Why Frank Lodgson's Statement on the NASB is Valid

"I must under God denounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version. I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord...We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interview some of the translators; I sat with the translator; I wrote the preface. When you see the preface to the New American Standard, those are my words...it's wrong, it's terribly wrong; it's frightfully wrong...I'm in trouble;...I can no longer ignore these criticisms I am hearing and I can't refute them. The deletions are absolutely frightening...there are so many. The finest leaders that we have today haven't gone into it [new versions of Wescott and Hort's corrupted Greek text] just as I hadn't gone into it...that's how easily one can be deceived...Are we so naive that we do not suspect Satanic deception in all of this?"

- Frank Logsdon

Audio Recording: https://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/logsdon-repudiates-nasb.html

https://www.defendproclaimthefaith.org/dr_frank_logsdon.html

Lockman Foundation Statement:

The Board of Directors of The Lockman Foundation launched the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE translation work in the late 1950’s following the completion of the AMPLIFIED NEW TESTAMENT. Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon was acquainted with Dewey Lockman, president of The Lockman Foundation, prior to Mr. Lockman’s death in 1974. Mr. Logsdon was never a member of the Board of Directors, nor was he an employee of The Lockman Foundation. Mr. Logsdon had no authority to hire employees or translators for the Foundation, to set policy, to vote, to hold office, to incur expenses, etc. He cannot be considered “co-founder” of the NASB, nor part of The Lockman Foundation, nor part of the NASB translation team, nor did he write the forward of the NASB. According to our records, he was present at board meetings on two occasions — once to hear a travel report; and once to deliver an “inspirational thought.”

Mr. Logsdon last wrote to Mr. Lockman in fall of 1973 that he was moving to Florida. Mr. Lockman replied that he was surprised and saddened by his decision to leave the area. Mr. Lockman passed away in January of 1974, and no further correspondence was exchanged between Frank Logsdon and The Lockman Foundation. He resided in Florida until his passing some years ago.

The grass withers, the flower fades; but the word of our God stands forever. Isaiah 40:8 (NASB)

The assumption here is that Lodgson's statements have no validity as he was not part of the board of directors, which means he had no official capacity at all.

But as someone who is very used to not working with "official capacity", I find this statement ridiculous. A lot of times there are influencers and leaders who for some reason or another are not part of the official list of people involved, sometimes because they want no credit or other valid reasons, but sometimes with sinister agendas, yet wield massive influence, even sometimes the most influence, over a project. An unofficial or undocumented capacity does not mean no capacity at all.

Notice the Lockman Foundation does not directly contradict Lodgson's statements of interviewing translators, rather he just did not have the official capacity to hire or incur expenses.

Now, I find it interesting the statement does not say he did not write the preface, just the forward. The preface is signed "Editorial Board, The Lockman Foundation". Who wrote it then? And could have Mr. Lodgson ghost written it? 

My aim at this post is not to prove Lodgson's statement true, just valid, even in light of the Lockman foundation statement. And it is valid. 

Comprehensive KJV Only Guide

This will be a long, long post. Whatever points you bring up will probably be at least alluded to in the post.
The Severity of the Why the Topic of Bible Transmission/KJV Only is Essential:
The Bible, if you are a Christian, is where we get all of our beliefs from. If you get the Bible wrong, you get most, if not all, your theology wrong. If you do not have a perfect Bible today in your hands, you cannot have a perfect belief, because faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God.

Revelation 22
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Now some may argue that isn’t a literal reading or it applies only to Revelation or whatever. It doesn’t discount the fact that the Bible at the very least holds its own words (or Revelation’s) very important, and at the most, threatens hell or an equivalent for those who add or subtract words.
We do see the same words in in Deuteronomy, and thus since it is a cross reference, it covers the whole Bible from Old to New (or at the very least, Deuteronomy and Revelation).
The point is, handling the Bible’s words is a severe thing, whatever way you look at it.
Categories of KJV Only:
First understand not every KJV Only adherent believe the exact same things about the KJV.

• Preference KJV Only
  The person only prefers to read the KJV for its language, prose, or some other non-important reason that has no or little bearing whether it is the Word of God or not. May feel comfortable with other versions.
• Best Manuscripts KJV Only
  The line of Antioch and Majority Manuscripts used throughout church history where the KJV is translated form versus the corrupt Alexandrian and Minority Manuscripts rejected by church history where most newer versions are based of. This one may be comfortable with NKJV and other Majority text derivative translations.
• Best Translation KJV Only
  Comparisons between the KJV and other versions are often a thing with this category. Very closely related to Best Manuscripts, and may use some Supernatural/Prophetic KJV Only arguments. Prefers the KJV as it is the best English translation and version due to the KJV translators exceptional translation skills and other humanistic considerations. They may believe however that a KJV equivalent can exist or can be achievable in otherm non-English langauges as equal to the Word of God.
• Supernatural/Prophetic KJV Only
  Based on the belief that God is supernaturally active in Bible transmission and translation and publishing and language spread today, and is based on prophetic readings of the Word of God about the Word of God that the KJV seems to fulfill. The KJV is the final and only perfect Word of God for today, and that excludes other language translations as well. So-called Ruckmanites, “double inspiration”, “KJV Superior” also falls in this camp but is not exclusive to them. This category seeks out to strip all humanistic reasoning of Bible transmission and replace them with Biblically-based supernatural reasoning.

Reasons why someone can be KJV Only:

• Reasons for Perfection
  Objective Truth versus Subjective Truth
  Either there is an objective truth apart from myself or a subjective truth of myself.
  Subjective truth deals with trying to judge interpretation, meanings, intentions, emotions, feeling, figurative, all personal things, when it affects me.
  (For example, it is subjective when someone says this Bible passage says to me, and sees the same meaning in a different wording.)
  Objective truth however deals with trying to judge ideas, words, literalness by their own merit apart from myself.
  (For example, focusing on the differences of the wording because the wording is different in each version, even though they sound the same to me. Each version stands on its own in objectivity. They may mean the same in subjectivity, however, each subjectivity is different.)
  An argument where the object, in this case, the Bible, is not fixed or stable, but is wholly reliant on meaning, is a subjective philosophy.
  Subjective philosophy is inherently sinful, because self is inherently sinful. Any truth must be apart from selves.
  
• Reasons for a Perfect Bible
  The Bible claims to be Truth itself, along with the Son of God and the Spirit of God.
  

The Scripture of God is Truth

John 17:17
17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

The Son of God is Truth

John 14:6
6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

The Spirit of God is Truth

John 16:13
13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

So if we have many valid Bibles, we have many truths. Right?
But as we note on other things called truth, they are exclusive.
There is one true Christ, and many false Christs

Matthew 24:24
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

There is one true Spirit, and many false spirits

1 John 4
4 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

And in that case,
There is one true Bible, and many false Bibles

2 Corinthians 2:17
17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

This passage is speaking about the many forgeries of Paul’s and other apostle’s letters already spreading in Paul’s time. Things like Gnostic gospels and so on. They had a Bible version problem back then. It isn’t just a modern phenomenon.

• Reasons for a Perfectly Worded Bible
  The Bible promises objective words preserved, not subjective meanings.

Isaiah 28:10
10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

Matthew 5:18
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
A jot is the dot on an “i” and a tittle is the line across a “t”.

Matthew 24:35
35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

Nowhere in the Bible do we see the same emphasis at all at so-called “core meanings” like the Bible does with individual words.
The power of individual words are often very understated.
If you add a single word “not” in Genesis 1:1, you will reverse the whole meaning of the Bible.
Here, we see the Bible put great credence on the differences between similar words:

Hebrews 4:12
12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
This verse is how we know that the soul and spirit are separate as a joint and marrow are distinct. Those who hold to a figurative interpretation often confuse soul and spirit as one thing.

And we see the hermeneutics principle of the Bible: division, not unity, when it comes to the Bible. In other words, words that seem the same but are different… are different more than they are the same. (For example, Israel and the Church are related, and both are people of God, but are ultimately distinct and divided from each other, not unified. Or faith, hope, love are all good traits, but are different from each other. Or grace and mercy are very similar, but are actually opposite in definition, and must not be confused as one thing.)

2 Timothy 2:15
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Why is this important? Each individual word is important in the Bible. If each objective word is important, then subjective meaning is secondary.

• Reasons for a Perfectly Worded and Translated Bible
  So in this case, is the original point (Perfection) broken by this? If an original needs to be translated to be perfect, then the original wasn’t perfect? The original is the objective object, right?

We look at this more below in the assumptions of perfection. The mistake of thinking that is thinking perfection is static, not dynamic. The idea of objectivity is not broken. Adaptation does not always break objectivity. Wrong adaptation does, however.
The Bible has been translated even in Hebrew and Greek times. In fact, we see Jesus quote from an Aramaic translation of Isaiah, not Hebrew Isaiah. The apostles translated Old Testament references in the Greek New Testament. So we have a basis on how to translate the Bible.

• Reasons for the KJV being that Perfectly Worded and Translated Bible
  Only the KJV has pure manuscripts, a Spirit power-filled history even in modernity, and it is the only Bible that fulfills prophecies about the Bible itself. I expound on why below under Basics of KJV Only, but first, let me destroy your assumptions with counter-intuition.

Addressing Assumptions:

• Assumptions about God

God inspired the originals once and that’s it or in other words (Or)
God creates everything perfectly once and leaves it alone (Deistic God)
False. God does not leave even His perfect creations alone, much less the Bible.
God is not active in the Bible transmission process of inspiration, preservation, and translation (Deistic God)
Again, as noted, false. God is involved with everything, and especially the Bible transmission process.

• Assumptions about Perfection and Concepts
  Perfection is an instant process, which is why the originals were perfect!
  False. There is more than one type of perfection. What you propose is a deistic, instant perfection which is not found in the Bible.
  Static perfection versus dynamic perfection. Anything on Earth and not in Heaven needs a dynamic perfection. Perfect Adam was innocent, but not perfect, Biblically. Since the Bible came down from Heaven, it needs a dynamic perfection, not a static one.

Patience is not instant and is one of the few times we see the word “perfect” in the Bible

James 1
4 But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.

A perfect Jesus needed to grow in wisdom, and stature, and favour. He did not come down as a static perfect angel, but a dynamically perfect Son of Man that grows.

Luke 2:52
52 And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.

In that same sense, the Bible needed to “increase” to perfection, in this case seven times

Psalm 12:6
6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
We cover the prophecy in this verse below.

• Assumptions about Languages
  Hebrew and Greek are “holy” languages! God can only work through them!
  False. All languages were created by God at Babel

There were many versions of Hebrew/Greek/other Bibles like we do with English
False. Only one for each language at a time. There was one Hebrew Bible in the time of early Israel. No other competing Bibles, whether Hebrew or another language. There was one Aramaic Bible in time of the exile. No other competing Bibles whether in Aramaic or another language. There was one Greek Bible for the apostolic era, then one Syriac Bible for the era after that, then one Latin Bible for the Dark Ages (not the Roman Catholic New Vulgate, but the Old Vulgate), then one German Bible for Reformation (from Luther), then, finally, one English Bible for today.
We also see that the main Bible of an era is always in the main language of the people of God in that era. Since the Gentile Church is the major force of the people of God today, it is English (along with other reasons).

• Assumptions about Originals and Bible Transmission
  The originals are the originals
  False. The true originals reside in heaven forever. Since the ones on Earth are thus earthly originals, they have to go through a purification process.

Psalm 119:89
89 For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven.

Only the originals given to the Bible writers are/could be perfect
They were perfect, but only for their time. They were incomplete as time went on.
Only the originals were inspired (Or)
Inspiration is a static, one-time thing!
False. Scripture is given by inspiration, and scripture by definition means copies (script-, writing -ture, repeated), not originals. We know it is speaking about copies because the same word are used to talk about the manuscripts of the Old Testament that Paul had, which are definitely copies, not original autographs.
Inspiration only happens with Bibles
Humanity, too, is inspired the same way. Adam the original human was inspired by God the same way He inspired the originals. The Bible uses the same word of inspiration and breathing for both instances.
Thus with that, we can make direct analogies from humanity’s transmission to the line of Bible transmission.

• Assumptions about Manuscripts
  The older a manuscript is, the better and more accurate, right?
  False. The more numerous a manuscript is, the better. because God is involved in the Bible transmission, it follows that the majority of the Bibles the Church uses in its history would be correctly preserved. The fact we have older manuscripts that differ from the majority means those were reject copies, rejected by the Church at large in history. This is the same reasoning why we don’t accept the extra gospels to the canon is because they weren’t accepted by the church at large.

Also, rejected older manuscripts can only be found if they are preserved, which means they weren’t used at all. The ones the church actually uses, broke down, of course, and so new copies had to be made. This is why we have so many copies of the Majority Text but so little of the Minority Text: the church trusted it, and so they made more copies of it, and the older copies wore out quick, which is why we don’t see older Majority manuscripts.

• Assumptions about Translations
  Translations can never be holy or supernatural! ( Or We never see translation in the Bible!)
  False. Translation is in the Bible, both the spiritual act, essence, and process.
  First, we see God translating Enoch. And as I note, humanity is inspired the same way as Bibles were inspired and took the same supernatural act, thus we can note that this translation also applies to correct Bible translation.

Second, we see in the Gospels Jesus reading an Aramaic translation of the Hebrew Isaiah, not the Hebrew Isaiah. Hence we know translation of the original can be valid.
Third, we see how the apostles translated Old Testament passages to New Testament references. For example, we see how the apostles translated the Isaiah passage Jesus quotes from to the Greek New Testament. This process is very close to how the KJV translators translated to English and is very different from the scholarly translation process we see today.
Translation is a human/secular/scholarly thing apart from Bible transmission!
False. As noted, Inspiration and Translation are both parts of the same human transmission, and hence there is no reason to conclude translation is apart from divine Bible transmission
Translations were never done in Bible times
Look above for the answer.
Translations can never be better than the originals
False. As I have shown, Enoch the translated is superior to Adam the original.

• Assumptions about Word-to-Word Equivalency and Accuracy
  This Bible version has a better word-to-word equivalency rating than the KJV!
  This is often said about comparing ESV, NASB, etc. to the KJV. However, the basis of the accusation is faulty at best.

The root assumption of a better word-to-word equivalency comes from uninspired Hebrew and Greek to English lexicons. No, dictionaries are not inspired, but the Bible is.
Also, another assumption is that word-to-word equivalency is a valid standard. It isn’t. We see how the Bible translates Old Testament passages it references in the New Testament. For example, the Hebrew Tetragrammatron, God’s name spelled out, is translated by the apostles into Greek Kyrios, which just means Lord. And you can technically spell it out in Greek, but the apostles in inspiration of the Holy Spirit “reduces” it to mere Kyrios.

• Assumptions concerning Updates and Relevancy

Covered more under Archaic Words in the Bible below.
Basics of KJV Only:

• Manuscript Evidence

The Sinaiticus and Vaticanus manuscripts, the Minority Manuscripts, often said as older, were found in the equivalent of church trash cans and with recent research considered possible forgeries

• Translation Evidence
  It is no secret the exceptional pedigree of the King James translators. Their work was double checked and triple checked and debated in different languages.

Their translator’s methodology is also very transparent, documented in the Preface and elsewhere. Often, they are accused of Anglicanism, or colluding with the king, but we have their documents to show what they were thinking in translating whichever word or not. In character and spiritual matters, too, they were off the charts. Modern translator methodology however is very centralized, usually with an editor-in-chief.
We also see the King James translators consistently translate the Bible how the apostles themselves translated Old Testament passages references to the New Testament, and took that methodology and applied it to English.

• Historical Evidence
  We see the KJV behind both of the nationwide Revivals (such as the Welsh revival), Great Awakenings, the Missionary Movements, which is considered the Philadelphia Church Age. We see the founding of the first “Christian” nation, America and its subsequent rise to superpower. (while the term “Christian nation” is controversial, compared to other governments’ founding documents and such, it definitely is, and that’s all that matters, and besides, all mentions of “Christian” in the Bible talks about outward appearance, not salvation). No other version can boast of being part of those movements in any significant manner.
  
• Prophetic Evidence
  Only the KJV can fulfill Psalms 12:6
  

Psalm 12:6
6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
English is the seventh language the Bible was translated in.
The King James is the seventh English translation.
The 7th edition of the KJV is the world’s best selling book. Yes, this includes all other Bibles and KJV editions.

Isaiah canon of 66 explained below in Miscellany.
Jeremiah prophecy of an evil king creating a perfect Bible explained below in Miscellany.

• Versions Comparison Evidence
  Perhaps the most common evidence. This includes comparing the KJV with the NIV, ESV, etc. where the modern versions remove key words, phrases, and entire verses. Or sub in a fotnote that casts doubt upon truth such as “this chapter is not present in the oldest manuscript” blahblah.

There is no space for that, Google is your friend for comparisons.

• Modern Evidence
  English as the fastest growing international Gentile language
  The KJV is the best selling book and Bible of all time
  The 7th edition of the KJV is the best selling book of all time
  The KJV is also the one read most by Christians

The great success of the KJV means it does have fruit.

Acts 5
38 And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:
39 But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.

Even in the flood of modern versions we have today, the KJV reigns supreme. Compared to KJV’s 85% superiority, the closest we see is NIV at 11%.
Miscellany:
Evil King creates a Perfect Bible in the Bible
How about the person of King James (or Anglicanism or something)?
Accusation of the influence of the king on translation is overblown.
But more importantly, we see in the Bible that God creates a perfect rendition of Jeremiah’s books along with other books of the Bible under an evil king’s command in Jeremiah 30. To accuse King James of being evil is actually fulfilling Bible prophecy and pattern.
Archaic Words in the Bible
Should archaic words be updated to synonyms?
The Bible actually does speak about archaic words.

I Samuel 9
9 (Beforetime in Israel, when a man went to enquire of God, thus he spake, Come, and let us go to the seer: for he that is now called a Prophet was beforetime called a Seer.)
10 Then said Saul to his servant, Well said; come, let us go. So they went unto the city where the man of God was.
11 And as they went up the hill to the city, they found young maidens going out to draw water, and said unto them, Is the seer here?

Here we see the Bible acknowledging that seer is an archaic word in comparison to the word prophet. Yet in the next passage, it continues to use seer instead of prophet. Just simply put, an archaic synonym of a word is still preferred if it is more accurate.
Since the Bible is our guide, we should follow
The Bible Canon (66) in the Bible
Did we get the canon through historical or scholarly or otherwise humanistic reasons? Yes, they were trusted by the churches and whatnot.
However, supernaturally, the current 66 book canon (and the 39 and 27 Testament division) we have is largely based on Isaiah’s 66 chapters which is also divided into 39 and 27. Each chapter of Isaiah corresponds to a book by theme in order. Coincidence? If one believes in the hand of God, no.
Before anyone says that chapters do not show up in original manuscripts, they actually do in Isaiah, as evidenced by the Dead Sea Scrolls Isaiah Aleph having the same 66 and 39/27 divisions we have today.
Verses and Chapters in the Bible
The claim is made that chapters and verses do not appear in originals manuscript, and that makes them a bad thing.
However, chapters do appear in older manuscripts for some books. As I already said, Isaiah does. Psalms does, too, you can see the divisions.
However, chapters and verses are actually improvements. It makes it easier to find passages. And since Jesus was often quoting passages by themselves, having a divided Bible is not wrong (and as I show, the Bible says to divide it, not unify it)
Lack of copyright of the KJV
The King James Bible lack a copyright. A copyright on a Bible signifies someone else other than God owns that version. A copyright also signifies that it must be at least 30% different from any other material for it to be legally sold. So whenever a new version comes out, it must be 30% different from the NIV, the ESV, etc. for it to be legal. And as I note, since the Bible places a huge importance on words, a 30% is way over threshold for it to be safe.
Why KJV Onlyists are often/usually Young Creationist, Dispensational, Fundamentalist, Baptist, etc. (Not all the time, but enough to warrant a point)? Since we take the Word of God literally when it says “every word”, as in every literal word, we tend to beliefs that depend on literal interpretations. Young Creationist comes from interpreting Genesis 1 literally, for example. Dispensationalist comes from interpreting Israel and Church as totally separate entities. Things like that.
Having multiple versions destroys literalist beliefs based on objectivity of the Bible. Which is why most who do not hold the above beliefs often will not have a KJV.
Conclusion:
This is a massive evidence dump. Yes, you can probably nitpick some of the “weaker” points (really only mostly I haven’t developed them here for lack of time and space), but taken as a whole, no version of the Bible can claim all the evidences at once.
For example, you can bring up other Bibles without a copyright. Or other Bibles translated from the Majority Text. Fine and all. But no other copyright-less or Majority Text Bibles have the same history and prophetic and power and spread. Thus all the evidences must be taken holistically as a whole, not just one or two things.
If you are intent in holding on your Bible version, it doesn’t matter anyways, as I don’t really aim to change your mind. My only aim is that we do have a comprehensive case, and that this doctrines about Bible transmission and translations, are essential.
FAQ:
What about the Apocrypha in the early copies of the KJV? Why do you have an uninspired map in the back of your Bible? I guarantee you that map mistakes where Mt. Sinai truly is. The Apocrypha was never considered to be part of the Bible proper. It is the same as a map in the back of your Bible, useful for history and reference. The translators noted as such, and since I believe in a purification ideology, it being removed is further evidence of purification.
So people who do not use the KJV are unsaved? No, that’s a strawman. Usage of Bible versions have nothing to do if someone is unsaved or not. All Bible versions have enough salvation information in them for salvation’s sake. But also does a gospel tract. At any rate, salvation passages alone do not make a perfect Bible.
If you are talking about the Revelation 22 passage, we have ample evidence the passage is talking about the actual Bible translators and scribes who do intend to remove or add words to the Bible. The book of life, which is for physical life, is not the Lamb’s book of life, which is for salvation.
How about people in the past (Adam, Jesus, Paul, etc.), did they have a perfect Bible?
Yes and no. This goes back to the dynamic perfection part. The Bible they had back then was perfect for their time. But not today’s time. Why? Well, the Jews had the Old Testament, but lacked the New Testament. That makes the Bible they had back then incomplete. But it was perfect for their time. Even in the New Testament, the epistles have not been gathered into one place, making the Bible splintered. We now have the full 66 book canon in our hands in our own language.
As I put in the question, why didn’t God give Adam a whole Bible? This problem still plagues those who believe the originals are the only true Bibles. If the originals are the only true Bibles, then the true Bible was only available back then. Not before they were given, not way after they were given. So in this KJV Onlyism beats the originals philosophy.
How about people who do not have English as their language? Can they have a perfect Bible in their own language?
( Or What makes English special?)
As a holder of the supernatural and prophetic KJV Only category: Accurate, yes. Perfect? No. English seems poised to dominate all languages. Yes, the Chinese language may be spoken by more people numerically, but English is spoken by more nations, if not all nations. English is taught in virtually all countries actively while as many as 2000 languages die each year.
This is a speculation, but since modern statistics do support it: In conjunction to having the perfect Word of God in English, English will become the language of the End Times to reflect the fulness of the Gentiles when Christ raptures the Gentile Church and the Antichrist comes.
This word in the KJV is better rendered as this other word in this other Bible translation, etc. The root assumption here is that the Hebrew or Greek Interlinear Lexicon or Dictionary you use to prove this is inspired. Which they are not, and cannot be inspired. With translations, it is possible they or at least one is inspired.
Also, most so-called word problems are easily solved by context reading, careful literal reading, and/or cross referencing. For example, Easter in the KJV is correct instead of Passover because it is in the context of a pagan king’s festival, the feast of unleavened bread, which the Passover is, already passed, when one reads the passage in question. Virtually all word rendition problems are solved that way.
What about different KJV editions? There are differing reasons about the editions. The first reason is the reason by comparison: changes between KJV editions is minor, spelling and punctuation most of the time, and whole words some of the time. Differing editions would be at least 10x smaller scale changes compared to modern revisions.
The second reason is what I tend to believe, and that the editions are part of the purification process. The editions were perfect for their time. But the final one, which is the most prominent and best selling book of all time (yes, that specific edition) is the perfect Word of God we have today.
Despite all this, I will stick with my version. What’s the worse that can happen? Well, you won’t lose your salvation if you’re not KJV Only, as I note. However, it does bear noting what errant philosophies you may hold in regards to the Bible, God, and whatnot. First, the erring philosophy of subjectivity, which means you will hold passages that are literal to be not literal. Second, an assumption that God may be deistic (at least in Bible transmission). Thirdly, you will not have a perfect belief.

Romans 10:17
17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Some other question not in this post? I’ll update this thread as needed.

Counter-Intuition: Assumptions About Bible Translations That Are Just Isn't So

Assumption: Bibles are the same if they have the same meaning
Root assumption: Specific words are unimportant as long they get the meaning across
Counter: The Bible says God preserved the words, not meaning or ideas
Counter: Changing just one word in any text can drastically even completely reverse the meaning of said text. (Adding a "not" in Genesis 1:1 will completely destroy the meaning of the whole Bible)

Assumption: Only original languages are holy
Root assumption: God made the original languages only
Counter: God made all languages at the Tower of Babel

Assumption: Bible translations can never be inspired, inerrant, preserved, etc.
Root assumption: Bible translations are removed from the divine process
Counter: The Bible's original languages already has been translated en route. The Bible in Jesus' day was a translation of Aramaic, not the Hebrew. The New Testament uses Greek translated Old Testament references. All of these translations were inspired.

Assumption: Jesus/Paul/etc. didn't use the KJV/a translation
Root assumption: There was no translation before the Bible was completed
Counter: Jesus read from an Aramaic translation (of Isaiah) of the Hebrew Bible in the Gospels. We also see the apostles mention Aramaic words in OT quotes, not Hebrew.
Counter: So if Jesus used a translation, He doesn't need to use the KJV, point is, translations were used.

Assumption: There is no proper way to translate the Bible so scholars have to do so
Root assumption: Bible translations has never been done in Bible times.
Counter: Bible translation has been done in Bible times, and we can pattern the our Bible translation after them. For example, we know how the apostles translated the Hebrew and Aramaic Old Testament references to Greek in the New Testament

Assumption: Bible translations can never be better than the original
Root assumption: Originals are always better
Root assumption: Translations are never mentioned in the Bible
Counter: Adam the original and Enoch the translated. The Bible uses the same words for inspiration of humanity as the same inspiration for the Word of God and hence we can make the leap that the translation of Enoch is in the same vein as inspiration and translation for text.

Assumption: Only the originals are perfect
Root assumption: The originals were perfect
Counter: The originals were not perfect, or rather, they were perfect for their time and time only.
Counter: God destroys the original writings in Jeremiah, and many like words were added.
Counter: The Bible says that patience has her perfect work. Nowhere do we see anything in the Bible instantly completely perfect (perfect as in both in form and maturity) without a time period of testing, trial, and purification. Jesus was born a baby, and had to grow in favor with God and man first, before going into ministry.

Assumption: No Bible translation can be the perfect Word of God because that means people before its translation didn't have the perfect Word of God
Root assumption: There can't be a progression because it is monolithic
Counter: There is a progression. God didn't give the whole original Bible at once, either. Revelation didn't come with Genesis. The Old Testament books were enough for the Jews for their time. The New Testament was added because it was enough for the Church for their time. It was collected all in one even long after he apostles' death in one place.
Root assumption: If there was no perfect Word of God back then, then the Bibles they had back then didn't do much
Counter: The Bibles they had were enough for them in their time period for what God wanted it to do
Counter: Jesus the perfect Word didn't come until many thousands of years later. Why didn't He come earlier to save?

Assumption: Bible translation beyond the original languages reduces the meaning of the originals
Root assumption: Reducing meaning is bad
Counter: Reducing meaning is good as it makes the language more specific.
Counter: (see below)

Assumption: Bible translations need to have word-for-word equivalency
Root assumption: Languages have only one word-to-word equivalency
Counter: They don't. However, translating always niches down to the correct specific word needed to be used. For example, we see the apostles translate Hebrew to Greek in more specific, specialized words or to more generic words but with less synonyms. For example, Hebrew Elohim can refer to God, gods, kings, angels, judges. Greek translates some to God, some to others, according to context. Hence translations should niche down to specific wording, instead of wider meaning. 

Assumption: Bible translations lose the force of the original languages
Root assumption: The force of the original languages is necessary (Contradicting the updated relevancy assumption)
Counter: Bible translations need the full force of the translated language, not the original language.

Assumption: Bible translations need to be relevant and updated to the modern speaker
Root assumption: Bible translations need to be updated for relevancy, not accuracy
Counter: The Bible in fact acknowledges archaic language even in light of modern words in I Samuel (seer versus prophet, where the book says prophet is the modern word, but continues to use archaic seer). There are times when archaic words are more accurate than modern words.
Counter: The main Bible versions have always been translated into the earliest, most basic form of languages. For example, early form Hebrew for OT, early form Aramaic for Daniel and translation, and koine Greek for New Testament, a Greek 400 years older from the apostles' time. And in that same vein, the English of 1611 is a language 400 years removed from us today, and even earlier.

Assumption: There can be more than one Bible version in any language and it still be the Word of God
Root assumption: There were multiple versions of other languages accepted as God's Word
Counter: There is only one version of Hebrew accepted. There is only one version of Aramaic translation of that Hebrew accepted. There is only one version of Greek translation of that Hebrew and Aramaic accepted. Hence it follows that there can only be one version for one language.

Why Romans 9 Is NOT a Calvinistic Proof Text

Triggered, yet? Let’s interpret the passage.

Romans 9
9 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,
2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.
3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh

Here, we see Paul set the context. This is about his kinsmen according to the flesh. That is PHYSICAL FLESH. Not spiritual. Who are his “kinsmen according to the flesh”? His family? We see who it is in the next verses.

4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

So Paul clarifies who the kinsmen are, Israelites, those born from the nation Israel according to the physical FLESH.

Chapter Context: physical, flesh, national, corporate Israel (hence context is not spiritual, not individual, not Church)

6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

Some would say this passage means Gentiles can be Jews or Israel. Not at all. The strict literal interpretation is that not all Israel, is of Israel. It doesn’t mean Gentiles are added into Israel. It just means not all Israel are Israel. Grafting the branches is not the same as a biological change. Neither is “there is no male or female, Jew or Greek, in Christ” mean Gentiles can turn into Jews in salvation (as much as you can turn into a third gender, again no male or female…).

Deductive/Literal Interpretation: Not all Israel are Israel therefore not all Israel are Israel (in context)
Inductive Interpretation: Not all Israel are Israel therefore Christians can be Israel, even though Christians aren’t mentioned at all in the passage (Calvinistic; out of context for additional element)

9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son.
10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;

This talks about two individuals in Israel’s history, Sarah and Rebecca, conforming to the context. What is the promise in context? The national promise of Israel. This part is ignored by Calvinists.

Deductive/Literal Interpretation: The word of promise is about the nation of Israel (in context, and cross referenced in Genesis)
Inductive Interpretation: Either ignored or made about salvation, which is not mentioned at all in the passage (Calvinistic; out of context for additional element)

11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

Here is where Calvinists usually quote first from Romans 9, skipping 1-10 most of the time.
But what is the purpose according to context? The NATIONAL PROMISE OF ISRAEL. Not salvation. God is calling one of them to be a nation, and one of them not to be the chosen nation.

Before someone would say it is clearly talking about individuals, they are individuals, but they are also nations, and in-context, nation is the better implication.
Genesis 25:23
23 And the Lord said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.

Deductive/Literal Interpretation: The purpose of God and election of God is national Israel being chosen
God gave the national promise to Jacob/Israel and not given to Esau/Edom as nations (in-context and cross referenced with Genesis)

Inductive Interpretation: The purpose of God and election of God is salvation
God (individually) loved Jacob as he is elect and God hated Esau because he is non-elect in the eternal past (Calvinistic; out of context for additional elements)

14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

So this makes more sense. God choosing Jacob as national Israel for just the national promise is not unrighteous.
However, Calvinism implies that God chose Jacob for salvation, which is not the context, and where they err. The promise has nothing to do with individual salvation, but national, corporate promise.

Notice also it talks about Moses, a figure in whose history? Israel.

Deductive/Literal Interpretation: God is not unrighteous for choosing a corporate nation for Himself (in-context and cross referenced with Genesis)

Inductive Interpretation: God is not unrighteous for choosing an individual for salvation (Calvinistic; out of context for additional elements)

17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

In context, this means God’s will was to make Israel a nation, and Pharaoh was his tool to make Israel a nation. It does not mean God raised Pharaoh for the sole purpose of being unmerciful to Pharaoh.
Cross referencing Exodus, Pharaoh hardened himself first before God hardened Pharaoh.
Also, hardening came from the plagues, it wasn’t an instant hardening which Calvinists imply. The plagues God sent is what hardened Pharaoh.

Deductive/Literal Interpretation: God raised Pharaoh for the purpose of releasing Israel as a nation(in-context and cross referenced with Exodus)

Inductive Interpretation: God raised Pharaoh specifically and individually so that God would just be unmerciful and hardeneth on Pharaoh just for kicks (Calvinistic; out of context for additional elements)

21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

Sort of minor note, but both man and God can harden, and also man may make himself a vessel of honour. Calvinists imply it is only God that can make vessels.
2 Timothy 2:20-22
20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour.
21 If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master’s use, and prepared unto every good work.
22 Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

Note about these verses.
It is a question, not a statement.
It is not just a question, it is a “What if” question.
You can’t make doctrinal statements out of questions!
Shortened version: What if God was willing to show his wrath to the Jews and also the Gentiles?

If you ask, What if I was a girl? Does that mean you are a girl?
No. It means you are the opposite.
In other words, what God is is the opposite of the question.

Deductive/Literal Interpretation: God is asking a “what if” question, and is not making a doctrinal statement (in-context)

Inductive Interpretation: God is making a doctrinal statement about Himself (Calvinistic; out of context for wrong grammar)

25 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.
26 And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.
27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:

Again, repeating the context of Israel as the main purpose of the chapter. These following passages are usualy ignored by Calvinists, but in the wider context, supports the physical Israel context.

28 For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.
29 And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.
30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.

A contrast between (physical) law for Israel and (spiritual) faith for Gentiles. Thus further underlying that the chapter is not about the Gentiles, but physical, flesh israel.

32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
33 As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

Again, contrast between faith and law.

A Quick Guide Why King James Is The Perfect Word Of God

I. Considerations
The KJV remains the most read, popular, and still the fastest growing Bible translation (and best selling book of all time) today
http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2014/march/most-popular-and-fastest-growing-bible-translation-niv-kjv.html

Why? If there is a demand for "easier more, modern reading", then why?

Do you believe the Bible? The Bible says it is inspired, infallible, inerrant, preserved, etc.

And not only does it say the Bible was inspired, but it says the Scriptures. Scriptures by definition are copies, and not the original. So at least some copies of the original are inspired, infallible, inerrant, etc.

The Bible also says God destroyed the original autographs in Jeremiah, and many like words were added. We do not have the true original autographs or manuscripts. All we have are copies of the Bible today. Some non-original must be inspired, as the Bible is preserved.

The Bible does not only say that the Scripture is inspired, but the specific words were. Neither jot nor tittle shall pass away. So not the meaning, ideas, thoughts, or intentions that were inspired, it was the specific words.

Conclusion: If the Bible says specific words were inspired, then only one version is correct, as every version’s words are different from each other. Which means there are versions that are incorrect.

II. The Seven Purifications Prophecy

Psalm 12:66 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

• English is the 7th language the Bible has been translated in line. (Hebrew to Aramaic to Greek to Syriac to Latin to German to English) 
• The King James is the 7th English translation in line (Tyndale's, Matthew's, Coverdale's, the Great Bible (printed by Whitechurch), the Geneva Bible, the Bishops' Bible, and the King James Bible)
• The 7th edition of the King James, 1900 Pure Cambridge, is the one most used today of any Bible, including other versions (1611, 1629*, 1638, 1743, 1762, 1769, 1900*)

*1613, 1617 weren't editions or major printings
**1873 was unused and unofficial and thus not part of the line.

Conclusion: The KJV fulfills the purification process
Also, English will become the global language of the End Times

III. Translations in the Bible
A. Enoch, 7th translation from Adam, the original

Jude 1414 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

Hebrews 11:55 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

B. Inspiration or God-Breathed

Genesis 2:7 (God inspires Adam, the Original)
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. 

2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 

2 Timothy 3:16 (God inspires His Words)
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Conclusion:
While God breathed into Adam, the Original, and God breathed into the original manuscripts, Enoch the 7th and Translated is better, making the KJV the Enoch of the Bible line.

IV. Originals in the Bible
A. Originals were given by inspiration

2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

B. Scripture (copies by definition, not originals) are also given by inspiration

2 Timothy 3:16 

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

C. Originals destroyed at the outset

Jeremiah 36:23 

23 And it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed in the fire that was on the hearth.

D. Scripture preserved

Jeremiah 36:27 

27 Then the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, after that the king had burned the roll, and the words which Baruch wrote at the mouth of Jeremiah, saying,28 Take thee again another roll, and write in it all the former words that were in the first roll, which Jehoiakim the king of Judah hath burned.

E. Many added words besides were added, defeating the assumed completeness of the Originals

Jeremiah 36:32

32 Then took Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire: and there were added besides unto them many like words. 

Conclusion: God has no respect for the originals and we shouldn't look for them

V. Archaic Words preferred over Modern Words 

I Samuel 9:9-11 (Bible acknowledges prophet as the newer word in verse 9, yet still uses seer in 11)
9 (Beforetime in Israel, when a man went to enquire of God, thus he spake, Come, and let us go to the seer: for he that is now called a Prophet was beforetime called a Seer.)10 Then said Saul to his servant, Well said; come, let us go. So they went unto the city where the man of God was.11 And as they went up the hill to the city, they found young maidens going out to draw water, and said unto them, Is the seer here?

Conclusion: Using archaic words are inherently Biblical and more accurate

VI. The Person of King James
A. James is English for Jacob
(Still being researched!)

Genesis 32:28 And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.

Ecclesiastes 8:44 Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?

B. It's Under The Reign Of An Evil King That A Perfect Bible is Made

Jeremiah 3636 And it came to pass in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah, that this word came unto Jeremiah from the Lord, saying,2 Take thee a roll of a book, and write therein all the words that I have spoken unto thee against Israel, and against Judah, and against all the nations, from the day I spake unto thee, from the days of Josiah, even unto this day....20 And they went in to the king into the court, but they laid up the roll in the chamber of Elishama the scribe, and told all the words in the ears of the king.21 So the king sent Jehudi to fetch the roll: and he took it out of Elishama the scribe's chamber. And Jehudi read it in the ears of the king, and in the ears of all the princes which stood beside the king.22 Now the king sat in the winterhouse in the ninth month: and there was a fire on the hearth burning before him.23 And it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed in the fire that was on the hearth.24 Yet they were not afraid, nor rent their garments, neither the king, nor any of his servants that heard all these words.25 Nevertheless Elnathan and Delaiah and Gemariah had made intercession to the king that he would not burn the roll: but he would not hear them.

Conclusion: Attacks on King James' character prove, not inhibit, that a perfect Bible came from his reign

VII. (Physical) Design of the King James as a Book (Holy Bible)
(Still being researched!)
Black covering
Red lettering
Gold Leafs
Seven Sealed Book

VIII. (Abstract) Structure of the King James
A. 66 Book Canon
Canon = 66 books, divided into 36 Old Testament and 27 New Testament
Isaiah = 66 chapters, divided into 36 and 27

Themes Determine Order
(Still being researched!)
Isaiah 1 and Genesis
Isaiah 2 and Exodus
...
Isaiah 45 and Romans
...
Isaiah 66 and Revelation

Conclusion: Apocrypha's final rejection is Biblical

B. No Copyright/Public Domain
(Still being researched!)
C. Chapter and verse system
(Still being researched!)
2 Timothy 2:15
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

IX. Historical Power of the King James
As noted above, the King James still remains the most popular and still the fastest growing translation today.
Instrumental in all the Great Awakenings and Revivals
(Still being researched!)

X. Conclusion
(Yet to be determined)

Seven Reasons Why I am KJV Only

by Samuel Garcia

This is an old post from a forums.

1. Translation, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, is superior to the originals. 

The law of first mention in scripture bears witness to this fact. 

II Sam. 3:10
10 To translate the kingdom from the house of Saul, and to set up the throne of David over Israel and over Judah, from Dan even to Beersheba.

As David's kingdom was superior to Saul's kingdom, the KJV is superior to the original.

Hebrews 11:5
5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

As Enoch was superior to the original Adam, the KJV is superior to the original.

A perfect God can take a perfect Book and make a perfect Translation and will. And all evidence points that it being the KJV. 

A study of the KJV translators is amazing. They far exceed all our language(and other subjects) scholars of the day. It's been said that they debated about Greek in Latin (while speaking Latin). And yet they were the most humble men. Humility is sign of the Holy Spirit.

One can see this truth by reading the Prefatory and Dedicatory remarks in the Authorized Version. These men didn't believe they were handling "God's message" or "reliable manuscripts." They believed they were handling the very words of God Himself. As I Thessalonians 2:13 says, they ". . . . received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe." 
Like the serpent of Genesis 3:1, modern translators approach the scriptures in skepticism, saying, "Yea, hath God said?" This was the first recorded sin in the Bible, and it still runs rapid through the hearts and minds of most scholars and new versionpromoters.

2. The KJV is the only translation that fulfills the prophecy of the seven purifications:
Psalms 12:6
The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

As any student of English Bible history knows, the Authorized Version of 1611 was not the first Bible to be translated into English. But even though hundreds of complete Bibles, New Testaments, and Scripture portions have been translated into English since 1611, it is obvious that the Authorized Version is the last English Bible; that is, the last English Bible that God "authorized."
...
And thus we have our answer. The seven English versions that make the English Bibles up to and including the AuthorizedVersion fit the description in Psalm 12:6 of the words of the Lord being "purified seven times" are Tyndale's, Matthew's, Coverdale's, the Great Bible (printed by Whitechurch), the Geneva Bible, the Bishops' Bible, and the King James Bible.

3. God does not respect the originals.
Jeremiah 36:22
Then took Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire: and there were added besides unto them many like words.

In this passage, the originals of what is today the book of Jeremiah and Lamentations were destroyed by the king. And there were added many like words! And the originals were not.

And also, no one knows where the originals are. All our Hebrew and Greek manuscripts are simply copies. Anyone who tells you they are studying the original Hebrew and Greek is a liar.

That is to say, practically every Bible language class of the Greek and Hebrew are based on the corrupt 5% manuscripts, not the established 95%. This is where our new translations come from, the Bible scholars of our day are scholars of the very corrupt eclectic texts of Wescott and Hort. If they make claims to have studied the originals, run. Run far away.

4. The power of the KJV across time and space.

Jesus said that every good tree will bring forth good fruit, and we can know them by their fruits (Matthew 7:17-20).

The KJV is the Bible of the Great Awakenings and the revivals after that. It is the Bible of our Founding Fathers and the American Revolution, a direct offspring of the Great Awakenings. Only with the KJV did we see great missionary movements. 

When the first English Revised Version in the 1900s, much revival work stopped. The ERV was made into the American Revised Version and the New American Revised Version, which is the root translation of the ESV. This was the start of the translation craze where we get all new versions. The chief editor of the NASV writes after the process:

I must under God denounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version. I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord...We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interview some of the translators; I sat with the translator; I wrote the preface. When you see the preface to the New American Standard, those are my words...it's wrong, it's terribly wrong; it's frightfully wrong...I'm in trouble;...I can no longer ignore these criticisms I am hearing and I can't refute them. The deletions are absolutely frightening...there are so many. The finest leaders that we have today haven't gone into it new versions of Hort and Westcott's corrupted Greek text just as I hadn't gone into it...that's how easily one can be deceived...Are we so naive that we do not suspect Satanic deception in all of this?
....
If we could hear His voice we would have no trouble learning His Word from the Authorized Version. Let me tell you this: You might not be able to answer the arguments, and you won't be [able to]. I can't answer some of them, either. Some of these university professors come along and say, What about this; what about that? They go into areas that I haven't even had time to get into.

As I said to you a couple of minutes ago. You don't need to defend yourself, and you don't need to defend God's Word. Don't defend it; you don't need to defend it; you don't need to apologize for it. Just say, "Well, did this version or this translation come down through the Roman stream? If so, count me out. Whatever you say about Erasmus and Tyndale, that's what I want."

And besides this, we've had the AV for 362 years. It's been tested as no other piece of literature has ever been tested. Word by word; syllable by syllable. And think even until this moment no one has ever found any wrong doctrine in it, and that's the main thing. He that wills to do the will of God shall KNOW the doctrine.

Well, time is up. Let's be people of the Book. It took my mother to heaven; and my dad, my grandfather, my grandmother. It was Moody's Book; it was Livingstone's Book. J.C. Studd gave up his fortune to take this Book to Africa. And I don't feel ashamed to carry it the rest of my journey. It's God's Book.

"Our Father, we thank Thee and praise Thee for Thy Word. Help us to love it, and preach it, and teach it, and tell everybody we can the Good News through thy Word. In Jesus' name. Amen."

Dr. Frank Lodgson

1 Corinthians 14:33
33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

And what is confusion but many versions running around?

The King James Bible was not translated during the apostate and lukewarm Laodicean church period, like the new translations. The Laodicean period is the last church period before the Second Coming of Christ. It is the last of the seven church periods in Revelation chapters two and three. One can clearly see that we are living in the Laodicean period today by simply comparing modern churches to the church of Revelation 3:14-22. This lukewarm period began toward the end of the 1800's and will continue until Christ returns. The new versions fit well into the lukewarm churches, because they are lukewarm "bibles."

5. The KJV is the only one that claims full inspiration and preservation and infallibility.

What other version of the Bible can say this? None. There are no defenders of (insert corrupt version here) of its inspiration. Only the KJV boasts such members.

As one points out, all new translations compare themselves to the KJV first. Just the fact that the KJV is mentioned brings great emotional response. And emotional responses are a sign of spiritual warfare.

All apparent "errors" in the KJV can be explained through prayer and a careful study of the scriptures. 
...
Ninety-five percent of all evidence SUPPORTS the text of the King James Authorized Version. The new versions are supported by the remaining five percent evidence.

I vouch for this. There is no other book I can feel the Spirit living within its pages. All "errors" I have now seen promulgated in the libraries of man I can easily show not to be an error by simply cross-referencing.

6. The English language dominates the world. The KJV was translated in the most perfect form of English.

God's Word is always primarily in the language His people will use it.

In Israel's time, it was in Hebrew, for it only applied to them.

In the apostle's time, it was in Greek (both OT and NT). In the fulness of time when Greek was the trade language did Jesus come.

Today, what is the prevailing language of God's people? What is the trade language of the world?

This is why you shouldn't fear Chinese nor another language overtaking English. It is our Bible that holds that barrier.

Those that are scholars of Greek and Hebrew set themselves up as priests and interpreters and scribes. We have a living, breathing English Bible right here! It's alive, brother!

There is a common misconception that the KJV translators used the English of their day to translate the Bible. That is not true. "You" already replaced "thou". Words and usages in it were already archaic in their day(1611). In other words, the English of the 1611 Bible is not from 1611.

A serious, deep study of it leads to the fact that it is indeed the most perfect translation of the Hebrew and Greek in English. For example, "Thou" is a singular pronoun. In modern day English, we replace it with the word "you", which can be both singular and plural. However, in the Hebrew and Greek, there are singular pronouns, and "thou" is the correct translation.

Sounds trivial? NO! "You" can mean groups of people. When it replaces "thou", it removes individuality of a passage, and will lead to serious doctrinal errors.

Luke 22:31
31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:
32 But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.

The Greek is plural for you in 31, while thou is singular in Greek. In that light, we know that Satan was desiring of all the disciples, not only Peter. This passage is fulfilled in Acts when Peter rises up as the leader and indeed strengthens his brethren.

Exodus 4:15
15 And thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth: and I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do.

Thou refers to a singular Moses, but ye refers to Israel.

7. The KJV is the only translation which magnifies Him, Our Lord Jesus Christ, fully. 
There is no question that new translations always question the Deity, Virgin Birth, Death, Resurrection somewhere. 

Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: And they are they which testify of me. John 5:39

With that I have no time left, I have to get to church. I still have more material to post.  I have written why the KJV is superior to other translations, and partly why it is superior to the originals, and I shall touch on more on the latter.

If the KJV is indeed the Word of God, and since it is the power of God in the Awakenings and the great Philadelphian Church Age of yesteryear, it would be more conducive to the Church to set it back on its rightful place. Of course, that will not happen in this lukewarm Laocidean Church, where people are forced to compromise for the sake of "fellowship". Having no rifts and no division sounds mamby-pamby, kumbayah, everyone loves everyone, and all that, but it's not the best, especially over a very, very important thing, which is the Bible and doctrine.

Matthew 10:34
34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

That sword is God's Word. God's Word must divide. And indeed it will divide, divide us in doctrine, which gives rise to different denominations; and it will divide us in its words, which gives rise to opinions of translations. We must be divided on these issues because they are the roots, and without them, whatever we are means nothing. If we compromise on these things, corruption is quick to take over as leaven in bread and whatever peace we achieve is pointless. 

Over other non-important things we shouldn't be divided, but since in this issue, there is only one true Word and only one true doctrine. The only time we are to be united is under one true Word and one true doctrine. And history shows that the Church was indeed united under the King James Bible only for about 300 years. And those were the best years of the Church until He comes.