Context, context, context
K.J.B.
“Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover. And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast. And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it” (Luke 2:41-43).
A.S.V.
“And his parents went every year to Jerusalem at the feast of the passover. And when he was twelve years old, they went up after the custom of the feast; and when they had fulfilled the days, as they were returning, the boy Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem: and his parents knew it not” (Luke 2:41-43).
The KJB clarifies the ‘legal’ notion by showing that Mary is Jesus’ mother while the ASV changes the ‘familial’ to parents.
Agreed, and if the reader had read Luke 1, there would be no confusion that the use of parents of Jesus in Luke 2 refers to the legal notion, not familial. It appear to me you are looking for controversies that are not there.
Luke 2:48-49 (KJB) (my emphasis in bold)
And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?
Luke 2:48-49 (ASV) (my emphasis in bold)
And when they saw him, they were astonished; and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I sought thee sorrowing.And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? knew ye not that I must be in my Father’s house?
Clearly both show that Jesus is the Son of God.