No Reformation, No King James Version
![Image](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhy4N0tubCwdVQZUOy0f4WeIPv8QyVTASNIurUgu-O_0T1oRZrIAEdMN4L_lGeVJW04a482dE3kSp2rDuFpT7lFGCtmAC97Mtb-XwXkZeoOsdMke6h7dvXkgHHQ6L4aQFoI0FAY35jaHEF_/s400/The-Reformation-Heritage-KJV-Study-Bible-18-980x652.jpg)
No Reformation then no King James Version should be a battle cry! I may be a Baptist, I still don't consider myself a Protestant but I'm no Baptist Brider, I'm somewhat of a King James Only-ist (even if many of my favorite preachers aren't and even Charles H. Spurgeon used what would be the English Standard Version today as an additional reference) because I don't trust any of the modern versions these days (because I believe all the 17 missing verses shouldn't be in the footnotes) but I would say one thing - the precious KJV wouldn't be possible without the Reformation! Okay, I agree that the Word of God preceded the KJV. The KJV is a translation of the Word of God. You had the Old Latin Bible which contained God's Word. Unfortunately, there's the Latin Vulgate which had some missing verses and that's what all was accessible (for the time being) to the Reformers. All Martin Luther had was a Roman Catholic translation for his time yet it led ...