A Gay Bible?

Introducing the Queen James Bible, proudly advertised in the website http://www.queenjamesbible.com as “A Gay  Bible….You can’t choose your sexuality, but you can choose Jesus. Now you can choose a Bible, too” [1], followed by a quotation of John 3:16.

The anonymous editors give a list of reasons why they chose to intentionally edit the KJV.  I found the third reason to be most interesting, 

3. Most English Bible translations that actively condemn homosexuality have based themselves on the King James Version and have erroneously adapted its words to support their own agenda. We wanted to return to the clean source and start there.”  [1]

Basically the same argument Matthew Vines gave in his lecture attempting to give a Biblical defense for homosexuality (for a detailed examination and refutation of said lecture click here):  The “homophobic” translators, being fully aware of the original language, chose to twist it to fit their own anti-gay agenda and rendered what we now know as the KJV. 

Ironically, a few paragraphs later, the anonymous editors reveal their own agenda in creating the QJV mistranslation, 

We edited the Bible to prevent homophobic interpretations. We made changes to eight verses.” [1]

Is it “to return to the clean source and start there” or to intentionally go through the KJV and remove anything these people consider “homophobic” from it?  (By the way, Merriam Webster defines “homophobia” as, “irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals.”)

An excellent article by Matt Slick from CARM.org titled “The Queen James Bible, the Gay Bible” brilliantly addresses these eight changes in an exegetical fashion, proving from the original language, Hebrew for the Old Testament and Greek for the New Testament, that the Bible strongly condemns homosexuality and those who practice it.  It is, as Slick points out, 

a new assault on biblical orthodoxy and sexual purity.  This is to be expected in a world of moral relativism….the Queen James Bible is a perversion of the original text and is the result of obvious prejudices against the original Hebrew and Greek texts in order to make homosexual practices appear acceptable.” [2]

The creators of the QJV appeal to a subjective standard to establish an objective standard of their own, an action, needless to say, self-contradictory and self-defeating, 

The Bible is the word of God translated by man. This (saying nothing countless translations and the evolution of language itself) means the Bible can be interpreted in different ways, leading to what we call “interpretive ambiguity.”  [1]

This is the same assumption cults such as Mormonism make, that the fact we have many Bible translations equals the loss of the original language and the futility and utter waste of time spent in hermeneutics and exegesis in interpreting the Bible; thus conveniently leading people away from the source and into an individual or group of individuals who claim to now have the right interpretation and the church to have been wrong for thousands of years.  It is the age-old cultic strategy to divide and conquer a group of people, making them loyal to a man or group of men rather than the Scriptures themselves.  In one short statement, the creators of this version assume interpretative authority over Scripture, ignoring historical and grammatical context.  Isn’t what they said they wanted to do was to cut through all the maze of confusion “homophobes” have created from the time of the KJV translation til today and go right back to the source to present the original meaning of Scripture?

No, instead of that we have liberal “scholars” (the creators of the QJV call themselves scholars in the website) twisting the Scriptures “to their own destruction” (2 Pet. 3:16) through relativism and the rejection of honest exegesis.

In order to truly “go back to the source and start there,” I encourage you to check out the CARM article if you are interested in finding out whether the creators of this mistranslation are actually translators or merely editors advancing their own agenda.  

“Edit they did, translate they did not.” – Matt Slick

1. “Editor’s Notes,” The Queen James Bible, http://queenjamesbible.com/gay-bible/ (accessed January 1, 2013).

2. “The Queen James Bible, the Gay Bible,” CARM, http://carm.org/queen-james-bible (accessed January 1, 2013).


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s