Is 'which' when referring to a person archaic?

In many older texts, it’s common to see the word ‘which’ being used as a relative pronoun instead of the more modern (?) ‘who’. One may see: ‘He had already told John, which was not there, that it was he.’ The more modern version would switch ‘which’ for ‘who’.

Of course, ‘who’ must be considered more, because it is subjective. The sentence ‘John, who had already done it’, could be restructured into ‘John, whom it had already been done by.’ Using ‘which’ is equally correct whether it is the object or the subject.

But I’m sure using ‘which’ to refer to a person gets caught in many ears, because it’s not seen anymore. Is it archaic? I’ve seen it in the King James Bible and old translations.