Greetings in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Before I reply, I must admit that I've not (yet) seen the article in question (owing to time/work) but have encountered these same 'difficult/archaic' arguments on a number of occasions in an attempt to discredit the Bible. I suppose there's a couple of points to make:
1. The language has devolved since 1611- a real 'dumbing down' of the population at large. As a result, we should hold fast to the words in the Bible and encourage folks to learn these so-called 'archaic' words. Bring folks up to the Bible, rather than lower the Bible to a people whose language has been- and indeed is- devolving.
2. We are told to "Study" the Bible. This involves more than reading. I find that the language of the Bible encourages me to study deeper and find the 'treasure' within its pages.
3. God the Holy Spirit Himself enlightens the person who studies the Bible (If we know the Author- Acts 16:31).The great myth of 'Get a Good News/ N.I.V 'cos it's easier to read' is daft: my father-in-Law was bought a Good News 'bible' on this basis and has never opened its covers.
4. One Book has blessed the church since 1611 and why do we need another?
5. It would be interesting to find out where/if Evangelical Outreach can tell us where God's Word is today? Hmmmmm.....

God Bless (and sorry for going on so long!)

[Paladin54]

The best argument (and truly, the only argument I really have) is found right here on av1611.com, and it has yet to be defeated, simply because of how awe-inspiring the concept is.

http://av1611.com/kjbp/faq/archaic.html

[Luke]

I would ignore everything on that page. It's a Dan Corner devotee page (or possible even his own ministries website), a heretic that believes in "conditional security", IE, Hyper Lordship Salvation (Saved if you DO, Lost if you DON'T).

[Luke]

There is a verse in Matthew which totally refutes Loss of Salvation

Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

The Loss of Salvationists say that many Christians will hear this on that day, thinking they have eternal security, but lost it, because they are workers of iniquity. Can they even read??

Is Jesus Christ a liar.

As Ruckman so eloquently put it "He ain't gonna say he never knew you, if he knew you".

If you are saved, then God will never say "I never knew you".

Originally Posted by Paladin54

I do have some difficulty explaining
The "revisions" of the Textus Receptus.

This link may help.
http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/textof.htm

the King James Version ought to be regarded not merely as a translation of the Textus Receptus but also as an independent variety of the Textus Receptus.

Originally Posted by Paladin54

That one of the main translators was an alchoholic and never kicked out.

I haven't heard this one yet, so I can't help you.

[Diligent]

Originally Posted by Paladin54

That one of the main translators was an alchoholic and never kicked out.

How quickly these things become gossip, even from history.

The Church of England did not necessarily have the same traditions as modern Baptist churches. It was not uncommon for people to consume moderate amounts of wine with their meals.

I'm not interested in another debate over the definition of "wine," which seems to change from verse to verse depending on one's traditions and involves lots of "gold digging" in "the Greek," but it is important not to get out of hand with these things. If there is any historical evidence that one of the translators was actually an alcoholic, I have not seen it.

Goes to show you: If you can't refute the truth, then attack the messenger. Since no one has been successful in making their criticisms of the AV1611 "stick", they are now going after King James himself and the translators.