As the Dean of the Deacons wrote, most us here have no major problems with the KJV. A gnat here, a gnat there, but the camel is a worthy ride. What you may have read is our dislike of "KJV-only" stances, where the KJV translation is held up as either
1-inspired itself (like the RC which teaches that Jerome's Vulgate Latin translation is itself inspired pr
2- that the KJV is the best available English translation.
I do not believe 1 or 2, but I have no major argument with anyone who believes 2. I personally rank the KJV WAAAY above the most popular current English Bible, the NIV. So you like KJV? Welcome brother, I like it too.
On the other hand, if you think the KJV translation itself is actually inspired, well, that is going to be a problem for me. Even so, you can debate that to. Many years ago this thread underwent an internal KJV-only war as there were some here who believed the KJV was itself inspired.
As to other matters, the Dean of the Deacons has given good advice as usual. There is a lot of latitude here, check out my recent thread on mythology and echos to see some of that. There are Augustinians, Semi-Pelagians, credobaptist, paedobaptist, Covenentals, Charismatics, Dispensationalists and like me: It's-not-clear-when-to-Baptizist Calvarminian Non-Charismatic-continuant-yes-I-am-totally-wacked-outists.
From your statements, I think you would fit in this thread just fine, welcome.
JR