Daniel chapter 11 speaks of the Willful king that will profane the temple and persecute the Jews. One of the many descriptions given to him is found in verse 37,
וְעַל-אֱלֹהֵי אֲבֹתָיו לֹא יָבִין, וְעַל-חֶמְדַּת נָשִׁים
וְעַל-כָּל-אֱלוֹהַּ לֹא יָבִין: כִּי עַל-כֹּל, יִתְגַּדָּל
He will show no regard for the gods of his ancestors or for the chemdas nashim, nor will he regard any god, but will exalt himself
above them all.
The meaning of chemdas nashim is unclear and I found different interpretation among the many translations, but mainly they fall neatly between the two folowing models of exegesis:
- desire of women/lust for women/love of women (which means he will have no sexual attraction towards women)
- the god loved by women (perhaps a fertility goddess?)
For example the KJV translates thus,
Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of
women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.
While the CEV has,
This king will reject the gods his ancestors worshiped and the god
preferred by women. In fact, he will put himself above all gods
The word god is obviously not present in the words chemdas nashim, but the CEV and others choose to translate the word chemdas (construct state of chemda) into "the desire of" or "the one desired" which can also mean "the god desired by". Whereas, the KJV and others opt for the simple translation "love of" or "lust for" (in their words, "desire of"). Judging from context (gods) the CEV is to be favored over the KJV; however the latter has the advantage of being more simple and straightforward as it doesn’t force in any words that are not present in the original text (see also 2 Samuel 1:26 for a similar Hebrew expression for "love of women").
Hermeneutically speaking, what are the arguments for or against the KJV? Also how do supporters of the KJV explain the juxtaposition of "having no lust for women" with "having no regard for the gods"?