Author Archives: Peter Van Kleeck Jr. Ph.D.

“Entities are not to be multiplied without necessity.” William of Ockham Ockham’s famous dictum gives us another occasion to demonstrate how Multiple Version Onlyism is not only out of touch with historic Christian doctrine but it is also out of touch with reasonable argumentation in general. As we have pointed out time and again, MVO’sContinue reading “Yet Another Place Where MVOism Fails: Ockham’s Razor”

Generally speaking the doctrines of the Christian faith can be sorted into ten main categories: Theology Proper, Christology, Pneumatology, Bibliology, Anthropology, Hamartiology, Soteriology, Ecclesiology, Angelology, and Eschatology. It seems from these ten doctrines that the case for a standard sacred text is evidently and substantively manifest. Given the advent of the tower of Babel weContinue reading “The Arc of Christian Theology Is Long and Bends Toward a Standard Sacred Text”

As Christians we are citizens of another kingdom, a heavenly Kingdom. This Kingdom is the greatest of all kingdoms and it ruled but the greatest of all Kings. So as we walk this earth we should be giving the world around us a foretaste of that Kingdom and what it will be like when ChristContinue reading “A Standard Sacred Text and the Eschaton”

Where the Bible should reign in the ecclesiastical sphere so the the U.S. Constitution should reign in the civil sphere of these United States. Since starting this blog I have been told more times than I can count how multiple versions is a huge blessing for the American Church. It has been plainly stated andContinue reading “A New Constitution for a New Era in American Civil Life”

Over the past couple week we have been discussing, among other things, the fact that the Post-Reformation Reformed dogmaticians were aware of many of the textual variants that we wrestle with today. Some of the take-aways of these observation is that the Reformed Orthodox were aware of these variants and still argued for a standardContinue reading “What About Mark 16:9-20, John 7:53-8:11, and I John 5:7?”

Over the last 5 years I have had the opportunity to teach at Trinity Baptist College in Jacksonville, FL the faculty of which is quite eclectic. For four years I taught on campus and have this last year started to teach online. In the opportunities in which I had to teach Bibliology or something inContinue reading “This Is What the Church Sounds Like.”

There is an interesting and regularly observable dichotomy found in the major tenets of modern evangelical textual criticism. On the one hand you have modern evangelical text-critics saying, “…the copies of Homer, Plato, Aristotle, and others from the ancient world have produced adequate copies for us to know what they taught. And as shown below,Continue reading “How Many Witnesses Do We Really Have?”

As we continue our survey of contemporary “meaningful textual variants” known and answered hundreds of years, we turn now to 1 John 4:3. Turretin observes that the text can be read, “Every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh” or as the Latin translates it, “every spirit that denies Jesus.”Continue reading “I John 4:3: Is it “Deny” or “Confess”?”

It has often puzzled me why an appeal to reading as “earlier” somehow trumped most claims to different but “later” readings. Consider the following quote from Wasserman and Gurry’s book, A New Approach to Textual Criticism: An Introduction to the Coherence-Based Genealogical Method, “Reading a, on the other hand, is not attested until the ninthContinue reading “What Do You Mean by “Earlier Readings”?”