Why KJV? #1: It was made from the best Greek and Hebrew texts.

How close is this?

from: Why I Use The KJV by Elder Milburn Cockrell - Sovereign Grace Landmark Baptist Pastor - Now In Glory

1.) First, I believe it was made from the best Greek and Hebrew texts, which are the preserved Word of God. I refer to the Masoretic Hebrew Text preserved by the nation of Israel, and the Textus Receptus Greek Text (or the Byzantine text).

This is the Greek text preserved from A. D. 452 to 1453 by the Greek church, the Waldenses, and Albigenses.

All modern translations are based upon the reconstructed Greek text of Westcott and Hort, two Romanist-oriented scholars, whose purpose was to replace the Protestant and Baptist text with those of the Roman Church and thereby wean back Protestants to the Roman fold.

These two men denied the blood atonement of Jesus Christ, exalted Mary worship and the Romanish mass, denied the Genesis record, and were ardent evolutionists and had universalist tendencies.

About 95 percent of all Greek manuscripts that we have are of the Byzantine type.

This means that the Westcott and Hort texts disagree with 95 percent of extant sources, including Scripture quotations from the writings of the early church fathers, who antedated the texts on which the Westcott and Hort reconstruction was based.

The Westcott and Hort texts came from Rome and Egypt, depicted as God's enemies in Scripture, whereas the text of the KJV came from Syria and Greece, the areas of the initial outreach of Christianity.

All translations since 1611 have not been made entirely from the Textus Receptus.

These did include some of the Textus Receptus but they largely depended on the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. Codex Vaticanus was found in the pope's library in A. D. 1481 and Codex Sinaiticus was taken from a waste basket on a Mt. Sinai monastery in 1859.

Both of these manuscripts include the apocryphal books outside of the New Testament canon.

This makes the new translations based largely on these texts essentially Roman Catholic translations.

They resemble Jerome's Latin Vulgate and the Rheims-Douai versions of 1582 authorized by the Roman Catholic Church at the infamous Council of Trent.

 

I was wondering if these things are so and weather they, in my words, have caused the ommission of Cardinal Doctrines, in the "Modern Versions", i.e.,
Death in the pot?

"So they poured out for the men to eat. And it came to pass, as they were eating of the pottage, that they cried out, and said, O thou man of God, there is death in the pot. And they could not eat thereof." II Kings 4:40.