Reading this fascinating take on Revelation (I highly recommend the entire series by the author):
I was astonished by some of the statements the author made based on KJV, which is currently considered the most accurate translation of the canonical texts of the Bible, with respect to the 144,000 saints in Rev. 14:4. I agree with most of the article, except for what I believe to be two errors which can be directly attributed to some misplaced creativity on the part of the KJV translators or to their use of adulterated sources.
In Rev. 14:4, here is the KJV excerpt (speaking about the 144,000 saints in heaven):
“These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. “
Based on the Greek, there are two possible misinterpretations in KJV: one concerning “defiled with women”, the other concerning saints being “virgins”, both found in just one single verse.
A more verbatim (and thus likely more accurate) translation from the Greek would read:
“These are they which were, [among OR] concerning their behavior towards women, not defiled.
Pure indeed they are” Rev. 14:4
That it not the same statement at all. The Greek does not imply that the saints had abstained from any sexual activity with women (as in: they never got married). It would be rather odd that, having destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for homosexuality, God would have modified the standard for saints in this way and declared women filthy defilers of male virginity. It makes no sense.
What the Greek text seems to be saying instead is that those considered saints had not engaged in abusive conduct towards women in any way, including, but not limited to, sinful sexual activity such as adultery or fornication, and rape, with a possible inclusion of any discriminatory behavior towards women as the economically weaker and potentially disadvantaged members of the society. This is a lot different from the interpretation found in KJV, as it does not imply that sex is dirty by definition, nor does it imply that women were created as devilish defilers of men, nor anything to that effect. Quite to the contrary, the Greek wording of 14:4 does not contradict Genesis 2:18-20 (the Hebrew original), from which we learn that a woman is her partner’s ezer kenegdo (strong help that shall match him). There’s nothing filthy about that. Why else would God have said in Genesis 1:28:
“Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth”
Have you ever thought about that?
In Greek, for all we know, μετὰ in Rev. 14:4 does not imply inclusiveness, which means these individuals are indeed men. (Whether women are allowed to teach or not is an entirely different question, though.)