Why is the KJV dubbed by some the only reliable bible?

It has to do with the original manuscripts. ALL the newer versions (except the NKJV) used the older Alexandrian Manuscripts along with the Septuagint, Vaticanus, Sinaticus, and many others. The early translators threw out the Alexandrian manuscripts because they were unreliable and did not agree with the others and didn't even agree with each other! In the newer translations there are whole chapters missing and whole sections of scripture. In the NIV and NASB for instance there are over 80 verses that are omitted in the new testament alone, not to mention the old testament. I can email you a list of these if you are really interested. I have a Parallel Bible which has 4 translations side by side. I read the newer ones quite often, but I always check it against the KJV for accuracy and find many mistakes. When I preach, it's KJV only though. Peace.

Read the blasphemous Chick's pamphlets on the subject.

It's all about denouncing anything that stems from intelligent discourse. Bible scholars found the KJV not up to standard, and they have repeatedly tried to offer new and better translations. However, the know-nothing christians must discredit all scholarly knowledge (except those who are already in the know-nothings' pocket), so all translations other than the KJV are denounced as the product of the devil.

Hort and Westcott are denounced as the devil's disciples, trying to lead the faithful astray by leading them away from the only true Bible version, the KJV.

In their extreme form, they claim that the KJV is divinely inspired by God, and that since God wills to work his ways through the United States, no other language than English has any importance.

Some evangelicals have conceded that the hoary KJV may be great, but the language in which it's written just doesn't serve their needs anymore. So, they have moved on to versions designed to serve the evangelicals' needs, such as the "New" International Version, or NIV, put out (er, marketed -- Bibles are biiiggg business!) by Zondervan (I never buy anything from this company if I can avoid it) in dozens of special marketing schemes.

Part of the argument about the KJV has to do with which manuscripts are used as the main sources. The manuscripts available to the KJV scholars were a very small group. Today, many more have come to light, or have been made available for study, changing the whole field of which manuscripts seem accurate today. The evangelicals, of course, want to find reasons to stick with the smaller group of manuscripts, just as the KJV translators used those sources. They feel it was divine will that those sources were available, and not others, so the other manuscripts are just the product of the devil.

The New King James Version (NKJV) uses modern English, but uses the sources used by the KJV translators.

There are surprisingly few cases where the different readings make a difference of any significance, but some examples are the different readings of the Lord's Prayer in different gospels. In the KJV version, the gospels do not have different versions of the Lord's prayer. They are pretty much identical, whereas in some manuscripts, the text varies enormously, to the point where it would seem that the longer form is a rewriting of the shorter version, but with elaborate commentary attached.

There are books that will clarify the origins of the Bible. I recommend it highly. It's almost as if one were reading a murder mystery in which the crime is having something to do with the changing of the original text. Fascinating.

Ignorance about the history of the English Bible and original languages.

The ASV, NASB and ESV are all translated word for word and they are translated from higher quality manuscripts than were used by the KJV translators. The KJV is actually a 7th generation translation, which began not with Greek and Hebrew but it began with the Latin Vulgate, another translation.

The King James Version is the only bible that comes from the Textus Receptus manuscript which is the true translation of the bible. All other versions come from the Alexandrian manuscripts which are known as Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus of the fourth century. This text, was publicized by Westcott and Hort who were occultist.

I love the KJV but it is not a word for word translation. If it were it wouldnt make sense as the sentence structure is different in the Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic in many ways. Also. many words do not translate directly.

i might propose you to be very careful whilst thinking approximately employing different variations different than the KJV. people who declare that the greater cutting-edge variations are "greater appropriate" translated or that they arrive from "greater appropriate" manuscripts have not completely studied the situation out. i'm going to depart you with this concept for the hot translations that are available. with a view to get carry of a clean replica write the hot version is had to have a definite share of the textual adjustments than its unique. to illustrate, whilst the translators of the NKJV finished their paintings and surpassed it to the publishers it replace into got here across that they did not have a sufficient quantity of variations. The writer hence had to "locate" greater adjustments.

I prefer the KJV over all other translations because it is the sharpest and most accurate when translated out of the original languages.

I also like the New American Standard and the American Standard 1901.

Some miss the hidden meaning, like when Adam asks Eve where she got Seth, and she says God gave him to her as a replacement for Abel; most people do not realize that Adam and Eve did not know sexual relations had anything to do with their children's conception.

Because if it was good enough for the Apostles, it's good enough for them!

EDIT: The KJV is not the only word for word translation. As "Jesus is Lord" mentioned, the NASB is also a literal word for word translation.

I don't think you want a sincere and knowledgeable answer. I think you only want to argue. I'm not sure why,

except maybe you want to show your own superiority as far as Bible translations go.