While I agree the KJV has a lot of problems (I don’t use it), and I agree there are several translation problems, source problems, printing errors, overt political influence, etc. with the KJV--it’s important to avoid overstating.

First of all, when it comes to etymology one must be extremely careful. As a comparative literature professor, Michael Edwards correctly points out, “Etymology proves nothing,” (Michael Edwards, The Bible and Poetry, 2016, 2023, p 149). The Greek pharmakia does literally mean, “one who uses [makes] a drug/potion.” However, it was commonly associated in the ANE with sorcery because sorcerers and magicians used drugs and potions to cast spells and enter into trances--not just poison (they did that, too). You make the meaning of the word far too narrow.

Whether the English word “witch” or “sorcerer” was the best word to use--the Hebrew Scriptures and the Greek New Testament condemns the use of magic, magical potions, necromancy, and divination and those who practice them. King Saul seeks out a medium but had a hard time because he had executed spiritists and mediums. He followed the Deuteronomic code: Deuteronomy 18:10-11 – "Let no one be found among you who consigns a son or daughter to the fire, or who is an augur, a soothsayer, a diviner, a sorcerer, one who casts spells, or one who consults ghosts or familiar spirits, or one who inquires of the dead.” The word mekhashep is part of this grouping--this group of words “augur, soothsayer, diviner, sorcerer (or witch in KJV)” their activities follow. This verse is an example of Hebrew synonymous parallelism (a common literary device in both Hebrew and Greek languages). The individuals in this group are very similar — almost synonymous with each other — enough to lump them together.

So, while in one sense, the word may not necessarily mean “witch”, it often does encompass the meaning. (I’d note, too, that even today the term “witch” has an association with the use of herbs, natural drugs, and incantations).

Yes, King James may have had a beef with witches but don’t blame everything on his prejudices.

Secondly, ghost is not a mistranslation. In 1611 ghost was synonymous with spirit. Languages evolve--just as King James charity no longer means love so ghost has evolved in its meaning since 1611. Today, the word just doesn’t work because it’s no longer quite equivalent with spirit anymore. But in 1611, that wasn’t a mistranslation. There’s a difference between mistranslation and retaining the use of archaic language.

Jesus orders men to hate their fathers & mothers. Miseo is correctly translated “to hate.” All major and recognized English translations translate miseo in Luke 14:26 as “hate,” including the NRSV, NIV, NASV, CEB, etc.

Luke 6:22, 27 speak of how disciples will be “hated” (miseo); Matthew 10:22 (“you will be hated because of me”)--in Attic Greek and Koine Greek it carries the meaning of “hate”, “despise,” “dislike."

The problem we have with Luke 14:26 is that hyperbole seems to be lost on us. For some reason we want to turn the Bible into some wooden text that has no use for figures of speech.

Literary exaggeration was not a creation of the 20th & 21st centuries. Just as Jesus uses terminology like “gouge out your eye,” and “cut off your hand,” he employs other uses of exaggeration throughout his ministry--the Bible is filled with metaphor, simile, hyperbole and all other forms of literary devices.

Again, I agree that the KJV is not a great translation--it has many faults. It relies on a faulty text (Textus Receptus), does not make use of the more recent finds of ANE manuscripts, and uses archaic terminology not employed anymore--in other words, it’s not really the English language anymore (that’s a hyperbole). The NRSV is a good standard translation and the NIV is also a good dynamic equivalent.