I found this in a Yahoo Group and will copy it below. Fundamentally I have 2 questions:
1. Some capitalizations do make somewhat of a difference in meaning such as "spirit" vs. "Spirit", right? I was an English major in college, so I tend to believe that there would be a difference in silent reading, but no difference if read aloud.
2. Of the 3 AV Bibles I have, only one matches the below and it was a Collins & Sons printing of the 1950's. So, is there a "pure" or "purer" AV today? Is it Oxford, Cambridge, the Pure Cambridge Edition (PCE) [ see http://www.bibleprotector.com ]. Many interesting items here.

I look foward to reading the replies. Here is the posting:

PCE: Pure Cambridge Edition (KJV)
In whichversion@yahoogroups.com </group/whichversion/post?postID=YI1wjoSnmXNMBPOYzTvd7r9Jvppri3nF1mW1EyUIRmorYF3aQniExEgASJ1gKJFGTV5-iFEjlxWaiLDIKjZ5jBsnobw-boU>, "Peter Fuhrman" <pnfuhrman@...> wrote:
message 27708
*******
Has anyone here taken a look at their Bibles to see if they have a
Bible that agrees with this list.
Out of some seventy KJ Bibles I have 5 that match this list.
*******
Do you have the pure Holy Bible?
For a quick check, look at whether Ezra 2:26 has the spelling "Geba".
Use the checklist to ascertain whether the Bible is a Pure Cambridge Edition:
1. "or Sheba" not "and Sheba" in Joshua 19:2
2. "sin" not "sins" in 2 Chronicles 33:19
3. "Spirit of God" not "spirit of God" in Job 33:4
4. "whom ye" not "whom he" in Jeremiah 34:16
5. "Spirit of God" not "spirit of God" in Ezekiel 11:24
6. "flieth" not "fleeth" in Nahum 3:16
7. "Spirit" not "spirit" in Matthew 4:1
8. "further" not "farther" in Matthew 26:39 [sic. addressed in another topic in this MySpace group. Reference Ruckman.]
9. "bewrayeth" not "betrayeth" in Matthew 26:73
10. "Spirit" not "spirit" in Mark 1:12
11. "spirit" not "Spirit" in Acts 11:28
12. "spirit" not "Spirit" in 1 John 5:8

While I wish every King James Bible printed was 100% the same as the Pure Cambridge, I do not believe it is necessary to throw out all copies of the KJB except the Pure Cambridge for several reasons...
1. Those differences you mentioned have VERY little effect if any in my view.
2. God has obviously blessed the use of every edition of the KJB since 1611.
3. If we did, almost nobody would have access to a Bible. Millions would be left in the dark. I think as Ruckman does, that the Bible is so powerful, that even with 50 typos from sloppy publishers, it will still work wonders. (For example, I live across the street from a dollar store where the poor people in my neighborhood can buy King James Bibles for ONE DOLLAR.)

Amen!!! Typos are not the same as whole verse and even whole chapters of the Bible being missing. My daughter wrot me a letter one time and mispelled every word she wrote, yet I understood exactly what she said and meant.

I'd go also with the Cambridge text, but I got like 50+ KJB's and they are all the words of God!!!

JB

Thanks all. I absolutely agree that as long as the words are NOT changed and verses/passages removed as in the modern "imitations", then our KJV/AV are the perfect tool to show the way to salvation and, very important in these times, a road-map of things to come.

Walking in grace,
Paul

Posted: Aug 27, 2007 10:37 AM
While I wish every King James Bible printed was 100% the same as the Pure Cambridge, I do not believe it is necessary to throw out all copies of the KJB except the Pure Cambridge for several reasons...
1. Those differences you mentioned have VERY little effect if any in my view.
2. God has obviously blessed the use of every edition of the KJB since 1611.
3. If we did, almost nobody would have access to a Bible. Millions would be left in the dark. I think as Ruckman does, that the Bible is so powerful, that even with 50 typos from sloppy publishers, it will still work wonders. (For example, I live across the street from a dollar store where the poor people in my neighborhood can buy King James Bibles for ONE DOLLAR.)
*******
Actually, there are many thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of copies of the pure word of God. As you can see from my first post by some other person, [Paul] I have many other varieties of the King James as well, so I have not thrown them out, but use them on a regular basis.
God has blessed the King James Bible because it is the pure word of God. But now, in the age of technology, we can find things fast. The 1611 edition is the pure word of God, as is the 1612, 1638, 1644, 1762, 1769, 1900, 2009. But, all are not the pure word of God, presentationaly. God has blessed the King James Bible because it is the final standard.
Throw the pure Bible out? say what? The differences are very small, agreed.
But...this leads to what we are fighting the nay’sayers and scholarship onlyites over.
Just how many arguments have raged over one letter or one word with the multi-versionist? The same principal is at work here. Yet on a minuscule scale.

Every word of God is pure: this must be believed and acted upon.
To say that this word or that word is good enough etc. is not good enough any more.
With increased light comes growth and increased responsibility to act upon the new knowledge.

Not acting upon the new knowledge would indicate sin on the part of the nay-sayer.

Millions without a Bible? This is your own straw man that you set up. Namely that WE all have to throw out the other AVs. Of course, there will be a settling time with this King James Only step.

I think it would be much easier for those with an impure presentation of the Holy Bible to simply make those few alterations with a good pen. Or they can look for a Pure Cambridge Edition of the Pure Holy Bible, the AV.
Ruckman said what he said, simply because he did not have the information needed at the time. Many took his stand and still do, but now I intend for the KJBO crowd to grow. I think that God would have this as well.

Every word of God is pure:
Peter Fuhrman