What I find particularly interesting with old Bibles is the extra information that is included by the publisher, separate from the scripture – such as this detailed chronology in the margins (see images below).
When you look at the well-used old Bibles for sale on the second-hand market on sites like Abebooks and eBay (I check them often), they mostly have the standard pure Authorised Version KJV text.
This is important, as God promised to preserve his pure words for all generations (Psalms 12:6-7). The scriptures also say that the word works effectually in you if you receive it as the word of God, not as the word of man (1 Thessalonians 2:13).
The Authorised Version KJV is the only Bible the shills try to undermine, the only one with any fruit.
Don’t let some satanist invert try to get you to defend the fake King James character we are told about in secular history, in order to justify your faith in the scriptures. In my opinion, the Holy Roman Empire never existed, neither did the Crusades.
When people think about today’s standardised KJV format, they often refer to the so-called Oxford 1769 Blayney version – there’s facsimiles of it readily available today.
However, the first KJV with standardised spelling is (according to the narrative) actually the 1762 Cambridge version attributed to Dr F. S Paris of Sidney Sussex College and H. Therold of Magdalene.
While I don’t buy the whole narrative around Blayney, Paris etc and the history that has been built up around how we got our Bibles, I have noticed that many of the most expensive used old Authorised Version Bibles are based on this 1762 Cambridge format.
The 1762 Cambridge version has basically been whitewashed from history – the official story is that the originals were mostly burned in a warehouse fire. The fire narrative is always used when they are trying to cover up our true history.
These old Bibles include some extremely interesting extra information – I’m not saying the extra material is scripture or 100% fact, but it is definitely worth looking at.
For example from Genesis onwards in the margins it dates every chapter according to the time before or after Christ.
Creation is listed as 4004 years before the common year of Christ, but there’s also references to chronology related to the cycle of the sun, cycle of the moon, Julian Period, Dominical Letter, Indiction – if anyone can interpret any of this let me know.
Next to the start of the gospel of Matthew in the margins it has the date as “The fifth year before the common account called Anno. Dom.”
There are also detailed index tables included in this 1762 Cambridge format Bible that go through the entire biblical history and the big events of scripture and show you where they lined up in the timeline.
This is extremely useful and shows you that the Bible is actually telling us true history – no wonder they remove this extra detail from today’s Bibles. It also conflicts with the secular narrative that says we are on an earth that is millions of years old – as creation was only 4000 years before Christ.
There are also detailed bonus articles included in this version that explain weights, measures, coins etc – i’ve tried to include some screenshots I’ve found but you will have to zoom in to see the detail.
It’s tricky now to find this version of the KJV which has all this chronology included, but they come up on the second hand market.
I’m not saying the chronology included is correct – one aspect I found interesting is in the book of Revelation it seems to date it in the margins at 96 AD, i’m assuming that is supposed to tell us John received the visions in 96 AD.
From the internal evidence of Revelation it’s clear it was written before the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, which we are told in secular history occurred in 70 AD.
However, the 70 AD date relies mainly on questionable historians like Josephus, Roman historians and the “early church fathers” – which we don’t know if we can rely on. Certainly a lot of shill historians and scholars refer to Josephus and the so-called church fathers, which makes me doubt those accounts.
What we can take to the bank is that Jesus promised in scripture to return quickly to the same generation. I always will trust the scriptures as 100% truth but be careful when you are relying on secular history accounts in order to confirm or deny scripture, as that is where you can end up with some seriously false doctrine, as we know secular history and scholarship is a lie.
