It has often been mentioned by KJVO people who are posting that the KJV1611 does not recognize the Apocrypha as the Word of God. I have reviewed my 1611 (printed in 1612) and do not find any reference to the fact that the Apocrypha is any different. It is NAMED the Apocrypha, as is the New Testament named the NT. But, I see nothing regarding canon of scripture. Let us be clear that the Apocrypha as printed by the Anglicans is NOT the same Apocrypha as determined by the Catholics. This is the reason it is often called by different names. For your viewing interesting, I have uploaded three pages of a 1611 version in PDF format that can be downloaded. As you can see, the first page of the Aprocryphal books is marked, but so is The First Book of Moses Genesis and Mathew, etc. There seems to be no reference to whether or not the authors seemed to think it was part of the canon and by reviewing the book, the way it is included, one would summarize that the Apocrypha printed in the 1611 version was intended to be there are part of the scriptures. At least referring to my books. If someone can show an equally old 1611 version that says otherwise, I would like to see it. This is from a book printed in 1612. The link to the three pages is: http://www.baptist-church.org/example.pdf It is free for the taking. It contains the first page in Genesis, First page of the Apocrypha and First page of Mathew--for reference...these are actual scans of an original, not a printed copy.