400

      I'm sorry to offend. But I have to get this off my chest.
      2011 is NOT the 400th anniversary of the "King James" Bible! It is the 400th anniversary of the "Holy Bible" of 1611 AD! Please do your homework! They are NOT the same thing!!! The KJV did not come about until 1857. And it is still not standardized! The wording in the scripture is different between KJV Bibles published by Nelson, Holman, Schofield, and others. Not just in the footnotes but in the SCRIPTURE TEXT! And the 1611 Bible did include all 15 books of the Apocrypha (some think it is 14 but the 1611 combined "Baruch" and "The Letter of Jeremiah") as opposed to the Douay Bible of 1610 which only included 12 books of Apocrypha. Please admit the historical facts. I read both the KJV and the 1611. They are not the same!
      Also the KJV was never "authorized". The misuse of this word stems from an American problem understanding that Parliament obtained a patent on the translation of 1611 and only "authorized" printers were permitted to print and publish it. This insured that the Royal Family would continue to receive "royalties" for the sale of the "Bible" which they still receive for all Holy Bibles of the 1611 translation and other "revisions" of the 1611 text. Although the "KJV" or "authorized version" or "the 1611" are all considered to be in the "public domain" in the U.S.A. I am obviously not a KJV "onlyist". But I do prefer the KJV to other translations.
      Another thing that concerns me is that so many "onlyists" refuse to believe the truth about the History of the translations. Not just the English but Greek, Latin, German, French, and others. Christ said His words would be preserved for all generations. Matthew 24:35, Mark 13:31, and Luke 21:33 all agree Christ said, "Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away." I believe this whole heartedly. But the KJV is an English translation. Not "the only written word of God". If it was then Christ's promise was not kept until 1857. And, if the KJV is the "only" so on and so on; Which KJV is the "only" one? As I said before, they are not all the same! It's just a fact. And the KJV is NOT a "perfect" translation of any text. Tyndale himself said it would never be possible to have a "perfect" English translation.
      And if it is so "perfect" why did they change the name of Christ? "Jesus" is an English name. "Jesus" and "Joshua" are both English names. "Jesus" is NOT Greek for "Joshua". "Jesus" is the English version of "Iesous" which is the Greek word for "savior". Hebrews 4:8 and Acts 7:45 are proof that someone changed the name who didn't know the difference between Yehoshua the Messiah and Yehoshua the son of Nun. I wouldn't fuss about it. But KJV "onlyists" blow it off and make excuses for the fact that the only "name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." (Acts 4:12) is changed to a different name. To me this whole KJV only debate borders on Idolatry.
      And for the record; Forbidding men and women from praying together is a form of cult behavior. "And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." Revelation 18:4
      There! I said it.
      God bless you.