King James version bible

The Story of King James
For the last three centuries Protestants have fancied
themselves the heirs of the Reformation, the
Puritans, the Calvinists, and the Pilgrims who landed
at Plymouth Rock. This assumption is one of history's
greatest ironies. Today, Protestants laboring under
that assumption use the King James Bible. Most of
the new Bibles such as the Revised Standard Version
are simply updates of the King James.
The irony is that none of the groups named in the
preceding paragraph used a King James Bible nor
would they have used it if it had been given to them
free. The Bible in use by those groups, until it went
out of print in 1644, was the Geneva Bible. The first
Geneva Bible, both Old and New Testaments, was
first published in English in 1560 in what is now
Geneva, Switzerland. William Shakespeare, John
Bunyan, John Milton, the Pilgrims who landed on
Plymouth Rock in 1620, and other luminaries of that
era used the Geneva Bible exclusively.
Until he had his own version named after him, so did
King James I of England. James I later tried to
disclaim any knowledge of the Geneva Bible, though
he quoted the Geneva Bible in his own writings. As a
Professor Eadie reported it:
"...his virtual disclaimer of all knowledge up to a late
period of the Genevan notes and version was simply
a bold, unblushing falsehood, a clumsy attempt to
sever himself and his earlier Scottish beliefs and
usages that he might win favor with his English
churchmen."
The irony goes further. King James did not
encourage a translation of the Bible in order to
enlighten the common people: his sole intent was to
deny them the marginal notes of the Geneva Bible.
The marginal notes of the Geneva version were what
made it so popular with the common people.
The King James Bible was, and is for all practical
purposes, a government publication. There were
several reasons for the King James Bible being a
government publication. First, King James I of
England was a devout believer in the "divine right of
kings," a philosophy ingrained in him by his mother,
Mary Stuart. Mary Stuart may have been having an
affair with her Italian secretary, David Rizzio, at the
time she conceived James. There is a better than
even chance that James was the product of adultery.
Apparently, enough evidence of such conduct on the
part of Mary Stuart and David Rizzio existed to cause
various Scot nobles, including Mary's own husband,
King Henry, to drag David Rizzio from Mary's supper
table and execute him. The Scot nobles hacked and
slashed at the screaming Rizzio with knives and
swords, and then threw him off a balcony to the
courtyard below where he landed with a sickening
smack. In the phrase of that day, he had been
scotched.
Mary did have affairs with other men, such as the
Earl of Bothwell. She later tried to execute her
husband in a gunpowder explosion that shook all of
Edinburgh. King Henry survived the explosion only to
be suffocated later that same night. The murderers
were never discovered. Mary was eventually
beheaded at the order of her cousin, Elizabeth I of
England.
To such individuals as James and his mother, Mary,
the "divine right of kings" meant that since a king's
power came from God, the king then had to answer
to no one but God. This lack of responsibility
extended to evil kings. The reasoning was that if a
king was evil, that was a punishment sent from God.
The citizens should then suffer in silence. If a king
was good, that was a blessing sent from God.
This is why the Geneva Bible annoyed King James I.
The Geneva Bible had marginal notes that simply
didn't conform to that point of view. Those marginal
notes had been, to a great extent, placed in the
Geneva Bible by the leaders of the Reformation,
including John Knox and John Calvin. Knox and
Calvin could not and cannot be dismissed lightly or
their opinions passed off to the public as the mere
ditherings of dissidents.
First, notes such as, "When tyrants cannot prevail by
craft they burst forth into open rage" (Note i, Exodus
1:22) really bothered King James.
Second, religion in James' time was not what it is
today. In that era religion was controlled by the
government. If someone lived in Spain at the time,
he had three religious
"choices:"
1. Roman Catholicism
2. Silence
3. The Inquisition
The third "option" was reserved for "heretics," or
people who didn't think the way the government
wanted them to. To governments of that era heresy
and treason were synonymous.
England wasn't much different. From the time of
Henry VIII on, an Englishman had three choices:
1. The Anglican Church
2. Silence
3. The rack, burning at the stake, being drawn and
quartered, or some other form of persuasion.
The hapless individuals who fell into the hands of the
government for holding religious opinions of their
own were simply punished according to the royal
whim.
Henry VIII, once he had appointed himself head of
all the English churches, kept the Roman Catholic
system of bishops, deacons and the like for a very
good reason. That system allowed him a "chain of
command" necessary for any bureaucracy to
function. This system passed intact to his heirs.
This system became a little confusing for English
citizens when Bloody Mary ascended to the throne.
Mary wanted everyone to switch back to Roman
Catholicism. Those who proved intransigent and
wanted to remain Protestant she burned at the stake
- about 300 people in all. She intended to burn a lot
more, but the rest of her intended victims escaped
by leaving the country. A tremendous number of
those intended victims settled in Geneva. Religious
refugees from other countries in Western Europe,
including the French theologian Jean Chauvin, better
known as John Calvin, also settled there.
Mary died and was succeeded in the throne by her
Protestant cousin, Elizabeth. The Anglican
bureaucracy returned, less a few notables such as
Archbishop Cranmer and Hugh Latimer (both having
been burned at the stake by Bloody Mary). In
Scotland, John Knox led the Reformation. The
Reformation prospered in Geneva. Many of those who
had fled Bloody Mary started a congregation there.
Their greatest effort and contribution to the
Reformation was the first Geneva Bible.
More marginal notes were added to later editions. By
the end of the 16th century, the Geneva Bible had
about all the marginal notes there was space
available to put them in.
Geneva was an anomaly in 16th century Europe. In
the days of absolute despotism and constant warfare,
Geneva achieved her independence primarily by
constant negotiation, playing off one stronger power
against another. While other governments allowed
lawyers to drag out cases and took months and years
to get rid of corrupt officials, the City of Geneva
dispatched most civil and criminal cases within a
month and threw corrupt officials into jail the day
after they were found out. The academy that John
Calvin founded there in 1559 later became the
University of Geneva. Religious wars wracked
Europe. The Spanish fought to restore Roman
Catholicism to Western Europe. The Dutch fought for
the Reformation and religious freedom. England, a
small country with only 4-1/2 million people,
managed to stay aloof because of the natural
advantage of the English Channel.
The Dutch declared religious freedom for everybody.
Amsterdam became an open city. English Puritans
arrived by the boatload. The 1599 Edition of the
Geneva Bible was printed in Amsterdam and London
in large quantities until well into the 17th century.
King James, before he became James I of England,
made it plain that he had no use for the "Dutch
rebels" who had rebelled against their Spanish King.
Another irony left to us from the 16th century is that
the freedom of religion and freedom of the press did
not originate in England, as many people commonly
assume today. Those freedoms were first given to
Protestants by the Dutch, as the records of that era
plainly show. England today does not have freedom
of the press the way we understand it. (There are
things in England such as the Official Secrets Act
that often land journalists in jail.)
England was relatively peaceful in the time of
Elizabeth I. There was the problem of the Spanish
Armada, but that was brief. Elizabeth later became
known as "Good Queen Bess," not because she was
so good, but because her successor was so bad.
Elizabeth died in 1603 and her cousin, James Stuart,
son of Mary Stuart, who up until that time had been
King James VI of Scotland ascended the throne and
became known as King James I of England. James
ascended the throne of England with the "divine
right of kings" firmly embedded in his mind.
Unfortunately, that wasn't his only mental problem.
King James I, among his many other faults,
preferred young boys to adult women. He was a
flaming homosexual. His activities in that regard
have been recorded in numerous books and public
records; so much so, that there is no room for
debate on the subject. The King was queer.
The very people who use the King James Bible today
would be the first ones to throw such a deviant out
of the congregations.
The depravity of King James I didn't end with
sodomy. James enjoyed killing animals. He called it
"hunting." Once he killed an animal, he would
literally roll about in its blood. Some believe that he
practiced bestiality while the animal lay dying.
James was a sadist as well as a sodomite: he enjoyed
torturing people. While King of Scotland in 1591, he
personally supervised the torture of poor wretches
caught up in the witchcraft trials of Scotland. James
would even suggest new tortures to the examiners.
One "witch," Barbara Napier, was acquitted. That
event so angered James that he wrote personally to
the court on May 10, 1551, ordering a sentence of
death, and had the jury called into custody. To make
sure they understood their particular offense, the
King himself presided at a new hearing - and was
gracious enough to release them without punishment
when they reversed their verdict.
History has it that James was also a great coward.
On January 7, 1591, the king was in Edinburgh and
emerged from the toll booth. A retinue followed that
included the Duke of Lennox and Lord Hume. They
fell into an argument with the laird of Logie and
pulled their swords. James looked behind, saw the
steel flashing, and fled into the nearest refuge which
turned out to be a skinner's booth. There to his
shame, he "fouled his breeches in fear."
In short, King James I was the kind of despicable
creature honorable men loathed, Christians would
not associate with, and the Bible itself orders to be
put to death (Leviticus 20:13). Knowing what King
James was we can easily discern his motives.
James ascended the English throne in 1603. He
wasted no time in ordering a new edition of the Bible
in order to deny the common people the marginal
notes they so valued in the Geneva Bible. That
James I wasn't going to have any marginal notes to
annoy him and lead English citizens away from what
he wanted them to think is a matter of public record.
In an account corrected with his own hand dated
February 10, 1604, he ordained:
That a translation be made of the whole Bible, as
consonant as can be to the original Hebrew and
Greek, and this to be set out and printed without
any marginal notes, and only to be used in all
churches of England in time of divine service. James
then set up rules that made it impossible for anyone
involved in the project to make an honest
translation, some of which follow:
1. The ordinary Bible read in the church, commonly
called the Bishop's Bible to be followed and as little
altered as the truth of the original will permit.
2. Or, since the common people preferred the
Geneva Bible to the existing government publication,
let's see if we can slip a superseding government
publication onto their bookshelves, altered as little as
possible.
3. The old Ecclesiastical words to be kept, viz. the
word "church" not to be translated "congregation,"
etc.
4. That is, if a word should be translated a certain
way, let's deliberately mistranslate it to make the
people think God still belongs to the Anglican Church
- exclusively.
5. No marginal notes at all to be affixed, but only for
the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek words, which
cannot without some circumlocution, so briefly and
fitly be expressed in the text.
*** You can find more info at Otto Scott's "James I:
The Fool As King" (Ross House: 1976), pp. 108, 111,
120, 194, 200, 224, 311, 353, 382; King James-VI
of Scotland/I of England by Antonia Fraser (Alfred A.
Knopf, New York 1975)pp. 36, 37, 38; King James VI
and I by David Harris Willson, pp.36, 99; James I by
his Contemporaries by Robert Ashton, p114; and A
History of England by Samuel Rawson Gardiner, Vol.
4, p.112. Check also A LITERARY HISTORY OF THE
BIBLE by Geddes MacGregor who has devoted a
whole chapter entitled "QUEEN" JAMES.
The Mammoth Book of Private Lives by Jon E. Lewis,
pp. 62,65,66
James White also makes mention of it in his book,
THE KING JAMES ONLY CONTROVERSY.
See also King James and the History of
Homosexuality by Michael B. Young
and King James and Letters of Homoerotic Desire by
David Moore Bergeron.
For those people who feel that the above is a result
of the attack on King James by the 17th century
tobacco industry are ignorant of the fact that his
behavior and personal life were quite well known to
his contemporaries. "He disdained women and
fawned unconscionably on his favorite men."
ENCYCLOPEDIA AMERICANA-pp. 674,675
"And shall I then like bird or beast forget

From Jordan Maxwell site