Part One - Was king James a homosexual or a Freemason?
Part Two - Is the King James Bible a Masonic Bible filled with occult symbols?
And Part Three is a short piece on the Urban Legend that Sir Francis Bacon had anything to do with translating the King James Bible.
3 minute 30 second video by David Daniels and Jack McElroy
Short and to the point.
Was King James Gay? Part 2. Seven minute video follow up by David Daniels.
See also these two articles -
Was King James a Homosexual?
And - Erasmus, King James, and His Translators
The Real Story of king James, by Dr. Phil Stringer
44 minute video showing how the rumors about king James being a homo got started.
WAS KING JAMES A HOMOSEXUAL?
King James I of England was one of the greatest kings the country has ever known. He was fluent in Greek, Latin, and French in addition to being schooled in Italian and Spanish. This same James once wrote a tract against the use of tobacco in hopes of curtailing its use in England. Such a tract angered many and no doubt produced enemies.
One of the King's bitterest enemies was Anthony Weldon. He had been excluded from the court of King‚ James and had sworn vengeance. Twenty-five years later (1650), after James had died, Weldon wrote a paper alleging James to be a homosexual. Obviously the King could not defend himself. But even then there were enough people still alive who knew King James and knew this accusation was not true. Therefore the rumor died.
In his book "King James Unjustly Accused" Stephen A. Coston Sr. states on page 287 "No less than three contemporary and professional historians (Sanderson, Heylyn, and Wood) sharply disagreed with those who hinted of James over fondness for male favorites. The testimony of these three, and the host of other men I have cited cannot be ignored, yet is ignored by those critical sources who seek to paint James as a homosexual."
Do you know how many children James and his wife Anne had together? EIGHT children. Only three of them reached adulthood, the other five died at birth or within the first year or two. This is all documented on pages 78-79 of King James Unjustly Accused.
This malicious allegation of James being a homosexual has been largely ignored until more recent years when it has been picked up by those who have tried to discredit the King James Bible.
One example occured in 1985 when MOODY MONTHLY published two articles about King James: "The Real King James" by Karen Ann Wojahn and "The Bible That Bears His Name" by Leslie Keylock (July/August, pp. 87-89). Although the writers could furnish no documentation, this "Christian" publication, when requested many times, refused to investigate or print the other side of the story.
If King James was a homosexual then he may have been the first one history to write passionate love letters to his wife who bore him eight children, and to have written a serious commentary on the book of Revelation in addition to a devotional entitled "Meditations on the Lord's Prayer".
In 1603 James wrote the following to his wife Anne:
"...I thank God I carry that love and respect unto you which, by the law of God and nature, I ought to do to my wife and mother of my children. . . For the respect of your honorable earth and descent I married you; but the love and respect I now bear you for that ye are my married wife and so partaker of my honour, as of all my other fortunes... Where ye were a king's or cook's daughter ye must be all alike to me being one my wife."
The fact remains that nowhere in history is there any documentation of King James having been a homosexual, only rumors and allegations.
(Anyone interested in a more thorough study of this might wish to read the book, KING JAMES UNJUSTLY ACCUSED by Stephen A. Coston, Sr., a man who is an authority on the life of this same king.)
Actually, since he fathered eight children, he couldn't have been much of a homosexual! He wrote love letters to his wife and obviously enjoyed her most intimate company. He referred to her as "our dearest bedfellow" (Gustavus Paine, The Men Behind the King James Version, p. 4).
In a book that the king wrote for his son Henry (entitled Basilikon Doron, or A King's Gift), he made the following statements about the importance of sexual purity:
"But the principal blessing is in your marrying of a godly and virtuous wife? being flesh of your flesh and bone of your bone? Marriage is the greatest earthly felicity" (p. 43).
"Keep your body clean and unpolluted while you give it to your wife whom to only it belongs for how can you justly crave to be joined with a Virgin if your body be polluted?" (p. 44).
"When you are married, keep inviolably your promise made to God in your marriage" (p. 45).
"Abstain from the filthy vice of adultery; remember only what solemn promise ye made to God at your marriage" (p. 54).
The king wrote plainly against the sin of homosexuality.
"Especially eschew to be effeminate" (Basilikon Doron, p. 46).
"There are some horrible crimes that ye are bound in conscience never to forgive: such as witchcraft, willful murder, incest, and sodomy" (p. 48).
The charge of homosexuality was made by the king's enemies and only after his death. Stephen Coston's book King James the VI of Scotland and the I of England Unjustly Accused? (St. Petersburg, FL: Konigswort, 1996) makes the case that the charge was slanderous and untrue. The charge was first made by Anthony Weldon, who had been expelled from his office by James for political reasons and had sworn that he would have his day of vengeance. Weldon not only hated James, he hated the entire Scottish race.
Historian Maurice Lee, Jr., warned, "Historians can and should ignore the venomous caricature of the king's person and behavior drawn by Anthony Weldon" (Great Britain's Solomon: James VI & I (New York: Oxford University Press, 1956) and Christopher Durston, James I (London: Routledge, 1993).
THE REAL STORY OF KING JAMES I
WAS KING JAMES REALLY THE UNGODLY MAN THAT HIS MODERN CRITICS PROCLAIM HIM TO BE?
By Dr. Phil Stringer
Landmark Baptist College Press
Notes from the Internet
"But what if he was a homo?"
In the discussion about the inerrancy of The Bible - NO King James Bible critic REALLY believes there IS such a thing in print anywhere on this earth in any language - I have run into one or two Bible agnostics (they don't know for sure what God said in many places) who just will not give it up about king James supposedly being a homosexual.
So, just for the sake of argument, I ask them - "OK. What IF king James were a flaming faggot? I don't believe he was, but what if you are right and he was. So what? What difference would this make?
Look at some of the men God himself used to give us his inspired words. King David was both a murderer and an adulterer. King Solomon promoted the open idolatry of his many pagan wives and tried to kill the man he knew God had chosen to reign after him. Noah was a drunkard and yet God prophesied through him. Moses was a murderer who killed an Egyptian and then ran for his life. Paul hunted down and killed Christians. Peter denied the Lord with cursing and swearing, and the apostle John twice tried to worship an angel. King James did not write or translate a single word of the King James Bible, but God directly and repeatedly used men like Moses, David, Solomon, Noah, Peter, Paul and John to give us his inspired words of truth.
Is homosexuality somehow worse than being a murderer? Like I said, I don't believe the accusation that king James was a homo is true at all, but even supposing that it is, what real difference would this make regarding the inerrancy of the King James Bible? God himself used men who were guilty of great crimes to give us those long lost "original autographs" in the first place.
The Bible agnostics themselves do not believe in the inerrancy of ANY Bible - except maybe for those non-existent, never seen by them "originals" which never DID make up an entire Bible. They are just LOOKING for an excuse to continue in their unbelief and they LIKE being their own authority.
Whether king James were a homosexual or not would have nothing at all to do with whether or not God could in some way use him to bring forth his perfect, complete and inerrant words of truth.
Notes from the Internet
There is another wild story going around the internet saying that king James was a Mason. Here is a site that refutes this ridiculous claim. See also the references to the alleged "masonic handshakes".
PROOF THAT KING JAMES WAS NOT A FREEMASON & THE 1611 KJV IS NOT A MASONIC BIBLE
Article refuting the idea that king James was a Mason
King James was NOT a FREEMASON!!!!!!!!! 100% PROOF!!!!!!
Many lies pass around the internet in an attempt to discredit the King James Bible. A very popular one is that King James was a freemason, A close examination of the facts proves this to be a LIE!!!!
13 minute video on Youtube.
Was king James a closet Catholic?
Let's play a little game of Fact and Fiction:
James wrote in his work Basilicon Doron that:
"There are some horrible crimes that ye are bound in conscience never to forgive: such as witchcraft, willful murder, incest, and sodomy."
There is no recorded objective documentation that King James ever practiced or promoted sodomy, the historical record only knows of King James' heterosexuality and condemnation of sodomy.
"There are a number of recorded statements in which James justified homosexuality/sodomy...King James was a homosexual monarch."
King James condemned "soft delicacies" in a man more than once:
"But especially eschew to be effeminate in your clothes, in perfuming, preening, or such like...and make not a fool of yourself in diguising or wearing long your hair or nails, which are but excrements of nature...Guard against corrupt leide and effeminate ones."
The King also condemned "female transvestism" by instructing the clergy by royal order and express commandment to inveigh vehemently in their sermons against the faddish practice.
James was effeminate and encouraged his favorites to also be effeminate.
King James wrote to his wife Queen Anne:
"I thank God I carry that love and respect unto you which by the law of God and nature, I ought to do to my wife and mother of my children...for the respect of your honorable birth and decent I married you but the love and respect I now bear you for that ye are my married wife and so partaker of my honor...God as my witness ever I preferred you to all my bairns much more than any subject (signed) Your Own, James Rex."
King James also wrote love poetry to his wife and in addition to this James also wrote of Anne:
"...if it were possible for me to love her better than ever I did before it were my part to do it."
After her death, James wrote, "She was an excellent wife to us...she has left a great longing for her." The Mighty King James had 8 children with his wife Queen Anne.
King James did not love his wife, disliked the institution of marriage and women in general.
All this and more is documented in King James VI of Scotland & I of England -Unjustly Accused? Read for yourself the actual facts surrounding the life and character of King James VI & I. The contemporary and modern critics are put into proper perspective and the real life of this much misunderstood monarch is clearly brought to light. This full length historical work makes it evident that the facts are at odds with the fiction. Ben Johnson's comments made in James' own time are timely and applicable even today:
"And there must go much more to the make of a guilty man than rumor."
The court is now in session, read for yourself what has been hidden on the shelves of libraries around the world and which will now travel through the reaches of time to vanquish ignorance and repression of the Godly character of one of the most famous and learned princes of the Jacobean world - King James VI & I.
Part Two - Is the King James Bible a Masonic Bible filled with occult symbols?
Is the King James Bible a Masonic Bible?
There are now several sites and videos and articles being circulated (they mostly copy from each other) that claim the King James Bible shows clear signs of being a “Kabbalistic Rosicrucian/Masonic bible filled with occult symbols and images. The main promoter of this Conspiracy Theory is a man named David Bay, from Cutting Edge Ministries.
You can see his article for yourself here -
Mr. Bay and others have to go into great detail to explain the occultic meaning of these symbols, and the reason for this is that most people simply have never noticed or considered them as such. So if the intent of the printer, Robert Barker, or someone allegedly under the influence of Francis Bacon, was to influence Christians to begin worshipping Satan or Baphomet, it didn’t work. And this is due to the fact that most Christians would have no idea what these symbols supposedly mean.
Mr. Bay claims the “handshake” seen on some pages is the “Masonic handshake”, but this is not true. The picture shows a man and a woman’s hands (not two men) and it is a symbol of marriage. In fact, Adam and Eve are both clearly named alongside the handshake.
He claims the picture of a goat found on one of the pages is none other than Baphomet or Satan. Yet, it may just be a goat since there are also pictures of a lamb and other animals that were used in the O.T. sacrificial system.
There are pictures of many animals found in the Bible, like the lamb, the lion, the snake, the bull, an eagle, other birds and angels. Remember the scapegoat on the day of Atonement. And the central animal seen in both these woodcuts (one at the beginning of the O.T. and the other at the beginning of the N.T.) is a Lamb as it had been slain, which obviously is the Lord Jesus Christ.
But even supposing that Mr. Bay is right and somebody put or allowed these woodcut pictures of “occult symbols” including Neptune, and Pan and the devil, to be depicted in pictures in the King James Bible during its first printings (you won’t find them there today), the question remains “So what?”
Most people never knew what they meant or even paid more than a passing glance at them. Even Mr. Bay affirms that the actual TEXT of the King James Bible was in no way affected by these symbols.
Mr. Bay himself, like ALL King James Bible critics, does not himself believe that ANY Bible in ANY language is now or ever was the complete and inerrant words of God, and he himself uses and quotes from The Amplified Bible. The Amplified Bible is a complete paraphrase and it’s base text is the Vatican supervised, ever changing Critical Greek text. And THIS we can prove. It is not a hypothetical Conspiracy Theory.
This is where his criticisms of the King James Bible have led the man. He has NO inerrant Bible to believe in, and now he is using one of the Vatican “comic book” versions sanctioned by the Roman Catholic Church.
Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard, NET, Jehovah Witness NWT etc. are the new "Vatican Versions" Part One - the Documentation
Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, Holman Standard, NET, NASBs, Jehovah Witness NWT are the new "Vatican Versions" Part TWO, which shows the whole verses, phrases and word omissions common to them all.
What about the 1611 King James Bible Calendar? Is there a Catholic Connection?
Two King James Bible bashers who kept posting their list of “errors” in the KJB, which they picked up from other bible agnostics like themselves, were using a list of printing errors they got from a guy named Rick Beckman, who at one time openly admitted he was “unashamedly atheistic”, but later took it down, and by an Orthodox Catholic on Youtube.
There was a Calendar in the original printing of the King James Bible. And this Orthodox Catholic on Youtube was trying to draw a connection between the KJB and the Catholic church.
KJB Calendar - Popery
Here is my response to a fellow King James Bible believer who was dealing with these two bible critics.
“Hi Vincent P. These two bible agnostics and unbelievers in ANY Bible in any language as being the complete and inerrant words of God (but they are too dishonest to admit it) are flat out lying about the KJB translators being pro-Catholic or Freemasons, let alone into astrology.
They are making this stuff up in an effort to slander God's perfect book.
The site these bible mockers put up is by an Orthodox Catholic who is trying to make a link between the King James Bible and the Catholic church.
The Catholic church never did approve of the Textus Receptus. No Catholic bible version ever used the Greek text of Erasmus to make up their translations, but ALL Reformation bibles did use Erasmus, Stephanus and Beza as their textual basis.
In fact, the Council of Trent (1545-1564) branded Erasmus a heretic and prohibited his works. In 1559, Pope Paul IV placed Erasmus on the first class of forbidden authors, which was composed of authors whose works were completely condemned.
There was a Calendar in the original KJB and you can see it in the reprint you can get from Nelson Publishers. I have a hard copy of it.
The Calendar is obviously not part of the Bible but was put there for historical reasons. Everybody in England was aware of religious holidays and the names of different religious figures in both the Protestant and the Catholic church. Both churches were free to worship after their manner and the customs of the Catholic church were well known to all.
The Calendar just makes note of these days in the calendar year so people could be aware of them. There is NO endorsement or approval of any of them on the part of the King James Bible translators.
The Calendar just made it possible for the common folk to know more about the religious environment and customs of the day on the part of both the Protestant and the Catholic churches.
These Bible bashers are trying to make it sound as though the KJB translators were mixed up in and approved of the Catholic church and its doctrines - which they openly criticized and preached against - and it is ludicrous to imply that they were into astrology of Freemasonry.
Many of the images and animals these King James Bible critics tell us are Masonic symbols are NOT that at all. The alleged "Masonic handshake" shown in the KJB is the hand of a man and a woman. Not two men. The handshake between a man and a woman was a symbol of marriage.
As for the animals, we see many of these same animals in the Geneva Bible. It is hard to make out some of the images, but there is a lion for Judah, a snake for Dan, a deer for Nehptali, what looks like another animal for Isacar, what looks like a goat for Joseph, some other animal for Benjamin, a sword for Simeon. These are not Masonic symbols. Just because the Masons use certain animals for their symbols as well, does not mean that they meant the same things for the KJB translators.
The fact of the matter is that the modern "bibles" these Bible agnostic clowns (Patrick Callaghan and John Lennox) are promoting like the ESV, NIV, NASB are based on the same "inter confessional" text that is common to the modern Catholic versions and the Jehovah Witness NWT, and it is under the direct supervision of the Vatican. They come right out and tell you this on page 45 of the Nestle-Aland 27th edition of their critical Greek textbook.
You can see the documented proof here -
Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard, NET, Jehovah Witness NWT etc. are the new "Vatican Versions"
As for the anti Popery of king James and the other translators, it is well known to anybody who actually looks into the matter.
Here are some quotes by king James.
King James made the following remarks concerning the Pope and Roman Catholicism:
"... Popery is in deed The mysterie of iniquitie ..." -- 1605 Speech to Parliament
"... blinde superstition of their errors in Religion ... led them to this device [The Gunpowder Plot] ..." -- 1605 Speech to Parliament
"The ground of all true ... religion, and ... service ... that brings salvation ... is to bee situate in Jesus Christ onely ... Act. 4:12 ..." -- Meditation Upon I Chron. 15:25-29
"The Pope is Antichrist ..." -- Meditation Upon Revelation 20:7-10
"Antichrist and his clergie ... not only infect the earth ... but rule also over the whole ..." -- Meditation Upon Revelation 20:7-10
"... Is it a small corrupting of the Scriptures to make all, or the most part of the Apocrypha of equall faith with the canonicall Scriptures ...?" -- A Premonition to All Most Mightie Monarches
"The Scripture forbiddeth to worship the Image of any thing that God created ..." -- A Premonition to All Most Mightie Monarches
"Christ did not promise ... to leave Peter with them to direct and instruct them in all things; but he promised to send the holy Ghost for that end." -- A Premonition to All Most Mightie Monarches
"Rome is the Seat of the Antichrist." -- A Premonition to All Most Mightie Monarches
Another reason to like king James!
What about the "pagan gods" pictures in the King James Bible?
Some Bible critics will latch on to anything they can find in an effort to degrade and criticize the King James Bible, even though not one of them will ever show you a copy of any Bible in any language that they honestly believe is now or ever was the complete and inerrant words of God.
One of the criticisms these Bible agnostics (they do not know for sure what God said - a = not + gnostic = to know) is that the artwork (not the TEXT) of the King James Bible included some pagan gods and goddesses like Pan, Daphne and Neptune.
Thus they claim that the KJB translators were promoting the worship of such pagan deities.
Well, it’s all in the interpretation of why they were included in the artwork and what the intention was.
Here is a well done article showing why these images were found (though not in most copies of the KJB you can buy today) in the original printing of the King James Bible.
Artwork within the Original King James Bible
Truths of Theology & Answers for Mythology
A presentation for a conference in Carthage, TX celebrating the 400th anniversary of the King James Version
by Rev. Eric Alan Greene
Pastor of Thomson Memorial Presbyterian Church (P.C.A.) Centreville, Mississippi
March 11, 2011
Mr. Greene first explains a lot of the Biblical significance of most of the images that were found on the title page, and then he discusses the few “pagan gods” images found on some of the others.
Under the heading of 1. The Death of False Gods
Mr. Greene writes : “the publishers of the King James Bible knew the famous myths of history and continued the evangelistic work of leading these futile superstitions to the truth in Jesus Christ. Their drawings can be understood as celebrating the church’s triumph over paganism. These pagan gods are merely quarantined on the pages of Holy Scripture, so whatever truths these myths sought for and desired – all such longings would be fulfilled in the gospel of scripture.
The King James Bible critics will latch on to anything they can find or make up to try to discredit the KJB, and promote their Roman Catholic supervised Comic Book versions like the ESV, NASB or NIV and themselves as their own final authority.
They see what they want to see, and no matter what evidence is presented that vindicates the KJB, they will reject it out of hand.
For these Bible critics to even suggest that the God fearing, Bible believing King James Bible translators would in some weird way be promoting the validity or worship of these pagan gods is the height of absurdity.
It just shows how incredibly desperate people like this get when they want to overthrow the absolute authority and truth of the King James Bible, to which the sovereign God has born witness in so many ways as being His perfect Book.
Return to Articles - http://brandplucked.webs.com/kjbarticles.htm
Here is a video discussion about the King James Bible and the different views about the Bible as held by those who are not King James Bible believers. It also addresses the claim that king James was a Mason.
Did Sir Francis Bacon help Translate the King James Bible?
Was The KJV Written By Sir Francis Bacon?
This is no more than an absurd Urban Legend being promoted by Occultists, Muslims and New Agers.
(4 minute video) on “Was the KJV Written by Sir Francis Bacon?
There was no tampering with the text of the manuscripts by Bacon, and that is easily proven by anyone who can read and translate Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic, or one can get copies of the various Textus Receptus copies and manuscripts used by the King James Bible translators and prove their work.
We know a great deal about all the previous English bibles and foreign language bibles that the KJB translators used and compared when they made their translation. No where in the text of the King James Bible do we see nor can anyone prove that Francis Bacon had any influence whatsoever on the English text.
It is an Urban Myth that has no historical or documented validity.
Here is an article that shows what the Textual Resources were that the King James Bible translators used in bringing forth this masterpiece.
What textual sources did the King James Bible translators use?
From the Internet
THE ORIGINS OF THE ATTACK ON KING JAMES
There is no record of anyone accusing King James of homosexual behavior during his lifetime. If you read most modern historians, you would believe that King James's homosexuality was open and widely recognized but this is far from the truth. There are absolutely no contemporary accounts alleging homosexuality on King James's part though there are contemporary accounts praising him for his moral virtue.
Sir Anthony Welden was an officer in the royal household of King James. He was knighted by King James in 1617. He was eventually dismissed from the royal court by King James. He vowed to get revenge!
He supported the anti-monarchy forces during the English Civil War. Twenty-five years after the death of King James, (one year after the execution of Charles I, King James's son) Welden made the first accusations of homosexuality against King James. His statements were widely rejected at the time because there were still too many living people who had known King James personally and who dismissed the allegations as ridiculous.
Disgruntled courtiers and political opponents picked up the allegations against King James and began to use innuendo to hurt his reputation. While not accusing him directly of homosexuality, they tried to create questions about his loyalties to his close friends and associates. These seventeenth century critics seem to fall into two groups. Some had their political and personal ambitions thwarted by King James. Others opposed his policy of uniting Scotland and England into one kingdom. All of these allegations come from people with a strong bias against James and they all were made a long time after his death.
Some historians began to repeat these attacks against King James without investigation. Soon vague allegations, rumor, innuendo and speculations were reported as historical fact. While some historians have sifted through the rumors to get the facts, many just repeated the statements of previous historians without any examination.
In the eighteenth century the primary reporters of King James's homosexuality, were those who opposed the union of Great Britain and also Roman Catholics who resented the support that James gave Protestants. In the twentieth century two different groups have clung to the allegations about King James and propagated them in defiance of the facts.
Homosexual activists have been determined to claim King James as one of their own. These are the same activists who claim that Abraham Lincoln, William Shakespeare, the Biblical King David and Jonathan and even Jesus Christ were really homosexuals. Historical facts means nothing to these people. They care only about their political and social agenda. It is a travesty when evangelicals quote their books as credible sources. The second group which refuses to be persuaded by the facts about King James are those who wish to use King James's supposed homosexuality to discredit the King James Bible.
In 1985, Moody Monthly magazine alerted the evangelical world to the allegations that King James was a homosexual. These charges came in an article entitled The Real King James by Karen Ann Wojahn. No evidence was provided. The article was accompanied by The Bible That Bears His Name by Leslie Keylock, This article was an attack on the King James Bible. Numerous attempts have been made to get Moody Monthly to either document or withdraw the charges made in these articles but fourteen years later neither has been done.
Despite the lack of evidence (and in spite of the evidence to the contrary) some evangelicals are quick to use the baseless accusations against King James to bolster their attacks on the King James Bible. But facts are contrary things! King James never claimed to be a homosexual. He was never accused of being one during his life time. No one ever claimed to see James in a homosexual situation. The accusations against him, past and present, stem from bias and not from fact. The character and record of King James clearly refutes the charges of homosexuality against King James.