My God hath been
my support; he hath
led me through mine
afflictions in the wilderness;
and
he hath preserved
me upon the waters of
the great deep
He hath filled
me with his love, even
unto
the consuming of my flesh
He hath confounded
mine enemies, unto the causing
of
them to quake before me
Behold, he hath heard
my cry by day,
and
he hath given me
knowledge by visions
in the night time
and
by day have I
waxed bold in mighty
prayer before him; yea,
my voice have I
sent upon high;
and
angels came
down and ministered
unto me. and upon
the wings of his
spirit hath my body
been carried away upon
exceeding high mountains
And mine eyes hath
beheld great things; yea,
even too great for man;
therefore I was
bidden that I should
not write them
Poet’s Notes:
Backtrack to read Psalm of Nephi: Part One.
Reactions to this piece are welcome in the comments below. As a suggested question, what lines of the poem stand out to you? Why?
This free verse poem is adapted from the text of the Psalm of Nephi (found in 2 Nephi Chapter 4 in The Book of Mormon).
Wheat & Tares 
Seeing poetic text displayed as poetry is one of the advantages of a modern Bible compared to the KJV. The same works for Book of Mormon poetic passages, although highlighting the words in poetic form rather than the meaning in straight text highlights the archaic usages. Poetry uses words to produce effects that go beyond the straightforward meaning of the phrases. It sure seems like the Book of Mormon archaic usages are trying to produce a King James-ish effect. But members are so habituated to KJV language that a modern language rendition of the Book of Mormon sounds wrong.
Thanks for weighing in Dave. I enjoy getting the perspective. Interesting that another reader also gave this reaction on the Part One post, regarding the distraction of the King James wordings. On the one hand I’m sympathetic, on the other I regard the older wording as superior. Speaking as a poet, I think KJV English routinely sounds better. Though, I’m speaking primarily about how language is experienced physically in our mouths and ears. For instance, I think “mine eyes” sounds and feels better than “my eyes.” I don’t think we’ve improved the language, or the meaning, by coming to favor the latter phrasing.
When it comes to the business of transacting language, especially if beauty is at all a priority, I think KJV routinely does it better. That said, if the goal is accessible reliable communication, especially for educational purposes, yup, using KJV is mostly counterproductive. On a side note, in preparation for a possible holiday post, I’m running up against this very issue with Thomas Wayment’s translation of Mary’s “Magnificat” in Luke 1:46–55. As poetry, I’m not sure how I feel about it yet.