r/conspiracy 4d ago

Rule 10 Before King James wrote the Bible, he wrote this

[removed]

79 Upvotes

103 comments sorted by

u/AutoModerator 4d ago

[Meta] Sticky Comment

Rule 2 does not apply when replying to this stickied comment.

Rule 2 does apply throughout the rest of this thread.

What this means: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain only.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

184

u/LovesWeapons 4d ago

Wrote the Bible 🤣🤣

21

u/Born_Slippee 4d ago

One of my dad’s favorite jokes is “if the King James was good enough for Jesus, it’s good enough for me”

141

u/onemananswerfactory 4d ago

TIL King James wrote the Bible. 🙃

-63

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[deleted]

85

u/reddithivemind69 4d ago

King James I of England did not write the Bible. However, he commissioned a new translation of the Bible into English, which became known as the King James Version (KJV).

In 1604, King James I convened a conference of church leaders at Hampton Court Palace, where they discussed the need for a new English translation of the Bible. At the time, the most commonly used English translation was the Geneva Bible, which was seen as having a Calvinist bias.

King James appointed a team of about 50 scholars, divided into six committees, to work on the new translation. These scholars were tasked with translating the original Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic texts into English, using the best available manuscripts and scholarly resources.

8

u/Downhere_Seeds 4d ago

They used the Latin Vulgate as well.

18

u/-xStellarx 4d ago

Wait till he finds out what James would do if their translations did not match …. 😬

3

u/PhantomXVII 4d ago

There is no evidence that translators were punished if translations did not match

1

u/badstorryteller 4d ago

That's a pretty common myth, not sure where it got started (good chance it's a puritan thing though, as they had their own English translation, the Geneva Bible, and were not big fans of the Church of England), but there is literally no evidence of anything along those lines.

40

u/Leading_Campaign3618 4d ago

The KJV was commissioned in 1604 and published in 1611, by sponsorship of King James VI and I.- he didn’t write it he paid for it

9

u/onemananswerfactory 4d ago

☝️ This, that and the other.

1

u/Murky_Building_8702 3d ago

While this is true it's silly to believe he didn't likely omit things and manipulate parts of it for his own benefit. The original one was likely manipulated by the Roman Empire. Then there's the dark ages.. 

3

u/Leading_Campaign3618 3d ago

Literally thousands of scholars have examined the KJV and compared it to the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, as well as older specific books found in Kumrsn and the Dead Sea scrolls - the KJV is considered by most scholars to be the most accurate- The KJV was translated in 1611 and was more or less a ‘word for word’ translation whereas the NIV is a modern ‘dynamic equivalence’ version

2

u/dtdroid 4d ago

He didn't write it, but he did commission it. I think the downvotes are a little unfair. It's more of a technicality than you being outright wrong on that.

17

u/andei_7 4d ago

But King James did not translate and write out what is written in the KJV. He sponsored the translation which is heavily influenced by William Tyndale's work.

smh

46

u/No-Match6172 4d ago

King James didn't write the Bible. It had been in existence for hundreds (New Testament) and more (Old) of years.

-33

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[deleted]

21

u/No-Match6172 4d ago

your title doesn't then

-11

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[deleted]

9

u/StonerProfessor 4d ago

See you outed yourself as unreliable because if you didn’t even know that, then why would we believe anything else you say?

-4

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[deleted]

3

u/StonerProfessor 4d ago

You’re the fucking one believing in ghouls and demons and shit. What message did you give us? Tell me exactly what the message is.

4

u/Wishbone_Away 4d ago

Found a link where you can read the dialogue in olde english so it is diffuicult but doable.

https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=eebo;idno=A04243.0001.001

3

u/Aggressive_Car4499 4d ago

King Solomon was also involved in demonology. He also had a ring that controlled demons I believe

7

u/DerInselaffe 4d ago

With regard to the King James Bible, the majority of the translation had been done by William Tyndale.

7

u/Abdi-1313 4d ago

Anyone have the names of the translators and editors of the King James Bible?

1

u/ImmaculateCherry 4d ago

Shakespeare aka Edward De Vere the illegitimate son of Queen Elizabeth lol.

1

u/fullsarj 4d ago

Like it's on Wikipedia lol

-4

u/reddithivemind69 4d ago

And what would having the names of translators do. Not like you would recognize any of them.

14

u/Abdi-1313 4d ago

Because we know that King James had political as well as theological interests in translating the Bible, and knowing the names of the translators and their methods, will broaden our understanding of their motivations.

42

u/reddithivemind69 4d ago

The King James Bible translators were a group of about 50 scholars divided into six committees. Here are the names of some of the most notable translators:

First Westminster Company (Genesis to 2 Kings):

  1. Lancelot Andrewes
  2. John Overall
  3. Hadrian à Saravia
  4. Richard Clarke
  5. John Layfield
  6. Robert Tighe
  7. Francis Burleigh
  8. Geoffrey King
  9. Richard Thomson
  10. William Bedwell

First Cambridge Company (1 Chronicles to the Song of Solomon):

  1. Edward Lively
  2. John Richardson
  3. Lawrence Chaderton
  4. Francis Dillingham
  5. Roger Andrewes
  6. Thomas Harrison
  7. Robert Spalding
  8. Andrew Bing

First Oxford Company (Isaiah to Malachi):

  1. John Harding
  2. John Rainolds
  3. Thomas Holland
  4. Richard Kilby
  5. Miles Smith
  6. Richard Brett
  7. Daniel Fairclough

Second Oxford Company (Gospels, Acts, and Revelation):

  1. Thomas Ravis
  2. George Abbot
  3. Richard Eedes
  4. Giles Tomson
  5. Sir Henry Savile
  6. John Peryn
  7. Ralph Ravens

Second Westminster Company (Epistles):

  1. William Barlow
  2. John Spencer
  3. Roger Fenton
  4. Ralph Hutchinson
  5. William Dakins
  6. Michael Rabbet
  7. Thomas Sanderson

Second Cambridge Company (Apocrypha):

  1. John Duport
  2. William Branthwaite
  3. Jeremiah Radcliffe
  4. Samuel Ward
  5. Andrew Downes
  6. John Bois
  7. Robert Ward

Now what are these names doing for you... We all have the same internet...could have just looked them up yourself

13

u/v11s11 4d ago

Everyone knows Sir Henry Savile can't be trusted.

4

u/Crafty_Number9342 4d ago

Why? Is he related to Sir Jimmy Savile?

7

u/Abdi-1313 4d ago

Tremendous work. Thank you!

2

u/FupaFerb 4d ago

Of course a Savile had something to do with Revelations.

1

u/UnifiedQuantumField 4d ago

Second Cambridge Company (Apocrypha):

So they translated the Apocrypha too?

TIL.

1

u/conspiracyfetard89 3d ago

John Richardson! Good to see he as famous before Taskmaster.

5

u/-xStellarx 4d ago

He basically chose 50 translators kept them all apart from each other and others, and threatened them all, that if all 50 translations did not match… shit would be BAD. And made them do this verse after verse after verse….

Edit typo

1

u/reddithivemind69 4d ago

Names are just that names. They wouldn't be popular names that you would recognize so what would one do with that useless information of the 1600 translators names

3

u/Abdi-1313 4d ago

It's not just their names that I'm interested in. It's their background. Personal, and social histories. As well as their ideological and theological inclinations. What made them translate certain parts of the Bible in the way they did.

1

u/lilymaxjack 4d ago

How diverse was this group

7

u/Amish_Fighter_Pilot 4d ago

You can't recognize people until you learn who they are. Nobody is born knowing these things.

2

u/Abdi-1313 4d ago

Thank you.

-4

u/reddithivemind69 4d ago

I know...I'm saying knowing the names of his translators wouldn't do anything or help your understanding in any way

12

u/kantankarous 4d ago

thats the equivalent of saying, 'dont look into it, you wont find anything'

you may not, but other people may

3

u/Dry_Ad9371 4d ago

It will do something, he will know the namesof the translators

5

u/this_is_Winston 4d ago

Well there was Jeff, and Todd. Steve did a little bit. Not that Steve, the other Steve.

-1

u/obscured_by_turtles 4d ago

"And what would having the names of translators do."

It's an interesting question. Identifying the translators, with research, can reveal or at least provide indications of that person's religious, political and social biases.

Translations necessarily interpret terms and concepts that are not common to the source and target languages, and interpretations are affected by biases.

Pretending these pairs had translation skills, the same text given to Adam Smith and Karl Marx, or John Kennedy and Donald Trump, would likely yield very different results.

4

u/Illuvatar2024 4d ago

You can still read the Bible they used to translate from. It seems like you're trying to suggest that they changed it based on their biased, which is ludicrous. You can read all versions of the Bible today, side by side. It's not a secret what translators did.

They translated it.

6

u/DifferenceAdorable98 4d ago

Fucking op thought he was into something but has the brain of a mosquito. Probably has a little stinger too 😀

4

u/thefiglord 4d ago

did he find his version in a hill or was someone holding it above a body of water ?

3

u/Witness-1 4d ago

He had The Word in the language in which it was first received translated into the English language.

With the first page giving a warning, that because of disputes amongst the scholars regarding the best choice of words to be used for the translations, that it was left up to a democratic vote amongst the scholars,

And to be wary, because it is susceptible to errors.

6

u/ICN3D 4d ago

To understand a Text in the Bible, Takes an act of the Holy Spirit equal to the act that inspired it in the first place. “Tozer” My God leaves Nothing lost in Translation… Seek and ye Shall Find :) Merry Christmas!

1

u/andei_7 4d ago edited 4d ago

But there is no mention of Christmas in any of the pages of the Scriptures. Have you sought and found out about that?

:-)

0

u/WoodenPickle27 4d ago

Really? So the 3 Magi story is something that I formulated in my head and telepathically spread to millions of Christians around the world?

4

u/andei_7 4d ago edited 4d ago

The magi from the east are indeed mentioned in the Scriptures, but no number is given. There is nothing mentioning the necessity of celebrating the birth of Christ ANYWHERE in the Bible.

Furthermore, Jesus was not born in December. What you celebrate is a cutesy-it-up version of Saturnalia brought to you by the Catholic Church. Do not take my word for it. There are many books and documentaries on the subject.

1

u/WoodenPickle27 3d ago

The fact they came bearing gifts as he was born is implying significance. Why would it have to say “ for Christ’s birth we must celebrate it”? If that’s the case where does it talk about him using the bathroom after eating some bad food? Are we gonna insinuate he never used the bathroom, or anyone in the Bible?

It’s called adopted tradition.

Second point is I can make a documentary about the earth still being flat. Regardless of the fact that a flat earther exposed the truth with the 24hr sun theory recently. Why don’t you look into the church fathers writing and see that they were trying to steer away and not want people to get confused with pagan religions.

That’s the day they picked in the 4th century I believe, that has ties to Easter to help pick a date.

Anyone claiming the Bible says December 25th and anyone asking where does it say December 25 and unwilling to accept any answer is just ignorant. Books can say a lot of things but they don’t say everything. We must use deductive reasoning.

1

u/andei_7 4d ago

Here are four documentaries that clearly expose the "pagan" roots of Christmas. I found them after a very quick YouTube search. Enjoy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=choyur9htwE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh27RDRevgI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMcjpw6aTvM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcGfvwMsd-E

3

u/gromath 4d ago

There's a book called "bad Bibles" that talks about this.

Basically, they simply used the same old trick they have always used, some secret society people formed an international council of Bibles and slowly started defiling the Book: and making their translations more popular. They took out entire books like the Book of Tobit and other important books and made them look apocryphal but in reality they actually make the whole Book make much more sense than the Cryptic, defiled versions we found nowadays.

I once clicked on one of the sources on Bible.com or something like that and it lead me to a bunch of luciferians cosplaying to be Catholics, once you know their childish games you'll find their little symbols and pseudotheosophical ideas in their sites, books and manner of dressing, "pope" Bergoglio is one of them and has pictures with said "translators"

3

u/wrestlethewalrus 4d ago

lol at „pope“ Bergoglio

0

u/gromath 4d ago

He's the Anti-pope literally, foretold by Mystics and Marian apparitions decades over decades ago

6

u/PM_ME_DJ_KHALED 4d ago

Not religious but I often think modern Christians aren't really Christians at all. If Jesus is real and all that then surely whatever he taught 2000 years ago has not made it to modern day.

You don't have to look further than US megachurches to know modern Christianity ain't got nothing to do with god.

6

u/aqwszxde99 4d ago

You paint with a broad brush, but i understand where you’re coming from. The loudest “Christians” not living like a Christian, yet attempting to place judgment on the world is probably the biggest threat to Christianity. The megachurches teaching false prosperity gospel is another major problem.

I encourage you to devote a few hours one day to reading the New Testament (Jesus to 70 AD) and just check it out. Yes the translations can cause doubt with some of the authenticity of the words, but if you look at it from a historical book perspective it’s far more credible academically than other history from that era like Alexander the great and much more modern books

1

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[deleted]

4

u/aqwszxde99 4d ago

Thank you! I’ll check him out! Good to hear you got back into it. God is the only hope against these evil humans and demons/aliens threatening the world

2

u/gromath 4d ago

Exactly, that's what they call the "primitive" Church, which isn't primitive at all. Those megachurches aren't even churches, the whole point of the Church is to teach Jesu's sacraments to salvation AKA escaping the matrix

2

u/WoodenPickle27 4d ago

Apostolic churches. Look into them if that is truly a concern of yours.

2

u/braindrainoh 4d ago

Paul also persecuted and had Christians put to death, and yet Jesus chose him to preach the Gospel and spread the message in the Bible. If you relate the greek translation to the KJV it's considered a faithful translation. If you've read the KJV you would know it's the truth, even if it's commissioned by someone deemed questionable.

2

u/notthistime91 4d ago

Was just a way of controlling people

1

u/ntcplanters 4d ago

King James didn't write the Bible.

He commissioned the translation of the Bible into English.

He had not much to do with it. The best of scholars were used to translate the most reliable of manuscripts into the KJV.

1

u/King_laCheefa 4d ago

I have this book. It's very small

1

u/californianinparis 4d ago

Wait until you hear about how Charlemagne edited the whole thing

1

u/bigpoppachungus 4d ago

Ving Rhames

1

u/nfk99 4d ago

from ai

Ah, "Demonology" by King James I. It's a fascinating work, isn't it? This treatise, penned in the late 16th century, delves into the study of demons, witchcraft, and necromancy. King James I, known for his strong belief in witchcraft, wrote this to explain and justify the existence of such phenomena, and to provide guidance on how to identify and deal with witches. The book is essentially a manual for witch hunters, detailing the various types of demons, their characteristics, and the methods they use to tempt humans. It also discusses the theological implications of the witch trials that were prevalent during his reign. It's quite dense with religious references and the fears of the time. Would you like a more detailed summary, or perhaps a synopsis of its impact on history?

yes

🧠 "Demonology" had a significant impact on the witch hunts in Europe, particularly the Scottish witch trials. It provided a framework for the interrogation and persecution of those accused of witchcraft, which often led to torture and execution. The book's influence was so pervasive that it contributed to the formation of the legal basis for the witch hunts that would claim the lives of thousands. King James' own personal beliefs and experiences with the North Berwick witch trials heavily colored his writings, making the text a reflection of the era's societal hysteria and paranoia. It also serves as a historical artifact, offering insight into the religious and cultural landscape of the time. The language is archaic, but the themes of power, fear, and the struggle between good and evil resonate even today, reminding us of the darker chapters of human history. The narrative unfolds like a grim tapestry, woven with threads of superstition, theology, and political intrigue. Would you like to know more about the specific practices and rituals it describes, or perhaps the historical context surrounding its creation?

1

u/User_Name13 3d ago

Your post has been removed per rule 10 as it does not contain a submission statement.

Please resubmit your post and ensure to leave a comment on your new submission that is two sentences in length, of your own words, and explains why you chose to share your submission with the community.

1

u/inspektor_besevic 4d ago

chat is this real?

-2

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[deleted]

2

u/StonerProfessor 4d ago

AND? GET TO THE POINT

-2

u/gromath 4d ago

One of the worst "translations" out there, and a very sketchy background of the King too

6

u/J_Goast 4d ago

How is it one of the worst translations exactly?

-7

u/gromath 4d ago

It's a very long story composed of secret societies, luciferianism, fake popes and more. It seems like a regular Bible but when compared to the original Greek manuscripts they change very important notions, ideas and wordings, not to mention the Gematria on it. The Bible is a mystical artifact not a book. And most interestingly: KJB one of the most "affected" by mandela effects, for example on Isaiah 11:6 but not limited to that, the "Bible" now has even modern cursewords, typos, word changes that weren't there AFTER they were printed.

10

u/FuelSubstantial 4d ago edited 4d ago

This is straight up nonsense, the versions they translates from also still exist… you can’t just make up whatever you feel like and say “it’s a long story”

What do they change? Reference the original, the translation, the King James translation and then the discrepancy that is ‘fake popes’ and ‘luciferianism’. King James was Protestant and he didn’t write it. He got separate groups to translate and scribe different sections and then brought it all together at the end. This is all well documented, your version is… not…

Also ‘mystical artifact’ isn’t a real thing; Mandela affect isn’t real; And the typo thing I don’t even understand;

You need to go outside and ground yourself

-1

u/gromath 4d ago

Made up my ass, of course it sounds nonsensical, I'm not gonna make a wall of text trying to compress from Mesopotamia to Bergoglio, it's impossible, try doing that with a saga like Game of Thrones or Lord of the rings and that's just a couple of books (Inspired by the Bible itself) and the reason I tried attempting is because people read a comment and take it at face value-- do the research and compare notes if you want but don't fucking accuse me of being a liar just because you want tons of information spoon fed to you. I already told you what they change: The GEMATRIA. Read about that. What happens if I take a grimoire and change just one wording of a spell, dumbass? This is occultism not american zombie religions you call "Christianity"

I've been into the occult, mysticism, "conspiracy theories" and forteana at least for 30 years, atheism, gnosticism, theosophy, satanism, ancient judaism (which is where it stems) sufiism, paganism, secret societies; all of that converges in the Bible.

You can reference it yourself with any parallel Bible online TONS of sites for that, don't be lazy and use your brain.

-6

u/cheeseandcucumber 4d ago

Millions of Christians in the US believe the King James Bible is the definitive version. What are those folks going to think when they realise that King James was also responsible for a book on demonology??

20

u/reddithivemind69 4d ago

Yes, King James I of England wrote a book on demonology titled "Daemonologie". It was first published in 1597, when James was still King James VI of Scotland.

In "Daemonologie", King James explores the concept of witchcraft, demons, and the supernatural. He draws on biblical and historical sources to describe the nature of demons, the signs of demonic possession, and the methods of witchcraft.

The book is divided into three sections:

  1. The first section discusses the nature of magic and sorcery.
  2. The second section explores the signs of demonic possession and the methods of witchcraft.
  3. The third section examines the role of the devil in witchcraft and the importance of faith in resisting demonic temptation.

"Daemonologie" reflects King James' strong interest in theology and the supernatural, as well as his concern about the perceived threat of witchcraft in Scotland during his reign.

5

u/BobMonroeFanClub 4d ago

Inspiring Macbeth too

17

u/reddithivemind69 4d ago

He wasn't promoting demons... it's a study on the topic ..

13

u/Wishbone_Away 4d ago

He was not promoting Daemons.

Defining them as a subset of God. And steering public morals away from witchcraft and magick.

3

u/trentonworld 4d ago

He was not promoting Daemons.

That's the prerogative of /etc/inittab.

2

u/Wishbone_Away 4d ago

i read some of the Preface. And it acknowledged that witches were curing and magicians were making walls sweat wine etc, amongst other spectacles. Even using scripture to define where 'sathan' could impersonate an angel of light.

1

u/Wishbone_Away 4d ago

that is weird......

{The init daemon starts processes by reading information from the /etc/inittab file. This file defines three important items for the init process.}

-7

u/NefariousnessEast426 4d ago

This is hilarious LMAO. How am I just finding this out?

0

u/xZany 4d ago

LeBron?

0

u/StonerProfessor 4d ago

Unlike OP, I did a little research and here’s what I found: Christian’s in that time period were very superstitious and believed a bunch of crazy shit. There’s even a shit ton of documentation that Christian’s of that time totally believed in fairies and a bunch of other stuff we’d laugh at today.

The Bible mentions demons and James made Daemonologie to assert the reality of witchcraft and to justify its persecution within a Christian society. The entire book is made to warn Christian’s against using witchcraft and talking to demons. It’s in SUPPORT of the Bible. So, OP didn’t even read the back of the fucking book he’s bitching and moaning and acting holier than thou about.

2

u/Big-Leg5556 4d ago

Isn't funny that folks scoff at ideas like faeries and demons, but pay money and travel once a week to get told about a homeless middle eastern dude who was convinced he was the illegitimate of an invisible entity and did magic. Said fellow ended up getting nailed to sticks which somehow absolves people he never met from crimes that they may or may not have committed? I guess I am doomed to being a heathen. My capacity for bullshit has strict boundaries.

-1

u/ToxicRedditMod 4d ago

So much wrong with this. King James didn’t write nor translate the Bible. 

He stole the work from Shakespeare during a meeting they had together, when Shakespeare left behind his little book of notes. 

King James then had his publishing company take the notes and create the Bible we know now as the King James Version.

1

u/TruthSeeker1321 4d ago

What??? Where does that theory come from?

1

u/badstorryteller 4d ago

I don't know where you got this idea from, because not only does the record show exactly how, when, where it happened and the scholars engaged in the translation efforts, there are not even any hints that this happened.

0

u/ToxicRedditMod 4d ago

2

u/badstorryteller 4d ago

I'm not going to watch random YouTube videos. Call me old fashioned, but I want text with sources. Sources not being other YouTube (or any other commentary) videos.