The King James is the closest to the original of all the most commonly available translations. However, there are no differences between the translations that would make the difference between heaven and hell.
I like the King James Bible. For one, it is the Bible I grew up with and I am familiar with it. Others just sound weird to me.
Secondly, I believe the Word of God deserves to be presented in the most beautiful form the English language has ever taken; Shakespearian English (This was not quite the common dialect of the 1600’s by the way. It was the theatrical form of the language.)
Third, its poetic cadence is easier to memorize than our modern translations. You tell me what sticks in the brain better;
“First this: God created the Heavens and Earth--all you see, all you don't see. Earth was a soup of nothingness, a bottomless emptiness, an inky blackness. God's Spirit brooded like a bird above the watery abyss.” (The Message)
or
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep.” (KJV)
Though the meaning is the same, the later has a poetic cadence that makes it easier to memorize.
Fourth, it uses easier words than the modern translations do. Yes, that’s right, easier words.
For example, in the story of the ordination of King Saul, The NIV tells us he hid among the “luggage.” The KJV uses the word “stuff.” There are many examples of this throughout the Word.
The King James only has about 8000 different words as opposed to the NIV, which has over 14,000 different words.
In comparisons of different translations for grade level placement, one scholar came to the following assessment:
The King James averages grade level 5.8 (fifth grade, eighth month)
New International Version- 8.4
New American Standard Bible- 6.1
The English Version-7.2
New KJV- 6.9
Sites comparing different versions:
http://www.chick.com/information/bibleversions/comparison.asp -(Comparing KJV with NIV from a KJV only perspective)
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_vers1.htm - (Comparing KJV with NIV from a NIV is the right one perspective)
http://www.biblestudytools.com/compare-translations/ -(This one is really cool! It compares each verse in the Bible with MANY versions!)
http://www.isawthelightministries.com/kjv.html -(Compare the KJV with the NASB)
There are some problems with the KJV, however.
For one, the men who translated it added a few verses in, originally as footnotes, that have since been incorporated into the main text. 1 John 5:7 is one of those. This is due to the influence of the very inaccurate Latin Vulgate.Secondly, many complain about the “thee’s and thou’s.” I don’t have a problem because I am used to them. However, it even helped me to learn that they were not just fancy ways of saying “you.”
In the sixteenth-century English the KJV was originally translated into, thee, thou, thine, and thy were singular pronouns, while you and yours were plural. This makes many verses, especially those referring to God, much plainer to understand.