A DEFENSE OF KING JAMES VI & I

By Barbara Aho
A recent Rapture Watch article contained many false accusations against King
James I of England who authorized the translation of the 1611 Authorised
Version. There was so much misinformation in this article that a response is in
order. The particular slant of the Rapture Watch report was that King James I was
a proponent of British-Israelism who controlled the translation of the 1611
Authorised Version in order to promote the religious superstition and political
agenda of British-Israel.
To understand the full import of this charge, it is necessary to know that the
British-Israel doctrine is based on the following unbiblical and superstitious
beliefs:
1. The ten lost tribes of Israel migrated to the British Isles following the
Assyrian Captivity.
2. After Jerusalem fell to Nebuchadnezzar, the daughter of King Zedekiah,
Tamar, was removed to Ireland (via Egypt and Spain) by the prophet
Jeremiah, who also brought the anointed Stone of the Covenant, known as
the Lia Fail or Stone of Destiny, upon which the monarchs of England and
Scotland were crowned.
3. The physical descendants of Jesus Christ who, we are told, married
Mary Magdalene, migrated to Great Britain and the royalty of that country
are of this divine lineage.
The author of the Rapture Watch report begins with the naive assumption that all
modern translations are equal. He further contends that the KJV translators took
great liberties in translating and would have encouraged comparison among the
various translations. Also, the report states that the translators of the 1611
Authorised Version worked under the dark shadow of a wicked king who wished
to impose his own pagan beliefs on the translation he authorized. The author
concludes in the second part of this series that King James was a member of the
Celtic [Druid] religion so prevalent in the British Isles. The knowledgeable reader
is left to draw the obvious conclusion that King James was therefore a believer in
the pagan practices of Druidism, which even included human sacrifice.
At various points, the author of the Rapture Watch report reassures the reader
that, despite the evil king's oversight and domination of the translators, the King
James Version is an excellent Bible translation. He also leads the reader to believe
that, since all translations have errors, there is little difference among them. As
well, he presents as facts a patchwork of undocumented theories and
circumstantial evidence, rather than primary source evidence, in order to discredit
King James VI & I and, by extension, the translation of the Bible he authorized.
In jurisprudence, the admissibility of evidence is governed by various rules. Rules
of evidence are fixed by determining prima facie evidence [of a fact],
corroborative evidence and forensic [laboratory] evidence, as opposed to evidence
which is merely circumstantial. Circumstantial evidence is generally admissible in
court unless the connection between the fact and the inference is too weak to be of
help in deciding the case. Many convictions for various crimes have rested largely
on circumstantial evidence.
However, we now hear of many convicted persons on death row who have been
found to be innocent upon appeal. For this reason, it seems to us that God wisely
adjudged under the Old and New Covenants that, in His divinely instituted
judicial systems, at least two witnesses must be present to establish guilt.
Consider His Word concerning jurisprudence in Israel and in His Church:
Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth
of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause
him to die. Num. 35:30
One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin,
in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth
of three witnesses, shall the matter be established. Deut. 19:15
But if [your brother] will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two
more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be
established. Matt. 18:16
In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established. II
Cor. 13:1a
Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three
witnesses." I Tim. 5:19
Another point of contrast between the rules of evidence established by God and
man would be the number of witnesses required. Under both the old and new
covenants, God required at least two witnesses, whereas one witness is sufficient
in a secular court of law and even that is not essential. Nor do rules of evidence
under the Noahide Laws conform to the Old Testament Law. Under the Courts of
Law section of the Noahide Laws is the provision: "A person may be convicting
[sic] in a Noahide court on the testimony of a single witness, but only if the
witness is known to be righteous. If the character of the witness is not known, it
takes two witnesses to be able to convict the accused."
It is evident that God is more equitable and merciful than the world's system of
justice. And so Christians must abide by the commands of Scripture in
considering an accusation against an elder of the Church. In his capacity as King
of Great Britain, James I was also head of the Church of England. If heresies or
bad reports attended his person, the Church would have been required to judge
him according to I Tim. 5:19. Happily, we have no record of such proceedings. To
the contrary, we have the record of the A.V. translators, who were not only
scholars but ministers of the Church. In their Dedicatory Epistle to the Authorised
Version, the translators convey the definite impression that King James had
earned the high esteem of his subjects and was a true follower of Christ:
"GREAT and manifold were the blessings, most dread Sovereign, which
Almighty God, the Father of all mercies, bestowed upon us the people of
England, when first he sent Your Majesty's Royal Person to rule and reign
over us. For whereas it was the expectation of many, who wished not well
unto our Sion, that upon the setting of that bright Occidental Star, Queen
Elizabeth of most happy memory, some thick and palpable clouds of
darkness would so have overshadowed this Land, that men should have
been in doubt which way they were to walk; and that it should hardly be
known, who was to direct the unsettled State; the appearance of your
Majesty, as the Sun in his strength, instantly dispelled those supposed and
surmised mists, and gave unto all that were well affected exceeding cause
of comfort; especially when we beheld the Government established in
Your Highness, and Your hopeful Seed, by an undoubted Title, and this
also accompanied with peace and tranquillity at home and abroad.
"But among all our joys, there was no one that more filled our hearts, than
the blessed continuance of the preaching of God's sacred Word among us;
which is that inestimable treasure, which excelleth all the riches of the
earth; because the fruit thereof extendeth itself, not only to the time spent
in this transitory world, but directeth and disposeth men unto that eternal
happiness which is above in heaven.
"Then not to suffer this to fall to the ground, but rather to take it up, and to
continue it in that state, wherein the famous Predecessor of Your Highness
did leave it: nay, to go forward with the confidence and resolution of a
Man in maintaining the truth of Christ, and propagating it far and near, is
that which hath so bound and firmly knit the hearts of all Your Majesty's
loyal and religious people unto You, that Your very name is precious
among them: their eye doth behold You with comfort, and they bless You
in their hearts, as that sanctified Person who, under God, is the immediate
Author of their true happiness. And this their contentment doth not
diminish or decay, but every day increaseth and taketh strength, when they
observe, that the zeal of Your Majesty toward the house of God doth not
slack or go backward, but is more and more kindled, manifesting itself
abroad in the farthest parts of Christendom, by writing in defence of the
Truth, (which hath given such a blow unto that man of sin, as will not be
healed,) and every day at home, by religious and learned discourse, by
frequenting the house of God, by hearing the Word preached, by
cherishing the Teachers thereof, by caring for the Church, as a most tender
and loving nursing Father.
"There are infinite arguments of this right Christian and religious affection
in Your Majesty; but none is more forcible to declare it to others than the
vehement and perpetuated desire of accomplishing and publishing of this
work, which now with all humility we present unto Your Majesty. . ."
To refute the false witness of the Rapture Watch report and, hopefully, to some
extent vindicate a Christian king whose good name has been maligned in our day
by similar false reports, we will consider prima facie evidence regarding the
person and works of King James. Additionally, certain revisers of the English
Bible which he authorized will be evaluated.
In preparing this response, I consulted Tracy, the webmaster of n the Jesus Is
Lord website on which is His Majestie King James VI & I Page, an extensive
resource for Christians to study the writings and history of King James and his
period, as well as obtain information on the translation of the 1611 Authorised
Version. In the report below, Tracy's comments are noted as Jesus Is Lord along
with the Watch Unto Prayer to the false accusations of Rapture Watch.
The Preface of the 1611 KJV should be read in its entirety. See: The Translators
to the Reader as well as Edgar J. Goodspeed's Thesis on the importance of the
Translators' Preface.

From: "Rapture Watch" <rls1@pcisys.net>To: Rapture Watch

<rls1@pcisys.net>Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2000 11:57 AM Subject: A
Message from the K.J. Translators
RAPTURE WATCH: It is not uncommon for us to be asked about Bible
translations and why it is that we do not quote solely from the original version of
the King James Bible. The following are some points why we defend looking up
original words of Scripture over giving a blanket endorsement of any translation.
The King James Version is superb--but not inerrant. Our stand is supported by the
original translators as can be shown by the following references.
For a little help in understanding, V’s are U’s, U’s are V’s, I’ s are J’s and F’s are
S’s etc.
1) The translators made it clear that translations could always use a reviewing and
that they are still just translations.
“And to the same effect say wee, that we are so farre off from condemning any of
their labours that traueiled before vs in this kinde. . .we acknowledge them to
haue beene raised vp of God, for the building and furnishing of his Church. . .Yet
for all that, as nothing is begun and perfited at the same time, and the later
thoughts are thought to be the wiser: so, if we build vpon their foundations that
went before vs, and being holpen by their labours, doe endeuour to make that
better which they left so good; no man, we are sure, hath cause to mislike vs;
they, we perswade our selues, if they were aliue, would thank vs. . .whom we
speak before, translated the Bible as carefully, and as skilfully as he could; and
yet he thought good to goe ouer it againe, and then it got the credit with the Iewes.
..
How many books of profane learning haue bene gone ouer againe and againe, by
the same translators, by others?. . .And this is the word of God, which we
translate. . .if a toy of glasse be of that rekoning with vs, how ought wee to value
the true pearle?. . .to haue the translations of the Bible maturely considered of and
examined. . .the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and
polished; also, if any thing be halting, or superflous, or not so agreeable to the
original, the same may bee corrected, and the truth set in place. . .
Now to the later we answere; that wee doe not deny, nay wee affirme and auow,
that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set foorth by men of our
profession. . .containeth the word of God, nay is the word of God. . . A man may
counted a vertuous man, though hee haue made many slips in his life. . .though
hee haue some warts vpon his hand, yea, not onely freakles vpon his face, but also
skarres. No cause therefore why the word translated should bee denied to be the
word, or forbidden to be currant, notwithstanding that some imperfections and
blemishes may be noted in the setting foorth of it. . .”1
JESUS IS LORD: These folks fail to take into account the conditions under
which the first translations were made. There was indeed need to refine them.
John Wicliffe (Morning Star of the Reformation and "arch-heretick" according to
the Catholic religion) only had the Latin Vulgate to work with. He lost his
prestigious position at Oxford because of his devotion to the word of God.
Tyndale translated as an outlaw on the run from the Catholic religion. When he
was finally caught they strangled and burned him. The Bibles that immediately
followed were essentially rehashes of Tyndale's version. There was NEED to
refine! The writer seems to twist the humility of the translators in not condemning
former translations. The Spirit of God revealed to them the reason for their
labors--to refine so that "the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed
and polished; also, if any thing be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to
the original, the same may bee corrected, and the truth set in place. . ."
WATCH UNTO PRAYER: In the days of the Reformers it was necessary to
compile a body of manuscripts other than the corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts
used by the Vatican for the Vulgate and other Catholic translations. The A.V.
translators remark that the Roman Church made endless translations, each one
more corrupt than the former: ". . .that certain Catholics. . .were in such an humor
of translating the Scriptures into Latin, that Satan taking occasion by them, though
they thought of no such matter, did strive what he could, out of so uncertain and
manifold a variety of Translations, so to mingle all things, that nothing might
seem to be left certain and firm in them, etc. . .What is to have the faith of our
glorious Lord JESUS CHRIST with Yea or Nay, if this be not? Again, what is
sweet harmony and consent, if this be?"
The deliverance of Reformed Christians from this confusion and the refining of
Greek texts and English translations did not occur overnight. After the Textus
Receptus was published in 1633, there was no need for another Greek New
Testament. The 1881 Westcott-Hort Greek Testament based on Alexandrian
manuscripts began the reversal of the Protestant Reformation, producing a
superfluity of translations in contradiction to the Textus Receptus and causing no
 end of controversy and contempt in the Church.
ARE ALL TRANSLATIONS EQUAL?
RAPTURE WATCH: 2) The translators themselves instructed Bible students to
compare other translations, and praised the effort as a good and profitable
undertaking. Some now think this undertaking is a work of the Devil.
“Therefore as S. Augustine saith, that variete of Translations is profitable for the
finding out of the sense of the Scriptures: so diuersitie of signification and sense
in the margaine, where the text is not so cleare, must needes do good, yea, is
necessary, as we are perswaded...They that are wise, had rather haue their
judgements at libertie in differences of readings, then to be captiuated to one,
when it may be the other...”2
WATCH UNTO PRAYER: In 1611, the majority of English translations
available for comparison were based on the Textus Receptus, which cannot be
said of our modern versions. A notable exception would have been the Jesuit
Douay Rheims Version of 1609 and it is doubtful that the A.V. translators were
advising readers to consult the Catholic Bible for verse comparison. Rather, the
English Bibles based on the Textus Receptus which were read in Protestant
England at the time of the translation of the 1611 Authorised Version are as
follows: William Tyndale's New Testament [1534], the Coverdale Bible [1535]
(first complete printed English Bible), the Matthews Bible [1537] (completed
Tyndale Version), the Great Bible [1539], Cranmer's Bible [1540[ (2nd edition of
the Great Bible), the Geneva Bible [1560] and the Bishop's Bible [1568]. It was
comparison of this "variete of Translations" the translators no doubt considered
"profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures."
The author of Rapture Watch has based his argument on the false assumption that
our modern translations are reliable. If the other translations in 1611 were deemed
corrupt, does he think that the A.V. translators would have suggested they be used
for comparison's sake? The real issue in determining the authenticity of a Bible
translation is the reliability of the Greek text upon which it is based. By
camouflaging this hidden factor, proponents of modern versions shuffle believers
from one corrupt version to another on the pretext that all are based on reliable
manuscripts. To avoid exposure of their skulduggery, the bible version spin
doctors magnify one or another presumed error in the KJV to prove their point
that all versions are equally flawed.
The Rapture Watch report is typical of many who prefer to strain at gnats in the
KJV, while they swallow the whole camel of modern versions that have been
translated from the corrupt Westcott-Hort Greek Testament. Never mind the fact
that the Westcott-Hort New Greek Text of 1881 altered the Textus Receptus in
fully 5,337 places, according to Dean John Burgon, textual scholar and author of
The Revision Revised, and that a great number of these changes are to be found in
verses affecting fundamental doctrine. The replacement of the Received Greek
Text with a New Greek Text by Anglican Spiritualists affiliated with secret
societies having a vision for a global government and religion is the subject of our
report, The Nineteenth Century Occult Revival.
THE ENGLISH REVISED VERSION OF 1881
B.F. Westcott, F.J.A. Hort & J.B. Lightfoot
The Life and Letters of B.F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort personally acknowledge the
involvement of these Bible revisers in various occult societies. Additionally, the
biography of Edward White Benson, Archbishop of Canterbury, documents his
founding of the Cambridge Ghost Society with B.F. Westcott and Fenton John
Anthony Hort. The Society for Psychical Research: An Outline of its History
provides further documentation of this fact:
"Among the numerous persons and groups who in the middle of the
nineteenth century were making enquiries into psychical occurrences may
be mentioned a society from which our own can claim direct descent. In
the Life of Edward White Benson, Archbishop of Canterbury, by his son,
A. C. Benson, will be found, under the year 1851-2, the following
paragraph:
'Among my father's diversions at Cambridge was the foundation of a
'Ghost Society,' the forerunner of the Psychical Society [meaning the
S.P.R.] for the investigation of the supernatural. Lightfoot, Westcott and
Hort were among the members. He was then, as always, more interested in
psychical phenomena than he cared to admit.'
"Lightfoot and Westcott both became bishops, and Hort Professor of
Divinity. The S.P.R. has hardly lived up to the standard of ecclesiastical
eminence set by the parent society." 1.
Westcott, Hort and Lightfoot, who dominated the Revision Committee for the
English Revised Version of 1881, were also members of other secret societies,
such as the Hermes and Apostles Clubs. 2. Also belonging to the Cambridge
Apostles Club were Victor Rothschild and Arthur Balfour, the founder and first
President of the Society for Psychical Research Society and future Prime Minister
of Great Britain. In his position as Foreign Secretary of Great Britain, Lord Arthur
Balfour presented to Lord Rothschild the Balfour Declaration of 1917 which
recognized the Zionist goal: "His Majesty’s government views with favor the
establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people and will use
its best endeavors to facilitate achievement of this object,. . .".
Across the Atlantic Ocean but working closely with the English Revision
Committee was Dr. Philip Schaff, the "Reformed and Catholic" ecumenist who
chaired the committee which produced the 1901 American Standard Version
[ASV]. Phillip Schaff had also been a member of the American Bible Union
which,in 1865, produced a version that was regularly consulted by the English
Revision Committee during. 3. This American revision of the English Bible,
which predated the English Revised Version by 16 years, was predominantly a
Baptist enterprise. The reader is invited and encouraged to read the fascinating
chronology of interlocking events in England and the United States which led to
the English Revised Version and the American Standard Version.
One notable member of the 1901 ASV committee was Skull and Bones member,
Timothy Dwight.
THE AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION OF 1901
Philip Schaff & Timothy Dwight
In The Life of Philip Schaff by David S. Schaff we read of Dr. Phillip Schaff's
work with the English Revision Committee in 1871, the year the revision
commenced at Cambridge University:
"The summer of 1871 Dr. Schaff spent in Europe and had conferences
with Dean Stanley and Bishop Ellicott and with the revision committee as
a whole. From his daily journal it appears that on June 26, he saw the
dean. 'I had a very important interview. All the details about Bible revision
are settled satisfactorily. The steps I have taken in organizing the
American committee are fully approved.' At Dr. Stoughton's, I dine with a
number of the Bible Revisers.' Of the sessions of the Revision companies
at the Deanery of Westminster he has this to say: 'The meeting of the New
Testament Revisers was intensely interesting. Lightfoot, Westcott, Hort,
Scrivener, Angus, Merivale, Eadie, David Brown, the Bishop of
Gloucester. . .the Bishop of Salisbury and others were all there. No
outsider is admitted except the Archbishop of Canterbury." 4.
In the same volume is noted the formation of the ASV committee and its inclusion
of Timothy Dwight:
"The first meeting of the American committee was held in Dr. Schaff's
study in the Bible House, New York, December 7, 1871.
"ff...to the New Testament company [was subsequently added]. .
.Professor Timothy Dwight of Yale College." 5.
In Philip Schaff: Historian and Ambassador of the Universal Church are
published Philip Schaff's visionary statements for a grand synthesis of
"Evangelical Catholicism":
"To Timothy Dwight he wrote in 1892: 'It is impossible that a work to
which a hundred scholars of various denominations of England and
America have unselfishly devoted so much time and strength can be lost.
Whether the Revised Version may or may not replace the King James
Version, it will remain a noble monument of Christian scholarship and
cooperation, which in its single devotion to Christ and to truth rises above
the dividing lines of schools and sects.'" 6.
"The documentary evidence for the work of the American Bible revision
 committee is conveniently gathered in Documentary History on the
American Committee on Revision, of which only 100 copies were
privately printed. However, an abridged version was published by
Timothy Dwight, Historical Account of the American Committee of
Revision of the Authorized Version of the Bible (New York, 1885)." 7.
"This young immigrant scholar [Schaff] had soon come to realize that
neither will any one of the existing churches ever become dominant in the
United States, nor will sectarian anarchy prevail. Instead, the grand
synthesis of 'Evangelical Catholicism' as the ripe fruit of a new
reformation will find its providential local in the United States." 8.
"'Unity in diversity, and diversity in unity,' this slogan would be the
ecumenical battle cry of Schaff's later years." 9.
Timothy Dwight had been initiated into the Order of Skull & Bones at Yale
University in 1849. In 1856 he went to the University of Berlin and in 1858 he
went to Yale Theological Seminary. From 1886 to 1898 he served as President of
Yale University. The origins of the Skull & Bones in Freemasonry are explained
in The Hiram Key: Pharaohs, Freemasons & Secret Scrolls of Jesus:
"As the new Master (Mason) is raised he looks back down at his tomb to
see a Skull and crossed bones on his death shrould. This symbol of earthly
remains was used by the Knights Templar as their marine battle flag." 10.
Interestingly, the Rothschild influence on establishment of the Skull & Bones
Order at Yale University in 1833 is disclosed in an online book, The Historical
Influence of International Bankingby Herbert Dorsey. 11.
According to Antony Sutton, author of America's Secret Establishment:
Introduction to the Order of Skull and Bones: "The Order was incorporated [as the
Russell Trust] in 1856." 12. Sutton stresses that Yale University presidents after
Timothy Dwight were typically members of the Order:
"In 1886 Timothy Dwight (The Order) had taken over from the last of
Yales' clerical Presidents, Noah Porter. Never again was Yale to get too
far from The Order. Dwight was followed by member Arthur T. Hadley
('76)." 13.
Rev. Timothy Dwight (S&B, 1849) was the grandson of Rev. Timothy Dwight
(1752-1817) who was the grandson of the famous Rev. Jonathan Edwards (1703-
1758), president of Union College. Both Timothy Dwights were presidents of
Yale. The elder Timothy Dwight, who was born on May 14, 1752 in
Northampton, Massachusetts, was a also personal friend of President George
Washington, a high-level Mason.
"Timothy Dwight was a man for all seasons: an ordained Congregational
minister, grandson of Jonathan Edwards, personal friend of George
Washington, and Army chaplain. He began reading the Bible at age four,
 and secretly learned Latin despite his father's prohibition. In 1785, he
published the 11-volume Conquest of Canaan. In 1787, he received a
Doctor of Divinity degree from Princeton University. In 1795, he became
president of Yale University (where, like his grandfather Jonathan
Edwards, he matriculated at age 13). He helped found Andover
Theological Seminary—the first seminary in New England—in 1809.
Dwight died of cancer after serving as president of Yale University for 22
years. Died: January 11, 1817, New Haven, Connecticut." 14.
According to Paul Boyer, When Time Shall Be No More: Prophecy Belief in
Modern American Culture, Jonathan Edwards and his grandson, Timothy Dwight,
believed that America would be the seat of Christ's Millennial Kingdom. This
vision was, in actuality, the Plan of British Freemasonry for the United States:
"With the struggle for independence, patriot prophecy writers reenacted
the familiar process of adapting their end-time scenarios to current events,
and vied in identifying contemporary British leaders as Antichrist. . .By
1773 King George himself, like Charles I 150 years earlier was being
portrayed as Antichrist . . .
"The independence movement also revived the belief of the Mathers and
of Jonathan Edwards that America might be the seat of Christ's millennial
kingdom. But what had been formulated in religious terms now took on a
secular cast, as prophecy speculation -- already politicized during the
French and Indian War -- oriented itself around the Revolutionary cause,
laying the groundwork for. . .'civil millennialism.' In 'A Poem on the
Rising Glory of America,' delivered to their Princeton graduating class in
1771, Philip Freneau and Hugh Henry Brackenridge looked to the day
when the New Jerusalem would 'grace our happy earth, perhaps this land.'
And independent American nation, declared Ebenezer Baldwin 1776,
would be 'the principle seat of that glorious kingdom', which Christ shall
erect upon the earth in the latter Days. Revolution and liberty, rather than
revival, now became the high road to the blessed future foreseen by the
biblical apocalypticus.
"With symbolic appropriateness, Jonathan Edwards' grandson, Timothy
Dwight, most fully elaborated this secular vision of the Revolution's
prophetic significance. Dwight's 1771 poem 'America' written when he
was a nineteen-year-old Yale student contains the kernel of is civil
millennialism. . . Five years later, speaking at Yale three weeks after the
Declaration of Independence, the now twenty-four-year-old Dwight fully
eschatologized the stirring events of the day. In America, history would
reach its climax in the fulfillment of 'that remarkable Jewish tradition' of a
thousand years of 'peace, purity and felicity.' Ushered in by Yale-trained
lawyers, physicians and other professionals, the Star Spangled
Millennium, he speculated (echoing Samuel Sewall whose ideas had
intrigued his grandfather), would probably begin about the year 2000. In
the soaring apocalyptic language of the prophet Isaiah, Dwight hailed the
 emerging nations: 'Arise, shine, for thy light has come.'" 15.
In his book Antony Sutton advised readers: "Select a major historical event and
search for the guiding hand of The Order." 16. This maxim ought to be applied
with respect to the historic revision of the English Bible in the last century in both
Great Britain and the United States -- by members of secret societies. [See
footnote #11 Rothschild and Skull & Bones Order]
Based on these facts regarding the 19th century revision of the Bible, can any
objective researcher believe that translators of the 1611 A.V. would recommend
our modern versions which are based upon the 1881 English Revised Version and
the 1901 American Standard Version?
ERRORS IN THE 1611 AUTHORISED VERSION?
RAPTURE WATCH: 3) The translators confess they took a degree of liberty
with certain words and phrases.
An other thing we thinke good to admonish thee of (gentle Reader) that we haue
not tyed ourselues to an vniformitie of phrasing, or to an identitie of words, as
some peraduenture would wish that we had done, because they obserue, that some
learned men some where, haue beene as exact as they could that way. Truly, that
we might not varie from the sense of that which we had translated before, if the
word signified the same thing in both places (for there bee some wordes that bee
not the same sense euery where) we were especially carefull, and made a
conscience, according to our duetie. . .
"For is the kingdome of God become words or syllables? why should wee be in
bondage to them if we may be free, vse one precisely when wee may vse another
no lesse fit, as commodiously?. . .Now if this happen in better times, and vpon so
small occasions, wee might justly feare hard censure, if generally wee should
make verball and vnnecessary changings. . .Adde hereunto, that nicenesse in
wordes was always counted the next step to trifling, and so was to bee curious
about names too: also that we cannot follow a better patterne for elocution then
God himselfe; therefore hee vsing diuers words, in his holy writ, and indifferently
for one thing in nature: we, if wee will not be supersitious, may vse the same
libertie in our English versions out of Hebrew & Greeke. . .But we desire that the
Scriptuire may speake like it selfe, as in the language of Canaan, that it may bee
vnderstood euen of the very vulgar. . .”3
JESUS IS LORD: The key ideas to these comments is thus -- They utilize the
richness of the English language to accurately convey the sense of the scripture.
"Truly, that WE MIGHT NOT VARIE FROM THE SENSE of that which we had
translated before, if the word signified the same thing in both places (for there bee
some wordes that bee not the same sense euery where) we were especially
carefull, and made a conscience, according to our duetie. . ." In the King James
Bible, the same Greek word may be translated, "look or behold". The words are
synonymous. Word choice does not change the scriptures, but rather enriches it.
 The translator comments confirm this, ". . .vse one precisely when wee may vse
another NO LESSE FIT, as commodiously? we cannot follow a better patterne for
elocution then God himselfe; therefore hee vsing diuers words, in his holy writ".
RAPTURE WATCH: The translators are found carefully apologetic when trying
to explain away the liberty they took when translating in some particular
instances.
JESUS IS LORD: That is not what they did. They were very careful to let us
know that they selected words no less fit than its synonym.
PASSOVER OR EASTER?
RAPTURE WATCH: On such mistranslation we are convinced concerns their
use of the word “Easter” in Acts 12:4. The original word is absolutely not
“Easter”, and the translators were careful everywhere else to translate it properly
as “Passover”.
“EASTER: PASCHA, mistranslated “Easter” in Acts 12:4. A.V., denotes the
Passover (R.V.). The phrase “after the Passover” signifies after the whole festival
was at an end. The term Easter is not of Christian origin. It is another form of
Astart, one of the titles of the Chaldean goddess, the queen of heaven. The festival
of Pasch held by Christians in post-apostolic times was a continuation of the
Jewish feast, but was not instituted by Christ, nor was it connected with Lent.
From this Pasch the Pagan festival of Easter was quite distinct and was introduced
into the apostate Western religion, as part of the attempt to adapt Pagan festivals
to Christianity.”4
PASSOVER: PASCHA, the Greek spelling of the Aramaic word for the Passover,
from the Hebrew pasach, to pass over, to spare, a feast instituted by God in
commemoration of the deliverance of Israel from Egypt, and anticipatory of the
expiatory sacrifice of Christ. The word signifies (I) the Passover Feast, e.g., Matt.
26:2, John 2:13, 23; 6:4; 11:55; 12:1; 13:1; 18:39; 19:4; Acts 12:4; Heb. 11:28;
(II) by metonymy, (a) the Paschal Supper, Matt. 26:18, 19; Mark 14:16; Luke
22:8, 13; (b) the Paschal lamb, e.g., Mark 14:12 (cp. Ex. 12:21); Luke 22:7; (c)
Christ Himself, I Cor. 5:7.”5
The question then arises: Why the blatant change from their previously correct
translation of the original manuscript? We have great difficulty with their
explanation that they had a liberty to commodiously use a less fit word while
translating, and absolutely refuse to change the Word of God to accommodate
their offered rationale which is clearly outside the bounds of an error or difficult
interpretation.
WATCH UNTO PRAYER: The critic's difficulty with the translators'
explanation is due to a misreading and misquote of their words as taking "liberty
to commodiously use a less fit word while translating." The actual statement in
the Translators' Preface is: ". . . why should wee be in bondage to them if we may
be free, vse one precisely when wee may vse another no lesse fit, as
commodiously?"
The Trinitarian Bible Society Quarterly Record credits William Tyndale with
translation of the word "pascha" as "Easter" in twenty-nine places of his 1534
New Testament. Although this was not a literal translation, it is understandable
considering the period of transition during which Tyndale produced this first
printed bible. In 1525, the Protestant Reformation was in its early stages and
readers of the new Bible, being yet unfettered from the Roman Catholic strait-
jacket, were unfamiliar with many facts of Old Testament history.
"When Tyndale applied his talents to the translation of the New Testament
from Greek into English, he was not satisfied with the use of a completely
foreign word, and decided to take into account the fact that the season of
the passover was known generally to English people as 'Easter',
notwithstanding the lack of any actual connection between the meanings
of the two words. The Greek word occurs twenty-nine times in the New
Testament, and Tyndale has ester or easter fourteen times, esterlambe
eleven times, esterfest once, and paschall lambe three times. 17.
The New Unger's Bible Dictionary confirms that the word "Easter" is often used
in the English versions which predate the 1611 A.V.
"Easter. [Gk. pascha, from Heb. pesah] The Passover ..., and so translated
in every passage except the KJV: "intending after Easter to bring him forth
to the people" [Acts 12:4]. In the earlier English versions Easter had been
frequently used as the translation of pascha. At the last revision [1611
A.V.] Passover was substituted in all passages but this. . .
"The word Easter is of Saxon origin, the name is eastra, the goddess of
spring in whose honor sacrifices were offered about Passover time each
year. By the eighth century Anglo-Saxons had adopted the name to
designate the celebration of Christ's resurrection." 18.
Two centuries prior to William Tyndale, John Wycliffe produced a hand written
English translation of the Bible using only the Latin Vulgate. Again, the
Trinitarian Bible Society explains the difficulty involved in the translation of the
Hebrew word "pesach" into Greek and then into English:
This single occurrence of Easter in the Authorised Version as a translation
of the Greek pascha, "passover", is an interesting reminder of the
problems which have confronted translators of the Holy Scriptures for
many centuries. When the scholars of Alexandria came to translate the
Hebrew into Greek in the third century B.C. they could find in the Greek
language no precise equivalent for the Hebrew pesach, and they decided to
adopt the Hebrew word in a Greek form. When the Bible was first
translated into Latin the same course was followed, and the Greek pascha
was adopted without translation. Centuries later, when Wycliffe translated
the Bible into English from the Latin version, he could find in the English
 language no satisfactory equivalent, so he just gave the Latin word an
English form -- pask or paske. In the 16th century the Rheims New
Testament followed Wycliffe's example, but slightly changed the English
form to pasche. None of these actually translated the word. . .
"When Tyndale began his translation of the Pentateuch he was again faced
with the problem in Exodus 12.11 and twenty-one other places, and no
doubt recognising that easter in this context would be an anachronism he
coined a new word, passover, and used it consistently in all twenty-two
places. It is therefore to Tyndale that our language is indebted for this
meaningful and appropriate word. His labours on the Old Testament left
little time for revision of the New Testament, with the result that while
passover is found in his 1530 Pentateuch, ester remained in the N.T. of
1534, having been used in his first edition several years before he coined
the new word passover."
The History of the English Bible chronicles developments which made possible
the mass publication of an English Bible from the Greek and Hebrew languages:
John Wycliff's hand-written manuscripts were the first complete Bibles in
the English language (1380's). Wycliff (or Wycliffe), an Oxford
theologian translated out of the fourth century Latin Vulgate, as the Greek
and Hebrew languages of the Old and New Testaments were inaccessible
to him. . .Wycliff spent many of his years writing and teaching against the
practices and dogmas of the Roman Church which he believed to be
contrary to the Holy Writ. Though he died a nonviolent death, the Pope
was so infuriated by his teachings that 44 years after Wycliff had died, he
ordered the bones to be dug-up, crushed, and scattered in the river!
Gutenburg invented the printing press in the 1450's, and the first book to
ever be printed was the Bible (in Latin). With the onset of the Reformation
in the early 1500's, the first printings of the Bible in the English language
were produced illegally and at great personal risk of those involved.
William Tyndale was the Captain of the Army of English reformers, and
in many ways their spiritual leader. His work of translating the Greek New
Testament into the plain English of the ploughman was made possible
through Erasmus' publication of his Greek/Latin New Testament printed in
1516. Erasmus and the printer and reformer John Froben published the
first non-Latin Vulgate text of the Bible in a millennium. For centuries
Latin was the language of scholarship and it was widely used amongst the
literate. Erasmus' Latin was not the Vulgate translation of Jerome, but his
own fresh rendering of the Greek New Testament text that he had collated
from six or seven partial New Testament manuscripts into a complete
Greek New Testament.
Erasmus' translation from the Greek revealed enormous discrepancies in
the Vulgate's integrity amongst the rank and file scholars, many of whom
 were already convinced that the established church was doomed by virtue
of its evil hierarchy. Pope Leo X's declaration that "the fable of Christ was
very profitable to him" infuriated the people of God. . .
The Tyndale New Testament was the first ever printed in the English
language. Its first printing occurred in 1525/6, but only two complete
copies of that first printing are known to have survived. Any Edition
printed before 1570 is very rare and valuable, particularly pre-1540
editions and fragments. Tyndale's flight was an inspiration to freedom
loving Englishmen who drew courage from the 11 years that he was
hunted. Books and Bibles flowed into England in bales of cotton and sacks
of wheat. In the end, Tyndale was caught: betrayed by an Englishman that
he had befriended. Tyndale was incarcerated for 500 days before he was
strangled and burned at the stake in 1536. His last words were, "Lord,
open the eyes of the King of England".
As previously stated, the English Bibles based on the Textus Receptus which
preceded the 1611 Authorised Version were: William Tyndale's New Testament
[1534], the Coverdale Bible [1535], the Matthews Bible [1537], the Great Bible
[1539], Cranmer's Bible [1540], the Geneva Bible [1560] and the Bishop's Bible
[1568].
When considering the single use of "Easter" in the 1611 A.V., it is imperative that
one also consider its multiple occurrences in the English Bibles which preceded it.
Following the transmission of the word "Easter" in these early Bibles, it becomes
apparent that the A.V. translators were helping to phase out this mistranslation --
but retained the word in Acts 12:4 for a good reason which will demonstrated
shortly.
In the Textus Receptus, the Greek word "pascha" is found in the following verses:
Matthew 26:2, 26:17, 26:18, 26:19
Mark 14:1, 14:12, 14:14, 14:16
Luke 2:41, 22:1, 22:7, 22:8, 22:11, 22:13, 22:15
John 2:13, 2:23, 6:4, 11:55, 12:1, 13:1, 18:28, 18:39, 19:14
Acts 12:4
I Corinthians 5:7
Hebrews 11:28.
Occurrences of the word "Easter" in New Testament verses cited above:

• John Wycliffe's translation based on the Latin Vulgate used the word
"paske" or "pask" in all of the above New Testament verses.

• William Tyndale's translation used "Easter" in all the above verses except
Mt. 26:17 and Jn 18:28.

• The Great Bible used "Easter" in 14 verses: [Mt. 26:2, 18; Mk. 14:1; Lk.
2:41,22:1; Jn. 2:13, 2:23, 6:4, 11:55, 12:1, 13:1, 18:39, 19:14; Acts 12:4].
 • The Geneva Bible eliminated "Easter" altogether.

• The Bishop's Bible [1568] used "Easter" in 2 verses: John 11:55 and Acts
12:4.

• The Authorised Version of 1611 used "Easter" in only one verse: Acts
12:4.
The following table shows graphically the occurrences of the word "Easter" in
these five English Bibles which preceded the Authorised Version of 1611. [The
Coverdale Bible (not represented in graph) used "Easter" in Acts 12:4. We have
not examined the other verses in the Coverdale Bible, nor the Matthews Bible.
The Cranmer Bible is the 2nd edition of Great Bible which is shown in the table.]
Wycliffe Tyndale Great Geneva Bishop's
N. T. VERSES KING JAMES
Bible Bible Bible Bible Bible
WITH EASTER Version (1611)
(1382) (1534) (1539) (1560) (1568)
Matt. 26:2 X X
26:17
26:18 X X
26:19 X
Mark 14:1 X X
14:12 X
14:14 X
14:16 X
Luke 2:41 X X
22:1 X X
22:7 X
22:8 X
22:11 X
22:13 X
John 2:13 X X
2:23 X X
 6:4 X X
11:55 X X X
12:1 X X
13:1 X X
18:28
18:39 X X
19:14 X X
Acts 12:4 X X X X
I Cor. 5:7 X
Hebrews 11:28 X
So much for Rapture Watch accusation #5 that King James had the translators of
the Authorised Version insert the word "Easter."
The only instance the A.V. translators chose to retain "Easter" is Acts 12:4:
"And when he [King Herod] had apprehended him [Peter], he put him in
prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him;
intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people."
Why did the translators revert to the earlier -- Tyndale, Coverdale, Great Bible
and Bishop's Bible's -- translation of "Easter" rather than "Passover"? The answer
is found in the Translator's Preface:
"Another things we think good to admonish thee of (gentle Reader) that we have
not tied ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some
peradventure would wish that we had done, because they observe, that some
learned men somewhere, have been as exact as they could that way. ... we have on
the one side avoided the scrupulosity of the Puritans, who leave the old
Ecclesiastical words, and betake them to other, as when they put WASHING for
BAPTISM, and CONGREGATION instead of CHURCH: as also on the other
side we have shunned the obscurity of the Papists, in their AZIMES, TUNIKE,
RATIONAL, HOLOCAUSTS, PRAEPUCE, PASCHE, and a number of such
like, whereof their late Translation is full, and that of purpose to darken the sense,
that since they must needs translate the Bible, yet by the language thereof, it may
be kept from being understood. But we desire that the Scripture may speak like
itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it may be understood even of the very
vulgar."
WAS KING JAMES A BRITISH-ISRAELITE?
 RAPTURE WATCH: It is interesting that one of their reasons offered was that it
was “according to our duetie.” Let us look at the conscience of duty being spoken
of while considering why certain words were apologetically mistranslated.
4) It must be kept in mind that the King James translators were not free agents,
but were under constant direction by King James to hastily provide him with their
progress and results for his “allowance and acceptance” as the recognized
“principal moouer and Author of the Worke” and to satisfy their humble craving
for his approbation (sanction).
“. . .this Worke, which now with all humilitie we present vnto your
MAIESTIE. . .your MAIESTIE did neuer desist, to vrge and to excite those to
whom it was commended, that the worke might be hastened, and that the
businesse might be expedited in so decent a maner. . .we hold it our duety to offer
it to your MAIESTIE, (keep in mind this word “duety” for a later point) not onely
as to our King and Soueraigne, but as to the principall moouer and Author of the
Worke. Humbly crauing of your most Sacred Maiestie, that since things of this
quality haue euer bene subiect to the censures of ill meaning and discontented
persons, it may receiue approbation and Patronage from so learned and iudicious
a Prince as your Highnesse is, who allowance and acceptance of our Labours,
shall more honour and incourage vs. . .”6
JESUS IS LORD: These people obviously hold His Majestie and the King James
Bible in contempt. They've willingly mis-interpreted the nature of King James
oversight. His Majestie was very excited about the project and supported it. How
many projects get started only to flop because nobody cares. It is well known that
King James was an able theologian and devout Christian. Why wouldn't he be
excited about this auspicious undertaking? Just look at the results--almost 400
years old and just as readable today.
WHAT ABOUT THE JACOBUS (UNITE)?
RAPTURE WATCH: 5) The reason for why the ancient pagan British festival of
the Celts known as Easter was inserted in the Bible can be laid directly at the feet
of the former king of Great Britain. Our attention must then be focused on King
James himself to find out if there is perhaps a motive for the mistranslation of
certain other words in the Authorised King James Bible, and if any of these words
have been altered to serve a hidden agenda.
King James was a devoted proponent of what is known as British Israelism, who
claimed the Lord had made him king over Israel. In 1604 he had a gold coin
minted called the Unite or Jacobus which demonstrated his beliefs. The belief of
this religion is that the Anglo-Saxon-Celtic people are the lost tribes of Israel and
the throne of King David is located in the British Isles; the very same throne that
Queen Elizabeth II now sits upon.
JESUS IS LORD: Er. . .Jacob is the Latin word for JAMES! The King's writings
speak for themselves. I've never read anything but sound Bible exposition in His
Majestie's writings.
WATCH UNTO PRAYER: So far, the Rapture Watch report has provided no
hard evidence that King James subscribed to this aberrant interpretation of
Scripture.
The Unite was a gold piece introduced by proclamation in November 1604, which
took its name from the union of England and Scotland under a single king when
James became king of "Great Britain." The reverse side of the coin proclaims
"Faciam eos in gentem unam" meaning "I will make of them one people." The
union of Scotland and England was finally achieved with the Act of Union under
Queen Anne in 1707. Although Ezekiel 37:16-22 is engraved on the reverse side
of the Unite, it should be obvious that uniting Scotland and Britain was never
intended to mean the fulfillment of Ezekiel's prophecy to the nation of Israel.
Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For
Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another
stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim and for all the
house of Israel his companions: And join them one to another into one
stick; and they shall become one in thine hand. And when the children of
thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou
meanest by these? Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I
will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the
tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick
of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.
And the sticks whereon thou writest shall be in thine hand before their
eyes. And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take
the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and
will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land: And I
will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and
one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations,
neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all.
True British-Israelism, as promoted by the Stewart Clan Home Page, holds that
the sticks in Ezekiel's prophecy are the lost tribes of Israel (i.e., all of the Anglo-
Saxon nations) which were scattered to the four winds, but will be reunited when
Christ returns:
"Therefore, in writing the name of Judah on one stick and the name of
Joseph on the other, is simply showing the separation or division of God's
People, Israel, and that by a miracle, He will rejoin them into one people.
Our Father says that when asked about the meaning of this joining, tell
them as follows: Verse 20: "Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take
the stick (the House or people) of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim
(whose leader was Ephraim -- at that time), and the tribes of Israel his
fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah (join
them with the House or people of Judah -- the remnant), and make them
one stick (one people), and they shall be one (a single nation, as in the
 beginning) in mine hand." Verse 22 confirms that these two sticks
represent people who have been scatterd to the four winds -- but will be
reunited when Christ returns; read carefully:
"22 And I will make them *one nation* (one stick, one people) in the land
upon the mountains of Israel; and one king (Christ) shall be king to them
*all* (Shiloh; Whose right the Stone of Destiny represents): and they shall
be no more two nations (two sticks), neither shall they be divided into two
kingdoms any more at all:" Can Christ be a King over anything except
people? These two sticks being joined are specifically used to remind the
descendants of Israel, even today, that they will yet be reunited into one
nation -- a single people -- in the original land given to Abraham!" 19.
RAPTURE WATCH: Also of further interest is the statement from the A.K.J.V.
translators in ‘The Epiftle Dedicatorie’ when referring to the king: “. . .the
appearance of your MAIESTIE, as of the Sunne in his strength” (see Malachi 4:2
and Revelation 1:16).
WATCH UNTO PRAYER: It is unclear what objection Jamma has to this
statement of the translators, who were employing a literary device in the form of
allegory to describe the righteous administration of their king. Their language
recalls King David's magnificent description of a just ruler, whom he likens to the
rising sun on a clear day:
The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me,
He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God.
And he shall be as the light of the morning, when the sun riseth, even a
morning without clouds;
As the tender grass springeth out of the earth by clear shining after rain. II
Sam.23:3,4
USE OF THE WORD “UNICORN”
RAPTURE WATCH: Two mistranslated or altered words of significance in the
A.K.J.V. are the words unicorn and the word Zion which is spelled in places with
an s instead of a Z. King James oversaw the change in spelling of Zion to sion in
what we find are significant places when we are reminded that in The Epiftle
Dedicatorie the translators refer to Great Britain as “our Sion”, and when recalling
King James’ devotion to British Israelism. The changes to the spelling of Zion to
sion are found in Ps. 65:1, Matt. 21:5, John 12:15, Rom. 9:33, 11:26, Heb. 12:22,
I Peter 2:6 and Rev. 14:1.
JESUS IS LORD: Once again, this is easily dismissed as a lie when we look at
earlier versions. Wicliffe's version came out almost 200 years BEFORE KING
JAMES WAS BORN and "Zion" was spelled "Sion" in Matthew 21:5. I did not
look up all the verses because it is not necessary. Same thing with Tyndale which
was OVER 30 YEARS BEFORE KING JAMES WAS EVEN BORN.
WATCH UNTO PRAYER: The Geneva Bible, published 50 years before the
Authorised Version, uses "Sion" in all of the New Testament verses mentioned
above. Again, it becomes obvious that the author of the Rapture Watch has not
searched out the facts when he maintains that "King James oversaw the change in
spelling of Zion to sion in what we find are significant places." The truth is that
the word "Sion" which was common usage in the English New Testaments before
the A.V.1611.
RAPTURE WATCH: In point number three we shared how the translators
defended the liberty they claim for altering such words as Easter and sion, but
what about the insertion of the word unicorn which is translated by the Jews as a
wild ox? “Will the wild-ox be willing to serve thee? Or will he abide by the crib?
Canst thou bind the wild-ox with his band in the furrow? Or will he harrow the
valleys after thee? Job 39:9-10.7
The Jews have never taught on unicorns. Why did the A.K.J.V. introduce a
creature unknown to be indigenous to the earth? Why didn’t Jesus enlighten the
Hebrew’s understanding of this passage at His first coming since the idea of a
unicorn is so far removed from what the Jews understood the creature to be? The
translators of the A.K.J.V. Bible in their opening address to us again appear to
have made an excuse for this misrepresentation which is accountable to King
James. The unjustified identification of this creature is made acceptable by
categorizing it as an issue unimportant to doctrine of salvation.
JESUS IS LORD: First of all the following explanation by the translators is very
reasonable. [See information on unicorns below.]
“. . .it hath pleased God in his diuine prouidence, heere and there to scatter wordes
and sentences of that difficultie and doubtfulnesse, not in doctrinal points that
concerns saluation. . .but in matters of lesse moment, that fearefulnesse would
better beseeme vu then confidence, and if we will resolue, to resolue vpon
modestie with S. Augustine. . .it is better to make doubt of those things which are
secret, then to striue about those things that are vncertain. There be many words in
the Scriptures, which be neuer found there but once. . .so that we cannot be
holpen by conference of places. Againe, there be many rare names of certaine
birds, beasts and precious stones, &c. concerning the Hebrewes themselues are so
diuided among themselues for judgement, that they may seeme to haue defined
this or that, rather because they would say something, the because they were sure
of that which they said, as S. Hierome somewhere saith of the Septuagint. Now in
such a case, doth not a margine do well to admonish the Reader to seeke further,
and not to conclude or dogmatize vpon this or that peremptorily?”8
RAPTURE WATCH: The translators appear to have offered up a reasonable
explanation for using the term “unicorn”, but still no explanation is available for
why they chose a mythical creature. It is to their honor that inspite of their
dangerous situation under the king they instructed people to seek further and not
dogmatize in such cases. Interestingly enough, this is exactly what is being
condemned by some supporters of the King James translators who they believe
were inerrant and as divinely led as the original apostles.
JESUS IS LORD: "Dangerous situation?" King James was well known for
loving peace and hating violence. He fought no wars during his reign and he even
tried to live peaceably with the Catholic recusants in his kingdom! [See Extracts
On Peace from King James accession speech to Parliament, 19 March 1603.] 20.
Was King James an imperial tyrant of whom the translators were afraid? Consider
the sincerity of their Dedicatory Epistle and the following extracts On Kingship
from King James accession speech to Parliament:
"I do acknowledge, that the special and greatest point of difference that is
between a rightful king and an usurping tyrant is in this: That whereas the
proud and ambitious tyrant does think his kingdom and people are only
ordained for satisfaction of his desires and unreasonable appetites; The
righteous and just king does by the contrary acknowledge himself to be
ordained for the procuring of the wealth and prosperity of his people, and
that his greatest and principal worldly felicity must consist in their
prosperity. If you be rich I cannot be poor: if you be happy I cannot but be
fortunate: and I protest that your welfare shall ever be my greatest care
and contentment: and that I am a servant it is most true, that as I am Head
and Governor of all the people in my Dominion who are my natural
vassals and subjects, considering them in numbers and distinct ranks; So if
we will take the whole people as one body and mass, then as the head is
ordained for the body, and not the body for the head; so must a righteous
king know himself to be ordained for his people, and not his people for
him." 21.
Furthermore, in A Trew Law of Free Monarchies (Or the Reciprock and Mutual
Duetie Betwixt a Free King, and his Naturall Subjects, c.1597), King James stated
that he conducted his administration in the fear of the Lord, knowing that he
would give account to God for his administration of justice: ". . .for certainly a
King that governs not by his law can neither be countable to God for his
administration nor have a happy and established reign. For albeit it be true, that I
have at length proved, that the King is above the law as both the author and giver
of strength thereto, yet a good King will not only delight to rule his subjects by
the law, but even will conform himself in his own actions thereunto; always
keeping that ground, that the health of the commonwealth be his chief law." 22.
RAPTURE WATCH: We believe the answer for King James’ introduction of
the mythological unicorn into the Scriptures is once again found in the king’s
commitment to British Israelism.
WATCH UNTO PRAYER: "We believe. . .," they say -- but their accusation is
without documentation. [See further refutation of the charge of British-Israelism
at end of report.]
RAPTURE WATCH: King James Charles Stuart I & IV (Scotland’s Royal
House of Stuart were long known as the ‘House of Unicorns’ and to this very day
the “Unicorn” along with the “Davidic Lion of Judah” are incorporated in the
Royal Arms Great Seal of Scotland and the British Coat of Arms--further
information is available at: http://www.rev.org/bi.htm), had input and control over
the work--this may explain why the mythological creature called the unicorn was
introduced into the Scriptures over the Jewish knowledge of it being a wild ox.
“God who brought him forth out of Egypt is for him like the lofty horns of the
wild-ox (unicorn in the KJV); He shall eat up the nations that are his adversaries,
and shall break their bones in pieces, and pierce them through with his arrows. He
couched, he lay down as a lion, and as a lioness; who shall ruse him up? Blessed
be every one that blesseth thee, and cursed be every one that curseth thee.
Numbers 24:8-9.9
JESUS IS LORD: Er. . .he was the VI of Scotland, not the IV.
WATCH UNTO PRAYER: Regarding the unicorn, the word is found in the
Geneva Bible which was translated 50 years before the Authorised Version. The
unicorn is not a mythical creature, but there were common English usages of the
word "unicorn" in the 19th century and probably in Elizabethan era also. The
1828 Webster's Dictionary does not even mention a mythical creature, but defines
unicorns as varieties of animals:
Unicorn, n. [L. unicornis; unus, one, and cornu, horn.]
1. An animal with one horn: the monoceros. This name is often applied to
the rhinoceros.
2. The sea unicorn is a fish of the whale kind, called narwal, ramarkable
for a horn growing out at its nose.
3. A fowl. Fossil unicorn, or fossil unicorn's horn, a substance used in
medicine, a terrene crustaceous spar. 23.
The earlier English Bibles -- Wycliffe's, Tyndale's, Coverdale's, Matthew's, Great,
Taverner's, Geneva, and Bishops' -- ALL used the word "unicorn" in
Deuteronomy 33:17. The Geneva Bible uses "unicorn" in the other eight verses
where it is found in the 1611 AV, and most likely the other Bibles did also. There
is one revealing reference to unicorns in Psalm 22:19-22. This appears to be a
prophecy of Christ's death at the hands of the Pharisees, who were the teachers of
oral traditions which made the Word of God of none effect.
"But you, O Lord, do not withdraw your help from me: look towards my
defense.
Rescue my soul, O Lord, from the spear, my only soul from the hand of
the dog.
Save me from the lion's mouth, and my lowliness from the unicorn's
horns".
It appears entirely reasonable that David was speaking prophetically of the
Pharisaic "lions" and "unicorns" as the Kabbalists who were the forefathers of the
Merovingians -- the House of the Unicorns who would produce the Antichrist.
 This translation alone would disprove that King James was a British-Israelite
paying homage to the mythical beast symbolic of the House of Unicorns.
The Rapture Watch reference to the House of Unicorns is based upon Laurence
Gardner's Bloodline of the Holy Grail, The Hidden Lineage of Jesus, which is a
flawed attempt to prove that the Scottish Stewarts are the royal Stuart bloodline,
rather than pretenders to the British throne. According to Gardner, the unicorn is a
mythological beast typifying the virile Christ. An entire chapter of this book is
devoted to "The House of the Unicorns," which is purported to be the Sang Raal
or sacred bloodline of Jesus Christ, whose bride was Mary Magdalene, here
referred to as the Sacred Prostitute.
"We have already seen that the 'Horn' of the Unicorn was equivalent to the
'Blade' in Grail lore, and both were represented by the male symbol L.
Along with the Davidic Lion of Judah and the Franco-Judaic fleur-de-lys,
the Desposynic Unicorn was incorporated in the Royal Arms of Scotland.
The Unicorn was considered to correspond to the virile Jesus, and was
related to the anointing (Messianic) imagery of Psalm (sacred song) 92:10.
The mystic beast was among the foremost symbols of the Albigensian
Cathars, who were so hideously persecuted by the Inquisition. In medieval
legend the Unicorn was always associated with fertility and healing, and
Renaissance tapestries portray his head in the lap of the Bride. This
alludes to the ancient ritual text for the Sacred Marriage (the Hieros
Gamos), 'The king goes with lifted head to the holy lap,' as originally
expressed in the poetic rite of old Sumerian Mesopotamia-the land of
Noah and Abraham." 24.
Thus far the Rapture Watch has presented not one statement from the writings of
King James or other source document which proves his thesis of "the king's
commitment to British Israelism." This is not only poor scholarship but it is
bearing false witness. If King James belonged to the House of Unicorns and
promoted its errant theology -- that the horn of the unicorn represented the virile
Christ, the male symbol of fertility in a Sacred Marriage with the Sacred
Prostitute, Mary Magdalene -- then why does not mention of this fundamental
doctrine of the Celtic Church appear in the king's writings, which are prolific?
RAPTURE WATCH: In summary what needs to be emphasized is the foremost
message the King James translators were conveying within their discreet
revelation about the king’s uncontestable control over their efforts. And that is
that the Word of God is fully available to all in the manuscripts they were
translating out of and that there are justified reasons for students of the Scriptures
to engage in comparative studies in order to gain greater understanding of these
preserved documents.
WATCH UNTO PRAYER: See first section: Are All Translations Equal?
WHY THE APOCRYPHA?
RAPTURE WATCH: It should be noted that in the original Authorized 1611
King James Version the Apocrypha was included. If the Authorized King James
Version was divinely inspired, then how accountable are those who took it upon
themselves to remove the Apocrypha, and why do King James purists not demand
its reinstatement?
WATCH UNTO PRAYER: The translators did not believe the Apocrypha was
inspired. Although the Authorized Version of 1611 contained the Apocrypha, so
did the English Bibles which preceded it:
Tyndale's Bible (1525 A.D.) places them by themselves as "uninspired."
Coverdale's Bible (1535 A.D.) does likewise, and with the following title:
"Apocrifa. The bokes & treatises which amonge the Fathers of old are not
rekened to be of authorite with the other bokes of the Byble, neither are
the foude in the Canon of the Hebrews." (1)
Matthew's Bible (1537 A.D.) and Taverner's Bible (1539 A.D.) place the
Apocrypha between the Testaments.
The Authorized, King James Version (1611), like the Great Bible, (1539
A.D.), the Geneva Bible (1560 A.D.) and the Bishop's Bible (1568 A.D.)
before it, places them in an appendix. 25.
Apocryphal books were omitted from the AV in 1629 and by 1827 the Apocrypha
was excluded permanently. Landmarks of English Bible: Manuscript Evidence,
by Robert Sargent, provides additional information about the Apocrypha with the
following explanation pertaining to its inclusion in the Reformation Bibles:
"Many of the early English versions contained the Apocrypha for two basic
reasons - because of the general acceptance of the Apocrypha during the Dark
Ages, and/or (in case of the Authorized, King James Version) for Scriptural
analysis. In each case, the Apocrypha were delineated either in an appendix
and/or with an explanation showing them to be non-canonical." 26.
In the Basilicon Doron, published in 1598, King James advised his son to avoid
these books as common fare compared to the precious pearl of the inspired canon:
"As to the Apocriphe bookes, I omit them because I am no Papist (as I said
before) & indeed some of them are as like the dietement of the Spirite of God, as
an Egge is to an Oyster." These sentiments of King James were published years
before thought was ever given to translation of the Authorised Version. 27.
RAPTURE WATCH: The translators went to great measures to make it clearly
understood that they made no claim to having produced an inerrant translation
delivered by an infallible revelation from God. What man would know this fact
better than themselves?
JESUS IS LORD: Well, when John the Baptist was asked if he was Elias, he said
"No" but Jesus tells us he was! Humble people don't seek to exalt themselves.
 They are so low to the ground they can't conceive that they are doing such a
marvelous thing.
RAPTURE WATCH: With total confidence before the Word of God Jesus
Christ, we will not change even one word of the Scriptures God has preserved for
us in the majority manuscripts in order to conform to any error, oversight or direct
act of subterfuge found in any Bible translation, and are in agreement with the
wisdom shared by the translators of the King James Bible. . .” To have the
translations of the Bible maturely considered of and examined. . .the same will
shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished,”10
We believe it to be an unwise practice, and we will not entertain circular
arguments by any professed Bible believer who when desiring to take a position
on a particular word translation fails to research for themselves first.
WATCH UNTO PRAYER: Strong words for a false witness who obviously
failed to research source documents on his subject.
Your brother and friend in Christ,
Jamma
WAS JAMES A CELTIC KING?
When false statements in the Rapture Watch were recently challenged, the first
report was followed with yet another which boldly asserted, again without factual
evidence, "...when King James secured a place for Easter within the Bible, this
Celtic king of Great Britain soundly established the Celtic religion above Rome."
[See Why No Easter in Acts?]
RAPTURE WATCH: "When investigating King James’ motive for having the
pagan holiday of Easter supplant God’s Feast of Passover in Acts 12:4, we need
to realize that Easter is of great significance to the Celtic religion. When Roman
missionaries vied with Celtic missionaries for supremacy at the Synod of Whitby
the date of Easter became an issue for proving authority since the date of Easter
was in dispute between the two apostate churches. It was at Whitby in 664 that
Rome gained her first doctrinal victory over the Celtic Church regarding five
major issues which included the date for celebrating Easter. By King James’ act
of subterfuge (when he secured a place for Easter within the Bible) this Celtic
king of Great Britain soundly established the Celtic religion above Rome."
WATCH UNTO PRAYER: To state that King James was really a member of
the pagan Celtic, rather than the Anglican Church is a brazen allegation that
James believed himself to be of the Merovingian dynasty or divine bloodline of
Jesus Christ. Such presumption is also found in New Age books like Laurence
Gardner's Bloodline of the Holy Grail, which maintains that the Stuart dynasty of
England helped to establish in Great Britain the Orders of the Rose Croix and
Freemasonry.
Gardner also declares, without a note of documentation, that Rosicrucian Grand
Master "Robert Fludd assisted with the English translation of the King James
(Authorised Version) of the Bible." [pp. 311-12]
This fallacy was originally propagated through Manly P. Hall's The Secret
Teachings of All Ages: An Encyclopedic Outline of Masonic, Hermetic,
Qabbalistic, & Rosicrucian Symbolical Philosophy. William T. Smedley writes.
'It will eventually be proved that the whole scheme of the Authorized Version of
the Bible was Francis Bacon's.'" 28.
Dennis Cuddy takes up the torch in his book, Dawning of the New Age New
World Order: "[John] Dee's disciple, Robert Fludd, was the chief proponent of
Rosicrucianism in England, and Fludd along with Sir Francis Bacon and others
were commissioned by King James I,. . .to produce an English translation of the
Holy Bible." 29. Dr. Cuddy's source for his information is Manly P. Hall, hardly a
reliable source. This reference is omitted in his book but made available to
researchers, who proceed to circulate the Masonic falsehood as fact.
These allegations have transitioned into a full-blown assault on King James and
the 1611 KJV by David Bay of Cutting Edge Ministries. Our exposure and
refutation of this attack on the KJV is available on audio. See the Watch Unto
Prayer homepage.
The Rosicrucians must exploit the Stuart prestige to make credible their pretense
that "Stewart" = the Stuart bloodline, and their claim to authorship of the 1611
A.V. is intended to give theological respectability to their spiritually bankrupt
belief system. However, Gardner is careful to lay the charge of consorting with
the Rosicrucians -- not on King James -- but upon his son and grandson:
"In Britain, and during their later exile, the Stuart kings were at the very
forefront of Scottish Rite Freemasonry, which was founded on the most
ancient of all arcane knowledge and Universal Law. Their Breton heritage
was closely allied to the noble families of Boulogne and Jerusalem, and
their background was largely Templar-inspired. It should come as no
surprise, therefore, that it was under Charles I and Charles II (who posed
such a problem to the narrow-minded Puritans and the Anglican Church)
that the Invisible College of the Royal Society emerged - a college that
within a brief period of Stuart patronage revealed some of the greatest
scientific discoveries of all time." 30.
At this point, a brief overview of the Stuart period is in order. Under the Tudor
King Henry VIII, England formally severed allegiance to the Roman Catholic
Church. Queen Elizabeth I, his daughter, established the Church of England
around 1570 and, according to Rosicrucian literature, also formally employed the
Order of the Garter "as a means of drawing noblemen together in common service
to the crown." 31.
The virgin Queen Elizabeth died in 1603 and James VI of Scotland (son of
Elizabeth's cousin, Mary, Queen of Scots who was beheaded) became King James
I of England. Upon James' accession to the throne, England and Scotland were
united. Also, the king received a petition signed by 1,000 Puritan clergymen for a
new translation of the Bible, as the Translators' Preface explains:
". . .for the very Historical truth is, that upon the importunate petitions of
the Puritans, at his Majesty's coming to this Crown, the Conference at
Hampton Court having been appointed for hearing their complaints: when
by force of reason they were put from other grounds, they had recourse at
the last, to this shift, that they could not with good conscience subscribe to
the Communion book, since it maintained the Bible as it was there
translated, which was as they said, a most corrupted translation."
It seems that the Authorised Version was the result of conflict between the
Episcopalians and the Puritans:
"King James was confronted with two religious parties - the Episcopalians
and the Puritans - each seeking to dominate the course of the English
reformation. Though raised in Presbyterian Scotland, James preferred the
episcopal notion of the 'divine right of kings,' a dogma based on Scripture
such as Proverbs 16:10. ('No bishop - no king!') For this reason he
despised the Geneva Bible with its republican notes. (e.g., a note at
Exodus 1:19 commended the Hebrew midwives for their disobedience to
Pharaoh.) But it was this conflict between the two religious parties which
Providentially led to the publication of the King James Version." 32.
Proverbs 16:10 states: "A divine sentence is in the lips of the king: his mouth
transgresseth not in judgment." The following extracts from King James' speech
to Parliament in 1609 delineate the monarch's position On the Divine Right of
Kings. These sentiments are expressed also in Scripture, which declares that the
appointment and authority of rulers are derived directly from God [Romans 13:1,
I Peter 2:13,14,17, Titus 3:1]. As noted previously, King James understood well
that, athough a king may rule with virtually unlimited power on earth, he will
receive a stricter judgement from God for his administration of justice:
"The state of monarchy is the supremest thing upon earth . . . Kings are
justly called Gods, for that they exercise a manner or resemblance of
divine power upon earth. For if you will consider the attributes to God,
you shall see how they agree in the person of a king. God has power to
create, or destroy, make, or unmake at his pleasure, to give life, or send
death, to judge all, and to be judged nor accountable to none: to raise low
things, and to make high things low at his pleasure, and to God are both
soul and body due. And the like power have Kings; they make and
unmake their subjects: they have power of raising, and casting down: of
life, and of death: judges over all their subjects, and in all causes, and yet
accountable to none but God only.
"Now in these our times we are to distinguish between the state of kings in
their first original, and between the state of kings and monarchs, that do at
 this time govern in civil kingdoms . . . In the first original of kings,
whereof some had their beginning by conquest, and some by election of
the people, their wills at that time served for law; Yet how soon kingdoms
began to be settled in civility and policy, then did kings set down their
minds by laws . . . And I am sure to go to my grave with that reputation
and comfort, that never king was in all his time more careful to have his
laws duly observed, and himself to govern thereafter, than I.
"I conclude then this point touching the power of kings, with this axiom of
divinity, that as to dispute what God may do, is blasphemy . . . so is it
sedition in subjects, to dispute what a king may do in the height of his
power: But just kings will ever be willing to declare what they will do, if
they will not incur the curse of God. I will not be content that my power
be disputed upon: but I shall ever be willing to make the reason appear of
all my doings, and rule my actions according to my laws . . . Therefore all
kings that are not tyrants, or perjured, will be glad to bound themselves
within the limits of their laws; and they that persuade them the contrary,
are vipers, and pests, both against them and the Commonwealth." 33.
According to Frances Yates, author of The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, King
James I of England, who succeeded the childless Queen Elizabeth in 1603,
participated in the investiture of his future son-in-law, Frederick, with the Order
of the Garter. After their wedding, Frederick and the daughter of King James,
Elizabeth II, returned to Heidelberg, Germany. There Frederick became
associated with the Protestant League, which was infiltrated by the Rosicrucians
in order to more effectively defeat their common enemy, the Hapsburg/Roman
Catholic alliance. In 1619, King James opposed the occupation of Bohemia by the
Protestant League which, led by his son-in-law Frederick, overthrew
Catholic/Hapsburg King Ferdinand. According to Yates, James, ever the
peacemaker, acted for political reasons; however, there is evidence that the king
recognized the Rosicrucian foothold within the Protestant League.
While revisionist historians and opponents of the Authorised Version are overly
eager to include King James I among the Stuart affiliates and patrons of the Rose
Croix, Frances Yates makes clear that King James was no friend of the leading
occultists of his day -- Rosicrucian Grand Master Francis Bacon and John Dee,
whose Monas Hieroglyphica had influenced the Rosicrucian Manifestos and
ultimately generated the Rosicrucian movement in England. Yates, the most
respected historian of The Rosicrucian Enlightenment,wrote of James' abhorrence
of all manner of witchcraft and its practitioners, such as Dee and Bacon:
"There has never, I think, been suggested that James's doubtful attitude
towards Baconian science might be connected with his very deep interest
in, and dread of, magic and witchcraft. These subjects had a fascination
for him which was tied up with neuroses about some experiences in his
early life. In his Demonology (1597) James advocated the death penalty
for all witches, though he urges care in the examination of cases. The
subject was for him a most serious one, a branch of theology. Obviously
 James was not the right person to examine the - always rather difficult -
problem of when Renaissance Magia and Cabala were valuable
movements, leading to science, and when they verged on sorcery, the
problem of defining the differences between good magic and bad magic.
James was not interested in science and would react with fear from any
sort of magic.
"It is not surprising that when old John Dee appealed to James for help in
clearing his reputation from charges of conjuring devils, James would
have nothing to do with him. Dee's fruitless appeal to James was made in
June 1604. The old man to whose learning the Elizabethan age was so
infinitely indebted was disgraced in the reign of James and died in great
poverty in 1608. Bacon must have taken good note of James's attitude to
Dee, and he must also have noted that survivors from the Elizabethan age
of mathematics and magic, of navigational boldness and anti-Spanish
exploits, were not sure of encouragement under James as they had been
under Elizabeth." 34.
William T. Still, author of New World Order: Ancient Plan of Secret Societies,
sheds some light on another famous character and member of the Baconian secret
society whose reputation for knightly chivalry is legendary:
"British exploration in America began in 1585 when Sir Walter Raleigh,
an adventuring British nobleman, mounted an expedition to colonize
Roanoke Island, off the coast of North Carolina. The twenty-four year-old
Raleigh was already a member of a secret society which would later
become known as the Baconian circle. This circle, of course, believed that
America was to be the glittering 'New Atlantis' promised for centuries by
secret societies." 35.
The authors of Sir Walter Raleigh’s Speech from the Scaffold relate his role in the
American enterprise:
"Hugh de Selincourt, one of Raleigh’s many biographers, has called him
‘the most romantic figure of the most romantic age in the annals of
English history.’ It is hard to dispute that characterization. David Quinn,
another biographer of Raleigh, calls him ‘a representative figure, an
originating rather than dominating one . . . in the history of the beginning
of British overseas enterprise.’ An originator of such an empire places
Raleigh as a foundation stone in what he hoped would become ‘an English
nation’ in America." 36.
However, the Encyclopedia Britannica records Raleigh's treason and eventual
demise under King James -- a clear indication that things were not going well
between James and the Baconian Circle.
"In 1603, he and others were accused of plotting to dethrone the king. . . In
1616, he was released but not pardoned. Accused of treason by. . . James I,
 he was imprisoned in the tower of London and eventually put to death. . ."
[He was beheaded in 1618.] 37.
The Daemonologie of King James VI & I
The author of the Rapture Watch would find no support in the works of King
James for the superstitious practices of the Celtic or any other pagan religion. To
the contrary, when James wrote the Basilicon Doron [the "Kingly Gift"], a book
to instruct his young son, Prince Henry, about the conduct of a Christian king, he
warned about heresies and superstition, which are the main ingredients of the
Celtic religion:
"Above all then (my Sonne) labour, to keepe sounde this conscience
which manie prattle of, but over-fewe feele: especiallye be carefull to
keepe it free from two diseases, which it useth oft to bee infected with, to
witte, Leaprosie, and Superstition: the former is the mother of Atheisme:
the other of Heresies. . .And for superstition, the word it selfe is plaine
ynough, being vocabulum artis. . .And for keeping your conscience sound
from that siknes of Superstition, which is called Morbus animi, yee muste
neither laye the safetie of your conscience upon the credit of your owne
conceits, nor yet of other mens humours, how great Doctors of Divinity
that ever they be: but ye must only ground it upon the express Scripture:
for conscience not grounded upon sure knowledge, is either an ignorant
fantasie, or an arrogante glaikerie. Beware therefore in this case with two
extreamities: the' one, to beleeve (with the Papistes) The Churches
authoritie, better nor your own knowledge: th' other, to leane (with the
Anabaptists) to your own conceites & dreamed revelations." 38.
A year before the Basilicon Doron, in 1597, King James VI had authored another
book titled The Daemonologie, to denounce in no uncertain terms and instruct his
Scottish subjects concerning the rampant witchcraft of that era, whose
practitioners he then prosecuted. King James set forth his purpose in the Preface:
"The fearefull aboundinge at this time in this countrie, of these detestable
slaves of the Devill, the Witches or enchanters, hath moved me (beloved
reader) to dispatch in post, this following treatise of mine, not in any way
(as I protest) to serve for a shew of my learning and ingine, but onely
(mooved of conscience) to preasse thereby, so farre as I can, to resolve the
doubting harts of many; both that such assaultes of Sathan are most
certainly practized, and that the instrumentes thereof, merits most severely
to be punished: against the damnable opinions of two principally in our
age, whereof the one called SCOT an Englishman, is not ashamed in
publike print to deny, that ther can be such a thing as Witch-craft: and so
mainteines the old error of the Sadducees, in denying of spirits. The other
called WIERUS, a German Phisition, sets out a publick apologie for all
these crafts-folks, wherby, procuring for their impunitie, he plainely
bewrayes himselfe to have bene one of that profession." 39.
 The full text of The Daemonologie is available here. In 1996, the book was
reprinted by Godolphin House, the publishing house of the School of Wicca and
was sold at Amazon Books, Border's and other bookstores for $6. [ISBN #0-
9630657-9-3]. At present, it is only sold through Godolphin House Publishing.
The Daemonologie vindicates the character of King James and should silence
those who irresponsibly claim that he was an occultist. On the back cover, the
Wiccans explained their reason for publishing a book which they despise:
"This book was used by many as an excuse to torture, maim and kill many
thousands of women. James became convinced at the Danish court that
Witchcraft was real and that the central source of the Witch's power was
the demonic pact. James focused attention on Witchcraft, because his
underlying fear was that magical means might be used to end his life as
the divinely ordained king of Scotland.
"After his return from the Continent in 1590, he became intensely
interested in sorcery and Witchcraft trials and particularly the trial of his
political enemy, Bothwell (1590-1591). Witches were vigorously hunted
and persecuted - to such an extent that some villages had no females left in
them. The period ends with the publication of this Daemonologie in 1597.
Because of the impact of the Daemonologie on the ruling classes, more
trials were now held with the Kings' approval, and very many more
convictions were obtained.
"This book should therefore be in every true Witch's library at the very
least as a monument to those who died." 40.
BEARING FALSE WITNESS
The author of Rapture Watch is not alone in bearing false witness against King
James VI & I who, according to all reliable evidence, was an honourable
Christian statesman to whom the Church and the world owe a considerable debt.
It is astonishing to us that the promotion of unsubstantiated rumors concerning
King James and the A.V. translators frequently comes from sources that would be
loath to publish such shoddy research in any other field of study. To what
perverseness can be ascribed their blatant denial and suppression of prima facie
evidence pertaining to King James, and preference of publishing vicious rumors
instead -- without a footnote of solid documentation? The A.V. translators would
say. . . "This seemeth to argue a bad cause, or a bad conscience, or both." 41.
To those Christians who carelessly circulate their slander, we admonish you to
diligently search out the facts of a man's life and work or you will be found
bearing false witness -- a sin for which you will surely suffer loss of rewards
when called to account at the judgment seat of Christ. We hope that those reading
these words, if they apply, will receive them in the spirit of love in which they are
offered. The truth ought never offend any child of God, but rather motivate him to
reassess his position and to furnish him with the facts needed to correct it.
 Finally, we refer all who love the Word of God to examine the evidence
pertaining to the life and works of His Majestie King James VI & I, who
authorized the translation of the Bible which has evangelized the lost and been
spiritual nourishment to many generations of Christians who have gone before us
to glory. We believe that the recommended website deserves an award of
excellence for reflecting the order and dignity that is worthy of its exalted
subject--which is, in the final analysis, the Word of God. Nor are the authors of
His Majestie King James VI & I Page conferring undue praise on men; rather they
are equipping the saints to contend for the faith of Jesus Christ. And what saith
the Scriptures?
Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is
due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to
whom honour. Rom.13:7
Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour
the king. I Pet.2:17
A Chronology of American & English Bible Revision
The Ninteenth Century Occult Revival

Rapture Watch NOTES

1. The Translators To The Reader, The Holy Bible 1611 Edition King James Version, 1st
Edition of the Authorized Version.
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
4. W.E.Vine, Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, p. 14.
5. Ibid., p. 166.
6. The Epiftle Dedicatorie, The Holy Bible 1611 Edition King James Version, 1st Edition
of the Authorized Version.
7. The Masoretic Text, The Jewish Publication Society.
8. The Translators To The Reader, The Holy Bible 1611 Edition King James Version, 1st
Edition of the Authorized Version.
9. The Masoretic Text, The Jewish Publication Society.
10. The Translators To The Reader, The Holy Bible 1611 Edition King James Version,
1st Edition of the Authorized Version.
Watch Unto Prayer ENDNOTES
1. W.H. Salter, The Society For Psychical Research, An Outline of it's History, London,
1948, pp. 5, 6.
2. Arthur Hort, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, Vol. I, Macmillan & Co.,
1896, pp.170-172.
3. Thomas Armitage, D.D., L.L.D., A History of the Baptists: Traced by their Vital
Prinicples and Practices, from the Time of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to the Year
1886, NY: Bryan, Taylor, & Co., Chicago: Morningside Publishing Co., 1887, pp. 908-9.

4. David S. Schaff, The Life of Philip Schaff, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1897,
362-3ff.
5. Ibid., pp. 362-3ff.
6. Klaus Penzel, Philip Schaff: Historian and Ambassador of the Universal Church,
Mercer University Press, Macon GA, 1991, p. 260-61.
7. Ibid., p. 252ff.
8. Ibid., p. 154.
9. Ibid., p. LV.
10. Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas, The Hiram Key: Pharoahs, Freemasons &
Secret Scrolls of Jesus, Element Books, 1996, p. 178.
11. Herbert G. Dorsey, The Historical Influence of International Banking, "World
Revolution and World War":
http://www.freeyellow.com/members2/moneyfacts/page3.html
"The serious historian will find that the Civil War was largely stirred up by Rothschild's
illuminati agents in the United States. One of these prominant Illuminati Orders was the
secret "Order of Skull & Bones", Chapter 322, founded at Yale University in 1833 by
William Huntington Russell and Alphonso Taft. The Order was incorporated as the
Russell Trust in 1856. William Russell became a member of the Connecticut State
Legislature in 1846 and a General in Connecticut National Guard in 1862. Alphonso Taft
became Secretary of War in the Grant Administration in 1876, U.S. Attorney General in
1876 and U.S. Ambassador to Russia in 1884. Alphonso Taft's son later became Chief
Justice and United States President. One researcher claims that this secret order
originated in Germany about the time the Bavarian Illuminati was outlawed in 1786 by
the Bavarian Elector. William Russell brought the Secret order to Yale from his student
days in Germany in 1831 to 1832. As an ancient tradition the gravestones of Master
Masons would have a skull and crossbones engraved on them. The name of this secret
society probably is derived from this tradtradition. Yale is the only University with
societies open exclusively to seniors. Only 15 Junior Class members are selected to be
initiated during commencement week each year. The candidates are always male white
Protestant and usually from wealthy and powerful families, often their fathers were also
members of the Order. During the Senior Year, members are called "Knights", then they
become "Patriarchs" for life. A number of "Skull and Bones" Patriarchs were to become
leaders in the Sucessionist movements of various Southern States. Thus, setting the stage
for events leading up to the Civil War. The Rothschild Banks loaned money to both sides
during the war. This strategy greatly weakened our nation, but failed with the Union
victory."
12. Antony Sutton, America's Secret Establishment: Introduction to the Order of Skull
and Bones, Liberty House Press, 1986, p. 92.
13. Ibid., p. 93.
14. The Cyber Hymnal, http://tch.simplenet.com/bio/d/w/dwight_t.htm
15. Paul Boyer, When Time Shall Be No More: Prophecy Belief in Modern American
Culture, Cambridge, Mass., Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1992, pp. 72-3.
16. America's Secret Establishment, p. 98.
17. Trinitarian Bible Society, Quarterly Record, Issue #470, Jan.-Mar. 1980
18. Merrill F. Unger, New Unger's Bible Dictionary, Ed., R.K. Harrison, Moody Press,
1957, 1988.
19. Stewart Clan Home Page: http://associate.com/stewart/stone_o_scone.html
20. His Majestie King James VI & I Page, On Peace and the Uniting of England &
Scotland, http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/kjpeace.htm
21. His Majestie King James VI & I Page, On Kingship, http://www.jesus-is-
lord.com/kjkingsh.htm
22. His Majestie King James VI & I Page, A Trew Law of Free Monarchies Or the
Reciprock and Mutual Duetie Betwixt a Free King, and his Naturall Subjects, c.1597,
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/kjtrew2.htm
23. Noah Webster, American Dictionary of the English Language, G & C Merriam Co.,
1828.
24. Laurence Gardner, Bloodline of the Holy Grail: The Hidden Lineage of Jesus
Revealed, Element Books, 1996, p. 324.
25. Robert J. Sargent, Landmarks of English Bible: Manuscript Evidence, Bible Baptist
Church Pub., pp. 73-4.
26. Ibid., p. 73.
27. His Majestie King James VI & I Page, Basilicon Doron, http://www.jesus-is-
lord.com/basilico.htm
28. Manly Palmer Hall, The Secret Teachings of All Ages, Los Angeles, CA: The
Philosophical Research Society, 1977, p. clxvi.
29. Dennis Laurence Cuddy, Now is the Dawning of the New Age New World Order,
Oklahoma City, OK: Hearthstone Publishing Ltd., 1991, p. 11.
30. Bloodline of the Holy Grail, p. 324.
31. Frances Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, Routledge, 1972, p. 308.
31. Landmarks of English Bible: Manuscript Evidence, p. 208.
33. His Majestie King James VI & I Page, On the Divine Right of Kings,
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/kjdivine.htm
34. The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, pp. 123-4.
35. William T. Still, New World Order: Ancient Plan of Secret Societies, Huntington
House Pub., 1990, p. 50.
36. The James Bell Ford Library, "Sir Walter Raleigh’s Speech from the Scaffold",
translation of 1619 Dutch Edition, and Comparison with English Texts by John Parker
and Carol A. Johnson, http://www.bell.lib.umn.edu/ral_form.html
37. Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed., pp. 913-14.
38. His Majestie King James VI & I Page, Basilicon Doron, http://www.jesus-is-
lord.com/basilico.htm
39. His Majestie King James VI & I Page, Daemonologie, http://www.jesus-is-
lord.com/kjdaemon.htm
40. King James' Daemonologie, Godolphin House, 1597, 1996, back cover.
41. His Majestie King James VI & I Page: The Translators to the
Reader:http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/pref1611.htm