In this episode Drs. Van Kleeck conclude their observations regarding Van Kleeck Jr.’s second cross-examination. Obviously this series is getting long and we have two more episodes to go. I hope that it is becoming clear if it is not already that what was presented at the debate was merely the tip of a very large iceberg which represents a defense of the Textus Receptus.
There are other defenses we can offer. Defense from explanatory ultimate, Scripture itself, properly basic belief, history, and church history. The defense of the TR is deep and wide. As such, don’t ever get sucked into the trap that only historical arguments can be made in defense of your Bible. Even worse, don’t get sucked into the trap that the best arguments are merely historical and the best way to argue these arguments is by assuming your opponent’s methodology. There is no good reason to entertain either of these traps whether you have a graduate degree or not.
Remain faithful to your Bible and defend it with distinctively Christian argumentation. With these two practical admonitions we will see belief in the Bible to change the world.
Standard Sacred Text.com 
James White is correct, he’s not a naturalist, he’s actually more of a Deist when it comes to textual criticism. He believes the Spirit inspired the words of Scripture but takes no role in preserving them. This is Deism; he’s a textual deist. The problem is, that God never works that way in anything that He does! Not in creation – He didn’t create and then just leave it on its own but actively holds all things together by the word of His power; and not in salvation – He doesn’t save us and then leave us on our own, but preserves us through His indwelling Holy Spirit. So if God doesn’t act that way regarding creation or salvation, why would He do that when it comes to His inspired Word?
Great job, Dr. Van Kleeck! I attended the debate and really enjoyed it.
LikeLike