Over the years I have either read about or encountered those who are commonly referred to as "King James only" people. These Christians and/or churches refuse to read anything other than the King James Bible and consider all other translations to be inferior.
On some occasions, when asked by members of this group, I have offered some reasons why the King James Bible is not the "only reliable" Bible. While it was a fine translation in its day and is the ancestor to the NAS and NRSV, it has simply gone beyond its shelf life. We have better translations based on better manuscript evidence. Of course many don't agree with my explanations and try to counter my arguments with statements about Textus Receptus, which I am pretty sure they think is some type of dinosaur.
But the following seven reasons offered as to why the King James Bible is better than the originals is new to me. The logic is, well . . .
Like James Mcgrath, who pointed this out to me, I thought this was a joke. But it seems to be very serious. Not much better is the other list which explains why the KJB is better than other translations.