I'm guessing the direction and implications of the translations are uncomfortable to a sincere (I believe Elsie is) literalist.
The Bible as currently understood and translated does not ever give as heartfelt an outcry against slavery as Darwin did. That must pain at least some literalists.
There isn't any outcry against slavery whatsoever in the Bible. There are regulations, particularly in regard to acquiring slaves, but no outcry against ownership of slaves. The outcry that Elsie found deals with slave trading or kidnapping. Obviously this deals with illicit means of acquiring slaves.
My sincerity lies with the original languages.
I have no dog in the KJV vs the others fight as I feel NONE are perfect (or can they EVER be). In the future, any other 'translation' or paraphrase will not be PERFECT, either.
This being said, ANY translation is suffcient to get one directed towards Jesus and getting their soul saved!
As far as 'literalism' is concerned; some things in Scripture are literally metaphors and allegories and some are not.
People FIGHT over which are which in many places, but this STILL does not detract away from the Salvation message, other than a 'sinner' (who ain't? ;^) can use as an excuse (that will not hold up, I imagine) that "Them guys fussed and fought all the time: who would want to be one of them?"