WM 346: Book Interview: Peter Van Kleeck, Jr., The 30 Best Arguments Against KJVO* (*Answered)

 

JTR

Peter Van Kleeck, Jr.: Augustine and the Septuagint (RBS 2024 Breakout Session)

 

JTR

WM 254: Seven Observations on the James White vs. Peter Van Kleeck, Jr. Debate on the TR

Here are seven observations on the James White vs. Peter Van Kleeck, Jr. Debate on the TR, held on September 24, 2022 (Watch it here).

First, I felt there were many aspects of the debate that were not handled in a fair or evenhanded manner.

Second, PVK began his opening statement with a very generous and charitable overture toward JW and those who hold to the modern text.

Third, simply on technical, forensic grounds, PVK clearly won this debate, as he rightly pointed out in his closing statement.

Fourth, even though PVK was not attempting to make an empirical defense of the TR but a more philosophical and theological defense of it, he did offer some meaningful rejoinders to JW’s evidential-based arguments.

Fifth, one of the highlights of the debate was in PVK’s cross-examination of JW, where he effectively showed (again) that, in the end, JW cannot point to a single verse in the Bible that might not be subject to change based on new manuscripts discoveries or the development of new manuscript discoveries.

Sixth, it was striking how JW in his cross-examination of PVK mocked the distinct spiritual aspects of the Protestant approach to Scripture (even comparing it to Mormonism).

Correction: The quotation from John Calvin's Institutes is from 1.7.5 (not 1.6.5, as mistakenly written on the PPT shared in the video).

Seventh, finally, PVK took his own unique approach to this debate and chose to argue on more philosophical grounds than evidential grounds. I think he could have pushed back with some evidential arguments at points.

All in all, again, PVK did prevail. It is a shame that JW did not respond, especially to the first two arguments. We are waiting for modern evangelicals to provide a Biblical based justification for their Bibliology. We are also waiting for those who are confessionally Reformed to respond to our suggestion that confessional Bibliology is a retrieval of the Reformed and Protestant Orthodox method.

We did not get these responses in this debate.

JTR

More background to the JW vs. PVK debate on the TR: Bayes' Theorem

 

From my twitter @ Riddle1689:

Regarding a postmortem of the JW vs. PVK debate on the TR, I found this video helpful to understand Bayes' Theorem, appealed to by PVK in his argument for a high probability that the TR =the autograph.

JW again appeared clueless on how to respond to this argument (maybe with good reason) and so never really responded to it.

JTR

Background for the JW vs. PVK TR debate: Swinburne's argument for the probability of the resurrection

 

From my twitter @Riddle1689:

If you listened to the JW versus PVK debate on the TR, you might find this lecture by Oxford philosopher R. Swinburne arguing for the probability of the resurrection (cited by PVK) to be of interest.

PVK used Swinburne's three types of evidence (posterior historical; background; and prior historical) in his argument for the probability of the resurrection and applied this to an argument for the probability of the TR being the autograph.

It did not appear that JW was aware of Swinburne's argument or three types of evidence and never really offered any response to PVK's argument here.

JTR

Peter Van Kleeck, Jr.'s book "A Philosophical Grounding for a Standard Sacred Text" is now available

Peter Van Kleeck, Jr.'s version of his dissertation, A Philosophical Grounding for a Standard Sacred Text: Leveraging Reformed Epistemology in the Quest for a Standard English Version of the Bible is now available in print form. You can order it online here.

I interviewed Dr. Van Keeck on this work in WM 213.

The print version of the book has an excerpt from a "blurb" I wrote for it on the back cover. Here is the full endorsement:

“It’s the economy, stupid!” was a slogan coined by political strategist James Carville during the 1992 US Presidential election. His point was that if his party hoped to win in November, they had to maintain a laser-like focus on the economy. When it comes to winning evangelical, conservative, and Reformed Christians back to the traditional Protestant text of Scripture (the Received or Confessional Text), I contend we must take up the motto, “It’s epistemology, stupid!”  The Bible is indeed the epistemic foundation of the Christian faith. How can we affirm that Scripture is our preeminent source of authority, if we are not sure of what the text of the Bible is? In this book A Philosophical Grounding in Favor of a Standard Sacred Text, based on his doctoral dissertation at Liberty University, Dr. Peter Van Kleeck, Jr. applies the “Reformed Epistemology” of leading Christian philosophers like Alvin Plantinga and Nicholas Wolterstorff to Christian Scripture, winsomely making the case that it is not irrational for ordinary believers to embrace a “standard sacred text” as the authority for faith and practice. I warmly commend this opening volume on Scripture and the philosophy of knowledge in what is projected to be a three-volume series, and I look forward to forthcoming companion volumes which will approach the doctrine of Scripture, respectively, from an exegetical and then a theological perspective. Epistemology is, indeed, the right starting point.

-Jeffrey T. Riddle, Pastor, Christ Reformed Baptist Church, Louisa, Virginia

Tolle Lege!

JTR