You are completely wrong about the King James being a bad translation. In fact, it and the New American Standard version have over a 90% accuracy in a word for word translation from the oldest manuscripts extent.
I gave myself a little leeway when writing those statistics. It was about 2 years ago when I saw those figures on the literalness of translations. I am thinking that the KJV is 99% accurate and the NAS 97% accurate. I'm not sure and would have to do some digging to come up with the exact figure.
It is impossible for translators to be completely accurate with a text due to abstract concepts being conveyed. So, any percentage in the +90% is actually quite good. I do think it best for people to study Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic, however not required. I also think that we can trust our Sovereign God to give us the knowledge we need to come to faith regardless of the translation.
10% error rate, made in good faith, is much better than 40% error rate by intent. So, your point is, R. Scott?
You've been listening to Zelda too much again.
It's not an "error rate". Unless you're silly enough to believe there is such a thing as a "verbatim translation" from one language to another.