If there are execeptions and it is only 99.99% accurate and literal, then how is the King James Bible perfect and infallible?
99.99% accurate to the TR is what I said. Not once did I say or imply that the entire TR is the infallible word of God, it's merely the best Greek text tradition in existance. The KJV differs with the TR in a few places, but in those certain places they have ample reason to correctly do so.
"the Bible remains the word of God, no matter how poor the translation."
There's a difference between a poor and a false translation.
Isa 9:3 KJV: "Thou hast multiplied the nation, and
not increased the joy..."
Isa 9:3 NIV: "You have enlarged the nation
and increased their joy"
These 2 translations are polar opposite in meaning, they cannot both be true. So how can a
lie be God's word?
Philippians 2:6 KJV: "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God"
Philippians 2:6 NASV: "who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped"
Here we find another verse which cannot be God's word in both versions. In the KJV this verse affirms the deity of Christ; in the NAS it denies the deity of Christ. That's not a poor translation, its a false translation.
What happened to those? Why were they inspired in 1611, but not today?
All you have to do is a little research to find out that those books were included
between the old and new testaments as a historical document, not as scripture. The catholic Bible I have sticks the apocrypha in with the rest of the books.
Until Gutenburg (who was Catholic, BTW) invented moveable type, Bibles were too EXPENSIVE for the "common man" to AFFORD
True, but that doesn't change the fact that the Roman Church outlawed commoners from having Bibles. The Bible was placed on the index of forbidden books at the Council of Trent. Look that one up yourself. They knew they'd lose control of the people once everyone knew what the
Bible had to say.