It very much isn't though, at least not to its original authors.

How far would a father go to save his children is another way to look at it.

You could spend a whole semester just on John 1:1. The word "logos" is all over the place.

What I love about the KJV is that Queen Elizabeth had encouraged an entire nation of poets, and they were still around for James. It was cool to write poetry, and everybody did it. (She banged out a few decent verses herself, for that matter.)

Even today, KJV is the "voice of God". When you want to write a divine voice, you mimic KJV. "Thou shalt not..." just sounds more authoritative than "Don't", even though they mean the same thing. (I'd argue that "don't" better preserves the meaning, which was not meant to sound archaic. "Thou" sounded informal in the 17th century, but that's not how it sounds now.)

The flaws in KJV run deep; it's a very opinionated translation. Which is fine; every translation is opinionated. But there's a risk that people assume it's definitive because it's so powerful. There are some who literally claim that it is truly definitive -- even more so than the Hebrew and Greek originals. (This is of course insane, and that's the fault of horrific theology rather than the translation.)

Perhaps coding needs marginalia.

I suppose that if you divide up the value of a full Bible by 73 or 66, the price for a Gospel of John alone is pretty reasonable. It is certainly not practical to purchase one book alone, other than for ornamental or display purposes.

A Gospel of John alone is unsuitable for any liturgical use. Most illuminated books were pretty much understood to be placed in sacred liturgical settings, and therefore it made sense to go to that expense; they would not be shoved in a monk's drawer or a young girl's dowry chest, all things being equal.

Therefore, the illumination process would produce a complete Lectionary, a Psalter, or a Missal; speaking as a liturgical Roman Catholic, the Holy Bible is not a book we use directly for public liturgy, like at all. Bibles are for personal devotion and study. A Book of Gospels is a specialized Lectionary, and I do not know its particular structure, but it would need to include all four, for sure!

If they intend to produce all four Gospels this way, or the entire NT, that's great; I'm sure a collector would avidly follow their publication and snap them all up in short order. But for ordinary consumers, the sheer utility of an illuminated Bible is questionable at best. It's the sort of thing you'll place on a coffee table as a conversation piece, or prominently on a shelf, just to exhibit your wealth and good taste.

Here's a little treat, if you go there. You may have heard of the Rhind mathematical papyrus [1]. It's a papyrus that's more than 3500 years old which has some math exercises on it. It's the oldest that we have discovered.

At this "Treasures" mini-museum you will find a small cuneiform tablet with math exercises that's at least 100 years older than the Rhind mathematical papyrus.

There is a Gutenberg bible there. I would say there are at least 10 items more impressive than the Gutenberg bible; I count this tablet as one of those.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhind_Mathematical_Papyrus

It's art, if you just want the text translated to kingon or L33t speak, you can down load that. No need for a jihad.

Would he? There seems to be a tradition of illuminations of the Quran (see e.g. https://www.islamicity.org/77800/illumination-of-the-quran/, first result of an internet search). The style is quite different, since Islam forbids making representations of animated beings, but that didn't prevent the development of a rather exquisite craftmanship.