The Queen James Bible, the Gay Bible

Read  also: Is Homosexuality Natural?

The Queen James Bible, also known as the Gay Bible, is a new assault on biblical orthodoxy.  This is to be expected in a world of moral relativism.  In it, the 1769 King James Bible has been reproduced with only a very few select verses altered–the ones that relate to homosexuality.  Those verses are listed below and analyzed.  I hope you will see that 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.

The interlinear citations are taken from two sources:

  1. Hebrew Interlinear Quotations are from van der Merwe, Christo. The Lexham Hebrew-English Interlinear Bible. Logos Bible Software, 2004.
  2. Greek Interlinear Quotations are from the Aland, B., Aland, K., Black, M., Martini, C. M., Metzger, B. M., & Wikgren, A. (1993, c1979). The Greek New Testament (4th ed.) (410). Federal Republic of Germany: United Bible Societies.

The editors of the Gay Bible have stated the following:

“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

I’m glad they acknowledge that most translations condemn homosexuality.  But, the annonymous editors of the QJV changed the translations, reinterpreted them, and made them say the opposite of what the original languages state. It says on page one of the QJV:  “The Queen James Bible is based on The King James Bible, edited to prevent homophobic misinterpretation.”  Edit they did; translate they did not.

Are they really going to maintain that basically all translators have gotten it wrong throughout the centuries and that they, the annonymous editors2, got it right?  It is easy to make assertions while you hid behind anonymity.  What are they afraid of if their edits are the right ones?

Let’s take a look at the verses that deal with homosexuality but comparing the KJV and the QJV and providing the original text for your examination.

1.Gen 19:5 “And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? Bring them out unto us, that we may know them.” (KJV)

“And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? Bring them out unto us, that we may rape and humiliate them.” (QJV)

Comment: אֹתָם׃וְנֵדְעָהאֵלֵינוּהוֹצִיאֵם (bring out  them to us  and  know  them)

  • As you can see, there is nothing in the original text that says “rape and humiliate.”  The word often translated as “rape” in English Bibles is the Hebrew yawdah which means “to know”:  “know” 645 times, “known” 105 times, “knowledge” 19 times, “perceive” 18 times, “shew” 17 times, “tell” eight times, “wist” seven times, “understand” seven times, “certainly” seven times, “acknowledge” six times, “acquaintance” six times, “consider” six times, “declare” six times, “teach” five times, and translated miscellaneously 85 times.3  So the word “know” is there which can be translated as “rape,” but “and humiliate” is a complete fabrication.
  • The KJV never uses the word “humiliate” in the O.T.  It occurs once in Acts 8:33, but that is the Greek.  However, in the NASB “humiliate” occurs in the Old Testament (Judges 18:7; Ezra 9:5; Psa. 35:26, etc.).  The word is kawlawm and means “ashamed 12, confounded 11, shame 7, blush 3, hurt 2, reproach 2, confusion 1″4
  • Adding the words “rape and humiliate” is not justified and alters the meaning of the text.  Moses knew what he was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.  Essentially, the QJV editors are saying that Moses didn’t get it right and that they had to add words – which are not there – to “correctly” get it to say what they think it needs to say.

2.1 Cor 6:9 “”Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind” (KJV)

“Men with men working that which is pagan and unseemly. For this cause God gave the idolators up unto vile affections, receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.” (QJV)

Comment: οὔτε  μοιχοὶ  οὔτε  μαλακοὶ  οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται (nor adulterers  nor soft ones nor male bed partners)

  • Let’s look at the Greek word that the QJV renders as “morally weak.”  The Greek is ἀρσενοκοίται, arsenokoitai.  What does it mean?
    • Arsenokoitais comes from two words, “ársēn, a male, and koítē, a bed. A man who lies in bed with another male, a homosexual”
      • “ἄρσην (arsēn), εν (en): adj.; ≡ DBLHebr 2351; Str 730—1. LN 79.102 human male”
      • “κοίτη (koitē), ης (ēs), ἡ (hē): n.fem.; ≡ Str 2845—1. LN 6.108 bed (Lk 11:7+); 2. LN 23.62 sexual life, marriage bed”
    • ἀρσενοκοίτης, ου m: a male partner in homosexual intercourse—‘homosexual.’
    • “ἀρσενοκοίτης, ου, ὁ arsenokoitēs male homosexual”
  • But, on the queen james site, the editors say the following about arsenokoitas.
    • “Greek as a language had developed words for homosexuality, but none of those words were used in arsenokoitais’s place. We changed the phrase “Abusers of themselves with mankind” to “promiscuous” as one who is promiscuous risks their own health and that of others, sexually and otherwise, as they disrespect their God-given body.”
  • If what they say is true, then let’s see some documentation that there were other words for ‘homosexual’. Just saying it doesn’t make it so.  Also, it doesn’t change the fact that the word ‘arsenekoitas’ says what it says as is documented above by several Greek lexicons.

Jesus warned against altering one jot or tittle from God’s Word (Matthew 5:18). Yet the unidentified editors of the Queen James Bible have seen fit to boldly remove anything they dislike and add words that have no right to be there—all to try to make God say what they want said. They are trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole, linguistically speaking, and it will never work. What are their scholastic credentials? Where can seekers of truth go to verify their claims? Are we to believe that all other Bible translators succumbed to “interpretive ambiguity,” while only the editors of the QJV have seen the truth of the text?

The only reason for making such changes is to accomplish their stated goal of making “homophobic interpretations impossible.” In other words, they are twisting the Word of God to suit their agenda.