We hope that this site will help you to understand the history of the text of the King James Bible as well as to understand many of its nuances and strengths.  The King James Bible has come down to us with many alternative text types.  This blog will make the case for the Cambridge text as it stood between c1918 and c1985 as the most carefully edited and ultimately the perfect version of the Word of God.   

     My name is John M Asquith.  I am the first of three bloggers who have been invited to contribute on a regular basis to this blog.  I am an historian of the text of the King James Bible as well as an aficionado of its accuracy and beauty.  I am probably the only only historian of the King James Bible who can say two things.  I believe the King James Bible is the Word of God and is perfect.  I have held each of the major printings of the King James Bible in my hand from 1611 until today and have taken time to collate the differences.  

     I am able to make the latter claim through the auspices of the American Bible Society in New York, New York which house the largest bible collection in North America and rivals the Cambridge Library in its collection of bibles.  I have had the privilege not just to examine a 1611 bible, but to hold and examine a 1629 Cambridge, a 1638 Cambridge, a 1701 Bishop Lloyd Oxford Bible, a 1762 Parris Bible, a 1769 Blaney Bible, as well as examining the many bibles that represented the efforts of the two major university publishing houses to perfect the printing and editing of the King James Bible throughout the last 400 years.  I can state rather frankly that most of what is written about this process is faulty at best.  

     The format of "blogging" is a new format for me. I have read blogs for years but this is the first blog wherein I am a contributor.  I hope to inform my readers by giving them factual information as well as giving them my opinions about those same facts.  I do not mind hearing contrary opinions.  I trust that someone who would be interested in this topic would understand the bounds of civility.