Otherwise, unless the newer versions' manuscripts and/or translators were (more) corrupted, there's nothing to say they're not equal to or better than the KJV.
The NKJV that I use has margin notes where the NU and other texts differ. One definite advantage of the KJV is its use of the pronouns "thee," "thou," and "ye," which add to the understanding (to the extent that such pronouns existed in the original text).
As per Gal 3:28 (using KJV) "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus". When the angels sang to the shepherds "peace on earth, good will to men"--are we supposed to think that it is only to "males"? What did God mean? "Men" (males) or "people"?
Many women who live in cultures where females have no value (baby girls are left to die at birth, etc) may be deeply touched to hear that Jesus loves them, not just men. We, in America, take for granted that we are loved by God. Others have no concept that God could possibly love a woman. It is considered heresy.
1 Timothy 6:10: The NKJV changes "For the love of money is the root of all evil:" to "For the love of money is a root of all KINDS OF evil". The words "KINDS OF" are found in NO Greek text in the world! Where did they get them? Straight from the NIV, NASV, NRSV! The Word changes go directly to the meaning of the verse. For what purpose?
Phil. 2:6: (NKJV 1979e.) change "thought it not robbery to be equal with God" to "did not consider equality with God something to be grasped". (robs Jesus Christ of deity) (NIV, NASV, RSV)
Matthew 7:14: change "narrow is the way" to "difficult is the way". There's nothing "difficult" about the salvation of Jesus Christ! Jesus says in Matt. 11:30, "For my yoke is EASY, and my burden is light." THE EXACT OPPOSITE! Boy, you talk about a contradiction!
The KJV may not be perfect, it is however the closest to the texts available.
We all, by faith, have to believe we have the Word of God in written form. If we knowingly read a book that calls itself God's word, and we believe it has errors in it and we believe it has errors in it, then we willingly are reading something that CANNOT be God's word...because it has errors in it!!
I find this a conundrum. While it is easy to believe the original Greek texts and the Hebrew are divinely inspired, the translation into other languages do not have to be divinely translated because all they are are copies, not original thoughts. For a translation to be authentic, even a Satan-Worshipper can accurately translate the Greek or Hebrew text into English; I doubt they would want to, but, we all realize, they could.
So, when it comes to the KJV, I believe it is the most accurate English translation because by faith, I recognize the arguements brought to defend it (Made by men smarter than me), and I can read the differences recorded by men(Who have more patience than me) in making verse by verse comparisons of Bible versions.
When the KJV is compared to almost all the latest translations, there are numerous verses left out of the newer versions, and doctrines are changed because these verses are left out of the newer versions.
Also, the KJV IS easy to read, if a person just tries to read!! There is someting else that we all need to consider concerning the Bible anyways, that many people forget!!
(1 Cor 2:14 KJV) But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
What other verses tells us this idea of things being spiritually discerned?
Matthew 16: 13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
So, if the natural man cannot understand spiritual things, and Peter did not have the human understanding to know that Jesus was the Christ, the Messiah, then it has to be that:
1). Spiritual teachings are not understood by simple readings of texts or by hearing. We are dependent on the Spirit of God to open our eyes and ears to what is being taught.
This means, we do NOT need a new translation every 5 years to accomadate changes in language or syntax. While it is important to have an accurate translation to start with, it is not the accuracy of the translation that makes a person understand what he/she reads, it is the Spirit of God that convicts a person of truth.
This does not mean we dont need an accurate translation!! On the contrary, back in the Garden of Eden, what was Satan's first lie?
Genesis 3:3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
YEAH, HATH GOD SAID???
Satan was putting doubt in man's thought's, he was trying to cause people to doubt God by placing doubt on what they really heard. I believe modern translations and Children's Bibles and paraphrase Bibles and parallel Bibles are all doing this: They are telling people WE DONT KNOW WHAT GOD SAID!!!
We do know what God said, and the best English translation was made in 1611 with the King James, it was corrected for spelling and some word usage over the next 60 years, and once in a great while since 1679 individual words were changed to reflect a more modern word that meant the same thing. We do not need a more modern translation, we ust need people that read the translation we have and believe it, instead of running around wondering what God said and do we have it!