The mistake was using the KJV, imo. The more reliable Greek texts use the term charis (grace). KJV is based on the most unreliable Codex and it was tailored to the Protestant correctness, so the Geneva-worshipping Protestants would acquiesce. In other words: a man-made Bible for a man-made church. How fitting, imo.
Kosta, that's BULL and you know it. What possible benefit would the Protestants have gained by saying faith over grace? You call the Codices used by Westcott and Hort as reliable and the ones used by Stephanus and Scrivener as unreliable. Who do you think YOU are. Your rhetoric needs to be toned down and a little respect given in this debate. You may truly believe they are superior, but you don't have to accuse the translators of the KJV of tailoring a text to Protestant correctness. The word in Scrivner and Stephanus is Pisteuo. In Westcott-Hort it is Charis. In the Latin it is Gratia. You can't get Charis when the codex says Pisteuo and there is no evidence that the KJV translators did anything other than make an honest attempt to translate the Bible as literally as possible from the text they had. There would have been no benefit to say Stephen was full of faith over grace. A protestant understanding would object to either.
The Holman Christian Standard Bible, incidentally says "grace." Since it is a conservative Southern Baptist translation, where is this Protestant Correctness you speak of. It is a charge meant to insult but is as hollow as the hate that spawned it.
Sheeezzzeeee...In one place you tell me Timothy was written by Paul and that was his opinion and now you tell me the Greek text are more reliable than the KJV. Does it matter if it was only Paul's opinion?