The Queen James Bible Paperback – November 27, 2012

With the publication of the Queen James Bible, the editors are very brave in following their convictions – they demonstrate that there is a serious debate to be had, and that a number of those who are in, or who agree with, same-gender relationships, do identify themselves as Christian – a point with which I cannot disagree. I may disagree concerning issues of biblical exegesis, but then I disagree with others over biblical exegesis, but on different topics of discussion – that is not a reason to discount their fellowship in Christ.My comments concern the issue of biblical exegesis especially where it concerns translation.It seems to me that the publication philosophy of this bible is; that if you dislike comments in the Biblical text, then find research that is convenient to your viewpoint, and amend the offending verses. There is an emerging tradition in this direction – witness “The Inclusive Bible”.In the preface entitled “A Gay Bible” it suggests that this is a serious work, however, it seems to me that the renaming in the title (to “Queen James” from King James) is gratuitous, and seems ‘camp’ (affected) – even taking into account King James’ alleged bi-sexual nature. If there is a serious point to be made, the renaming detracts from that. The Introduction (The Editor’s Notes) does provide a serious read, but I suspect many will fail to get that far put off by the title.Still found in ‘pro-same gender attraction’ Christian literature is the recasting of the Levitical injunctions against same sex unions as being injunctions against sacred prostitution. The Queen James Bible is no exception (mentioned on page 5 of the Bible). This claim concerning sacred prostitution has been thoroughly debunked by Dr Stephanie Budin, in "The Myth of Sacred Prostitution in Antiquity" Cambridge University Press 2008. Budin's work is not original and uses the work pioneered by an Israeli Professor Mayer Gruber, whose work is not available in English but has proved beyond doubt that there is no "ambiguity" in the prohibition for sexual relationship among same sex men. Dr. Mayer I. Gruber, is professor in the Department of Bible and Ancient Near East at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Beersheva, Israel. His works are as follows; Mayer I. Gruber, “The qadesh in the Book of Kings and in Other Sources” [in Hebrew], Tarbiz 52 (1983): 167–76; idem, “Hebrew qedeshah and its Canaanite and Akkadian Cognates,” Ugarit Forschungen 18 (1986): 133–48; idem, “The qedeshah—What Was its Function?” [in Hebrew], Beer Sheva 3 (1988).The other points in the Introduction (Editor’s Notes pages 3-9) defending the changes in the King James Version text, have been amply discussed by Professor Robert A. J. Gagnon in his book “The Bible and Homosexual Practice, Texts and Hermeneutics”, Abingdon Press, Nashville, 2001; the conclusions of which differing from those which justify the changes in the King James Bible text to create the present “Queen James” edition.Also some argue (but not in this bible) that our Lord was silent on the subject of same-gender relationships, but that silence is not absolute. In the Matthean affirmation for marriage given by our Lord, is the assumption of the anthropology of the Old Testament (our Lord quotes from Genesis) and the Levitical Law which still held in the mind of Jesus (Matthew 5:18).I do understand the pastoral issues, especially when it is argued that those with a same sex attraction cannot help that attraction. For many concerned Christians, a pastoral approach, that is in concert with a biblical witness is a better solution, recognising God does indeed forgive the failings of our human fragility - of all mankind - not just a section – and not just relating to sexual relationships, as if those led to the most serious sins! Psalm 103:10-14; “He hath not dealt with us after our sins; nor rewarded us according to our iniquities. For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them that fear him. As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us. Like as a father pitieth his children, so the LORD pitieth them that fear him. For he knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust.”

I purchased this version of the Bible a few years ago right here on Amazon. I let a life in my younger years in which I thought sexual orientation and the Bible oxy morons. I thought that being gay was incompatible with Christianity. Then I started studying the so called clobber passages. In the New Testament , Paul used The Greek words malakoi and arsenokoitai to describe pagan behavior in the Roman religion, such as, sex acts in temples (temple prostitution, etc) which were at odds with his teaching. The word homosexuality was coined in 1892 in a text on variations in sex practices, a scientific work. In the 1940’s these two Greek words were re-translated “homosexual”. Malakoi literally means soft, not homosexual. In fact, the same word was used in Matthew in which Jesus was referring to softe clothing. This word was traditionally translated as morally weak or effeminate (a reference to, again, temple prostitutes). Arsenakoitai is a word that is in rare use in the Greek world during the time of Paul’s ministry but never translated as such except in modern English translates of the Bible written in a era of extreme homophobia. I could go on and on. The reviews of this version of the Holy Scriptures here are mostly based up that homophobia and not sound Biblical exegesis. They are also ignoring other passages, such as, Jesus’ the two commandments that Jesus gave us, Love God, Love others. He said that all of God’s word was summed up in those two commandments. How is the language of these reviews showing fulfillment of the commandment to love others as yourself?This version is based upon the original KJV and the language is, of course, archaic. It also does not address the over abundance of gender exclusive language, that no longer holds cultural relevance. We must always take scripture in context of the time it was written. When the scriptures were written, women and children were treated as property. Today, we recognize the value of women as equals of men, and that they always have been, by God’s original design. There is a great translation that addresses this issue: Today’s New International Version. It was discontinued by the producer and publisher of it due to the backlash from the Evangelicals who hold patriarchy as sacred. It, however, does not address the clobber passages. I wish the two concepts could be combined in one version.

I got this because I'm gay, mainly as a funny thing to have on the shelf, but also because I thought, hey why not give the bible another read? But I really felt the editors did a crappy job of making their changes and rationalizing them. In some passages they make it kind of not an abomination??? The bottom line is, keep reading the bible, idiots. It keeps you from being too evil I guess. I've read it and it's a good book. Some of it is beautiful and informs how I live my life (NOT the parts about incest and genocide, etc.), but there is a wealth of other good reading in this world.