~ The Received Text ~







Download Acrobat Reader FREE from




In 1516, Desiderius Erasmus published his first edition of the Byzantine Greek text and this edition was followed by four more editions in 1519, 1522, 1527 and 1535. The next great edition of the Textus Receptus was published in 1550 by Robert Stephanus (Estienne) and was based on Erasmus 4th and 5th editions. Stephanus’ (Stephens) 3rd edition became one of the two standard texts of the Textus Receptus, the other being that of Theodore Beza, the leading Protestant reformer after John Calvin. Beza’s editions were published between 1565 and 1611, and the KJV Translators used  the 1588-89 and 1598 editions of Beza, along with Stephens’ 3rd edition. In 1624 and 1633, the Elzivir Brothers published a New Testament based on  Beza’s editions. In their preface of the 1633 edition, the Elzivir brothers referred to the Byzantine editions in use as the “textum...nunc ab omnibus receptum“the text now received by all” hence, the name Textus Receptus was thereafter applied to these editions.  


There were between 100 and 200 textual differences between the various editions of the Textus Receptus, and most of these were orthographic, that is related to letters and spelling. It is important to understand that the reason for the differences in these Byzantine type texts was due to the differences in the multitude of Byzantine manuscripts used to compile them, and the editors (Erasmus, Stephens and Beza) had to make textual choices among variations in the manuscripts. In the main, the various editions of the Textus Receptus are substantially the same as opposed to the Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and Alexandrian manuscripts which form the basis of most modern versions. 


The 1611 Translators found fault with the Septuagint and the Vulgate which were translated from Alexandrian manuscripts but regarded all translations from the Byzantine editions to be reliable translations.



“Therefore let no man’s eye be evil, because his Majesty’s is good; neither let any be grieved, that we have a Prince that seeketh the increase of the spiritual wealth of Israel (let Sanballats and Tobiahs do so, which therefore do bear their just reproof) but let us rather bless God from the ground of our heart, for working this religious care in him, to have the translations of the Bible maturely considered of and examined. For by this means it cometh to pass, that whatsoever is sound already (and all is sound for substance, in one or other of our editions, and the worst of ours far better than their authentic vulgar) the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also, if anything be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place.”  (The Translators to the Reader)

Here we see the Translators’ humble and honest admission that all translations, including their own, are by their very nature imperfect and must, therefore, “be maturely considered and examined...that...if anything be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place.  The Translators took a dim view of those who protested revision of the English Bible, accusing them of having an evil eye and hindering the spiritual profit of the Church. These critics they likened to Sanballat and Tobiah who withstood the Jews who labored to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem—a very fitting analogy! 


Apparently, the 1611 King James Version was not gladly received by all subjects in the Realm, the reason being that, according to the Translators, any revision of the traditional Bible in use is always met with resistance and persecution. Even though the King James Version was based for the most part on the inspired Greek text, the Translators were much abused for their efforts:



“This, and more to this purpose, His Majesty that now reigneth (and long, and long may he reign, and his offspring forever, Himself and children, and childrens always) knew full well, according to the singular wisdom given unto him by God, and the rare learning and experience that he hath attained unto; namely that whosoever attempteth anything for the public (especially if it pertain to Religion, and to the opening and clearing of the word of God) the same setteth himself upon a stage to be gloated upon by every evil eye, yea, he casteth himself headlong upon pikes, to be gored by every sharp tongue. For he that meddleth with mens Religion in any part, medleth with their custom, nay, with their freehold; and though they find no content in that which they have, yet they cannot abide to hear of altering.” (“The Translators to the Reader”)


Harsh criticism of the Translators revision of previous English Bibles came from the Puritans as well as Anglicans who objected to any revision of the Bible in use:


Your most Sacred Majesty, that since things of this quality have ever been subject to the censures of ill meaning and discontented persons, it may receive approbation and Patronage from so learned and judicious a Prince as Your Highness is, whose allowance and acceptance of our labours shall more honour and encourage us, than all the calumniations and hard interpretations of other men shall dismay us. So that if, on the one side, we shall be traduced by Popish Persons at home or abroad, who therefore will malign us, because we are poor Instruments to make God's holy Truth to be yet more and more known unto the people, whom they desire still to keep in ignorance and darkness; or if, on the other side, we shall be maligned by self-conceited Brethren, who run their own ways, and give liking unto nothing, but what is framed by themselves, and hammered on their Anvil; we may rest secure, supported within by truth and innocency of a good conscience, having walked the ways of simplicity and integrity, as before the Lord; and sustained without by the powerful protection of Your Majesty's grace and favour, which will ever give countenance to honest and Christian endeavours against bitter censures and uncharitable imputations.  (The Translators to the Reader)




Many mens mouths have been open a good while (and yet are not stopped) with speeches about the Translation so long in hand, or rather perusals of Translations made before: and ask what may be the reason, what the necessity of the employment: Hath the Church been deceived, say they, all this while? Hath her sweet bread been mingled with leaven, here silver with dross, her wine with water, her milk with lime? (Lacte gypsum male miscetur, saith S. Ireney,) [S. Iren. 3. lib. cap. 19.] We hoped that we had been in the right way, that we had the Oracles of God delivered unto us, and that though all the world had cause to be offended and to complain, yet that we had none. (The Translators to the Reader)


But besides all this, they were the principal motives of it, and therefore ought least to quarrel it: for the very Historical truth is, that upon the importunate petitions of the Puritans, at his Majesty's coming to this Crown, the Conference at Hampton Court having been appointed for hearing their complaints: when by force of reason they were put from other grounds, they had recourse at the last, to this shift, that they could not with good conscience subscribe to the Communion book, since it maintained the Bible as it was there translated, which was as they said, a most corrupted translation. And although this was judged to be but a very poor and empty shift; yet even hereupon did his Majesty begin to bethink himself of the good that might ensue by a new translation, and presently after gave order for this Translation which is now presented unto thee. Thus much to satisfy our scrupulous Brethren.”  (The Translators to the Reader)


Because the 1611 Translators knew that any translation of the originals would contain errors, and that even their translation had ”imperfections and blemishes,” they, of all men, would have approved of “corrections” even of their own translation, if the corrections rendered it “more agreeable to the original.”



...neither did we disdain to revise that which we had done, and to bring back to the anvil that which we had hammered...(The Translators to the Reader)


Far from warning against correction of their translation, the Translators would have thought refusal to undertake examination of their translation and correction of errors to be a sin against God:



Yet before we end, we must answer a third cavil and objection of theirs [the Papists] against us, for altering and amending our Translations so oft; wherein truly they deal hardly, and strangely with us. For to whomever was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to go over that which he had done, and to amend it where he saw cause? Saint Augustine was not afraid to exhort S. Jerome to a Palinodia or recantation; [S. Aug. .] and doth even glory that he seeth his infirmities. [S. Aug. .] If we be sons of the Truth, we must consider what it speaketh, and trample upon our own credit, yea, and upon other mens too, if either be any way an hindrance to it. (The Translators to the Reader)

The God-fearing and self-effacing principles of the Translators were honored by future generations and the Authorized Version was revised several times over 158 years following its publication. This fact is vehemently denied by KJV-Only advocates:


“...the King James Bible printed in 1611 reads the same as the King James Bible printed in 1997.” (William Bradley, Purified Seven Times, p. 115)


“A lost man would laugh at the suggestion that a particular text could be promoted as the same text with even one alteration.” (William Grady, Final Authority, p. 311).


“It is true that there were revisions. The first was in 1629 by Samuel Ward and John Bois, who had worked on the original translation. The second was in 1638 by the Cambridge University Press. The third was in 1762 by Dr. Thomas Paris of Trinity College, Cambridge. The fourth was in 1769 by Dr. Benjamin Blayney. The changes, though, were of a very minor nature. They were largely a correction of printing errors, an updating of italics, spelling, and punctuation, and modernizing of some obsolete words. The changes also involved the addition of a large number of new marginal notes and cross-references. How different, then, is the King James Bible today than the one in 1611? The following authoritative answer is by Dr. Donald Waite of Bible for Today ministry. It is authoritative because he took the time to examine this challenge first hand by diligently and laboriously comparing every word of the 1611 KJV with a standard KJV in publication today. Following is his testimony:...” (David Cloud, “Was the 1611 King James Bible Different Than Those We Have Today?”)


“There were ONLY 136 SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES that were different words. The others were only 285 MINOR CHANGES OF FORM ONLY. Of these 285 MINOR CHANGES, there are 214 VERY MINOR CHANGES such as towards’ for toward’; burnt’ for burned’; amongst’ for among’; 'lift’ for lifted’; and you’ for ye.’ These kinds of changes represent 214 out of the 285 minor changes of form only. Thus you're talking about ONLY 136 REAL CHANGES out of 791,328 words. Many people imply that the KING JAMES BIBLE is completely changed from what they had in 1611, that there are THOUSANDS of differences. You tell them about the MERE 136 CHANGES OF SUBSTANCE plus 285 MINOR CHANGES OF FORM ONLY.” (D.A. Waite, The Four-fold Superiority of the King James Bible).

“Samuel Ward was involved in the ongoing proofing of the KJV text after its publication in 1611. The only changes of the KJV since 1611 were of three types:

1.    1612: Typography (from Gothic to Roman Type).

2.    1629 & 1638: Correction of typographical errors

3.    1762 & 1769: Standardization of spelling...

“These typo-corrected editions of 1629 and 1638 and standardized spelling editions of 1762 and 1769 are wrongly called revisions’ of the KJV, by those who would like to pretend that the KJV has undergone ‘several revisions’ or ‘four revisions’ correcting ‘slight inaccuracies’ and ‘its English form’... There have never been any revisions’ of the KJV text. ...

“...Scrivener lists many of the typos and the course of their correction over the years [e.g. 1613, 1616, 1629, 1638, 1744, 1762, 1769 et al.] He lists some of the unwarranted variations. Seeing for one’s self his list of typos, which have been fixed over the years, makes the myth of any textual revision’ of the KJV vanish into smoke. Most are spelling errors of insignificant words, such as ‘Jehoiakins’ vs. ‘Jehoiachins.’ Most were fixed almost immediately by Ward and Bois.” (Gail Riplinger, In Awe of Thy Word, pp. 600-602)


F.H.A. Scriveners volume, The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611): Its Subsequent Reprints and Modern Representatives documents hundreds of textual revisions of the original 1611 King James Version. Scriveners Appendix A titled “Wrong readings of the Bible of 1611 amended in later editions” reveals that a surprising number of the revisions were not of misspellings or typos but correction of translation errors. In other words, wrong readings which tainted the interpretation of verses. Even D.A. Waite admitted there have been “136 substantial changes that were different words...136 changes of substance” between the original 1611 KJV and the present day (Old Scofield) KJV. (Defending the King James Bible, p. 244) 


These “changes of substance” in progressive editions of the King James Version are documented in Frederick Scriveners Appendix A which is reproduced on our website. For relevance sake, we omitted from Scriveners Appendix the Apocryphal books that were in the 1611 KJV (1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Wisdom, Ecclus, Baruch, Hist. of Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, Prayer of Manasseh, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees). For readability, we have bolded the more significant errors noted by Scrivener in the 1611 AV.  For the full list of corrections, see Scriveners Appendix A: “Wrong readings of the Bible of 1611 amended in later editions.” The tables below present abbreviated lists of selected translation errors along with their dates of correction.






Gen. xxxix. 16 her lord his lord, 1638
Lev. 26:40 confess the iniquity of their fathers (the iniquities, 1613) confess their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers (1616)
Jer. 38:16 So the king sware So Zedekiah the king sware
I Kings 11:5 Amorites (Ammorites 1612) Ammonites, 1629
II Kings 11:10 the Temple the temple of the Lord, 1638
2 Chron. iii. 10 most holy place most holy house, 1629,
2 Chron. xxxii. 5 prepared Millo repaired Millo, 1616, 1617
Ezra ii. 22 The children of Netophah The men of Netophah, 1638
Job xxxix. 30 there is he there is she, 1616, 16171
Psalm ii. 6 & marg. Sion Zion, 16382. Cf. Ps. lxix. 35
Psalm lxv. 1 Sion Zion, Amer. 1867 only. See below, note 2
Psalm lxix. 32 seek good seek God, 1617
Psalm lxix. 35 Sion Zion, 1761.Cf. p. 165 note 2

Jer. xl. 9,10 marg.

ver. 9 † to serve

†Heb. to stand before. And so verse 101

ver. 10. † to serve.

† Heb. to stand before, 1629-1769, Bagster 1846, American 1867

Ezek. i. 17 returned / Bishops Bible turned, 1769. Cf. vers. 9, 12
Ezek. iii.11 thy people the children of thy people, 1638
Ezek. xxiv. 7 poured it poured it not, 1613
Ezek. xlvi. 23 a new building a row of building, 1638
Dan. xii. 13 in the lot in thy lot, 1638
Zech. vii. 7 of the plain and the plain, 1638

1 This gross error of 1611-1630, though corrected long ago, is revived in most modern Bibles, e.g. D’Oyly & Mant 1817, Oxford 1835, Camb. 1858.


Dr. Scrivener noted one “gross errorin the 1611 AV, in the marginal note for Jeremiah 40:9,10, which was not corrected until 1629. The alternate reading would render the verse: “Feare not to stand before the Caldeans: dwell in the land, and serue the king of Babylon, and it shalbe well with you. The error lies in the fact that the remnant of Jews were to remain in Israel to till the land. (2 Kings 25:12)  The marginal note may have been based on readings in the Septuagint (LXX).

kai wmosen autoiv Godoliav kai toiv andrasin autwn legwn mh fobhqhte apo proswpou twn paidwn twn Xaldaiwn katoikhsate en th gh kai ergasasqe tw basilei Babulwnov kai beltion estai umin

Had our present King-James Only defenders lived in 1611, they would no doubt be among the AV Translators harshest critics. Alas, some of the marginal notes in the 1611 King James Version plainly demonstrate the uncertainty and fallibility of the Translators, which they were the first to acknowledge in their Preface. While King James-Only proponents self-righteously remonstrate against marginal notes in new versions, modern version proponents are noting the same “diversity of signification and sense in the margin” of the 1611 KJV:




Judges 19:2

 And his concubine played the whore against him, and went away from him vnto her fathers house to Bethlehem Iudah, and was there foure whole moneths. Or, a yeere and four months. Heb. dayes, and foure months

Ezra 10:40

Machnadebai, Shashai, Sharai,
Or, Mabnadebai, according to some copies.

Psalm 102:3

For my dayes are consumed ║like smoke: and my bones are burnt as an hearth. Or, (as some reade) into smoke.
Matt. 1:11 And Iosias begate Iechonias and his brethren, about the time they were caried away to Babylon. Some read, Iosias begate Iakim, and Iakim begat Iechonias
Luke 10:22 All things are deliuered to me of my father: and no man knoweth who the sonne is, but the father: and who the father is, but the sonne, and he to whom the sonne will reueale him. Many ancient copies adde these words, And turning to his Disciples, he said.
Luke 17:36 Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. This 36 verse is wanting in most of the Greek copies  
Acts 25:6 And when hee had taried among them more then ten dayes, hee went downe vnto Cesarea, and the next day sitting in the iudgement seat, commanded Paul to be brought. Or, as some copies reade, no more then eight or ten dayes.
Eph. 6:9 And ye masters, do the same things vnto them, forbearing threatning: knowing that your master also is in heauen, neither is there respect of persons with him. Or, moderating. Some read, both your, and their master.
James 2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I haue workes: shew mee thy faith without thy workes, and I will shew thee my faith by my workes. Some copies reade, by thy workes.
1 Pet. 2:21 For euen hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for vs, leauing vs an example, that yee should follow his steps. Some reade, for you.
2 Pet. 2:2 And many shall follow their pernicious wayes, by reason of whom the way of trueth shall be euill spoken of: Or, lascivious wayes, as some copies reade.
2 Pet. 2:11 Whereas Angels which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord. Some read against themselves.
2 Pet. 2:18 For when they speake great svelling words of vanitie, they alure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonnesse, those that were cleane escaped from them who liue in errour. Or, for a little, or a while, as some read.
 2 John 8 Looke to your selues, that wee lose not those things which wee haue wrought, but that we receiue a full reward Or, gained. Some copies reade, which yee haue gained, but that ye receive, &c.

Hebrews 11:35

Women receiued their dead raised to life againe: and others were * tortured, not accepting deliuerance, that they might obtaine a better resurrection.

*2 Maccabees 7:7 / Reference to Apocrypha

                         Source: Photo gallery of 1611 edition, KJV marginal variations

This is one example of a modern version proponent trying to justify an otherwise weak case against the KJV by focusing on false information put out by the KJV-Only disinformation network. KJV-Onlyism has so damaged the credibility of the King James Bible that proponents of modern versions seem to represent the more rational side of the version issue. So many lies have been disseminated by KJV-Only leaders that the whole community is largely misinformed and therefore unable to intelligently discuss the issue with modern version advocates. To state the matter frankly, the modern version proponents seem to have a secret ally in the KJV-Only leadership. 

Returning to F.H.A. Scrivener’s Appendix A, the following table presents a few examples of “Wrong readings of the Bible of 1611 amended in later editions which were not mere spelling errors or typos. Note that words were added, omitted and mistranslated in the original KJV and some of these errors were not corrected until many years later.





Matt. vi. 3 thy right doeth thy right hand doeth, 1613 (not 1616, 1617), 1629, 1630
Matt. xxvi. 75 the words of Jesus the word of Jesus, 1762
Luke i. 3 understanding of things understanding of all things, 1629
Luke xi. 3 his sister his sisters, 1629
John vii. 16 Jesus answered them, Jesus answered them, and said, 1634, 1638
John xv. 20 than the Lord (lord 1629-1743) than his lord, 1762
Acts. xxiv. 24 which was a Jew which was a Jewess, 1629. Cf. ch. xvi. 1
1 Cor. xii. 28 helps in governments helps, governments, 1629
2 Cor. xi. 32 the city the city of the Damascenes, 1629
Eph. vi. 24 sincerity sincerity, Amen, 1616 (not 1617, 1629 C.)
2 Thess. ii. 14 the Lord Jesus Christ our Lord Jesus Christ, 1629
1 Tim. i. 4 edifying godly edifying, 1638 (Tynd.-Bps’)
2 Tim. iv. 13 bring with thee bring with thee, and the books, 1616, 1617, 1629 C. & L., 1630.
1 John v. 12 hath not the Son1 hath not the Son of God, 1629 C. (not 1629 L., 1630), 16382.
Heb. x. 23 faith hope. See Appendix E, p. 247.


Scrivener’s footnote on Hebrews 10:23 was: “The variation in Heb. x. 23 ‘faith’ for ‘hope’ is...a mere oversight of our Translators...”


The table above is a selective list from Scrivener’s catalogue of the word changes, additions, and omissions to the 1611 KJV that were not printing or spelling errors. We do not fault the Translators for such translation errors. Indeed, it is extraordinary that there were not more translation errors given the sheer magnitude of the project they undertook. Absent divine authorship and direct inspiration, it is humanly impossible to render every word of a manuscript the length of the Bible (and even much shorter documents) with perfect accuracy. The 1611 Translators understood full well that they were not infallible as the Prophets and Apostles who penned the Hebrew and Greek Originals:

For whatever was perfect under the Sun, where Apostles or Apostolic men, that is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of Gods spirit, and privileged with the privilege of infallibility, had not their hand?(The Translators to the Reader)

“sion” VS. “zion”


There are certain translation errors in the King James Version that will have end-time ramifications. Analysis of the most critical errors is available in an appendix, Translation Errors in the KJV Which Affect the Interpretation of Bible Prophecy.”  A few of these errors are also discussed in the body of the report, specifically errors related to the name, location and mark of the Antichrist. Chapter 2 dealt with the problem of the name JEHOVAH instead of YHWH. The location of the Antichrist’s headquarters follows here, with his “mark” the subject of the next chapter.


The 1611 KJV mistranslated of the Hebrew word for “Zion” (tsiyown) as “Sion” in the following Psalms: 2:6, 9:11, 14; 14:7; 20:2; 48:2, 11, 12; 50:2; 51:18; 53:6; 65:1, 69:35, 74:2: 76:2; 78:68; 97:8.  Of these, all were corrected except for Psalm 65:1 which was corrected only in the American edition of 1867. However, the KJV Old Testament still retains the mistranslation “Sion” in Psalm 65:1, which is the Hebrew word tsiyown and should be translated should be “Zion.”




Reading of the Authorized Bible


Variation of later editions

ii. 6 & marg.


Zion, 16382. Cf. Ps. lxix. 35

lxv. 1


Zion, Amer. 1867 only. See below, note 2

lxix. 35


Zion, 1761.Cf. p. 165 note 2

2 So Ps. ix. 11, 14; xiv. 7; xx. 2; xlviii. 2, 11, 12; l. 2; li. 18; liii. 6; lxxiv. 2; lxxvi. 2; lxxviii. 68; xcvii. 8. Elsewhere 1611 has “Zion” except in Ps. lxv. 1, where all have “Sion” except Amer. 1867. Cf. Ps. lxix. 35 

This translation error can be traced back through all of the English Bibles, except the Geneva Bible, to the Latin Vulgate (425 A.D.). It is possible that Jerome derived the error from the Greek Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament (c. 280-130 B.C.). The translators of the Greek Septuagint changed all Hebrew spellings of Zion to Sion because there is no letter S in the Greek alphabet which corresponds to the letter Zayin” (Z) in the Hebrew alphabet. These mistranslations demonstrate that, in these verses, the King James Translators were ultimately following the Greek Septuagint, by way of the Bishops and other English Bibles (except the Geneva), as well as the Latin Vulgate, instead of the Hebrew Masoretic Text.  See below:

Psalm 65:1-2


Masoretic Text “Praise waiteth for thee, O God, in Zion; And unto Thee is the vow performed.

Septuagint soi prepei umnov o qeov en Siwn kai soi apodoqhsetai euxh en Ierousalhm


Bishop's Bible “O Lorde thou wylt be greatly praysed in Sion: and vnto thee shal vowes be perfourmed”
Geneva Bible
“To him that excelleth. A Psalme or song of Dauid. O God, praise waiteth for thee in Zion, and vnto thee shall the vowe be perfourmed.”

Coverdale Bible “Thou (o God) art praysed in Sion, and vnto the is the vowe perfourmed.”

Tyndale N.T. n/a

Wycliffe BIBLE “The titil of the foure and sixtithe salm. `To victorie, `the salm of the song of Dauid. God, heriyng bicometh thee in Syon; and a vow schal be yolden to thee in Jerusalem.”
Latin Vulgate
tibi silens laus Deus in Sion et tibi reddetur votum”

Douay Rheims VERSION A hymn, O God, becometh thee in Sion: and a vow shall be paid to thee in Jerusalem.”

What may at a glance seem to be a spelling error was in fact a translation error. The Hebrew word for “Sion” is Siyon, an altogether different word than Tsiyown, which is translated “Zion”. The words Tsiyown (Zion) and Siyon (Sion) are not interchangeable because they identify two different locations, Mount Zion in Jerusalem and Mount Hermon, also called Mount Sion, in northern Israel.  

#7865 Siyon {see-ohn} from 7863; n pr mont AV - Sion 1; 1 Sion = lofty” 1) another name for Mount Hermon

#6726 Tsiyown {tsee-yone} the same (regularly) as 6725; TWOT - 1910; n pr loc AV - Zion 153, Sion 1; 154 Zion = parched place” 1) another name for Jerusalem especially in the prophetic books.

Deuteronomy 4:48 identifies Sion as Mount Hermon:

Deuteronomy 4:48

KJV ...even unto mount Sion, which is Hermon...


Deuteronomy 3:9

KJV ...(Which Hermon the Sidonians call Sirion; and the Amorites call it Shenir;)...

Mount Hermon/Sion is the highest mountain in Israel where the fallen angels mated with human women (Genesis 6). It is for this reason sacred to to the Merovingian bloodline. The Merovingians are the tribe of Dan which relocated to the Mount Hermon area and intermarried with the Canaanite Tuatha de Danaan.  Mount Hermon in Dan is located at the 33º latitude and longitude using the Paris Zero Meridian, which was used by the French before 1884 when Greenwich became the international Zero Meridian. The Prieuré de Sion is headquartered in Paris; the Protocols of Sion were signed by the Leaned Elders of Sion of the 33rd Degree. 

Psalm 48:2 and Isaiah 14:13 identify Mount Zion in Jerusalem as the city of the great King, the most High, God. However, these readings in the Septuagint locates the throne of the Most High at Mount Sion in northern Israel:

Psalm 48:2

KJV - Beautiful for situation, the joy of the whole earth, is mount Zion, on the sides of the north, the city of the great King.

Septuagint - The city of the great King is well planted on the mountains of Sion, with the joy of the whole earth, on the sides of the north.


Isaiah 14:13

KJV - How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

SEPTUAGINT - How has Lucifer, that rose in the morning, fallen from heaven! He that sent orders to all the nations is crushed to the earth. But thou saidst in thine heart, I will go up to heaven, I will set my throne above the stars of heaven: I will sit on a lofty mount, on the lofty mountains toward the north: I will go up above the clouds: I will be like the Most High.

Mistranslation of the Hebrew word for Zion (Tsiyown) to Sion in Psalm 65:1 in the King James Version is important because this verse will provide Scriptural support for the Merovingian high command, the Prieuré de Sion, to exalt Mount Hermon in Dan as the place where God dwells, i.e., Lucifers dwelling place in Mount Sion, instead of Mount Zion in Jerusalem. The Antichrist, a Merovingian who will be indwelt by Lucifer, will rule the world from Mount Sion/Hermon in Dan instead of Mount Zion in Jerusalem.  At the Luciferic Initiation, the False Prophet will coerce mankind to swear allegiance to Lucifer and to receive his mark.

And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed...And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. (Rev. 13:1-13, 16-18)

Psalm 65:1, as it is mistranslated in the King James Bible, may even be the text from which the False Prophet will preach that all must swear allegiance to Lucifer and seal their vows with his mark:

Praise waiteth for thee, O God, in Sion: and unto thee shall the vow be performed. O thou that hearest prayer, unto thee shall all flesh come. ” (Ps. 65:1-2 KJV)

Compounding the problem, all seven New Testament references to Mount Zion in Jerusalem have been translated “Mount Sion” in the KJV.  Five of these verses were fulfilled at the first coming of Jesus Christ, however, two of these verses pertain to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ –  Romans 11:26 and Revelation 14:1. These verses they will likely be prematurely misappropriated to the Antichrist to establish him as the messiah of Israel and ruler of the world from his palatial headquarters in Mount Sion/Hermon.

Matthew 21:5   Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass. (KJV)

John 12:15   Fear not, daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an asss colt. (KJV)

Romans 9:33   As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. (KJV)

Romans 11:26   And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: (KJV)

Hebrews 12:22   But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, (KJV)

1 Peter 2:6   Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. (KJV)

Revelation 14:1   And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Fathers name written in their foreheads. (KJV)

See: Heeding Bible Prophecy: New Government: Mount Zion/Sion


KJV-Only advocates sanctimoniously denounce the New King James Version translators use of the Septuagint which, they omit to mention, the 1611 KJV Translators also consulted.  Ironically, in Psalm 65:1, where the KJV mistranslated the Hebrew word Tsiyown as “Sion” (following the Septuagint reading), the NKJV translated it correctly as “Zion”:  

Praise is awaiting You, O God, in Zion; And to You the vow shall be performed. O You who hear prayer, To You all flesh will come.” (Ps. 65:1-2 NKJV)

In the NKJV, only Deuteronomy 4:48 is translated as “Sion,” since it is the Hebrew word “siyon referring to Mount Hermon. In all other relevant verses of the Old Testament, including Psalm 65:1, the NKJV correctly translates the Hebrew word Tsiyown as “Zion.”

In the New Testament, the Greek  word Sion [#4622 ] does not derive from the Hebrew word for Sion [#7865, siyon] referring to Mt. Hermon, but is derived from the Hebrew word for Zion [#6726, tsiyown] referring to Mt. Zion in Jerusalem.

#4622  Sion {see-own'}of Hebrew origin 6726; TDNT - 7:292,1028; n pr loc AV - Sion 7; 7 Sion or Zion = a parched place 1) the hill on which the higher and more ancient part of Jerusalem was built 1a) the southwestern most and highest of the hills on which the city was built 2) often used of the entire city of Jerusalem 3) since Jerusalem because the temple stood there, was called the dwelling place of God

In the NKJV, all New Testament references to Mount Zion in Jerusalem are accurately translated “Zion.”

Matthew 21:5 – Tell the daughter of Zion, Behold, your King is coming to you, Lowly, and sitting on a donkey, A colt, the foal of a donkey. (NKJV)

John 12:15 –
Fear not, daughter of Zion; Behold, your King is coming, Sitting on a donkey's colt. (NKJV)

Romans 9:33 –
As it is written: Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense, And whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame. (NKJV)

Romans 11:26 –
And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; (NKJV)

Hebrews 12:22 –
But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, (NKJV)

1Peter 2:6 –
Therefore it is also contained in the Scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion A chief cornerstone, elect, precious, And he who believes on Him will by no means be put to shame.  (NKJV)

Revelation 14:1 –
Then I looked, and behold, a Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand, having His Father’s name written on their foreheads. (NKJV)





Download Acrobat Reader FREE from







Jeremiah 40:9-10

7Now when all the captains of the forces which were in the fields, euen they and their men, heard that the king of Babylon had made Gedaliah the son of Ahikam gouernour in the land, and had committed vnto him men, and women, and children, and of the poore of the land, of them that were not carried away captiue to Babylon;

8 Then they came to Gedaliah to Mizpah, even Ishmael the sonne of Nethaniah, and Iohanan and Ionathan the sonnes of Kareah, and Seraiah the sonne of Tanhumeth, and the sonnes of Ephai the Netophathite, and Iezaniah the sonne of a Maachathite, they and their men.





And Gedaliah the sonne of Ahikam the sonne of Shaphan sware vnto them and to their men, saying, Feare not to serve the Caldeans: dwell in the land, and serue the king of Babylon, and it shalbe well with you.

10 As for me, behold, I will dwell at Mizpah to serue the Caldeans, which will come vnto vs : but yee, gather yee wine, and summer fruits, and oyle, and put them in your vessels, and dwell in your cities that yee haue taken.

Heb. to stand before. And so verse 10.