[bibleprotector]

I got in a debate about the context of the 1611 and the King James Bible of today. Some guy posted these verses to prove that the context has changed...

Context (or interpretation) is not altered, because:

1611 (e-sword):
Ezekiel 24:7 For her blood is in the middest of her: she set it vpon the toppe of a rocke, she powred it vpon the ground to couer it with dust:

1987 (from BibleGateway.com):
Ezekiel 24:7 For her blood is in the midst of her; she set it upon the top of a rock; she poured it not upon the ground, to cover it with dust;

This was a typographical error in 1611, corrected in 1612.

1611 (e-sword):
Genesis 39:16 And she laid vp his garment by her, vntill her lord came home.

1987 (from BibleGateway.com):
Genesis 39:16 And she laid up his garment by her, until his lord came home.

Although 1611 matches to the Bishops' and Geneva rendering, I would say that the change was intended by the translators, but is an example of where the printer followed the Bishops' reading rather than the translators' alteration (there are plenty of examples of this happening by accident). It was corrected in 1638.

The first existing draft of the KJB is known as the Bodleian Manuscript. This is made up of sheets of the 1602 Bishops’ Bible which have been bound together to form a complete Bible. Several portions of this book are heavily annotated with handwritten corrections and possible alterations. This draft comes from one (or several) of the groups somewhere in the middle of their translating process. It is speculated by "experts" (and the most likely situation) that the final draft was also made in this form. Thus, a printer would have the Bishops' Bible with corrections written all over it, which could at times be confusing or cause things to be missed. Quite a number of printer errors in 1611 can be explained by this view, particularly unobvious errors that were corrected soon afterward.

1611 (e-sword):
Joshua 3:11 Behold, the Arke of the Couenant, euen the Lord of all the earth, passeth ouer before you, into Iordan.

1987 (from BibleGateway.com):
Joshua 3:11 Behold, the ark of the covenant of the LORD of all the earth passeth over before you into Jordan.

This was a typographical error in 1611, corrected in 1629, which also agrees with the former versions.

Also, I was told that the King James Bible translators sometimes used the Latin. Is this true?

They consulted Latin versions, yes. They did not write any Scripture in the KJB in Latin, though sometimes its effects in English may be noticed, but that is "good English", not Latin.
a. words like "sanctify" are English.
b. word order like "crown royal" is English.

As a final note, I would not say,

His/Hers, same difference.

Now, I know some KJB people try to say that his and her differences don't matter, because it could read true both ways, or could be the same Hebrew word... HOWEVER, since we have a jot and tittle accurate Bible, and the provision of a perfect God, and the words "his" and "her" do change meaning, we must be certain that only one meaning is actually right and intended by God.

This is not a case of the translators saying one thing in 1611, and then everyone since 1638 saying another thing, as though either the translators or the editors were wrong: the situation is clear, the printers in 1611 really did mess things up quite a lot. A typographical error is not a "change" nor a "true reading" in the KJB.

Those who try and make a case out of this against the KJB are grasping at vacuum.