I haven't read any anti Textus Receptus or anti KJV Literature. I simply said what I said because to value one particular manuscript to the exclusion of all others or use argumentation by known radical King James Onlyists. Not to mention recycling the same arguments Gail Riplinger has used to atack Wescot and Hort is begioted. If that comes of as stronglly worded or insenstive so be it I would rather be thought harsh and insenstive then be weak or unwiling to speak up for what I consider right or wrong. With all that being said this is my last post on this subject I have said what I have said take it or leave it I stand by everything I said. What evednce I could show has been laid out far better by far better men then I. So with that this subject is
to me
