The Holy Spirit leads us into all truth. - John 16:13
I have no problem with the English of the KJB and words that are hard to understand are usually defined for us in the passage itself.
There are passages in the KJV that are clearly understood; others not so much. This has to do with the fact that the KJV reflects 1611 thought. This is not to say the KJV is a bad translation. As I said, it's what I read primarily. We need to be intellectually honest and understand that we're reading a translation suited for the English language of 1611, which is different from 21st century American English.
There are no originals anywhere except perhaps in heaven where they are being watched over - but we do have a God that promised to preserve his word unto ALL generations.
The original, original is a person, who we know as Jesus, the Word of God. Regarding original manuscripts, you are right in saying there are no originals. However, the early churches carefully maintained copies of originals, which ultimately became canon, ie., became the NT.
Yes, I do use faith in the KJB as a “test of fellowship.”
If by this, you are saying that you limit your Christian fellowship to Christians who limit themselves to the KJV, then I'm sad for you. Christian fellowship should be based on the lordship of a person, namely Jesus and our belief that He is Messiah as confirmed through his life, death and resurrection. He is our personal Savior and the Savior of the world. This is what binds us together, not our conviction about the KJV.
>>>If by this, you are saying that you limit your Christian fellowship to Christians who limit themselves to the KJV<<<
You read correctly . . .
I totally reject the ungodly dual of Westcott and Hort. Even a most basic knowledge of who they are and what they believed should cause one to reject their notion of the “better texts.”
And those “better texts” came out of a trash barrel at Sinai - so you can keep them . . . and to your own crowd.