End Times and Current Events

Why the King James Bible Endures

The King James Bible, which was first published 400 years ago next month, may be the single best thing ever accomplished by a committee. The Bible was the work of 54 scholars and clergymen who met over seven years in six nine-man subcommittees, called “companies.” In a preface to the new Bible, Miles Smith, one of the translators and a man so impatient that he once walked out of a boring sermon and went to the pub, wrote that anything new inevitably “endured many a storm of gainsaying, or opposition.” So there must have been disputes — shouting; table pounding; high-ruffed, black-gowned clergymen folding their arms and stomping out of the room — but there is no record of them. And the finished text shows none of the PowerPoint insipidness we associate with committee-speak or with later group translations like the 1961 New English Bible, which T.S. Eliot said did not even rise to “dignified mediocrity.” Far from bland, the King James Bible is one of the great masterpieces of English prose.

The issue of how, or even whether, to translate sacred texts was a fraught one in those days, often with political as well as religious overtones, and it still is. The Roman Catholic Church, for instance, recently decided to retranslate the missal used at Mass to make it more formal and less conversational. Critics have complained that the new text is awkward and archaic, while its defenders (some of whom probably still prefer the Mass in Latin) insist that’s just the point — that language a little out of the ordinary is more devotional and inspiring. No one would ever say that the King James Bible is an easy read. And yet its very oddness is part of its power.

From the start, the King James Bible was intended to be not a literary creation but rather a political and theological compromise between the established church and the growing Puritan movement. What the king cared about was clarity, simplicity, doctrinal orthodoxy. The translators worked hard on that, going back to the original Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic, and yet they also spent a lot of time tweaking the English text in the interest of euphony and musicality. Time and again the language seems to slip almost unconsciously into iambic pentameter — this was the age of Shakespeare, commentators are always reminding us — and right from the beginning the translators embraced the principles of repetition and the dramatic pause: “In the beginning God created the Heauen, and the Earth. And the earth was without forme, and voyd, and darkenesse was vpon the face of the deepe: and the Spirit of God mooued vpon the face of the waters.”

The influence of the King James Bible is so great that the list of idioms from it that have slipped into everyday speech, taking such deep root that we use them all the time without any awareness of their biblical origin, is practically endless: sour grapes; fatted calf; salt of the earth; drop in a bucket; skin of one’s teeth; apple of one’s eye; girded loins; feet of clay; whited sepulchers; filthy lucre; pearls before swine; fly in the ointment; fight the good fight; eat, drink and be merry.

But what we also love about this Bible is its strangeness — its weird punctuation, odd pronouns (as in “Our Father, which art in heaven”), all those verbs that end in “eth”: “In the morning it flourisheth, and groweth vp; in the euening it is cut downe, and withereth.” As Robert Alter has demonstrated in his startling and revealing translations of the Psalms and the Pentateuch, the Hebrew Bible is even stranger, and in ways that the King James translators may not have entirely comprehended, and yet their text performs the great trick of being at once recognizably English and also a little bit foreign. You can hear its distinctive cadences in the speeches of Lincoln, the poetry of Whitman, the novels of Cormac McCarthy.

Even in its time, the King James Bible was deliberately archaic in grammar and phraseology: an expression like “yea, verily,” for example, had gone out of fashion some 50 years before. The translators didn’t want their Bible to sound contemporary, because they knew that contemporaneity quickly goes out of fashion. In his very useful guide, “God’s Secretaries: The Making of the King James Bible,” Adam Nicolson points out that when the Victorians came to revise the King James Bible in 1885, they embraced this principle wholeheartedly, and like those people who whack and scratch old furniture to make it look even more ancient, they threw in a lot of extra Jacobeanisms, like “howbeit,” “peradventure, “holden” and “behooved.”

This is the opposite, of course, of the procedure followed by most new translations, starting with Good News for Modern Man, a paperback Bible published by the American Bible Society in 1966, whose goal was to reflect not the language of the Bible but its ideas, rendering them into current terms, so that Ezekiel 23:20, for example (“For she doted vpon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses”) becomes “She was filled with lust for oversexed men who had all the lu****lness of donkeys or stallions.”

There are countless new Bibles available now, many of them specialized: a Bible for couples, for gays and lesbians, for recovering addicts, for surfers, for skaters and skateboarders, not to mention a superheroes Bible for children. They are all “accessible,” but most are a little tone-deaf, lacking in grandeur and majesty, replacing “through a glasse, darkly,” for instance, with something along the lines of “like a dim image in a mirror.” But what this modernizing ignores is that the most powerful religious language is often a little elevated and incantatory, even ambiguous or just plain hard to understand. The new Catholic missal, for instance, does not seem to fear the forbidding phrase, replacing the statement that Jesus is “one in being with the Father” with the more complicated idea that he is “consubstantial with the Father.”

Not everyone prefers a God who talks like a pal or a guidance counselor. Even some of us who are nonbelievers want a God who speaketh like — well, God. The great achievement of the King James translators is to have arrived at a language that is both ordinary and heightened, that rings in the ear and lingers in the mind. And that all 54 of them were able to agree on every phrase, every comma, without sounding as gassy and evasive as the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, is little short of amazing, in itself proof of something like divine inspiration.

SOURCE (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/24/weekinreview/24mcgrath.html?_r=1&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+delicious%2Fgqlf+%28Christian+Headlines+Top+Headlines%29)

Thanks for the post but i see they could have made there article about the King James Bible alot longer and there are alot of things they didn't mention!

The king of the bibles

We enjoyed a parish visit recently to St George’s Chapel, Windsor: the Queen’s Chapel. In there was a big sign saying, “Celebrating the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible”. I must say, it was a custom more honoured in the breach than in the observance. For at Choral Evensong, the lessons were both from some illiterate, godforsaken modern version. I knew we were in for trouble from the start when, in the Old Testament lesson, King Solomon addressed the Almighty as, “You God…” – as if the deity were some miscreant fourth-former in the back row. Of course it went from bad to worse.

On Wednesday, the Queen will attend a service of celebration at Westminster Abbey to mark the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible. The address will be given by the Archbishop of Canterbury, who earlier this year urged us to read the King James Bible in order to get a glimpse of what he called “the big picture”. Perhaps this was meant to go with Dave’s idea of “the big society”? This is a strange injunction, coming as it did from a man who has been in positions of power and influence in the church for decades. For in that time the same church hierarchy has ruthlessly suppressed the King James Bible, along with the Book of Common Prayer.

I can add a personal note on this subject. When I came to the City in 1998 I discovered that St Sepulchre’s did not have a lectern Bible in the King James Version (KJV). So I asked St Paul’s if they would lend me one of theirs.

They replied, “Oh yes, and you can keep it. We never use it at St Paul’s, only when the Royal Family comes – awkward people like that.” The King James Bible is a work of literary and spiritual genius. It is the religious register in English and its words and phrases have penetrated deeply into English literature. You cannot read 10 pages of Dickens or Arnold, George Eliot or the Brontës without coming across wholly integrated resonances of the King James Version. And, of course, English poetry is saturated with it. W H Auden said, as he witnessed the sidelining of the King James Bible: “It was our luck to have that translation made when English was at its strongest and most robust. Why spit on our luck?”

C H Sisson said that all we really know is what he called “the reluctant deposit on the mind’s floor”. That is to say, what you remember when you’ve forgotten everything else. For centuries, people of all walks of life have carried around with them echoes of the King James Version. So to throw it out as the church hierarchy has done amounts to a savage act of deprivation and, as this deprivation is of the Word of God in English, it is vicious iconoclasm. Sidelining the King James Version especially deprives our children and is therefore a notable case of child abuse.

There is no such thing as noble truth expressed in ignoble words. The choice of words determines what is being said. Therefore, we should choose the best.

“Strips of cloth” is no substitute for “swaddling clothes”. And Mary was “with child” – we think of the Madonna and Child – and she had not “fallen pregnant” as it says in one of the modern versions. You cannot satisfactorily replace “through a glass darkly” with the crass literalism “puzzling reflections in a mirror” or “sounding brass and tinkling cymbal” with “noisy gong and clanging cymbal”. The King James Bible was designed to be read aloud in churches. All the modern versions sound as if they have been written by tone-deaf people with tin ears and no rhythm.

What level of vacuity is reached when “Son of Belial” (i.e. the devil himself) is rendered by the New English Bible (NEB) as “a good-for-nothing”? As if the son of the devil is only a truant from the fourth form who has been stealing from the housemaster’s orchard.

The real Bible says, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.” The NEB gives us instead, “The first step to find wisdom.” But that is only the way in which babyish primary school teachers speak to their charges. The first step to find wisdom – and then, if you are ever so good little children, I’ll show you the second step. This is infantilisation. Sometimes the New Jerusalem Bible’s (NJB) pedantry, this pseudo-scholarly fascination with all that is merely foreign and obscure, is just silly, as in “You, Yahweh examine me.” But occasionally it is mindlessly un-poetic and banal, as in the substitution of “Acclaim Yahweh” for the mesmerisingly beautiful and timelessly familiar “make a joyful noise unto the Lord”. But in one example of supreme idiocy the meaning becomes impenetrable: The King James Version says, “He that dwelleth in the secret place of the Most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty. I will say of the Lord …” In the New Jerusalem Bible this degenerates into tasteless obscurantism: “If you live in the shelter of Elyon and make your home in the shadow of Shaddai, you can say to Yahweh …” The Revised Standard Version (RSV) loves to parade the translators’ acquaintance with the slightest nuances in the ancient languages but their utter ignorance of what will go into ordinary English. It renders the “giants” of Genesis as “nephilim” – to the confusion, one supposes, of elderly ladies everywhere. And the “two pence” that the Good Samaritan gave to the innkeeper as “two denarii” – lest we should imagine that the currency of the Roman Empire was the same as that of England, pre-decimalisation.

The RSV makes a habit of iconoclasm, as for instance in its destruction of that very familiar phrase: “Arise, take up thy bed and walk.” The RSV says, “Take up your pallet and go home.” Because we must on no account be allowed to imagine that the poor paralytic slunk off carrying his four-poster, we have forced upon us the literalism pallet: and the result sounds like instructions to a sloppy painter.

The NEB also cannot tell the difference between speech that is poetic and metaphorical and speech that is literal and descriptive. That is why for “wolves in sheep’s clothing” we are given instead the pantomime howler “men dressed up as sheep”. We recall perhaps Ulysses’ escape from the Cyclops or that pejorative expression “mutton dressed up as lamb”. In the KJV men are “at meat” or they “sup”; but the RSV mentions a Pharisee who “asked Jesus to dine” – where, at The Garrick or White’s? Likewise, his rebuke to the disciples on the road to Emmaus, “O fools and slow of heart” is emasculated to become “How dull you are!” How dull indeed. Can you imagine for one minute Our Lord Jesus Christ on the evening of his day of resurrection using such language? “How dull!”

The KJV’s “pearl of great price” is exhibited in more of that infantilised Blue Peter language as “a pearl of very special value”. And then the end of the world itself is described as if it were only an exceptionally hot afternoon at Goodwood: “My dear friends…” (that is the voice of the NEB’s urbane, housetrained St Peter) “…do not be bewildered by the fiery ordeal that is coming upon you, as though it were something extraordinary.” The end of the world not extraordinary?

There is a sort of discreet charm about the KJV’s saying, “It ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women.” This is marvellous. It seems to reach up the underclothes of words, as that other great admirer of biblical prose, Dylan Thomas, said. But the Jerusalem Bible was written in the era of sex education, so it can confidently come straight out with “ceased to have her monthly periods”. And the KJV’s “great **** of Babylon” seems to have lost what is left of her character when the New Jerusalem Bible refers to her only as “the famous prostitute”. Who is this – Eskimo Nell?

With studied pedantry, the New Jerusalem Bible replaces “inn” with “living space” – I suppose because they imagined readers to be so literal-minded that we might think St Luke meant the Rose and Crown. A similar pedantry removes the KJV’s lovely “coat of many colours” and offers us “a decorated tunic”. The KJV translates Psalm 139: 16 – a beautiful poem in which the Psalmist declares that God knew him “while he was yet in his mother’s womb – as thine eyes did see my substance yet being unperfect.” This is allusive, evocative, tender. Unbelievably, the NJB gives us instead, “Your eyes could see my embryo” – as if God were a member of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority.

There is a pervading irreverence bordering on blasphemy. The translation of the Psalms in the Book of Common Prayer is by Miles Coverdale and he renders the Hebrew, “O let thine ears consider well …” The NJB gives this as “Listen attentively Yahweh”. But is that the way to speak to God? What more is there to be said when we notice that the NJB renders “Vanity of vanities, all is vanity” as “Sheer futility. Everything is futile.” That phrase will serve as the motto for all the modern translations: “Sheer futility”.

How hypocritical and sordid of the church authorities relentlessly to suppress the KJV, only to take it out and gawp at it in an anniversary year, as if it were a museum piece and we were all blundering tourists. The proper place for the KJV is on the lectern in every parish church – to be read, marked, learnt and inwardly digested, week in, week out.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8887946/The-king-of-the-bibles.html

KJV Defended As God's Word - Scott A. Johnson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CziwuAjhi-s&feature=share

In this teaching we will start by examining a shocking article entitled: 'Apostate Bible Scholar Loses Voice on the John Ankerberg TV Show'. We will also be reading relevant excerpts from: Fighting Back!--A Handy Reference For King James Bible Believers/Reasons for Accepting the KJV as God's Preserved Word (See: http://www.av1611.org/kjv/fight.html )

Some topics we will be covering:
Reasons for Accepting the KJV as God's Preserved Word,
Questions for the KJV Critics,
Antioch vs. Alexandria ,
Sinaiticus and Vaticanus,
Facts about Westcott and Hort,
Translating the King James Bible,
Let's Compare Bibles,
The Various Editions of the 1611 A.V.

The Bible says in Proverbs 11:3: 'If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?' Since the Word of God is the foundation of a Christians faith, it is very important to clearly establish how the Lord has chosen to preserve 'His Word' in the day and times we live in. Psalm 12:6&7: 'The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.'

Also see: Where did our bibles come from?: http://www.born2serve.org/images/kjvchartbig.gif

The KJV Defended as God's Preserved Word PDF
http://www.divshare.com/download/10354255-ba8

Gail Ripplinger's "New Age Bible Versions" is highly recommended - I haven't gotten through 1/2 of it yet, but nonetheless it is EYE-POPPING. Had no idea all of the heresies and errors REALLY ran deep. For example, alot of these "discernment" ministries today want to make you believe that the wealth and prosperity gospel came from the Word of Faith movement/Joel Osteen, but this is NOT true - Wescott and Hort were the ones that planted the seeds for it through the corrupt Alexandrian texts a LONG time ago. Of course, some of these discernment ministries have yet to defend the KJV(while one of them attacked it).

No wonder why few pastors on the pulpits don't have a backbone to call out people like Osteen.

Not sure where to post this, but nonetheless want to share this, so here goes...

Was in Louisiana visiting over the weekend, and attended his Presbyterian church(where his wife is the music director). Yes, it was pretty rotten, but won't go into the details, other than the preacher is not only a WOMAN, but her main, full-time job is being a law clerk during the week(so this is her 2nd job).

It wasn't so much that the pastor here is a woman(and for that matter too her sermon was unsurprisingly lukewarm-no preaching of the cross, and the pews recited some blasphemous prayers throughout the service), but her preaching is NO different from many of the Southern Baptist MEN preachers I've encountered in my lifetime, INCLUDING the most recent one in my city(he's a middle aged man with 3 grown boys, FWIW).

Seriously, if you hear this woman preach, the reactions from pretty much ANYONE are, "Her sermon isn't bad b/c she sounds alot like my male preacher". So how are they VERY similar? Words of wisdom, philosophical, saying nice things about catholics, mentioning worldly/wolf in sheep's clothing people as good people, coming off as soft, and most importantly NOT mentioning JESUS'S FINISHED WORKS ON THE CROSS and being saved by his BLOOD!

Pt being that these false bible versions have really done alot of damage to the modern-day church - as you can see, it's let alot of evil, unclean spirits infiltrate the walls, and in this case it has really EVENED the playing field b/w men's and women's roles in the church. Has feminism really crept through the walls? Looks like it!

Definitely don't be fooled by anyone that doesn't preach out of a KJV - sure, a few may look like they preach truth, but again, look at the overall fruit, and you're gonna see some big cracks!

1Th_5:21  Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

2Ti_1:13  Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.

2Ti_4:3  For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
2Ti 4:4  And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
2Ti 4:5  But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.

Tit_1:9  Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.

Wow thanks for the insights, a longtime ago i went to a Presbyterian Church myself, i didn't feel comfortable their either.

From what I was told, the big majority of pastors in Presbyterian churches are women. I don't know why, but it's pretty much obvious why this "denomination" is very corrupted. But even more alarming is that these women "preachers" are really no different from these "macho" men SBC preachers, in terms of how they get off their messages on the pulpits.(and for that matter too, these same men preachers either do other unbiblical activities outside of their church, or their wives have full-time jobs, both of which are unbiblical as well)

This is yet another one of those very subtle deceptions going right under the noses of Churchianity, why? Obviously, b/c the great majority of these pastors have thrown out the KJV. Again, yes, as we all discussed here many times, it DOES make a BIG difference over which bible version is being used - as you can see in this example, there's something really wrong when the majority of church goers see no difference in "conservative" men preachers and "liberal" women preachers. There's no question about it. And some of these discernment ministries that use other versions need to wake up too - it's great that they're exposing Rick Warren, the Emergent Church, and other Postmodernism New Age nonsense infiltrating churches, but they just have no depth beyond that in terms of understanding the times.

Eph 4:1  I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
Eph 4:2  With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
Eph 4:3  Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Eph 4:4  There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
Eph 4:5  One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Eph 4:6  One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
Eph 4:7  But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.

BTW - 3 years ago when I was out of town, I attended a small, non-denominational, 501c3 church whose pastor was preaching out of the NIV. At the time, I thought it was a wonderful sermon(despite him using the NIV) where he seemed to preach alot of truth.

It was at the older board that had the chat box(instead of the shout box) at the time, and I had a conversation with Mark and someone else about this. Not only did Mark(and the other person) hold their grounds, but they kept asking me the tough questions about this pastor and church, persisting that discernment is a must on every angle.

While I didn't agree with Mark at the time, I'm thankful him and the other person just held their grounds and asked the tough questions on everything.

Yeah, lesson to be learned here is that definitely question all things, b/c alot of deceptions can be very subtle, especially ministries that use false bible versions and have 501c3 statuses. Since that time over the last 3 years, the Lord HAS SHOWN me cracks in this particular church(ie-won't go into all the details, but this church lacks depth).

2Ti_4:2  Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

This is something I've noticed recently...

Not that I'm trying to come off as belittling others et al - it just seems like with the KJV crowd, there are days when they'll read their bible for a mere 1 hour, or even just 20 or so minutes focusing on 1-2 chapters, and there are days when they'll be reading an entire book(ie, let's say 1st Samuel in its entirety) all morning.

But take the NIV and the other versions crowd - I've seen them read it all day almost every day, and they say how it's hard to put down the bible from reading it. It's as if they're reading it like a John Grisham novel.

Do you see what I'm trying to say here? The bible is NOT a story-book, per se - for one, too much studying can weary the flesh. And with that being said, you read what the Lord leads you to do so(and meditate on). If it's a mere 1 chapter of Psalms or Proverbs, so be it. If it happens to be 5-6 chapters of 1st Corinthians and then call it a day, then so be it.

But en yet it seems like the modern-day Churchianity crowd feels you have to read it a certain amount a day(even many hours), and have to pray on your knees a minimum number of hours a day for that matter too.

Again, I don't know if what I wrote made sense, but does anyone kind of see what I'm trying to get at? Yes, I love the KJV, but again, it's NOT a John Grisham story-book novel. There are times when after reading a mere couple of chapters, you can feel your flesh giving away, and the Lord even telling you to stop and meditate on what you read. With these other versions - it's as if you can read them for hours like it's some page-turning novel, which itself is a red flag.(and to boot, if they're really reading these versions for hours, well, with the lack of discernment the modern-day church has...you know the rest of the fruit)

ill leave it like this, for the KJB people, we read and memorize easily. For the Catholic bible people, there is no memorizing involved. I believe i posted a South West Radio program that dealt with this.

Well, I have some bad news and good news on my front...

OK, bad news first - although slightly off-topic, I still attend that church with my parents. Don't want to get into all the details, but it's a 501c3 lukewarm one and I need to get out. But it's a long story.

HOWEVER, here's the GOOD news - there's an old lady in the pews that reads the KJV! Last year, she tapped me on the shoulders from behind and asked me if I read King James, b/c she saw my bible. I told her yes. And a week later, I gave her materials to watch from Bryan and Scott concerning defending the KJV.

OK, here's the part of the GOOD news I want to elaborate - I approached her before I went into the sanctuary today and asked her how many years she's been reading the KJV. She told me all her life, and here's the BEST part...she KNOWS ALL the deleted verses, words, and all the wickedness being thrown into these other versions(as well as the deletion of Lucifer in Isaiah 14). I couldn't tell you the FEELING I had when I heard this from her. Praise Jesus!

So ultimately, Praise the Lord that there's not only a KJV-only person at my "church", but also knows all of the wickedness in the other versions. It's as if both of us know the truth, but are stuck b/w a rock and a hard place.(her children, who are at the senior citizen age, also attend that church - yes, she's that old)

But like Jesus Christ says...Love the Lord with all our heart, soul, strength, and mind. And love your neighbor as yourself.

you could always tell other people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8V6CpCYaDM4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5u7fCbyV7K4

Well guess what...ended up meeting another KJV-only person(an elderly) when I was out of town this weekend(it was at the public library). She insisted on keeping the old paths(which is why she uses the KJV only). And from there we ended up talking about end times stuff, and how these other perversions are setting the stage for the Antichrist to be releaved(among other things, like a SW town in Lousiana using biometrics ID at an elementary school). It wasn't like I was running around town looking for a KJV-only person - to be honest, I went to the library b/c for some reason I wasn't in a good mood, and out of the blue this woman started talking to me when my cell phone rang(and the rest of the story from there).

Just don't give up hope, guys, and put your faith alone in Jesus Christ(and the KJV) - you will never know who you will run into, and you don't even have to go running around town or the country doing so.

Heb_13:2  Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.

Well, here's yet more bad fruit with the other (per)versions...

It just seems like when you are looking for answers, it's just not very often, if rarely, that they're in those other (per)versions. And as a result, the modern-day church is looking to other MEN(or women) for just that. For example, was listening from upstairs Rob Bell babbling in a video over "learning how to say no", and my mom told me that one of the fellow Christians we know just has problems learning how to say no to others. So subsequently she was given a Rob Bell video giving advice on this from someone in her bible study group.

Whatever happened to the Boreans searching the scriptures daily? Whatever happened to study to show thyself approved so we can rightly divide the word of truth? Oh wait...both of those verses are NOT in those other versions! And to top it off, what Bell said made absolutely no sense, as he was letting "bitter water" come out of his tongue.

Gal 1:10  For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.

(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-nCo0F8ffPyA/U--XL96qO7I/AAAAAAAALms/pI7jWh8p8oU/w506-h677/IMG_0699.JPG)

(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-2vVF0Eo-jlc/U_0-Ea5bEoI/AAAAAAAAL44/I0RZJrmoiqM/w400-h508/kjb_chart-large.gif)

http://www.born-again-christian.info/answers/guy-fawkes-bonfire-night-nov-5-gunpowder-plot-catholic-coup-against-king-james.htm

(http://s10.postimg.org/mknmpr3fd/ea8786181464bffe50d530abc5653e15.jpg)

I'm reading the book "New Age Bible Versions" again - it details everything over how these corrupt Alexandrian texts not only subtlely delete/add critical words in these perversions, but the very words they add(and replace) are the same ones occultists, New Agers, etc use.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sb22O8Ra1ZI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cHp8JspStA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6e4xS7A3dhQ

The King James Bible was not translated during the apostate and lukewarm Laodicean church period, like the new translations.  The Laodicean period is the last church period before the Second Coming of Christ.  It is the last of the seven church periods in Revelation chapters two and  three.  One can clearly see that we are living in the Laodicean period today by simply comparing modern churches to the church of Revelation 3:14-22.  This lukewarm period began toward the end of the 1800's and will continue until Christ returns.  The new versions fit well into the lukewarm churches, because they are lukewarm "bibles."
 
The Authorized Version, however, was translated LONG BEFORE the Laodicean churches appeared.  It was translated during the Philadelphia church period, which is the best church period of all.  It was this church that the Lord Jesus COMMENDED for KEEPING HIS WORD( Rev. 3:8-10)!
 
In 1611, when the King James Bible was completed, the scourge of lukewarm Laodicea had not yet swept over the world.  There was no "scientific" crowd around in 1611 to put pressure on the translators.  There was no civil rights movement going on at this time to influence the work of these men.  The women were not screaming for "equal rights," and the humanists and socialists had not yet taken control.  The massive army of liberal and modernistic preachers had not yet been assembled.  The open public denial of God's word and the Deity of Christ was practically unheard of among ministers.  It wasn't until the twentieth century that professing Christianity became flooded with lukewarm preachers who would be willing to compromise the word of God for self gain.
 
The greatest missionary work in church history occurred between 1700 and 1900, so it makes perfect sense that God would have a Bible ready for this great work, and He did - the KJV.  Unfortunately, the new translations appeared a bit LATE on the scene!  Think about that.  I know the KJV is the word of God because of the time in history in which it was translated.

http://biblebaptistpublications.org/kingjamesbibledebate.html

(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-y3lTIIyaso4/VMGXOKEklsI/AAAAAAAAGAI/uVbcAiEOoe0/w506-h900/15%2B-%2B1)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOqGXVWXfyg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5U17tkp8XI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzu6QVrtW8Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwEIEjr9ogI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ok-H6T2x5Dg

This is a KJB-defending Facebook page from a close brethren on Youtube.

He does a really good job with this.
https://www.facebook.com/Kjvsilvertried7times

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfFX_e7RdvQ

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/?p=36517
EARLIEST KNOWN DRAFT OF 1611 KING JAMES BIBLE IS FOUND AT CAMBRIDGE
Geoffrey Grider | October 21, 2015 | 12 Comments

THE KING JAMES BIBLE IS THE MOST WIDELY READ WORK IN ENGLISH LITERATURE, A MASTERPIECE OF TRANSLATION WHOSE STATELY CADENCES AND TRANSCENDENT PHRASES HAVE LONG BEEN SEEN, EVEN BY SECULAR READERS, AS HAVING EMERGED FROM A KIND OF COLLECTIVE DIVINE INSPIRATION.

“The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.” Psalm 12:6,7 (KJV)

In an unassuming notebook held in an archive at the University of Cambridge, an American scholar has found what he says is an important new clue to the earthly processes behind that masterpiece: the earliest known draft, and the only one definitively written in the hand of one of the roughly four dozen translators who worked on it.

The notebook, which dates from 1604 to 1608, was discovered by Jeffrey Alan Miller, an assistant professor of English at Montclair State University in New Jersey, who announced his research on Wednesday in an article in The Times Literary Supplement.

While the notebook has yet to be examined by other scholars, experts who have reviewed Professor Miller’s research called it perhaps the most significant archival find relating to the King James Bible in decades.

David Norton, an emeritus professor at the Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand and the author of several books about the King James Bible, called it “a major discovery” — if not quite equal to finding a draft of one of Shakespeare’s plays, “getting on up there.”

Gordon Campbell, a fellow in Renaissance studies at the University of Leicester and a consultant for the planned Museum of the Bible in Washington, said the new manuscript shed fresh light on how the King James translators actually did their work, as opposed to how they had been told to do it.

Studying the creation of the King James Bible “is like working with a jigsaw puzzle where 90 percent of the pieces are missing,” Mr. Campbell said. “You can arrange the surviving pieces as you wish, but then you find something new and you realize you put it together the wrong way.”

“Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?” Ecclesiastes 8:4 (KJV)

The King James Bible, published in 1611, was produced by six teams of translators, known as “companies,” in London, Oxford and Cambridge, who were charged with creating an authorized version that would support the Church of England against the Puritan influence seen in some earlier translations. Along with Shakespeare’s First Folio of 1623, it is one of the most influential books in the history of English and the wellspring of common phrases like “salt of the earth,” “drop in the bucket” and “fight the good fight,” to name only a few.

While some records of the committee that supervised the overall translation survive, only three manuscripts of the text itself have been known to exist until now. The Bodleian Library at Oxford owns nearly complete drafts of the Old Testament and the Gospels, in the form of corrected pages of the Bishops’ Bible, a 16th-century translation that the King James teams used as a base text. Lambeth Palace Library in London has a partial draft of the New Testament epistles.

Professor Miller discovered the manuscript last fall, when he was in the archives at Sidney Sussex College in Cambridge, researching an essay about Samuel Ward, one of the King James translators and, later, the college’s master. He was hoping to find an unknown letter, which he did.

“I thought that would be my great discovery,” he recalled.

BUT HE ALSO CAME ACROSS AN UNASSUMING NOTEBOOK ABOUT THE SIZE OF A MODERN PAPERBACK, WRAPPED IN A STAINED PIECE OF WASTE VELLUM AND FILLED WITH SOME 70 PAGES OF WARD’S NEARLY INDECIPHERABLE HANDWRITING.

The notebook had been cataloged in the 1980s as a “verse-by-verse biblical commentary” with “Greek word studies, and some Hebrew notes.” But as Professor Miller tried to puzzle out which passages of the Bible it concerned, he realized what it was: a draft of parts of the King James Version of the Apocrypha, a disputed section of the Bible that is left out of many editions, particularly in the United States.

“There was a kind of thunderstruck, leap-out-of-bathtub moment,” Professor Miller said. “But then comes the more laborious process of making sure you are 100 percent correct.”

The draft, Professor Miller argues, dates from between 1604, when the King James Bible was commissioned, and 1608, when the six teams were asked to send their work to the general committee for review. Unlike the other surviving drafts, which scholars date to later parts of the process, it shows an individual translator’s initial puzzling over aspects of the Greek text of the Apocrypha, indicating the reasoning behind his translation choices, with reference to Hebrew and Latin as well.

“You can actually see the way Greek, Latin and Hebrew are all feeding into what will become the most widely read work of English literature of all time,” Professor Miller said. “It gets you so close to the thought process, it’s incredible.”

The draft, he argues, also complicates one long-cherished aspect of the “mythos,” as he put it, surrounding the King James: that it was a collaborative project through and through.

The companies were charged with doing their work as a group, rather than subdividing it by assigning individual books to individual translators, as was the case with the Bishops’ Bible. But the Ward notebook, Professor Miller said, suggests “beyond a reasonable doubt” that at least some of the companies ignored the instructions and divided up the work among individuals, at least initially.

Further, he said, the notebook contains a complete draft for the book of the Apocrypha known as 1 Esdras, but then, after a run of blank pages, only a partial manuscript for the book known as the Wisdom of Solomon, suggesting that Ward picked up the slack for another translator.

“Some of them, being typical academics, either fell down on the job or just decided not to do it,” Professor Miller said, with a laugh. “It really testifies to the human element of this kind of great undertaking.”

In recent years, scholars have chipped away at the idea of Shakespeare’s plays as the product of an isolated genius, emphasizing instead the intensely collaborative nature of Elizabethan theater. Professor Miller said that the origins of the other great monument of 17th-century English literature is due for a similar reconsideration.

“There’s a strong desire to see the King James Bible as a uniform object, and a belief that it’s great because of its collaborative nature,” Professor Miller said. “It was incredibly collaborative,” he continued. “But it was done in a much more complicated, nuanced, and at times individualistic way than we’ve ever really had good evidence to believe.” source

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-hNvrI-DoxOY/VjGTPaBO_1I/AAAAAAAAJM0/kwZZLl1ZfxI/w346-h549/15%2B-%2B1)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptoa11edfMo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Hc3F1by5Ac

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu469oGJHXk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFsg0cptn58

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CeWT0J2qYg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_q42y4aT1KI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqAUR3aMHTg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LCDTvKrvY0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyUHgFPVngE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1q6A45Wj8qE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UI1M2OHyyM

(http://media.sermonaudio.com/gallery/photos/CooleyJason-02.jpg)      

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=531172210192      
The Jesus Of The NIV Is The Antichrist - Seed Of Satan      
5/31/2017 (WED)      
Audio: http://www.sermonaudio.com/playpopup.asp?SID=531172210192      

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMUrCLguarM&t=1690s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjvqhNlXW9M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYuYKDuVCWg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igligy21f5g&t=185s