The Queen James Bible Release: a Story of Malice and Deception
April 29th, 2013
LTRP Note: We believe this article, written by a [COLOR=RoyalBlue]Lighthouse Trails reader, goes hand in hand with our recent article, “4 Reasons Why Holman Publishers Should Not Have Inserted an Article by a Contemplative Author into Their King James Bibles. ” Both that and this article below show that the King James Bible is being exploited because it is in the public domain. While the so-called Queen James Bible may be an extreme case, it is still another case in point regardless.[/COLOR]
On December 12, 2012 an unnamed US publisher announced release of the Queen James Bible (QJB), dubbed A Gay Bible. It was apparently produced for the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual, and Transgender) community using the 1769 edition of the King James Bible (KJB) for its base translation. The following commentary and conclusions concern the contents of the QJB’s official website, its press release, and Internet coverage. It is assumed that the QJB is not a hoax due to the expense incurred to publish it and the care with which its editors and the publisher have concealed their identities.
Quoting the QJB official website:
Homosexuality was first mentioned in the Bible in 1946 in the Revised Standard Version. There is no mention of or reference to homosexuality in any Bible prior to this – only interpretations have been made. Anti-LGBT Bible interpretations commonly cite only eight verses in the Bible that they interpret to mean homosexuality is a sin; Eight verses in a book of thousands [implying an insignificant number to establish God’s meaning]!
The Queen James Bible seeks to resolve interpretive ambiguity in the Bible as it pertains to homosexuality: We edited those eight verses in a way that makes homophobic interpretations impossible.
The accusation of homophobia from the homosexual lobby against those who disagree with the LGBT worldview for biblical and moral reasons deliberately obscures the distinction between fear and reasoned disagreement. Unlike reasoned disagreement, fear in the phobic sense is irrational. Quoting Wikipedia:
A phobia (from the Greek, Phóbos, meaning “fear” or “morbid fear”) is, when used in the context of clinical psychology, a type of anxiety disorder, usually defined as a persistent fear of an object or situation in which the sufferer commits to great lengths in avoiding, typically disproportional to the actual danger posed, often being recognized as irrational
It is claimed that the term homosexual was not used in Bible translation before 1946. That term was also never used in any preserved text Bible because it did not exist in the English language until 1892, according to Webster’s Dictionary. Regardless of the language used, the essential meaning of homosexuality has been presented for millennia in Bible manuscripts as a form of sexual perversion and that understanding is also clear from Jesus’ and the apostles’ New Testament teachings on marriage as a sacred union of fidelity between one man and one woman. The term homosexual was introduced into Bible translation by the same theological revisionist school of textual criticism that is responsible for the modern Alexandrian Critical Text Bibles.
The QJB official website goes on to say:
The Bible is the word of God translated by man. This (saying nothing [of the] countless translations and the evolution of language itself) means the Bible can be interpreted in different ways, leading to what we call “interpretive ambiguity.” In editing The Queen James Bible we were faced with the decision to modify existing interpretively ambiguous language, or simply to delete it.
Clearly, the decision of the QJB’s editors and publisher was to modify the KJB’s text to accord with the LGBT agenda. To purchase the QJB, its official website directs one to Amazon where God is indicated as the Author and Jesus Christ as Contributor. It is unclear if this blasphemy is attributable to the editors, the publisher, or both.
The editors deliberately played upon James’s title (Queen for King), implying that rumours of his sexual proclivities made him one of them, so to speak. Alterations to the KJV text may calm the consciences of a demographic accused and offended by God’s intended understanding of the Bible regarding sexuality and marriage, but at what price? Quoting further from the QJB official website regarding James’ alleged sexual orientation:
Commonly known to biographers but often surprising to most Christians, King James I was a well-known bisexual. Though he did marry a woman, his many gay relationships were so well-known that amongst some of his friends and court, he was known as “Queen James.” It is in his great debt and honor that we name The Queen James Bible so.
No verifiable historical evidence that King James was either homosexual or bi-sexual has been found by this writer, although James has been described as having less than manly deportment for a king (The Bible in the Making, Geddes MacGregor, P.146). In its historical context, Queen James may well have simply referred to deportment, and nothing more. It should be obvious that such an observation regarding James’ manner does not warrant the indictment of his sexual orientation being anything but heterosexual. For the QJB editors to advance their interests without citing sources is slanderous and irresponsible, the more so when James’ accusers choose anonymity. Even if evidence of sexual perversion existed, it would in no way cast a shadow on the veracity of the King James Bible because James’ role was to commission it, not participate in its rigorous translation process. Who are we, the created, to question why God uses unlikely vessels, such as the Apostles and others, for His divine purposes?
Attempts by this writer and others to identify the US publisher and editors of the QJB have been unsuccessful. Further, Internet postings to date are not neutral regarding the QJB’s biases. They have also accepted as factual the association of the fictional Reverend J. Pearson and the real San Francisco Holy Innocents Episcopalian Church with the QJB.
Recent telephone discussion with clergy at Holy Innocents Episcopal Church revealed that they had no knowledge of the QJB prior to that discussion. That discussion also revealed that there had been a Rev. A (Bertie) Pearson at the Church, but not a Reverend J. Pearson, as cited in the QJB’s press release. Rev. Bertie Pearson left Holy Innocents Episcopal Church on October 1, 2012 to minister elsewhere. On December 12, 2012, PR Web, an online press release distribution service, (www.prweb.com/) issued the press release titled, “New Gay Bible Prevents Homophobic Misinterpretation of Key Verses; Titled The Queen James Bible.” During a telephone conversation with the falsely associated Rev. Bertie Pearson, he stated that he also had no knowledge of the QJB until contacted by his former church, whereupon he had PR Web remove the article from its website because it was inaccurate and libelous.
The QJB has an International Standard Book Number (ISBN), but the ISBN Registration Office in the US only has record of John Pearson as the contact person and Queen James as the publisher. Pink News (firstname.lastname@example.org), a UK website that caters to the European LBGT community, posted an article on December 13, 2012 titled, “San Francisco: Gay-friendly ‘Queen James’ Bible launched, naming Reverend Pearson of San Francisco’s Holy Innocents Church” (no given name initial). It is noteworthy that the Pink News posting occurred just one day after PR Web’s press release in the US. Telephone contact with the US Copyright Office revealed that there is no record of copyright registration for the QJB, including among recent registration applications awaiting processing. If there had, identifiers such as God or Queen James would have been questioned. Apparently, the ISBN Registration Office did not do that. Copyright registration would afford protection under law for the holder and would become part of the public record, which would open the holder’s identity to disclosure. However, registration would not be sought if a work’s copyright holder wanted anonymity, which is obviously the situation regarding the QJB – so far. US copyright begins the moment a work is created and it lasts until the author’s death and/or its ownership is transferred, plus seventy years. Copyright work, registered or not, can show the copyright symbol (C inside a circle), which the QJB does.
The following conclusions drawn from unsuccessfully attempting to identify of the QJB’s editors and publisher serve as a warning to be vigilant and to anticipate future sophisticated deceptive attacks on the King James Bible and its teaching.
– The QJB editors and publisher apparently have no fear of having to one day answer to the Lord for blasphemy, heresy, and gross unethical and immoral conduct.
– The QJB editors and publisher apparently have no scruples about deliberately propagating disinformation and libeling others.
– So far, the QJB editors have failed to publicly associate with their altered KJV, and they have been careful to avoid scrutiny. By any standard, that is moral cowardice and contrary to the admonition of Scripture, which is to stand publicly for one’s faith.
– The KJ Bible was chosen for corruption because outside the UK its text is in the public domain and therefore not subject to copyright violation. The year 1769 identifies the King James as the text used. A non-UK KJ text would have required permission from the copyright owner to alter it, and that would have revealed the QJB’s editors’ identities.
– Several factors suggest the QJB editors may reside in the UK and be associated with the LGBT community there and in the US. Those factors include:
•The one-day separation between the PR Web’s US press release and the UK’s Pink News’ article suggests that Pink News may have anticipated the release. No LGBT publication from another English-speaking country appears to have posted an Internet QJB article within such a short period after PR Web’s release.
•The wording on the QJB’s official website (i.e. printed and bound in the United States), suggests that it was not edited in the US.
•Knowing that only the KJV text is in the public domain outside the UK necessitated a non-UK publisher in a large market. It seems unlikely the QJB’s editors, if from the UK, would select another Commonwealth country for publishing, such as Canada or Australia, and visa-versa.
•Editing abroad and publishing in the US makes it unlikely that prosecution would occur should the editors and publisher be identified.
•Choosing a San Francisco church to scapegoat is consistent with that city’s being internationally known for its homosexual community. And choosing the surname of a past member of that church’s clergy added superficial plausibility to the press release and subsequent coverage. But would domestic (US) editors be as careless in overlooking an individual’s correct given name initial if they were concerned about not raising suspicion?
One would hope that even the LGBT community would distance itself from the QJB if it were to become aware of the deceptive tactics of its editors and publisher on its behalf. Concerning the alteration of Scripture, Revelation 22:18-19 gives clear warning:
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. (KJV)