What I need to know about Islam

Assalamualaikum, am not shia but sunni Muslim but let put aside both shia and sunni what did you understand by MAWLA. Please leave you comment below

If you are a Christian and you said you are son of God it's mean you are not following what bible say

Romans 6:16-22
New International Version
16 Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you have come to obey from your heart the pattern of teaching that has now claimed your allegiance. 18 You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.

19 I am using an example from everyday life because of your human limitations. Just as you used to offer yourselves as slaves to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer yourselves as slaves to righteousness leading to holiness. 20 When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness. 21 What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now ashamed of? Those things result in death! 22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life.

Finally about beginning of day and night

We read in 22:61 how God "yulig" the night into the day and the day into the night:
That is because God 'yulig' (merges) the night into the day and merges the day into the night, and because God is Hearer, Seer. 22:61
The concept of the night merging into the day, and day merging into the night, confirms once again that parts of the night will have light (not sunshine), and that parts of the day will include some darkness (lack of light). Once again, the words in 22:61 would not make any sense if the night is restricted to the time when it is pitch black. The same is confirmed in 31:29 and 35:13.
Third Indication:
We read in 36:37 the very significant word "naslakh". This word means to gradually extract. God says how the day is being gradually extracted from the night:
And a sign for them is the night: We 'naslakh' (peel) the day away from it, whereupon they are in darkness. 36:37
The gradual peeling away of the daylight from the night can only happen at the time just after sunset, which as per 36:37 is defined by God as night. During this period of the night the daylight is being gradually extracted from it, until it becomes totally dark.
If we assume that the "Night" does not start until it is totally dark, then it would not be possible for daylight to be extracted/withdrawn from it (night). This is because when it is totally dark, there is no light to be extracted!

Interesting Observation:
As we have read above, God uses the words "yulig" (merges) and also the word "naslakh" (slowly extract) to describe the periods when the day and night mix. This raises the following question: Is this a repetition that describes the same event? Would only one of these two words be sufficient to describe this process?
The answer is that it is not a repetition. The use of both words is necessary as they describe different times of the day and different astronomical events. One of these words on its own cannot describe both times.
To demonstrate this feature, which is yet another indication of the meticulously precise attribute of the Quranic words, let us remind ourselves of the various times when day and night mix, they are:
1- The hour or so before sunrise.
2- The hour or so after sunrise
3- The hour or so before sunset
4- The hour or so after sunset.
These are the 4 times of day when light and darkness mix.
Let us first consider the word "yulig" (merges).
This word can describe 2 of the above four times of day:
- It describes time 1 when light is gradually merged into the end of the night (remember that the time before sunrise is part of the night). Then as we approach sunrise more light is gradually being merged into the end of the night.
- It also describes time 3 when darkness is merged into the day (remember that the time before sunset is part of the day). Then as we approach sunset more darkness is gradually being merged into the end of the day.
Now let us consider the word "naslakh" (peel away gradually).
This word can describe 2 of the above four times of day:
- It describes time 2 when the darkness is gradually being extracted from the day (remember that the time after sunrise is part of the day). Then as we recede away from sunrise, the last remnants of darkness is extracted from the day.
- It also describes time 4 when light is being gradually extracted from the night (remember that the time after sunset is part of the night). Then as we recede away from sunset, the last remnants of light is extracted from the night.
The word "yulig" can only describe two of the four times. Similarly the word "naslakh" can only describe the other two times of the day, hence the need for both words.
Fourth Indication:
The fourth indication to offer us the correct definition of the night can be found in the following verse:
Observe the Salat at the 'tarafai' (two ends) of the day, and during 'zulufan min al-layl' (the near parts of the night). 11:114
The key word in 11:114 in relation to our subject is the Arabic word "tarafai". This word is the plural of the word 'taraf' which means terminal or endpoint. This word speaks of two terminals/ends of the day.

The terminals of the day are sunrise and sunset. The word "tarafai" cannot be speaking of the periods when light is fading or darkness fading since these periods last around 1.5 hours to complete. A period of 1.5 hours would not be described as an endpoint/terminal. But sunrise and sunset are specific points in time that last around a minute each.
If sunrise and sunset compromise the beginning and end of the day, by definition, they must also be the end and beginning of the night. It follows that the night is the period between sunset and sunrise.
Fifth Indication:
We also read in 11:114 a reference to the "zulafan min al-layl". This phrase translates to the 'near parts of the night'. What are these parts of the night near to? They can only be near the two points given in the same verse, and these are the "tarafai al-nahar" (ends of the day). We have already established that the ends of the day are sunrise and sunset.
The parts of the night, described as "zulafan min al-layl", are thus the parts of the night that are near sunrise and sunset. These parts of the night cannot be the times after sunrise or before sunset when the sun is in the sky, since these times are part of the day and not night. They can only be the times before sunrise and after sunset.
The words "zulafan min al-layl" therefore refer to the parts of the night which contain some light. Thus, the claim that night is only when there is total darkness is in violation of the concept of "zulafan min al-layl".
Sixth Indication:
Finally, and to seal this issue, the Quranic words in Sura 91 provide additional conclusive evidence for the definition of the "nahar" (day) as well as the "layl" (night). Sura 91 is called Al-Shams (The Sun). The following words speak of the sun:
By the sun and its brightness, and the moon when it follows it, and the 'nahar' (day) when it reveals it (sun), and the 'layl' (night) when it covers it (sun). 91:1-4
These words provide a clear definition of night and day. Whenever the sun is revealed (i.e. it can be seen) it is day (91:3), and whenever the sun is covered (it cannot be seen) it is night (91:4).
This means that the time just before sunrise, when the sun is not revealed yet, is part of the night (91:4). Equally, any time immediately after sunset, when the sun is also un-revealed is also part of the night (91:4).
It follows that anytime between sunrise and sunset, when we can see the sun (it is revealed) it is day (91:3). The definition of night and day in sura 91 is absolute and cannot be contested.

When does the 'DAY' begin?
By: A Mohamed

The words in 39:5 include two very important statements:
1- The night is rolled over the day
2- The day is rolled over the night
When we look at the diagram above we note two periods of time, one just before sunset, and one just after sunset. During these two periods, light and darkness mix. It is not totally dark nor is it totally light.
Verse 39:5 describes these periods very accurately. Just before sunset, which is part of the day, the darkness starts to creep in and thus the night is rolled over the (end of) the day.

Similarly, just after sunset (which is part of the night), the remaining light starts to fade out of the night and thus the day is rolled out of the night.
So how does 39:5 give us the confirmation that the night begins at sunset and ends at sunrise?
Let us consider the second definition used by some scholars for a moment. They state that the night does not begin until all the light has disappeared from the sky and it is totally dark. They state that the period in time when there is some light in the sky is part of the day and not night.

They follow that by saying that fasting should be maintained until all light has faded away after sunset and it is totally dark (approximately 1.5 hours after sunset).
If this definition is correct, the case described by God when the day is rolled onto the night would never be possible. In other words, if the night does not begin until it is totally dark, then the day can never be rolled onto the night.
However, since 39:5 states that the day is rolled onto the night, then by definition, part of the night will have some light in it. The parts of the night when this is possible are the times immediately after sunset and just before sunrise. During these two parts of the night, there is light in the sky. These two periods of time must be parts of the night for the reason explained.
The words in 39:5 confirm that some of the night has light otherwise we could not have a situation where night and day mix.
Similarly, we can look at the diagram which represents the time around sunrise:

When does the 'Night' begin?
By: A Mohamed

The question of when exactly the night begins (in Quranic definition) has been debated over the years, primarily due to its implications with regards to the time when the daily fasting ends.
The time given in the Quran for fasting is as follows:
You may eat and drink until the white thread of dawn becomes clear to you from the dark thread, then maintain the fast until the night. 2:187
If fasting is to be maintained until night, when exactly does the night begin?
1- The first understanding defines night as the period of time between sunset (beginning of night) and sunrise (end of night).
2- According to the second understanding, night does not begin until all light has disappeared from the sky after sunset, and ends when the first trace of light appears in the sky before sunrise.
Before we attempt to determine which of these definitions is the correct one, we must remember that the Quran gives explanations for all things concerning the religion:
And We brought down upon you the Book providing explanations for all things. 16:89
If we have this guarantee in the Quran, we do not need to look for the answer to this question anywhere other than in the Quran.
When we research the Quran we find that there are two clear indications that confirm that the night begins at sunset and ends at sunrise.
First Indication:
The first indication to confirm the correct timing of the night can be found in the following verse:
He rolls the night over the day and rolls the day over the night. 39:5
It can be shown (explanation below) that according to 39:5 the night begins at sunset and ends at sunrise.
Before presenting the significance of 39:5, it is important to distinguish between 'Night' and 'Darkness'. Similarly, we must distinguish between 'Day' and 'Light'.
1- Darkness simply means lack of light, while 'Night' is a defined period of time.
2- Light is what we receive from the sun, while 'Day' is a defined period of time.
To demonstrate how 39:5 provides us with the correct definition of night and day, we are aided by the following diagram:

As for those women whole ill-will you have reason to fear, admonish them [first];
then distance yourself in bed, and then tap them; but if they pay you heed, do not
attempt to hurt them. Surely, Allah is indeed the most High, the Greatest.” (Q 4:34)
This verse is often quoted for justifying the ruthless dominance of patriarchal males
demanding obedience from their wives- to the point of disciplining them through physical
punishment!
But let us analyze it with Qur’anic wisdom. Firstly, the “fadl” or preference is related to
responsibility, so there is reciprocity between this privilege and responsibility. The fact
is that it is through Allah’s benevolence that he gets this “fadl” should make a man God-
conscious. So, if he is given this authority or preferential responsibility, it is
accompanied by a heavy mandate and obligation. He cannot abuse the “fadl”. The
purpose of this “fadl” could be attributed to the fact that a family functions harmoniously
when there is leadership and authority in it, manifested through fulfilling duty and mutual
co- operation.
It is wrong to conclude from this that as men (or women) have some “advantage” in one
respect, they are therefore superior to the other. The right attitude should be for each s*x
to think that it is deficient in certain aspects, which can only be complimented by the
collaboration and co-operation of the other as essential for its perfection and healthy
growth. In other words, it should never fancy such ideas as its own excellence, but
should consider itself dependent upon the other for its own perfection. The Qur’an has
beautifully described this relationship of the two s*xes in these words: “And among His
signs is that He created for you mates from among yourselves, that you may dwell in
peace with them, and He has shown you mercy and love between your hearts. Surely in
that are signs for those who reflect.” (Q 31:21)
The issue of NUSHUZ
Verse 4:34 has commonly been used to Justify Wife beating. How can this can be
explained?
NUSHUZ could be defined as animosity, hostility, rebellion, ill- treatment, discord,
violation of marital duties on the part of either husband or wife. In this context, a wife’s
“ill-will” implies a deliberate, persistent breach of her marital obligations.
The verse of Surah Nisa’ has attracted great attention from both within the Beliving
community and without: “As regards those women on whose part you fear defiance and
ill- conduct, admonish them (first), (next) separate in bed, (and last) tap them (if they
still persist in their defiance); but if they cooperate and pay you heed, do not look for
excuses to harm them. Note well that there is Allah above you all.” (Q 4:34)
In the context of the above verse the most appropriate meaning for nushuz is marital
discord (ill- will, animosity etc.) The process suggested is necessary, otherwise it is inviting the likelihood of divorce without any reconciliation procedure, and this will
contravene the Qur’anic guidance. The separation could be temporary or permanent
depending on the reconciliation procedure, and this fits in very well with the divorce
procedure that the Qur'an describes. Therefore the more accurate understanding of the
above verse would be: (4:34) “…As for those women whose animosity or ill- will you
have reason to fear, discuss the mater with them, then separate in bed, then tap; and if
they pay you heed, do not seek a way against them.”
The verse following the above verse gives further weight to the above translation. (4:35)
“And if you fear a breach between them (the man and the wife), appoint an arbiter from
his folk and an arbiter from her folk. If they desire amendment, Allah will make them one
of mind. Lo! Allah is Ever Knower, Aware.”
An added weight to the meaning outlined above is given by verse (4: 128), where in the
case of man the same word, nushuz, is also used. Note too that as ill- treatment emanating
The husband sends this, and reconciliation is encouraged! “If a wife fears ill- treatment (nushuz) or desertion (i’raad) on her husband’s part, there
is no blame on them if they arrange an amicable settlement between themselves; and such
settlement is best…” (Q 4:128)
In the same surah, we read, “Whoever among you; men or women, are guilty of this
crime (impropriety/ obscenity), punish them both; then if they both repent and reform
themselves, leave them alone, for Allah is Most Generous in accepting repentance, and
Merciful in forgiving sins.” (4:16)
As previously mentioned, women could only be taken to task when they were guilty of
open obscenity. The verse (Q 4:16) clearly states that whoever commits open
licentiousness, man or woman, must be punished. It may here be mentioned that this
open obscenity or licentiousness (nushuz) means obscenity short of adultery and
fornication.
If a wife fears that her husband is going to be excessive, there is the same process for the
wife too. She can advise him first. Psychological pressure of withdrawing closeness and
intimacy? But why is there no reference to physical pressure, like a symbolic slap or the
like? The wife is not required to slap her husband, guarding against the possibility of
physical retaliation and its dire consequences. However, she has access to an injunction that is better than that; to sit down with respected members of the community, (if need be with a
judge), and draw up a contract with the man, which says: You have done this or that- if
you do it again, these will be the consequences. In other words, she is getting the
community behind her.
Three steps for regaining marital harmony or an amicable settlement
We note that in the event that there is disruption of marital harmony, the Qur’an suggests
three ways to get things back on track. In order of preference, they are.
(Step 1) Wa’z (admonition, consultation and discussion). This is the preferred method
suggested for regaining marital harmony and is the same mechanism discussed in the
Qur'an for the purpose of coordinating activities among all groups. Consultation can be
between the parties (as in 4:34) or between the two parties with the help of arbiters or
hakim (4:35, 4:128). Wa’z or admonition implies advising and reminding one of the
consequence of one’s actions; this in a way that softens the heart of the listener (16:125)
and making him/ her incline favorably to your words.
(Step 2) Wahjur (to separate in bed; time and space boycott, at least one night). If
consultation does not lead to marital harmony, the second suggestion is of time-out, a
phrase to denote a separation in time and/ or space between two people. This is a form of
psychological pressure. Note that it is avoidance in the house or in front of the family,
children and so forth.
The purpose of that act is to solve the problem well- known not to belittle the woman or
uncover the secrets that are going on. However, it is a reaction to her act of nushuz and
recalcitrance by avoiding her and turning away from her in hope that this will lead to
reciprocity and togetherness. It can be for an intermediate cooling off period only, or
could presumably continue for an indefinite amount of time, whereas in the context of marriage, mean divorce.
(Step 3) Daraba (a gentle strike or tap: an expression of physical pressure) If the first two
methods are used in their preferred order to the fullest extent, the need for the third
method of a strike would not be reached.
A famous Multi- meaning word “Daraba”
The problem of abuse comes from the word “Idribuhunne” which is usually translated as
“beat them”. The root of this word is “Daraba”. If one consults an Arabic dictionary
you would find a long list of meanings ascribed to this word!
The list is one of the longest lists in the whole Arabic dictionaries and has so many
different meanings. In the Qur’an, depending on the context, one can ascribe different
meanings to it, i.e:
To travel to get out: 3:156; 4:101; 38:44; 73:20; 1:273
To strike: 2:60; 7:160; 8:12; 20:77; 24:31; 26:63; 37:93; 47:04
To beat: 8:50; 47:27
To set up: 43:58; 57:13
To give (examples): 14:24-45; 16:75,76,112; 18:32,45; 24:35; 30:2858; 36:78; 39:27,29;
43:17; 59:21; 66:10-11
To take away, to ignore: 43:5
To condemn: 2:61
To seal, to draw over: 18:11
To cover: 24:31
To explain: 13:17
Thus, in the Qu’ran alone wa witness the verb “Daraba” having at least ten different
meanings. “Daraba” has also other meaning which are not mentioned in the Qur’an. For
example in the Arabic language, you do not print money-- you “Daraba” money, you do
not multiply numbers-- you “Daraba” numbers, you do not cease the work—you
“Daraba” the work-
Webster’s Dictionary gives fourteen meanings to the verb “strike”: hit (against); ignite;
(of snake)bite; (of plants) (cause to) take root; attack; hook (fish); sound (time) as bell in
clock; affect; arrive at, come upon; enter mind of; discover (gold, oil etc.); dismantle;
remove; make (coin); cease work as protest or to make demands. The same dictionary
gives eight meanings to the verb “beat”: strike repeatedly; overcome; surpass; stir
vigorously with striking action; flag (wings); make, wear (path); throb; sail against wind.
When we encounter a multi- meaning word, we select the proper meaning according to
the context, form and common sense.
Why the “Daraba”?
Why has the Qur’an included the method of a “strike”? The Qu’ran always emphasizes
doing good and abstaining from evil. If the Qur’an is looked at as an integrated and
cohesive text, situations can be identified where the Qur’an calls for the prohibition of
certain things in stages. For example, whereas early revelations discourage the use of
intoxicants (2:219, 4:43), the final revelation on this matter clearly condemns and
prohibits them (5:93-94).
This is where there is a need to understand the historical context in which the Qur’an was
revealed.

https://chat.whatsapp.com/HYkH8Zxbou8KbXC341Qz3q

Below are the documents that back forming of Israel up.

There are several historical documents that provide evidence of the formation of Israel as a sovereign state. Some of these include:

1. The Balfour Declaration (1917): A letter from the British government expressing support for the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine.

2. The United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine (1947): A resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly that called for the partition of Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states.

3. The Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel (1948): A proclamation declaring the establishment of the State of Israel, signed by the leaders of the Jewish community in Palestine.

4. United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 (1947): This resolution recommended the adoption and implementation of the partition plan for Palestine, leading to the formation of Israel.

These documents provide legal and historical evidence of the formation of Israel as a sovereign state.

If you want to know how the Israel was form and by who and what was they interest of forming it?

The modern state of Israel was established on May 14, 1948, following the adoption of the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine in 1947. The plan proposed the division of the British Mandate of Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states, with Jerusalem being designated as an international city.

The establishment of Israel was primarily driven by the Zionist movement, which sought to create a homeland for the Jewish people in response to centuries of persecution and anti-Semitism. The Zionist leaders, such as Theodor Herzl, Chaim Weizmann, and David Ben-Gurion, worked tirelessly to promote the idea of a Jewish state in Palestine.

The interests behind the formation of Israel were mainly centered around providing a safe haven for Jews worldwide, following the atrocities of the Holocaust during World War II. Additionally, there was a strong sense of national and cultural identity among the Jewish population, who sought to establish a sovereign state in their historic homeland.

The establishment of Israel was also supported by Western powers, particularly the United States, who saw it as a strategic ally in the Middle East. The Soviet Union also played a role in supporting the creation of Israel, as part of its broader geopolitical interests.

Overall, the formation of Israel was a complex and contentious process, marked by conflict and displacement of the Arab population living in Palestine. The creation of Israel has been a source of ongoing tension and conflict in the region, with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remaining unresolved to this day.

Assalamualaikum brothers and sisters I was to ask a question before talking about it. It's goes like this out of the two books which one talk more on jihad. Please comment belong if you want me to prove them out

Which King is King James in the Bible?

King James Version (KJV), English translation of the Bible, published in 1611 under the auspices of King James I of England. The translation had a marked influence on English literary style and was generally accepted as the standard English Bible from the mid-17th to the early 20th century
Background
The reign of Queen Elizabeth I (1558–1603) succeeded in imposing a high degree of uniformity upon the Church of England. Protestantism was reinstated as the official religion of England after the short reign of Mary I (1553–58), who had attempted to restore Roman Catholicism in the country. In 1604, soon after James’s coronation as king of England, a conference of churchmen requested that the English Bible be revised because existing translations “were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the original.” The Great Bible that had been authorized by Henry VIII (1538) enjoyed some popularity, but its successive editions contained several inconsistencies. The Bishops’ Bible (1568) was well regarded by the clergy but failed to gain wide acceptance or the official authorization of Elizabeth. The most popular English translation was the Geneva Bible (1557; first published in England in 1576), which had been made in Geneva by English Protestants living in exile during Mary’s persecutions. Never authorized by the crown, it was particularly popular among Puritans but not among many more-conservative clergymen.
Preparation and early editions, Encyclopedia Britannica
HomeGames & QuizzesHistory & SocietyScience & TechBiographiesAnimals & NatureGeography & TravelArts & CultureMoneyVideos
King James Version
Home
Philosophy & Religion
Scriptures
History & Society
King James Version
sacred text
Also known as: Authorized Version, King James Bible
Written and fact-checked by
Last Updated: Article History
King James Version of the Bible
King James Version of the Bible
King James Version (KJV), English translation of the Bible, published in 1611 under the auspices of King James I of England. The translation had a marked influence on English literary style and was generally accepted as the standard English Bible from the mid-17th to the early 20th century.

Category: History & Society
Also Called: Authorized Version or King James Bible
Background
The reign of Queen Elizabeth I (1558–1603) succeeded in imposing a high degree of uniformity upon the Church of England. Protestantism was reinstated as the official religion of England after the short reign of Mary I (1553–58), who had attempted to restore Roman Catholicism in the country. In 1604, soon after James’s coronation as king of England, a conference of churchmen requested that the English Bible be revised because existing translations “were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the original.” The Great Bible that had been authorized by Henry VIII (1538) enjoyed some popularity, but its successive editions contained several inconsistencies. The Bishops’ Bible (1568) was well regarded by the clergy but failed to gain wide acceptance or the official authorization of Elizabeth. The most popular English translation was the Geneva Bible (1557; first published in England in 1576), which had been made in Geneva by English Protestants living in exile during Mary’s persecutions. Never authorized by the crown, it was particularly popular among Puritans but not among many more-conservative clergymen.

Gutenberg Bible
More From Britannica
biblical literature: The King James and subsequent versions
Preparation and early editions
Daniel Mytens: portrait of James I
Daniel Mytens: portrait of James I
Given the perceived need for a new authorized translation, James was quick to appreciate the broader value of the proposal and at once made the project his own. By June 30, 1604, James had approved a list of 54 revisers, although extant records show that 47 scholars actually participated. They were organized into six companies, two each working separately at Westminster, Oxford, and Cambridge on sections of the Bible assigned to them. Richard Bancroft (1544–1610), archbishop of Canterbury, served as overseer and established doctrinal conventions for the translators. The new Bible was published in 1611.
Not since the Septuagint—the Greek-language version of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) produced between the 3rd and the 2nd centuries BCE—had a translation of the Bible been undertaken under royal sponsorship as a cooperative venture on so grandiose a scale. An elaborate set of rules was contrived to curb individual proclivities and to ensure the translation’s scholarly and nonpartisan character. In contrast to earlier practice, the new version was to use vulgar forms of proper names (e.g., “Jonas” or “Jonah” for the Hebrew “Yonah”), in keeping with its aim to make the Scriptures popular and familiar. The translators used not only extant English-language translations, including the partial translation by William Tyndale (c. 1490–1536), but also Jewish commentaries to guide their work. The wealth of scholarly tools available to the translators made their final choice of rendering an exercise in originality and independent judgment. For this reason, the new version was more faithful to the original languages of the Bible and more scholarly than any of its predecessors. The impact of the original Hebrew upon the revisers was so pronounced that they seem to have made a conscious effort to imitate its rhythm and style in their translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. The literary style of the English New Testament actually turned out to be superior to that of its Greek original.Two editions were printed in 1611, later distinguished as the “He” and “She” Bibles because of the variant readings “he” and “she” in the final clause of Ruth 3:15 (“and he went into the city”). Some errors in subsequent editions have become famous. Perhaps the most notorious example is the so-called “Wicked Bible” (1631), whose byname derives from the omission of “not” in the injunction against adultery in the Ten Commandments (“Thou shalt commit adultery”). The printers were fined £300 for the error.

Reputation since the early 20th century

In the early 20th century the King James Version fell into disfavour among many mainstream Protestant churches, which viewed it as antiquated. Beginning in the middle of the century, they increasingly turned to more-modern translations, such as the Revised Standard Version (1952), the New International Version (1978), and the New Revised Standard Version (1989). The King James Version, however, remained a popular source for the more famous Psalms and for the Gospels.
English-speaking Roman Catholics used an authorized English Bible, the Douai-Reims (1609), which was produced from the Latin Vulgate by English Catholic exiles in France, who also worked from many of the same English sources used by translators of the King James Version. Yet among English Catholics the King James Version was widely accepted from the 18th century; moreover, when the Douai-Reims Bible was updated in the mid-18th century, the translator, Richard Challoner (1691–1781), a convert from Protestantism to Catholicism, largely worked from the King James Version. Both the King James Version and the Douai-Reims Bible were finally supplanted in popularity by the Jerusalem Bible (1966).

The King James Version is still the favoured biblical translation of many Christian fundamentalists and some Christian new religious movements. It is also widely regarded as one of the major literary accomplishments of early modern England. A complete New King James Version (NKJV) with modernized spellings was published in 1982.