[PeterAV]

Hi illusionznc,
You stated

My main concern is not with the Apocrypha at the moment, but true doctrine and scripture and what edition I can find it in.

*******
You will find that mostly every King James Bible has true doctrine. But as you now know, that the PCE has eliminated every possibility of error in presentation.
It is presentationaly pure as it is docrinally pure.
But any KJB for that matter is an excellent Bible, albeit not presentationaly pure as the PCE. [Joshua 19:2]
I too was searching for the truth, even though I knew all about the various differences in the various King James Bible editions.
Why, even by the very same publishers in the very same years, would use different editions for printing.
I think that they either did not see any differences, or that they thought it was too inconsequential to do anything about it. Also certain publishers purposed to use certain spellings.
*******
As far as the Apocryphal books in the King James Bible, this is not a big issue.
Even in 1611 the Apocryapha was not considered cannon.
Read the title page. Plus Apocrypha means something.
*******
The various early King James Printers already were taking the Apocrypha out at very early dates. Other printers include them, even to this day arise the odd publisher's devotion to the Apocrypha in an ignorant way.
*******
I do not know personally when the first Bible eliminated the Apocrapha from inside the covers of the Bible.
But I do remember DR. Ruckman stating that they started taking out the Apocrapha almost right away, even though many KJBs yet contained the Apocrypha.
*******
I have the luxury of having a few old Bibles myself a couple for each century.
Some include it and others omit it.
1612 included -publisher= Robert Barker
1663 omitted -publisher= John Field [Cambridge]
1668-66 omited-publisher= John Field [Cambridge]
1726- included-publisher= John Baskett [Oxford]
1769- included-publisher= John Archdeacon [Cambridge]
1824- omitted-publisher= George Eyre and Andrew Strahan [London]
1890- omitted-publisher= Oxford
1917- omitted-publisher= Oxford [Scofield]
1937- omitted- publisher= W. Lewis M.A. [Cambridge]
1953-omitted-publisher=Collins [J.L.Clyde Lord Advocate]PCE
1986-included- publisher= Oxford Crown edition
2003-included-publisher= Hendrickson [1611 Faxcimile]
2007-omitted-publisher= Bible Protector [PCE]
*******
Just because I have ones that omit the Apocrypha in certain years does not mean that there was no King James Bibles out there with the Apocrypha. Sometimes they printed more than one run in a year, and so even the very same publishers would sometimes[depending on their leanings and goals for the publication] print the Bible including the Apocrypha, while another printing does not.
Some printers never printed the Apocrapha while others would include it only for historical and study skae. Some include it because they think it should be there.
I do not agree to that and neither does most of true Christendom.
*******
PeterAV
Every word of God is pure:

[illusionznc]

Thank you! I am convinced now the Pure Cambridge Edition circa 1900 is the one I should stick with. Where can i get this Bible in genuine leather ? And also, does it omit the Apocrypha ?

[bibleprotector]

Originally Posted by illusionznc

I had thought the 1611 king james bible would be the one, however, it contains the "Apocrypha" which is not considered to be devinely inspired

The version-text and translation of the Scripture in the King James Bible (1611) is right. The Apocrypha is not Scripture (it is in its own section in 1611, and not printed with the other books).

If you think the King James Bible is right (which it is), then you should be able to find satisfactory explanations and answers to objections against it from people on this forum and on this website.

Someone might say, "The 1611 had the apocrypha, or there are many word changes since 1611, or the language used is not every day speech." Every one of these things can be easily answered. Even things like, "But new Greek manuscripts were discovered after 1611, or modern science has been able to discover more about ancient writings", etc. can all be shown in the right light.

somewhere, one king james version contains the truth

See PeterAV's answer in a post above.

[Jeremy]

Originally Posted by illusionznc

I have studied and researched what bible version to trust for quite some time now. What I have discovered is nothing more that confusion on top of more confusion. No matter how much I search, or how close I think I am to the truth, there is always something present to contradict what is there. I had thought the 1611 king james bible would be the one, however, it contains the "Apocrypha" which is not considered to be devinely inspired, and even considered evil by some due to the referencing of being able to pay your way out of sin:

FWIW, I have just bought the Old Scofield Bible,and really like it.
Others will also suggest a Ryrie,Dake,Thompson Chain. All good.
At one point i had to stop listening to everyone else's opinions and do it,luckily my new pastor ordered the Scofield. Believe me,i have been just as confused as you and as frustrated in finding a Bible. Everywhere i turned,there was always something wrong with my decision on a KJ Bible.
Being in a church that uses 2 or 3 versions causes confusion,been there done that. This year i struggled with other versions,opened my mind up to it,but, always knowing the KJ as my foundation,even when others bought into the new improved god. You don't feel secure or comfortable.
If the Preacher doesn't know where he stands,the congregation will never know,nor will they feel confident in there belief of God. The Apocrypha is not recognized as part of our Bible. 66 books,Thats it.
I hope you can overcome this confusion and may God help you through it.

[illusionznc]

I absolutely agree, and I wholeheartedly agree the King James Bible as the sole authoritive doctrine. I trust in the Lord with all my heart and I am positive He will guide me to where I need to be. Satan is the master of confusion, but he has not confused me as to Gods word. Even without a bible at all anymore, the Holy Spirit still guides my heart.

What has confused me recently is, all the editions of King James bibles. I have not yet checked out this pure cambridge edition, but I do well plan to. I do however recognize the 1611 doctrine as pure with the exception of the Apocrypha which I prefer to stay away from for now. I had 2 bibles, one of which was a NIV & the other a NKJV. I burned them both because I believe them to be corrupt.

I hope that doesnt sound harsh, but its what my heart was telling me was right. Things had been changed, altered or completely removed in those editions and that overwhelming feeling inside me said this was wrong. I want a quality bible that will endure everyday reading, and I do want the absolute closest to the 1611 doctrine I can get, so long as it is still a king james bible. I do honestly want the truth & am not looking for what I want, but Gods will for me.

[bibleprotector]

I write for any sincere seeker:

Even without a bible at all anymore, the Holy Spirit still guides my heart.

A person doesn't need to be a prophet to tell you that the Holy Ghost would not want you to have no Bible.

The Word of God is true, whether it has leather binding or not.

The text and translation of 1611 was correct. That same text and translation has been retained throughout various editions of the King James Bible, and is accurately presented in the Pure Cambridge Edition. Even though there is changes in spelling and other such things, the "real Word" is right here right now, not locked back in 1611.

What has confused me recently is, all the editions of King James bibles.

There is nothing confusing about it. It is clear that today we have the right text and translation the same as 1611, despite different editions over time. (There is an edition today which is being upheld as standard.)

"Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it." (Psalm 119:140).

Originally Posted by illusionznc

I absolutely agree, and I wholeheartedly agree the King James Bible as the sole authoritive doctrine.

Well brother, that's a good start, keep studying the KJV and your confusion will be gone in no time, because the KJV is the inerrant, inspired Word of God and it's being preserved for you even today! No one is angry at you---as I said before, I hope you can honestly be helped by this forum! And I can pretty much assure you, no one gets verbally abused here unless they verbally abuse God's Word and seek to confuse others with false teachings, and I think we've had a belly full of that in the past week. Let me be among the first to say without reservation: welcome to the forum!

[illusionznc]

I have looked into the "Pure Cambridge Edition". I have compared it to a Nelson King James Bible. All the things to look for in the "Pure Cambridge Edition" listed on http://www.bibleprotector.com/purecambridgeedition.htm, such as :

HOW TO KNOW THE
PURE CAMBRIDGE EDITION OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE



It is important to have the correct, perfect and final text of the King James Bible, since there are correctors (e.g. publishers) who have changed some aspects of King James Bible texts. The final form of the King James Bible is the Pure Cambridge Edition (circa 1900), which conforms to the following:



1. “or Sheba” not “and Sheba” in Joshua 19:2

2. “sin” not “sins” in 2 Chronicles 33:19

3. “Spirit of God” not “spirit of God” in Job 33:4

4. “whom ye” not “whom he” in Jeremiah 34:16

5. “Spirit of God” not “spirit of God” in Ezekiel 11:24

6. “flieth” not “fleeth” in Nahum 3:16

7. “Spirit” not “spirit” in Matthew 4:1

8. “further” not “farther” in Matthew 26:39

9. “bewrayeth” not “betrayeth” in Matthew 26:73

10. “Spirit” not “spirit” in Mark 1:12

11. “spirit” not “Spirit” in Acts 11:28

12. “spirit” not “Spirit” in 1 John 5:8

All of these things are correct as mentioned on the site in the Nelson King James Bible except the word "cleft" was changed to "cliffs" in one verse. The reason I dont want to read the Nelson Bible I used to compare with, is because of the footnotes and references (It is a study bible). From what I have read in the forums, the footnotes can sometimes not be correct interpretations, therefore, I would prefer not to have them, and trust God to give me the correct interpretation.

I would like to know a little more in detail what difference there is from the Pure Cambridge Edition & the 1769 King James Version & the 1611 version, and whether or not the Pure Cambridge Edition contains the Apocrypha, and is the Pure Cambridge edition the same thing as the AV of 1611 ? I think if that can be answered for me, my decision will be made. And I want to thank everyone that has responded for their help! It has helped me alot in my goal for the truth.

[bibleprotector]

There are two things. One is the doctrine of having a pure Bible today. The other is the more detailed examination of editions. Learning about Psalm 12 and other passages is foundational. If you can see that God's promises include the presence of His Word today, such as by 1 Peter 1:23, 25 and other verses, that is good.

In regards to the other more scientific issues, the Apocrypha was/is part of the 1769 Edition and there is the Apocrypha for the PCE. Most KJBs do not print it though. Basically it has long been removed from taking up space in our Bibles for both spiritual and economic reasons. In reality, the Apocrypha does not constitute part of the Scripture, nor is it an essential part of the KJB. Therefore, even big sized Bibles do well to omit it (when long ago they did not).

There is one VERSION, which is a set of words based on the original languages, from 1611. This VERSION includes 1 John 5:7, etc. Differences in the construction of the underlying text would equal a different VERSION.

Likewise, there is one TRANSLATION, which is the turning of the Scripture from the original languages into English.

However, there are many different printings of the King James Bible, which are all different editions or impressions. And there are times when the early printing errors were corrected, or when there was an effort to standardise the spelling, etc., which is the definition of a MAJOR EDITION. These MAJOR EDITIONS exhibit a line of purifying from 1611 to 1769 and beyond. KJB editions today are based on the 1769 Edition, but all exhibit further small changes, differences or peculiarities. Of these, the Cambridge Edition has been seen as standard, and although there are tiny differences in Cambridge printings, there is one which is recognised as the "final standard".

Jesus said, "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." (Matt. 5:18). This is one verse which shows how important every letter is. Another is, "Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him." (Proverbs 30:5). Another is, "But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." (Matt. 4:4).

Originally Posted by illusionznc

........ Time and evil has corrupted many things to include Gods Holy Word & my search for the truth will be everlasting until the end of my time.

Do not be discouraged or weary in well doing. We are all struggling in this age of apostasy. Try not to become disillusioned, although we all go through these stages as well. The Book of Revelation warns that there will be those who add and subtract from the Word of God, so why should we be surprised to find this is the case.

Keep the faith!

Shalom,

Tandi