> You people ... You make all Roman Catholics look bad

Your attacks on character fail. I left Protestantism because of the lack of historical basis, the rejection of Christ's clear teaching on the Real Presence (John 6 and the Last Supper narratives are very clear), and the complete lack of authority.

You claim to not defend Sola Scriptura, but you have given no other basis upon which KJV Onlyism can be founded. How is it not downstream of Sola Scriptura? Where else might the ultimate authority in the Faith lay which would allow a KJV Onlyism?

Jesus gave Peter the Keys to the Kingdom, and the rest of His Twelve the authority to forgive sins. It is upon them and their successors that the Church has authority, and that competes against KJV Onlyism. It does not stand against it in any way.

The only way KJV Onlyism may have a chance is to reject the authority of the Magisterium of Christ's One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Show how anything else may support it. 

 How many times do I have to say "I AM NOT KJVO IN THE COLLOQUIAL SENSE" before you get it through your head?

Are you even reading these responses? I bet you aren't. You're a waste of time.

>How is it not downstream of Sola Scriptura?

Sola Scriptura is a claim about the normative authority of the Church. It's a claim about the metaphysical status of Scripture.

My position on the science of Biblical text criticism is based on an internal examination of the 3 printed editions of the Greek New Testament, as well as research into development of the theories that currently dominate the field. It's material and scientific.

You could be a Roman Catholic and still basically hold to my position. You'd have to say there is no sufficient translation into English, but that's actually not all that crazy, since historically, Rome has assassinated anyone who tried to translate Scripture into English. The original 5 editions of the Textus Receptus were printed by a Roman Catholic.