Now I am a big fan of the King James Bible.

However, I have come across some interesting info on the design of the 1611.

It seems King James was in the occult world. And the designs on the pages look like they have pagan backgrounds!

Alot of Freemasonry symbols as well as Babylon.

Has anyone else taken notice on this?

Yahweh Bless

Kevin

Yahweh Bless

My King James Bible says Jehovah (you might want to study out where the name Yahweh came from...).

King James was definitely NOT involved in the occult - he wrote at least one book I am aware of against the occult.

Don't blame the pictures the printer put in there on the King. Besides, King James had nothing to do with the translation of the words in the KJV - he was (one of) the person(s) God used to set this translation in motion - but he was not a translator of the KJV.

...I've found that if someone can't fault the "message", they attack the "messenger". No one has ever been able to discredit the KJB, so they try and discredit the king who ordered it's production.

Yahweh Bless, Jerry.

First of all in the 1611 the writers did not use j as a capital letter.

Gen 22:14 And Abraham called the name of that place Iehouah-ijreh, as it is said to this day, In the Mount of the LORD it shalbe seene.

Exo 6:3 And I appeared vnto Abraham, vnto Isaac, and vnto Iacob, by the Name of God Almighty, but by my name IEHOVAH was I not knowen to them.

Exo 17:15 And Moses built an Altar, and called the name of it IEHOUAH Nissi.

Isa 12:2 Behold, God is my saluation: I will trust, and not be afraid; for the Lord IEHOVAH is my strength and my song, he also is become my saluation.

Isa 26:4 Trust ye in the Lord for euer: for in the Lord Iehouah is euerlasting strength.

In the second place there were no "j" in the Hebrew. The Hebrew Massorah which the 1611 KJV is derived from, uses no j's!

Pastor Mike I agree with you. Alot of KJV Bibles have been translated into man's thinking. I believe the best KJV Bible is the Companion Bible. This Bible takes you back into the Hebrew and Greek. Plus the appendixes are assume.

I just find it interesting that the diagrams on the pages of the 1611 do with pagan issues.

Yahweh Bless

Kevin

The Hebrew Massorah is only what is the Old Testament. It is today's Torah used in Orthodox temples. The New Testament came from the Textus Receptus. One must also be careful the translation is the Koinate (not sure of the spelling)Greek and not the Classical Greek. It seems to me that you are using a version of the KJ that is in Olde English.

Originally Posted by kjndds

The Hebrew Massorah is only what is the Old Testament. It is today's Torah used in Orthodox temples. The New Testament came from the Textus Receptus. One must also be careful the translation is the Koinate (not sure of the spelling)Greek and not the Classical Greek. It seems to me that you are using a version of the KJ that is in Olde English.

Koine Greek was the ligua franca spoken in Greek up to about the ninth century. After that came what we call modern Greek today. You cannot take a Strongs concondance and expect to translate ancient Koine Greek. There are simply too many diviations. Actually by modern definition the KJV is not Olde English. Modern English is defined as any English from the latter part of the 16th century to date. With that said the KJV would fall within the modern English definition.

Textus Receptus being the recieved text handed down as the majority Byzantium text from the east as opposed to the Alexandrian text, minority text of Alexandria Egypt. Todays modern perversion of the Bible are based on these minority text also known as the Alexandrian autographs or manuscripts which represent less than 1% of all manusripts in existance, i.e. approx 44 measly manuscripts as compared to over 5,360 autographs of the Byzantium or Majority Text. The minority text do not agree with each other in many places and have had many authors and changes made including by Origen making changes in them so they would agree with the knostisism rampant in Egypt at the time.

What manuscripts do you want to trust? Majority manuscripts also agree with the most ancient copies of the Bible including the Peshitta written in Aramaic.

The last thing any Christian needs to do is refer to the Greek or the Hebrew definition of a word from some modern Greek or Hebrew lexicon. It can mean mean so many things in many cases. When I hear a pastor or teacher say, " well er that word in the Greek means a er I really can't pronouce it but my Strongs Concordance or my Interlinear say it means", I cringe because of the ignorance of that Pastor as to what he has just done to the people that are listening to him. He has now placed doubt that God could and would as He said preserve His Word for all generations and that God could not say what He meant to say. Confusion is not of God.

All a Christian needs to know God is preserved in the pages of the KJV. If you want to know what a word means look it up in an English dictionary even it that means going back to the 1828 Noah Websters dictionary. It is a very handy tool for certain words not used much today in the KJV. The KJV is written on a 6th grade reading level. It has been the Bible that during the last 400 years has been Gods Word that brought hundreds of millions of people to salvation. It is still the only real preserved Word of God given to us through God using a King like so many things He did in the Bible.

God gave us instruction on how to use His Word.

2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

You will not find that word Study in any other Perversion.

In the service of the Lord.

Danny

First of all in the 1611 the writers did not use j as a capital letter.

So? Like Jerry said, mine and his and yours (unless you're using one of those reprints) says Jehovah. The reprint doesn't say it. The last cambridge update 1789 does. Those reprints use gothic font and roman numerals. My Authorized Version (AV) doesn't and so neither do I.

When I study a letter, such as James, I use only my Companion KJV, along with James Strong Concord, with Smith's Bible ditcionary. However, I go back to the 1611 for references, just as I go back into the copies of the Greek manuscripts. Basically, I begin with the KJV, but totally depend on the manuscripts. From the manuscripts, I then search for the differents variants contained within these different copies. To me the most reliable is the Ethopic manuscripts, which is the foundation of our KJV.

I do not use the Alexander copy at all. This is the foundation for the NIV etc. Bibles.

Probably the real reason that I use the 1611, is the preface. That letter that the writers wrote to us the readers.

When I read their letter and look at the different pictures within the pages, it tells me, someone is trying to change the mindset of the writers.

Yahweh Bless

Kevin

In the second place there were no "j" in the Hebrew. The Hebrew Massorah which the 1611
Again. . .so?

NOTE: Neither the hebrew nor the greek can trump the KJV. You can profit by looking at other versions you can read (greek or hebrew or syrian for that matter). But we don't have a HIGHER AUTHORITY in the TR than we do in the KJV. The KJV was translated from some greek texts (NT) and the masoretic text (OT) and was also diligently compared to previous versions. That's why sometimes a particular KJV translation looks faulty: Some particular greek word in some edition of the TR may not be seen as best represented by the word in the KJV. And then you will hear unbelief say "The translators really blew it" here or there. Well sometimes the KJV translators went with the word they did because it was from a previous (perhaps non-greek like the syrian) version. They diligently compared the previous english versions also.

Originally Posted by kevin

Now I am a big fan of the King James Bible.

However, I have come across some interesting info on the design of the 1611.

It seems King James was in the occult world. And the designs on the pages look like they have pagan backgrounds!

Alot of Freemasonry symbols as well as Babylon.

Has anyone else taken notice on this?

Yahweh Bless

Kevin

Brother Kevin. Never in all my studies. I think you are mistaking the KJB for the NKJB perversion.

Bro. Danny