As with all recognized translations of the Bible, the KJV does indeed communicate the essentials of the gospel of Jesus Christ. However, to claim as “KJV only” advocates do that the KJV is the sole infallible translation by which all others are judged is both illogical and untrue. The Textus Receptus (TR) is based on late inferior manuscripts, which have gone through generations of transcriptions containing numerous textual and scribal errors, which affect the intended meaning of the biblical authors. Unlike late text-types, early text-types such as the Alexandrian are clearly a better representation of the original compositions. Obviously, the less time between an original autograph and a manuscript copy the less likelihood for scribal alterations (unintentional and intentional).
In contrast to the immovable textual tradition of the KJV, modern textual criticism follows a more objective means of determining the original autographs—namely, reasoned eclecticism. Hence, modern Greek texts, which are based chiefly on the earliest witnesses of the New Testament, are clearly more reliable in terms of establishing the text than that of Greek texts based on late Byzantine manuscripts as with TR. Moreover, the numerous textual errors of the TR and translational errors of the KJV are evaded and/or ignored by “KJV only” supporters, not on the basis of objective textual criticism, but rather on the basis of an a priori assumption: the KJV is the ultimate standard by which all translations of the Bible are to be judged. As a result, modern translations are irrationally and uncritically attacked.