<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d14792577\x26blogName\x3dPLAIN+PATH+PURITAN\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttps://electofgod.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://electofgod.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d8382812700944261936', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>


Spot the devil's glee

Look at this from Critical Text scholar James White's blog:

The Ecclesiastical Text position could be considered, in essence, a variation on the Textus Receptus position described in the previous blog. However, while both agree upon the resulting textual tradition that must be appealed to as the authoritative text, the Ecclesiastical Text position arrives at that point in a very different way.
The main proponent of this position in recent times was Dr. Theodore P. Letis. Letis was a student of Dr. Edward F. Hills, also a staunch defender of the Textus Receptus, though on very different grounds from his protégé. Hills' works include The King James Version Defended! in which he argues that God has providentially preserved His Word in the Textus Receptus.

Can you spot the mark of the child of the devil there? Look at the exclamation mark after the title of Edward Hills book. (After reading this he'll probably remove it.) Critical Text scholars are children of the devil. They exist to push the devil's manuscripts and corrupt versions of the Word of God. In the process they can't help but mock and play games in the exact manner one sees in Darwinians and atheists on secular forums across the internet.

It's a satisfying thought that they have no future in God's creation, other than to burn in hell. When the King returns all mockers of God's elect and the Word that quickens God's elect will burn in hell.


Anonymous ct said...

And why not say it? They are defiling the most important thing, and they are doing it knowingly.

April 23, 2008 at 11:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Moron,

Before you continue to demonstrate what a spiritually bereft hypocrite you are, I hope you will demonstrate some consistency with these folks:


They too have the ! after the word as it is. But if Islamic principles prevail as they have in your other postings here, I assume we can see another one of your many examples of the end justifies the means.

May 2, 2008 at 3:52 PM  
Anonymous ct said...

Because a website has an exclamation mark after that title it gives you warrant to do it? What does the actually book have on it's cover and title page?

Here: Don Quixote!

Now write it that way every time.

Admit that an exclamation mark put after Hills book gives it a less than scholarly vibe, shall we say. This you have to do because Hills is Everest compared to any 'scholar' pushing the Roman Catholic counter-reformation Jesuit-approved Alexandrian manuscripts.

May 4, 2008 at 12:52 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home