WRIGHT WAY: The Queen James Bible?
Jun 21, 2013 | 9658 views | 0 0 comments | 246 246 recommendations | email to a friend | print
A Queen James Version of the Bible has come out of the “closet” and is offering a new interpretation on verses that addressed homosexuality in the standard King James Bible and other modern translations.

The editors explained the reason their version is call “Queen” James, claiming that “Commonly known to biographers but often surprising to most Christians, King James I was a well-known bisexual.”

Their online Editor’s note admits, “Revelation says not to ‘edit the book,’ and people often extend that to mean the entire Bible, not just the book of Revelation.” Perhaps they are unaware that Deuteronomy 4:2 also warns, “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.” — KJV.

One modification given is at 1 Timothy 1:10, where the King James Version reads, “For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine.”

Editors of the Queen James Version said, “Given the context and theme of all our edits, we have changed ‘defile themselves with mankind’ to simply ‘defile themselves.’”

Regarding the notorious incident in Sodom at Genesis chapter 19, editors of the Queen James Version says, “We side with most Bible scholars who understand the story of Sodom and Gomorra to be about bullying strangers.”

“Most Bible scholars” may be surprised to learn that their understanding of the events in Sodom were reduced to an act of bullying. But to be fair, let us take a closer look at the account.

According to Genesis 19:8-9, Lot said to the mob who were demanding that he bring out the men so that they could “know” them, “Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof. And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them.” — KJV.

Does the fact that Lot was willing to send out his daughters in place of the two men, and that the mob became upset at Lot for judging them, suggest their intentions was simply to intimidate? When given the choice to have their way with women or men, they clearly preferred the men. Wouldn't bullies prefer weaker victims? Does this sound like mere bullies behaving badly? While this incident may have included aspects of bullying, this attempt at rape was clearly aimed at men — not women.

Regarding Jude verse 7, where the King James Version reads, “Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.”

Editors of the Queen James Version responded: “Given our clarification of the story of Sodom, we chose to highlight the fact that the male mob in Sodom raped angels, which is ‘strange’ in that it is nonhuman. We changed the verse to the following, ‘Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after nonhuman flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.’”

Look again at the account. No one “raped angels.” The verse simply states that Sodom and Gomorrah was “going after” something. Second, the Bible is clear at Genesis 19:5 that this mob did not view Lot’s visitors as angels. They thought they were “men” — not “nonhuman flesh.”

Then, in addressing Leviticus 18:22 where the King James Version reads, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination,” and Leviticus 20:13: “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death,” The Queen James Version inserted the phrase “in the temple of Molech” in both verses to imply the abomination was not having same-sex relations, but having same-sex relations “in the temple of Molech,” making this an issue of pagan idolatry instead of illicit sex.

The editors said, “Since abominable offenses aren’t all punishable by death like this one leads us to believe there was translative error at some point.” Taking such liberties in translation, may horrify the avid Bible reader who is loyal to a more traditional version of the Bible. But all translations are subject to bias and some are more bias than others. So choose your translation wisely.

Although the Bible must be translated into different languages, including modern English, Hebrews 4:12 reminds us that God’s Word “is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” — KJV.

If this book can reveal what our ulterior motives are, all translators would be wise to exercise caution when translating God’s Word.

*For a copy of The Little White Book of Light featuring more than 100 Wright Way columns, visit barnesandnoble.com, booksamillion.com and amazon.com.