In order to prevent any tendency of homophobic interpretations using the Sacred Scriptures, the unidentified pro-gay scholars produced the so-called Queen James Bible or Gay Bible in 2012 based on the 1769 edition of the King James Bible. The editors of this Bible version asserted that there were no negative verses in the Bible in referrence to homosexuality and thus all the biblical versions, except the QJV, are all scriptural misinterpretations.
Below are the biblical verses concerning homosexuality comparing the King James Version, approved Catholic version (Douay-Rheims), and the Queen James Version:
Genesis 19:5 —
“And they called Lot, and said to him: Where are the men that came in to thee at night? bring them out hither that we may KNOW them:” (Douay-Rheims)
“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)
NOTE that 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“. On the other hand, the word “know” can also be translated as “rape,” but “and humiliate” is a complete fabrication. 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. However, 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.
Leviticus 18:22 —
“Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind, because it is an abomination.” (Douay-Rheims)
“Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.” (KJV)
“Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind IN THE TEMPLE OF MOLECH: it is an abomination.” (QJV)
NOTE that “in the temple of Molech” is not in the original text. The modification is not justified. In the previous verse (Leviticus 18:21) it says, “And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD.” (KJV) The editors of the gay Bible have borrowed the topic of Molech from the previous verse and inserted it into v. 22. If the proceeding verses are referring only in the temple of Molech, then it should follow that the v. 23 also in condemning bestiality in the temple — Leviticus 18:23 says, “Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.” Does v. 23 condemn bestiality “in the temple of Molech” but accepted it outside the temple? Of course not. Why the selective inconsistency? The QJV editors are not justified in their text modification. They altered it to make it fit to their sexual preference.
Leviticus 20:13 —
“If any one lie with a man as with a woman, both have committed an abomination, let them be put to death: their blood be upon them.” ( Douay-Rheims)
“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; their blood shall be upon them.” (KJV)
“If a man also lie with mankind IN THE TEMPLE OF MOLECH, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” (QJV)
NOTE that there is nothing in the text that says “in the temple of Molech.” Molech is indeed mentioned in earlier verses in Leviticus 20:2, 3, 4, 5. However, if the reasoning of the pro-gay editors is to be followed, then it implied that the verses starting at 9 should also be in referrence to the temple of Molech, like in Leviticus 20:9 where Moses forbids cursing your mother and father (Leviticus 20:9), condems adultery (Leviticus 20:10), lying with one’s father’s wife (Leviticus 20:11), and lying with one’s daughter-in-law (Leviticus 20:12). Then after verse 13 it says not to marry a woman and her mother (Leviticus 20:14), to not lie with animals (Leviticus 20:15), etc. If the Gay Bible editors want to borrow a topic from several verses earlier and insert it into only one particular verse, why just that one found in v. 13? It’s because that is the verse that disagrees with their pro-homosexual agendum, so they modified it.
Romans 1:26 —
“For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature.” (Douay-Rheims)
“For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature.” (KJV)
“Their women did change their natural use into that which is against nature: AND LIKEWISE ALSO THE MEN, LEFT OF THE NATURAL USE OF THE WOMAN, BURNED IN RITUAL LUST, ONE TOWARD ANOTHER.” (QJV)
NOTE that there is a significant alteration in this verse. The editors not only removed several words (the beginning of the v. 26), but also added many more (in bold). They also moved words from the next verse (v. 27) into v. 26. The QJV editors rewrote what Paul actually said. Notice that “ritual lust” is not in the original Greek manuscript. The inclusion of “ritual lust” alters the meaning of the text to get it to say that that homosexuality is bad when it is practiced in some sort of religious ritual, as temple prostitution. But, this is not what it says. The original KJV has no occurrence of the word “ritual” in the entire Bible. It occurs in the NKJV (Old Testament) in Deuteronomy 23:17; 2 Kings 23:7; Ezekiel 20:26; Hosea 4:14. But, none of these are in the New Testament, so there is no justification for changing the text to “ritual lust.”
Romans 1:27 —
“And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error.” (Douay-Rheims)
“And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.” (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)
NOTE that they have added the words pagan, idolators, and vile affections so that the meaning of verse would be twisted entirely to focus not on plain homosexuality but paganism. They are not justified for this text. Those words are not there in the original Greek manuscripts.
1 Corinthians 6:9 —
“Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers,  Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind […]” (Douay-Rheims)
“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)
“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor MORALLY WEAK, nor PROMISCUOUS,” (QJV)
NOTE that he Greek word for “soft” is translated as “effeminate”; that is, a “soft, womanly man.” But the Queen James Bible editors claim that the word effeminate is unrelated to how the word is used today; rather, it means “morally weak.” The Greek word ἀρσενοκοίται was translated as “abusers of themselves with mankind,” refers to sodomites, males engaging in same-gender sexual activity. Arsenokoitais comes from two words, “ársēn, a male, and koítē, a bed — that is a man who lies in bed with another male, a homosexual.” However, the QJV editors claim this means “the male who has many beds,” an expression referring to men who are promiscuous. They say that, since no specific Greek word for homosexuality was used, they are justified in “translating” it as “promiscuous.”
1 Timothy 1:10 —
“For fornicators, for them who defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and whatever other thing is contrary to sound doctrine.” (Douay-Rheims)
“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; (KJV)
“For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine.” (QJV)
NOTE that the QJV removes “with mankind” because it implies teaching against homosexuality. The word in the Greek is ἀρσενοκοίταις, arsenokoitas.
Jude 1:7 —
“As Sodom and Gomorrha, and the neighbouring cities, in like manner, having given themselves to fornication, and going after other flesh, were made an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire.” (Douay-Rheims)
“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.” (KJV)
“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.” (QJV)
NOTE that the word “other” in Greek is heteros. It means “another of a different kind.” This verse alteration is possibly sound since the context of Sodom and Gomorrah is that the sodomites sought to have relations with the angels who they thought were men. However, the QJV editors are justifying themselves by saying that the “strange flesh” the mob of Sodom was seeking was “angelic flesh”; that is, it was only “strange” because it was nonhuman. Thus, the sexual violence the men of Sodom wanted to perform on Lot’s guests cannot be truly called a homosexual act.
This act by the QJV editors is a clear pervertion of the words of God for their own advantage — a work of Satan. Be reminded that “Every word of God proves true; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him. Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you and you be found a liar” (Proverbs 30:5-6). Thus, those who are not of the truth are not of God but of Satan, the “father of lies” (John 8:44).
Now, is this what the pro-LGBT advocates want — to go against God by desecrating and blaspheming His words? Is it not enough to disrespect the sanctity of the sacrament of Matrimony that even the Sacred Scriptures need to be altered? So true that the 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. Twisting the words of God does not make homosexuality morally acceptable. Pervertion of the sacred Scriptures does not make it best but make it worst.
For even though how hard they tried to alter the sacred Scriptures but “The words of the LORD are pure words: [as] silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.” (Psalm 12:6-7)
REPENT AND DENOUNCE SATAN!