Hi Bartholomew,
I understand your question, I really do. I understand the appeal in believing a particular Bible is "COMPLETELY without error".
But think for a moment what you're asking. You're asking for a "final authority", and you clung to KJVOnlyism because the KJV is where you saw it. But what did you actually see? You saw a familiar, accepted book. But where is the authority - in the ink on paper? Or rather, is it from what *you* understand as *you read* it and the Holy Spirit guides you? You see, the Bible, as ink on paper, is not much use until you read it. And when you read it, you (and everyone) read it through the glasses of bias, the result of human imperfection and experience. We make mistakes, and we misunderstand things.
Now when you read the KJV through your glasses, and when someone else reads the KJV through their glasses, the two of you may come to different understandings about an issue. Take for example end-times. There are some KJV-only supporters on this board who read the KJV as then say "premill!". There are other KJV-only supporters on this board who read the same KJV and then say "amill!". They both read the same words. They are both Christians. But what of the "final authority"? If the KJV *itself* (or any translation) were the "final authority", there could not be any disagreement. We then see that the "final authority" *cannot* be ink on paper, but rather God's absolute truth, regardless of the ink on paper, regardless of mistakes in understanding when one reads that ink, regardless of whether people and Bibles even exist. The ink on paper is a *witness* to the final authority, but is not the final authority in and of itself.
We have many many translations (new and ancient) and many many manuscripts, all witnesses to the final authority of God's truth. We, as humans, make mistakes. The Holy Spirit can guide a humble, searching soul to the "final authority" when reading *any* translation, for the Holy Spirit is God himself. I think many KJV-only supporters minimize or even forget about the Holy Spirit in this role.
You have probably seen me repeatedly ask "where was the word of God in 1605?" on this board. The point of the question is this: we all (I hope) believe that God's eternal truth, the "final authority", did not pop into existence in 1611. It had to have existed prior to 1611. There were witenesses to the final authority earlier, like the Geneva, Tyndale's, Wycliffe's, the Vulgate, etc, etc. Yet none of these match the KJV word-for-word. If a *book* is the "final authority", then we MUST be able to find that final authority prior to 1611 - but we cannot, it is a logical impossibility. Rather, we must consider that we are looking in the wrong place for a final authority in the first place. The final authority is NOT a book, but is *God's eternal truth*. This final authority is revealed to us through Bibles and through the guiding of the Holy Spirit when reading those Bibles, and a perfect book need not exist in order for that final authority to exist, as was the case in 1605. And if it was the case in 1605, it must still be the case today.
I hope that explains where I am coming from, and why I can never accept KJV-onlyism as truth.
God bless,
Brian