Wednesday, October 14, 2020

Taylor DeSoto Responding to 20 Common Claims Made Against the TR

Taylor DeSoto continues his prolific blogging pace over at his "Young, Textless, and Reformed" site (He's probably written three articles in the time it's taken me to post this one!). He recently posted an article with convenient links to 20 of his past articles addressing various objections to the TR position. Read the post here. Sample some of the articles below:

Common Claims Made by Critical Text Apologists Answered:

  1. TR Advocates are more skeptical than Bart Ehrman
  2. Treating Text and Canon the same is a category error
  3. P75 proves that Vaticanus is early and reliable
  4. Beza was doing the same thing as modern textual critics
  5. The CBGM can get us to 125AD
  6. There is a “fatal flaw” in TR argumentation
  7. The CBGM is going to give us a Bible more accurate than before
  8. The CBGM is “God’s gift to the church”
  9. The TR position offers no meaningful apologetic to Bart Ehrman
  10. The TR position is “anachronistic”
  11. The TR position starts with the TR and is circular
  12. Adopting the critical text is consistent with presuppositional apologetics
  13. There is no doctrine affected between the TR and CT
  14. The TR position is “textual mythology”
  15. Learning textual criticism is necessary for apologetics
  16. The burden of proof is on the TR advocates
  17. The Bible does not teach providential preservation
  18. There is no difference between Critical Bibliology and Reformed Bibliology
  19. It is possible to reconstruct the original autographs with extant evidence
  20. The TR position is just fundamentalism, emotionalism, and traditionalism

1 comment:

Howie said...

Taylor DeSota's blog at is par excellence and these 20 links underscore that in the growing array of his writings on text. I found DeSota's commentary on "No, Beza Was Not Doing Modern Text-Criticism" very helpful. It articulated the key differences between what the Critical Text school has/is doing vs. what Beza, et al were doing.

The differences are big.

He sums up in part: "I doubt I could find a single Reformed believer who would agree with DC Parker (Critical Text) on what the Bible is, and yet the vast majority of the modern day Reformed are getting their Bible from him and his colleagues."

Hopefully that tide is changing and we all continue reforming, by God's amazing grace, in and about our Kingdom's Constitution (as our Pastor calls it)... the sacred Word of God most High that has been kept pure in all ages.