KJV has many conceptual errors. One, for sure is the ending of the Lord's prayer with the "from evil" vice from "the evil one." Another that comes to mind is "be therefore perfect..." vice "become [future tense] perfect..."
I hate to think of all the misconceptions created through KJV in the minds of people who read the NT "cold" (i.e. not in the context of the Holy Tradition).
"KJV has many conceptual errors. One, for sure is the ending of the Lord's prayer with the "from evil" vice from "the evil one." Another that comes to mind is "be therefore perfect..." vice "become [future tense] perfect..." "
I wouldn't go so far as to say "many." There are a few real doozies, to be sure. But then, there are many more doozies in most modern translations.
All in all, the KJV is probably more free of conceptual bias on the whole than are most English translations of Scripture. This is because of the atmosphere in which it was written. At that time, England was a very believing place, so the modern biases of unbelieving skepticism weren't there -- and those are significant in many translations. Also, England was divided between Protestants who basically wanted to keep things the same but not have the Pope and those who wanted a Continental-style Reformation. Both sides were scrutinizing the KJV, and the result were translators who tried to be very literal and exact in their translations, in order to try to stay above such criticisms.
"I hate to think of all the misconceptions created through KJV in the minds of people who read the NT "cold" (i.e. not in the context of the Holy Tradition)."
I don't think that this is any different from any other translation. Every translation requires a context in which it is to be interpreted. And most of the time, there are things in any translation that a priest needs to correct or explain -- either by changing the words on his own while reading it out loud, or by clarifying it in a sermon.
Right now, I think that the best translation of the first three Gospels is the text embedded in the translations of St. Theophylact's commentaries. St. John will be published soon. It is essentially the KJV, but it is corrected with great precision, since St. Theophylact comments verse by verse on the meaning and wording -- there is little doubt as to meaning, since St. Theophylact is essentially compiling the consensus of Orthodox commentary.
I hope that it will be available in other forms soon. It is a first-class work.
Priests reading the Gospel in Slavonic also, incidentally, "correct" it off the cuff when needed to prevent gross misunderstandings. They simply change words while they are reading it if there is a danger that the Slavonic word has a very misleading meaning for a modern Russian speaker, etc...