Over the years, I’ve had several King-James-Bible-only advocates claim that I bash the KJV because I speak out against the KJV-only movement. My problem has never been with the King James Bible. My problem is with the KJV-only doctrine because this doctrine’s foundation is prima scriptura. I admit that I prefer the Critical Text over the Majority Text and the Received Text, but this does not mean that I set out to bash the KJV.
The KJV and the Textus Receptus line of Bible are dear to me, which is why I study from the Geneva Bible and the King James Bible. (These Bibles can be downloaded for free at e-Sword) I just believe the older manuscripts are closer to the originals, so I prefer the Critical Text. Let me state again, I have never and I will never bash the KJV. The KJV is an excellent translation with very few short comings. The main short coming is how our English language has changed since the KJV was created. This does not mean that I do not recommend the KJV. It simply means that to study only from the KJV requires a little more work and a deeper knowledge of the English of that day in order to get a full understanding of some of the archaic words/phrases in the KJV.