something i'm paraphrasing out of the book i'm reading, but should give you something to think about...

in order for God to communicate his word to his people, he had to put his word in the common language. now, note that some groups are going to just be excluded because of that, but you would just have to learn the new language. is this unfair to other nations? perhaps... but we should never question God's will; i believe that in the end, the very words that jesus spoke about losing none of those that were given to him from the Father holds true.

so...

old testament - hebrew language is the common language.

new testament - greek language(God didn't even return back to jersualem to use it to further his kingdom; the new center of christianity was in antioch, syria, as established in acts)

combination of the 2 together to form the bible - english language. God did not choose any other european country powerhouses because they were tainted with rome(ie the pope had some influence there), and hence had roman catholic influences. that excluded spain, france, germany, italy. england had a history of being catholic, true, but it also had a long, and permanent history after that of rebellion against rome(look up when rome used spain as a pawn tried to attack them navally and failed), and remained prostant. the us was also established upon christian(specifically protestant) men and women.

that's basically the gist of what i was going to say; i'm not looking at my book as i'm writing this, so i'm sure i'm excluding some words, but this should be good enough for you to mull over for a bit.

btw, the book i'm reading is:

samuel c. gipp - an understandable history of the bible

(one more note: what we consider "old english" and "middle english" is actually a LOT more old than the english in the kjv; if you were to look at actual "old english," there'd be NO WAY you could read it AT ALL. so, the excuse that kjv is old english does not hold up)