I'll let Ken know :-)
Even God speaks of “my soul” at Isa. 42:1.
In the LXX the words "my soul" as found in the KJV appear as "psuche", and in the Hebrew as "nephesh". A little point that both terms mean the same thing. Things like this should be noted, as Ken says, in the margin, in brackets, or in a note at the bottom of the page. In the eyes of most people the words "my soul" insinuates something belonging to them - a mystical, ethereal something within them. Anyone who realizes that it is God Himself speaking in Isa. 42:1 would think that God Himself has within Himself a "soul". But God is a "spirit" scripture tells us. Does a "spirit" have a "soul"? I think that this verse should have been translated different. Maybe like, "my being"? Try to read it that way and see what a difference it makes to your understanding. It opened up my eyes!
Does it matter? Yes, if we believe Jesus’ words at John 4:24 about worshiping God “in truth”.
Excellent point! And we should also not neglect to understand what Jesus said in John 12:47-50 and what is said in Proverbs 30:5-6.
Or just "I'm troubled." (Elvis translation: I'm all shook up.)
Of course, affecting the problem is that those of us who've heard the KJV as far back as we can remember have OUR language influenced by it. When I say, "My heart is troubled within me," I know I MAY be quoting, but I don't MEAN to be quoting.
I completely agree that at least in "Scholarly" versions of the Bible, when a word like nepesh or psyche is translated in different ways, a note ought to be made of it.
“nephesh
neh’-fesh
from ‘naphash’ (5314); properly, a breathing creature, i.e. animal of (abstractly) vitality; used very widely in a literal, accommodated or figurative sense (bodily or mental):—any, appetite, beast, body, breath, creature, X dead(-ly), desire, X (dis-)contented, X fish, ghost, + greedy, he, heart(-y), (hath, X jeopardy of) life (X in jeopardy), lust, man, me, mind, mortally, one, own, person, pleasure, (her-, him-, my-, thy-)self, them (your)-selves, + slay, soul, + tablet, they, thing, (X she) will, X would have it.”
“being” would fit, I guess. But this shows then that “soul” cannot be an intelligence or something that is separate and able to exist beyond the person.
“Anyone who realizes that it is God Himself speaking in Isa. 42:1 would think that God Himself has within Himself a “soul”.”
And that would be because they are attaching their idea of what soul is rather than how the verse and the Scriptures as a whole uses the term.