I don’t think Ven. T’s translation places a different spin on V&V than the other translations you compared to. The questioner is asking how the loke/world is examined/vicāra.
If there is a mistake in associating V&V from that passage with vipassana/insight, that would be my own interpretation, I’m not sure what Ven. T’s is, but because he’s translating it with the same terms as he does for first jhana V&V, I can see that’s why people would think that.
In any case, it is unambiguous that the exploring/examining of the world (loke) is at least one of the meaning of V&V in that passage. But the fact that 4th jhana, 5 hindrances, and dhamma-takka (takka is even more discursive and coarse than vitakka) are all alluded to, and the original questioner is asking the Buddha, “seated in jhana”, the way to nirvana, I think it’s pretty clear V&V is also alluding to the possibility of first jhana V&V (see AN 9.36) for attaining nirvana while IN first jhana.
And how the buddha answers the question, it seems clear the questioner can not only do four jhanas prior to meeting him, but also formless attainments (vinnana-anta-ayatanam).
So while wrong thinking such as thoughts of lust, hatred, etc, can bind us to the world, by replacing the wrong thoughts with right thoughts of nekkhamma, renunciation, good will, etc, plays a key role in liberation. And first jhana acknowledges this.
I dug up this passage just for you Mike 
You still think V&V in Snp 5.14 is a bad thing to get rid of along with tanha? Or as it often is the case with terse verse in poetry, multiple meanings are intended?
Also see rohittasa sutta, AN 4.45. Without fully understanding and exploring loke, an end to dukkha can not happen. And how is one going to fully explore the landscape of loke without vitakka and vicara? When samadhi deepens, you could say V&V is replaced with a subtler equivalent in S&S, upekkha, maybe dhamma-vicaya-sambojjhanga and vimamsa of 4ip, but V&V in first jhana would be the natural lead into that.