Sir Francis Bacon

[PreacherBen]

Dear Brethren,
A dear friend of mine who is a member of a non-Baptist church has gotten into a struggle with the membership over their unwise decision to go with the corrupt NKJV. Sad! However, it has been an educational process for he and me (since he confides in me quite a bit,) they have thrown everything including the kitchen sink at him.

Now, this fellow Sir Francis Bacon. They say he was an occultist, and Free Mason and was involved with the editing process of the AV1611 and that there are mystic insertions done by him. Of course I don't buy it AT ALL, but they have picked it up from somewhere.

To the best of my ability, it seems the Masons have made this lie up to take credit for the translation, i.e, their man (a Mason) was responsible for this great Bible. I think it is balderdash made up by them to toot thier own horn.

Do any of you have more info on this attack and what do you know about it.

Thank you and God bless you,
Bro. Ben

[tired]

I have never heard this but in my studies of the Masons they do like throwing famous names out there to say all these great men were Masons. It is dishearting if even half of these men they say were Masons were. Many great preachers of the past and most of our founding fathers can be found on there sites. In my old church that went the way of the seeker sensitive purpose driven croud they started saying that King James was a sodomite. It seems like most of them want to say anything they can to stop you from reading a KJV. I wonder why?

[Jerry]

That's true - they like to claim everyone and their dog as a mason, because it gives them more credence and authority. As far as Francis Bacon goes, I have read the names and short bios of all those involved in the translation of the King James Bible, and he was not one of them. Maybe he did take a KJV and make his own edition out of it (like one or two presidents did - ie. changing it to make it the way they want it), but that is not the same thing as saying he was involved in the translation of the KJV - no more than if I took my KJV now and changed some words, and then claimed to be involved in the development of the KJV.

[HappyChristian]

I know he developed a scientific method of inquiry, and many have linked it to the occult because of the types of so-called sciences that were around then.

Just a side note - there are people who believe Bacon and Shakespeare are one and the same.

[Jerry]

Well, neither of them worked on the KJV - though I have heard rumours that Shakespeare was involved. Looking at Shakespeare's writings, he was obviously not saved (occult, sexual innuendo throughout, philosophies that contradict the Bible), though he did have some familiarity with the Bible (ie. in some phrases used or characters referred to).

[HappyChristian]

No, you're right, Jerry, they didn't work on the KJB. It's truly sad that those who don't want to use the KJB trump up excuses and then brand those of us who do as troublemakers!!!

[flaja]

I know he developed a scientific method of inquiry, and many have linked it to the occult because of the types of so-called sciences that were around then.

Just a side note - there are people who believe Bacon and Shakespeare are one and the same.

In Bacon's day science and the occult were essentially one and the same thing. If anything, Bacon's work on the scientific method helped separate the two.

[flaja]

Well' date=' neither of them worked on the KJV - though I have heard rumours that Shakespeare was involved. Looking at Shakespeare's writings, he was obviously not saved (occult, sexual innuendo throughout, philosophies that contradict the Bible), though he did have some familiarity with the Bible (ie. in some phrases used or characters referred to).[/quote']

The Bible that Shakespeare (as well as the Pilgrims) used was the Geneva Bible. The AKJ wasn't the dominant English Bible until about mid-17th century. But, much of the text in the two is the same- based on Tyndale's work early in the 16th century.