I have noticed that the Geneva Bible, which preceded the King James, has most of the King James’s phrasing. There was a pitched battle between the two versions for the first hundred years after the King James came out, mostly on grounds of national, political, and religious affiliation. (National because the English printers preferred the locally printed King James.) But I don’t think that, had the Geneva somehow won, it could have had the impact that the King James had over the subsequent centuries. For one thing, the King James’s spelling is so much more modern than the Geneva’s, despite the relatively short number of years between the versions’ releases. It’s rarely the true innovator who gets the credit, but the adapter, I think! (Though the KJV does have many striking innovations. I enjoyed In The Beginning by Alister McCrath, which takes the English Bible from Wycliffe to the present. (There’s another such book out there, too; I can’t remember the name.))

(One of my favorite English versions is the Bishop’s Bible, which also preceded the King James. It goes its own way many times.)