"Not One Iote or One Title...":  A Plea for Original Spelling

by John Bookman [Pseudo.]

 

[Attention--this is a SATIRE]

 

Just days ago, I realized that we have not gone far enough in insisting that the Bible be preserved unchanged "in the form God intended for us to have."  Of course, I speak of the infallible, inerrant, verbally-inspired and unalterably preserved English Bible, the Authorized Version (AV 1611), "the Bible God uses and Satan hates."  Sure, there are lots of zealous defenders who have shielded it from the corruptions of such heinous translations as the NIV, the NASB and that most sinister NKJB, and have kept us from returning to the now-completely-unnecessary Hebrew and Greek.  But while they kept their watch on one front, the Enemy has come in unawares by another route and sown seeds of corruption that have, I fear, already yielded a corrupt harvest.

  What am I getting at?  Simply this: we have insisted on the verbal inspiration of the English, that is, that the very English words were divinely chosen and given to the Learned Men.  But simply insisting on the perfection of the English words and preserving the words is not enough.  A careful consideration of the true intent and meaning of the words of Matthew 5:18 is necessary: "Till heauen and earth passe, one iote or one title, shall in no wise passe from the law, till all be fulfilled."  (I have made no mistake in my spelling, as I shall shortly explain).  Notice how Jesus insisted on the verbal inspiration, not just of the words, but also of the very letters of the words of Scripture.  And since this verse is a specific promise of the preservation of Scripture in our infallible English Bible, we must insist on following, not just the original KJV words but also their very spelling.  What other meaning can we draw out of the words "one iote or one title"?  Every letter--the very spelling--is certainly inspired, and to alter the spelling of a single word, to alter even a single letter in a single word, is to deny and reject the inspiration of the AV 1611.  If God had wanted us to spell the words in the AV 1611 different in our Bibles, He would have given them to us in that form originally.  Modern spelling is as hideous and hateful a thing as modern translations.  It’s new age corruption, pure and simple.  No one was ever authorized to corrupt, to "modernize" the infallible original spelling.  There are eight spelling corruptions in John 3:16 alone!!!

  I'm sure some "liberal" soul will say, "What difference does spelling make?"  Argue it out with Jesus, brother!  Didn't He say that inspiration of the words included the very spelling, every iote, not just the words?  Will you reject the teaching of Matthew 5:18 of letter/spelling inspiration of our preserved AV 1611?  To stop at "word inspiration" and not insist on spelling inspiration is to be second cousin to mere "thought inspiration." It is creeping apostasy, through and through.  Next someone will deny the inspiration of the chapter and verse numberings in the AV 1611.  Where will it stop?

  And I think we must recognize that Jesus' infallible English word was "title" and not the now-corrupted "tittle."  A tittle is part of the ornamentation of a Hebrew letter (at least that's what I've heard at Fellowship meetings, so I have assurance that it's right).  But a title is something else.  I have complete confidence that this promise of Jesus was a specific reference to the preservation of the chapter and page headings, the titles found in the original AV 1611.  Sadly, those infallible titles, attached by the Learned Men under divine inspiration at the top of each page and at the beginning of each chapter have been removed from our modern editions.  Without them, we cannot claim that we have a perfectly preserved Bible, and by allowing them to be removed, we have called God a liar, and denied that He is able to preserve the inspired English Bible He has given us.

  It is no secret that none of the commonly used English Bibles published in our day have the original AV 1611 spelling, or punctuation (that, too, is part of our directly inspired, infallible English Bible) or titles of which Jesus spoke, so in reality, these Bibles, even though they say "King James Version" or "Authorized Version" are really not Bibles at all.  Only the Nelson reprint of the original 1611 AV is a real Bible; all the others are sinister corruptions. 

  And there is growing upon me the deep conviction, as deep as anything I've written in this article, that no English-speaking person can be saved if he was not saved by an original, unaltered AV 1611, with original spelling, original punctuation, and original chapter and page titles.  This simply means that anyone who thought he was saved by reading a revised "KJV" or by hearing a sermon from such a "Bible" or by reading a Gospel tract that quoted the words in a revised spelling form, even if it was labelled "KJV" is not really saved, has never been saved, and never will be saved until he gets a true, fully-preserved AV 1611.  That will mean that virtually all those who thought they were saved--preachers, deacons and all--will have to go back and get truly saved through a real AV 1611, then get rebaptized.  Verbal inspiration of the English requires inspiration of the very spelling as well.  Anything less is rank modernism.

  I will confess to one further worry: original type style.  The real AV 1611 was printed in what printers call "black letter," a very ornate type style much like Gothic script, which is still used many times for the banner at the top of the front page of newspapers.  This original type style was replaced with “Roman” type sometime in the 18th century.  Note that name: Roman.  I fear that once again, the Jesuits have conspired to corrupt the pure word in English.  They have taken away the original Gothic (and as everyone knows, the Gothic Bible used the textus receptus for its foundation which proves with certainty that the Gothic was the correct script for a real Bible), and have substituted the corrupt Roman script.  In a real sense, even the KJV has become a Roman Bible, since its modern editions use Roman script and not the original black letter.  As further proof that Roman type is a corruption, notice that all these apostate Bibles--the ERV, ASV, NASB, NIV, NKJB, and the rest, have always been printed in Roman type.  That's proof enough to me that any Bible in Roman type is no Bible at all, and that only a Bible with the original script, the black letter, given to us in the form we should have it by the Learned Men, is a true Bible.  Perhaps even those saved by the true original spelling KJV are not saved at all, and must locate a black letter edition.  The Roman script Nelson reprint may not be enough (it's just like those Bible corrupters at Thomas Nelson to pass off a Roman script KJV as though it were a real Bible!).  Fortunately for me, my brother has a facsimile reprint in the original black letter of the AV 1611, and I'm secure since I've studied out of it several times.

  It is a desperate situation.  The shortage of black letter, original spelling AV 1611 Bibles is severe.  There is truly a famine of the preserved word of God in the land.  And all our efforts at preaching, teaching, Bible study, and soul winning are completely futile until we return to the real, unaltered, perfectly preserved bonafide AV 1611.  Perhaps the best thing to do for the present is to send off and buy one of those pages from an original KJV, even if it costs thousands of dollars and has all the appearance of Romish relic worship; if you can get a page that has a salvation verse, or part of the "Romans road," perhaps there will be enough of the Gospel in the true preserved English to rescue your soul.

  [As a service to the reader, so he can be saved through a real AV 1611, I will quote John 3:16; in the inspired original black letter script:

  For God so loued ye world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life.]

  And just today, I came to understand that the only proper format for any Bible is in scroll form (or at least loose-leaf), since the Apostle assures us that “the word of God is not bound” (2 Timothy 2:9). Therefore any book that is bound, regardless of its printed contents, cannot honestly be said to be the word of God.  I’m sure the inspired 1611 translators never intended for their translation to come sown and within leather covers.  Such would be a travesty, in light of the Apostle’s clear and plain teaching.

  I’ve begun the systematic unstitching of all my sewn Bibles so that they can qualify, according to Paul’s definition, as the word of God.  I urge you to do the same.