Can We Trust the King James Bible?
June 17, 2013
LEFT, Masonic handshakes in the original
King James Bible
"As the Bible itself exhorts us to stay away from occult and witchcraft practices, it is paradoxical that Christians should embrace a work mastered as it was by high-ranking members of the occult."
(Editor's Note: I reserve judgment on this question, and present it for discussion. The New Testament has always struck me as authentic.)
By John Hamer
In my view, the translation of the existing biblical texts prior to 1603 into what became the 'King James' Bible in 1611, was a work of social engineering by the English Elite. This was undertaken to coral the masses into mental servitude to Luciferianism/Rosicrucianism. It was a step away from true spirituality, whose tenets presented a clear danger to the establishment then, and as it still does today.
Most foreign language versions of the bible have been derived from the King James Bible; therefore these deliberate falsifications are compounded many-fold.
It is universally agreed that there are a mass of so-called 'translation errors' in the KJV, but what if anything, may be significant about that fact?
In the late 16th century, immediately prior to the KJV becoming the de facto standard bible, Sir John Dee, left,
was an Enochian black magician. Dee and Francis Bacon, the author of 'The New Atlantis' were both instrumental in the production of the KJV. As the Bible itself exhorts us to stay away from occult and witchcraft practices, it is paradoxical that Christians should embrace a work mastered as it was by high-ranking members of the occult.
As well as being Queen Elizabeth's 'spymaster', Sir John Dee was a prominent member of The Worshipful Company of Mercers, which are Masonic Lodges by another name, led by a Worshipful Master. If the Puritans of the 16th and 17th centuries had the power, they would have burned adherents of the KJV at the stake for witchcraft!
Freemasonry was always Luciferian in nature. The first three (blue) degrees of the order up to Master Mason, are absolutely identical to the initial lower orders of witchcraft?
The Worshipful Company of Mercers is responsible for most of our social institutions. Both Gresham College and the Royal Society were derived from this Masonic organization. In turn, these two abominations have given us Luciferian pseudo-science through the gradual creation of a scientific dictatorship which denies the existence of a spiritual and moral dimension.
The official KJV scholarship committee completed their work in 1610 and passed the manuscript to King James I (left). The King enlisted Sir Francis Bacon and his cohorts, who kept it in their possession until 1611, when it was published. We may never know exactly what happened in that intervening period.
Many Satanic symbols and Freemasonic motifs were originally placed within the pages of the 1611 KJV Bible. The Rosicrucians believed they were creating symbols which would emanate demonic power. I further believe that Bacon and King James firmly intended to create a Rosicrucian Bible to seduce the English-speaking peoples into the 'mystic Christianity' of Rosicrucianism.
The Masonic handshakes are extremely significant as they provide proof that Bacon and King James conspired to produce a totally Rosicrucian 'handbook'.
ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT TO BE OCCULTIZED
The KJV Bible and the Shakespearean plays (well known to be esoteric masterpieces - but definitely not written by William Shakespeare)
were part of a plan to subvert and 'occultize' culture. Popular religion was to be hijacked through the new 'People's Holy Book' - hence the King James Version of the Bible.
Thus, this two-pronged attack on humanity was meant to propound the Masonic agenda. However, its proponents had a rude awakening. Their new Bible was almost unanimously rejected by the religious hierarchy of the time. It was almost completely reviled and shunned due to the Satanic symbolism, which was instantly recognized for what it was. Indeed Anglican pastors absolutely refused to replace their existing texts with what they regarded to be the work of the Devil.
Eventually, around the year 1650, a 'toned-down' version of the KJV was produced with all overt occult references removed, but nevertheless significant 'translation errors' remain - in abundance.
For example, the scriptural Hebrew word (which means 'so be it' or 'verily') is 'Amein' and not 'Amen'. Likewise, the Greek equivalent is also 'Amein'. The Egyptians had been worshipping Amen-Ra, the great sun-deity for more than one thousand years BC and before he was known as Amen-Ra, he was known simply as Amen.
Amen was the god of life and procreation in Egyptian mythology and only later identified as 'Amen-Ra'. Smith's Bible Dictionary agrees with this statement. Have we been misled down the centuries to invoke the name of the Egyptian sun god at the end of all Christian prayers?
Indeed almost every page in the KJV has arguably been subtly amended. Then there is also the case of the Bible's 'missing' books. Only a few have been published, such as the Book of Enoch and the Book of Jasher but they are still regarded as missing as they do not appear in the bible.
Some more missing books:
* Book of the Wars of the Lord (Num. 21:14)
* Book of the Acts of Solomon (1st Kings 11:41)
* Book of Samuel the Seer (1st Chr. 29:29)
* Book of Gad the Seer (1st Chr. 29:29)
* Book of Nathan the Prophet (1st Chr. 29:29)
* Prophecy of Ahijah (2nd Chr. 9:29)
* Visions of Ido the Seer (2nd Chr. 9:29)
* Book of Shemaiah (2 Chr. 12:15)
* Book of Jehu (2 Chr. 20:34)
* Sayings of the Seers (2 Chr. 33:19)
* An Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 5:9)
* An Epistle to the Church at Laodicea (Col 4:16)
* Other prophecies to Enoch (Jude 1:14)
One inevitably wonders exactly what Sir Francis Bacon knew about these works. The KJV Bible credits King James by stating that this Bible was 'diligently compared and revised by his majesty's special command'.
What was King James' 'special command'? Could it perchance have been Bacon and his 54 secret scholar / translators? We do know that after the first five Books of the Bible (the Pentateuch) that the Bible is no longer written chronologically. It was King James' and his employees who decided that this should be the case. Today, some Bible scholars firmly believe that these important works are missing because their messages did not agree with the prescribed version and thus did not convey Bacon's intended edicts.
The changes made to the KJV turned the Bible into an esoteric rather than a spiritual work representing God's message. Bacon and his co-conspirators, King James, John Dee et al, set out to hijack a sacred work to deceive the masses into passively accepting the tenets of Rosicrucianism and Freemasonry, disguised as the word of God.
Also by John Hamer:
Titanic Sinking an Insurance Scam?
Churchill's Father was Jack the Ripper
'John Hamer is a researcher and author. His latest book, 'The Falsification of History' is available here.
First Comment from Marcos:
Things like the validity of a translation are easy to check. The KJB has been universally approved by scholars as one of the best versions of the Text Receptus. It was also the spark that initiated a huge spiritual revival in the Anglo world.
The author is a militant (catholic, maybe? Knight of Malta? occultist?) but an amateur in this subject. Why does he want to push people away from a Bible that has helped save so many? Why not focus in the many false and corrupt translations that abound today? Qui bono?
Try the book Defending the King James Bible by D. A. Waite in order to have a true analysis of the subject. The present article is of very low quality.
The author John Hamer comments on comments:
"Well my piece certainly seems to have generated a very mixed bunch of reactions! I would firstly like to say that I do not like having arbitrary labels of any kind applied to me and therefore just for the avoidance of doubt, I am not a militant, a Catholic or an occultist and nor am I a Knight of Malta. I have my own sincerely held spiritual beliefs as many of you will do, but that I believe is a very personal matter. But, if I do have to have a label applied, then I am a researcher and author who is merely trying to get at the truth and as such can only go where my research leads me. I have no particular axe to grind but simply present my findings for others to consider.
Obviously I appreciate that what I have written goes against some people's deeply and sincerely held beliefs and for that I make no apologies. How can we grow and learn unless we are prepared to consider other possible scenarios from time to time? We may ultimately reject them as nonsense of course which is everyone's prerogative, but to never consider them in the first place, to me is a gross self-deception.
Maybe it's just me but the whole point of the piece was to defend Christianity against such practices and NOT endorse them. I apologize if the point has been missed by some people, but I was trying to convey the idea that Christianity has been hijacked by the authors of the KJV for their own non-Christian, Pagan agendas and I am lamenting that fact and not approving of it.
I am indeed not a specialist scholar of the Bible and I defer to those whose knowledge of this area is far greater than mine, but this is a much wider issue than religion or Christianity. It is one more very tiny piece in an absolutely massive jigsaw puzzle."
Comments for "Can We Trust the King James Bible? "
Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at