It can't be. It removed over 64,000 words without manuscript evidence and removes WHOLE verses!!!
Also, the KJV is much easier to read.
"Modern versions bave been marketed extensively as being easier to read than the KJV Bible. However, recent computerized document analysis programs have objectively revealed that the King James Version of the Bible is in far easier to read than the NIV or the NASB.
The Fleisch-Kincaid research firm has, through computerized analysis, sbown that the KJV vocabulary has fewer syllables per word than the NIV or the NASB.
Furthertmore, the KJV has less complex sentences than the NIV or NASB. In reality, the KJV is easier to read than its modern counterparts in the manner of vocabulary and syntax."
http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/hall-whykjv.html
That's silly. We don't speak that language any more.
Evidently you only read what backs your opinion.
The New International Version is a completely new translation of the Holy Bible made by over 100 scholars working directly from the best available Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts.
I'm not a King James fan, of him or his Bible. I'm also not a "computerized document analysis program". Guess that ends the discussion.
>>However, recent computerized document analysis programs have objectively revealed that the King James Version of the Bible is in far easier to read than the NIV or the NASB.<<
This is borderline idiocy. First of all, there is no way to "objectively" rate one version easier to read than the other. People read different ways and on different levels. Second, if there were a way to determine objectively which one is easier to read, it sure wouldn't be the KJV, at least not compared to the NASB. I don't personally like the NIV translation, but it too is far easier to read.
Consider the following verse:
Mark 1: 10-12
(KJV)
[10] And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him:
[11] And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
[12] And immediately the Spirit driveth him into the wilderness.
(NASB)
10 Immediately coming up out of the water, He saw the heavens opening, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon Him;
11 and a voice came out of the heavens: "You are My beloved Son, in You I am well-pleased."
12 Immediately the Spirit impelled Him to go out into the wilderness.
(NIV)
10 As Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove.
11 And a voice came from heaven: "You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased."
12 At once the Spirit sent him out into the desert,
In this passage, the NIV is clearly easier to read, while the NASB has some modern language benefits. I challenge you to show me 10 passages of scripture that illustrate the KJV is easier to read than either translation. As soon as the words, thou, thine, and anything ending in "ith", you lose. Those words by themselves make the KJV harder to read because we don't talk like that or read anything like that.
If you like the KJV, that's great. I don't have anything against it. But to say it is "objectively" easier to read is as absurd as saying the moon is made of green cheese.
Do you know how funny it is that it took a computer to show all who have been struggling with the KJB that it is actually easier for them to read?
What do the computers say about sprinkling vs dunking?