions are read, quoted and expounded, who much prefer to address the Almighty as Thou, and are disturbed to hear the more colloquial forms of speech used in public prayer. Others, after some years of practice, have accepted the innovation, and are not particularly concerned whether the person conducting a service of worship uses the language of the Authorised Version or that of the Good News Bible.

Reverence in Worship

Advocates of the long established usage, and advocates of the new, are apt to misrepresent each other’s position, while maintaining their own with much feeling, but not always with much regard for the facts. Critics of the modem colloquial style sometimes assert that it is irreverent to address God as you, but God only, who is able to search the heart and mind, can see where there is reverence and where there is not. It is possible on the one hand to use the most elegant and high-sounding language in prayer, and to fall far short of a truly reverent approach to the Majesty on high. On the other hand it is possible for a barely literate person with a very limited vocabulary, and lacking in experience of the other forms of speech, to draw near to the throne of grace with a simple prayer, poorly expressed, but heard in heaven as a reverent utterance of the heart. Reverence is indeed a most important factor in private and in public worship, in prayer, in praise, and in the reading and hearing of God's Word. In our approach to Him whose ways are above our ways, and whose thoughts are above our thoughts, “as high as the heavens are above the earth”, speech, thought and conduct conducive to reverence, and expressive of reverence, should be encouraged. It would ill become us to discourage or disparage a reverent approach to God expressed in either way.

Hebrew, Greek, and English Usage

Critics of the use of Thou and Thee in prayer and in the Bible often contend that there is no such distinction in the Hebrew or Greek underlying the English rendering. This argument is sometimes presented in a most misleading manner, ignoring the very clear distinction between singular and plural, which is lost in a modem English rendering. One of many examples may be found in Luke 22.31 “Satan hath desired to have you (plural, referring to the Apostles), but I have prayed for thee (singular, meaning Peter) that thy faith fail not.” In the New International Version, which has you for the singular as well as for the plural, a footnote has to be added to explain that the Greek is plural. It is a fact that the English thou and thee are more distinctively singular than the ambiguous modem you, which may be either.

Going a step further, critics of the use of thou, thee and thy insist that the ancient languages did not use a different fom1 of the personal pronouns in speech addressed to God. This is quite true, but when the Holy Scriptures are translated into another language the translators have to take into account all of the phenomena of the receptor language. When the Bible was first translated into English the singular forms of the pronoun thou, thee etc. were commonly used in speech and in literature, both in relation to God and in relation to man. The translators rightly took the current phenomena of the English language into account and rendered the Greek singular thou and the Greek plural you in speech addressed to God and man “Trust thou in the LORD” (Psalm 115.9); “Be Thou exalted, O God” (Psalm 57.5).

English Usage in Prayer and Worship

For several hundred years the dominance of the English Bible secured for these forms of speech a settled place in public and private worship, in prayer, in the reading of the Holy Scriptures, in metrical versions of the Psalms, in Christian hymns, in Christian poetry, and in preaching. During this period colloquial speech and secular literature gradually dropped thou, thee and thy and the related forms of the verbs, while these forms continued in use as an integral part of the language of prayer and worship throughout the English-speaking world. Their disappearance from secular literature did not render them obsolete, for they were still in constant daily use by millions of English-speaking Christian people all over the world. It is not reasonable or true to describe as obsolete forms of speech that are in constant use today. Quite recently compiled hymn books furnish abundant evidence that Christians in the late twentieth century are still accustomed to addressing God in this distinctive manner. A detailed examination of “Grace Hymns” (1976) for two instance reveals more than six hundred examples of so-called obsolete usage in the first hundred hymns alone. No doubt the compilers assumed that these hymns would be intelligible to those who use them, and that they would continue to be used in reverent worship for many years to come. This amounts to a tacit acknowledgment that Christian people today use distinctive forms of the personal pronoun and verb in praise and prayer. Similarly plentiful evidence will be found in Gadsby’s hymns, the Baptist Hymnal, Gospel Hymns, Hymns of Faith, and in the Metrical Psalms.

Sound Principles of Translation

During the last few decades there has been a gradual tendency in some quarters to use the colloquial forms of speech in prayer and worship, and to some extent the adoption of modern versions of the Holy Scriptures has accelerated the process, but in this respect the modern versions have not followed sound principles of translation. These require that in a translation all of the characteristic features of the receptor language should be considered. A translation committee undertaking a new translation in a tribal language of India, Africa, or South America would not feel able to ignore such an important feature of the language of the people. If they found that in addressing God the people had used distinctive forms of speech, which had become elevated and hallowed by this use in worship only, so as to be regarded by many as the most appropriate and reverent mode of worship, the translators would not disregard such a distinctive feature, but rather endeavour to make good use of it in their translation.

The same principle should be applied in a modern English version. At present English-speaking Christians do not normally use thou and thee in ordinary conversation, and it would be no great loss in a modern English rendering of John's Gospel if the Samaritans were to say to the woman, “Now we believe, not because of your saying,” rather than “not because of thy saying”. Similar changes in other passages would not offend, but in passages such as “I will extol Thee, O LORD”, “I will sing aloud of Thy mercy”, “Thou art my hope, O Lord God”, and “Thine , 0 LORD, is the greatness, and the power”, it should be acknowledged that in this language of worship addressed to God present day English-speaking Christians retain Thou, Thee, Thy etc.

Distinctively Christian Usage

In this respect the English language has acquired, developed and retained a distinctive usage, which continues to be regarded by many as the most appropriate for all speech addressed to God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, even when the Father speaks to the Son— “Thou art my Son”, or when the Son speaks to the Father—“I come to Thee”. While it is true that the Greek language in the first century used the same pronoun for God and man, it is also true that the English language in the twentieth century has developed in such a way as to make the distinction possible, and this important fact should not be ignored.

When a modern version is adopted which discards this distinctively appropriate usage in speech addressed to God, the effect is that in the corporate or congregational acts of worship the people sing praise and prayer using those forms of speech, which for so long have been hallowed by their exclusive use for the high purpose of communion with God, and are then obliged to submit to hearing the Holy Scriptures, God’s Word to man, in a style of English in which the time-honoured, long-established, and distinctively Christian usage has been eliminated.

A translation of the Holy Scriptures needs to be in language appropriate to the Divine Author, appropriate to the inspired writer, appropriate to the subject matter, and appropriate to the reader. In the present state of the English language, having regard to the general and continuing use of Thou and Thee in public worship, these forms of speech are still considered by many to be the most appropriate in each respect.

Conformity with Declining Standards

It is sometimes said that the Authorised Version has “failed to communicate” to the present generation, but the reception of God's Word is not guaranteed by the simplicity or modernity of a translation—for “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God ... neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Cor. 2.14).

The last twenty-five years have witnessed the popularisation of numerous modern English versions of the Holy Scriptures, all of which have aimed at simplicity and modernity, but it has to be acknowledged that these have not been effective in arresting the general decline in standards of conduct in every section of our society. Conformity with an inferior standard is easier than resistance to it, but the Lord's people are warmly exhorted by His Word—“Be not conformed to this world” (Ro. 12.2). It is evidently not the function of the Church to catch the spirit of the age, but to correct it, with God's help. The principle is one which needs to be observed even in the matter of Bible translations, and in the conduct of public worship.

Those who retain the Authorised Version on the ground of its intrinsic superiority to the offered alternatives have sometimes been charged with following the example of 16th century Roman Catholics who venerated the Latin Vulgate and insisted that sacred worship should be conducted in an unknown tongue. This is not a fair criticism, as a very high proportion of the vocabulary of the Authorised Version continues in common daily use wherever the English language is spoken. The use of Thou, Thee, Thy in prayer cannot be likened to worship in an unknown tongue, while English speaking Christians continue to use these forms in their sung praise. The words remain a distinctive part of our contemporary usage in the context of worship, being neither obsolete nor unknown.

Process of Change in Christian Usage

The King James Version is now used in very few day schools, but in many the Revised Standard Version or the New English Bible has been adopted, and where these are read children will continue to be accustomed to hear Thou and Thee in speech addressed to God, even when the colloquial pronouns are used in prayer. It must be recognised that our language, like others, is subject to change, but changes in distinctively religious usage take place more slowly than in the secular usage. It is not unlikely that over quite a long period of time the two styles will co-exist, some Christian people using the one style, and some the other, with the newer style gradually becoming more common. This process has been taking place already for many years, and in some parts of the world the general adoption of the colloquial style in spoken prayer has been more rapid than in England, while the Thou and Thee forms have held their place in congregational singing. Many people who have no difficulty in understanding the Thou and Thee usage when the Holy Scriptures are read, or when they sing psalms and hymns, experience some difficulty in actually composing sentences in prayer consistently using these forms of speech, particularly the verbal forms associated with Thou—Thou wast, Thou didst, Thou hadst, Thou dost, etc. Some avoid the difficulty by mingling Thee, Thy and you in public extemporary prayer while some have solved the problem by using the modern pronouns only thoughout.

These problems call for mutual understanding and sympathy, rather than for mutual censure and criticism, and where the Eternal God is reverently worshipped differences of opinion on this subject should not constitute a bar to Christian fellowship or disturb that true charity which is the bond of peace among the Lord's people. Among the various age groups in the Christian community there are many who will never relinquish the long established Thou and Thee usage in their approach to God, and there are also many who will never adopt that usage, being increasingly insulated from it, in the home, at day school, Sunday school, and in their places of worship. Paul had to remind his readers that “the Kingdom of God is not meat and drink”, and we have to remind ourselves that the worship of God is not merely a matter of traditional usage and forms of speech, although the language of worship should never be lacking in reverence.

Modern Versions Reviewed

The rules of the Trinitarian Bible Society, drawn up in 1831, simply state that “the copies in the English language shall be those of the Authorised Version”, and the work of the Society is conducted in accordance with these rules. Many of the modern versions of the Holy Scriptures published during the past thirty years have been reviewed in the pages of the Quarterly Record, and the reviews have drawn attention to the deficiencies of their underlying text and unsatisfactory features of their English style. It has been consistently maintained that those who adopt one or other of these versions and discard the Authorised Version lose more than they gain. While the intrinsic excellence of the Authorised Version has been often emphasized, no article published by the Society has ever asserted that this version is perfect, or that there is nothing in it that could possibly be improved. Nor has the Society ever advanced the view that the concept of a modem translation is fundamentally or inherently wrong. To a large extent the reviews have been concerned with the effects of unsound textual criticism upon the modern versions. Matters of English style and usage have also come under examination, and these are no less important even when the underlying text is generally sound.

Among members of the Trinitarian Bible Society, and in other quarters, the question is asked with increasing urgency whether, while retaining the Authorised Version in its present form, there should also be an edition of it available in which as far as possible difficult and obscure passages are rendered more simply, and archaic vocabulary and style replaced by appropriate and dignified modern equivalents, making no departure from the text underlying the Authorised Version, and preserving to a large extent its familiar phraseology and characteristic rhythm. The careful consideration of such a proposal calls for the exercise of discernment and spiritual wisdom, which all who are concerned with the preservation, propagation and proclamation of the Word of Truth need to seek continually from its Divine Author, the only wise God.

First published in Quarterly Record 470, January 1980. Lightly edited for online publication in April 2023.