King James Onlyism

Thank you for your opening response. Memember, the burden of proof is on you in this case to prove that Christians should accept the KJV as the FINAL authority from God. As an atheist, I'm simply playing the devil's advocate for a good laugh and a noob snipping debate.1. Modern translations do not remove verses My opponent claims modern translations remove verses from the Bible. However, let's critically examine this claim. First, my opponent has to PROVE that the verses actually are legitamently missing from the modern translations. Another problem is that even IF modern translations do remove those verses, it does not prove the supremacy of the KJV. For example, I can make a modern translation without the verses missing. To claim that some modern translations are missing verses that are in the KJV prove the KJV is superior to all translations commits the fallacy of hasty generalization.I'm now going to take a look at some of the verses my opponent provided. The first is going to be Mark 16 where my opponent claims that the modern translations remove the entire passage. Unfortunately, my opponent neglects to tell us that the passage is interpolated -- in otherwords, it is a later addition to the Gospel of Mark. I'm going to provide some evidence below.1. Manuscript variansThere are manuscript variations to such a passage. This is found in the manuscript known as L, Psi, 009, 0112 and 274mg 579, K, Syrh which states, "But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that had been told. And after this Jesus himself sent out by means of them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclomation of eternal salvation." [1]2. Manuscript assertionMatt Slick notes:The last twelve verses of Mark (16:9-20) are lacking in the two earliest parchment codices, B and Aleph, in the Old Latin manuscript k,, the Sinaitic Syriac, many manuscripts of the Old Armenian version, the Adysh and Opiza manuscripts of the Old Georgian version, and a number of manuscripts of the Ethiopic version. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Ammonius show no knowledge of the existence of these verses; other Church Fathers state that the section is absent from Greek copies of Mark known to them (e.g. Jerome, Epist. cxx. 3, ad hedibiam,)... The original form of the Eusebian sections makes no provision for numbering sections after 16:8. Not a few manuscripts which contain the passage have scholia stating that older Greek copies lack it (so, for example, MSS. 1, 20,22, &c.), and in other witnesses the passage is marked with asterisks or obeli, the conventional sigla used by scribes to indicate a spurious addition to a literary document." [1]Another example is the The Johanine Comma which states: I John 5:7-8 (KJV)For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one. And there are three that witness on earth, the Spirit, the Water and the Blood and these three agree in one. The verse does not appear anywhere except for the Latin vulgate and the KJV. [2] 2. Removing wordsAre the modern translations removing words or are they translating them different? Changing "charity" to "love" is no big deal as it is modernizing an archaic phrase. Please cite only 2 examples. References1. http://carm.org...;2. http://www.amazon.com... notes on 1 John.