Recently, somebody was using James White’s controlled/uncontrolled argument in favour of the New Testament (uncontrolled preservation) and arguing against Quranic preservation (controlled preservation).
This argument is flawed as it misrepresents/misunderstands Quranic preservation BUT is also inconsistent as it argues AGAINST the Old Testament as the OT was preserved in a controlled environment!!! [I hope those whom I was interacting with recently are taking note of the video]
So James White’s argument is inconsistent and unchristian as it throws mud at the Old Testament – what a blunder! It seems James White’s desperation to project an argument for the preservation of the NT leads him to the blunder of inconsistency – roll on the video!
James White kills his own argument, VS Bart Ehrman
Video description: James White shoots himself in the foot. He spent a few minutes trying to build an argument for the preservation of the NT, but during the Q&A period, he destroys his own argument in few seconds. (Video is by 1MoreMuslim)
Why is James White looking silly in 1MoreMuslim’s video?
Firstly, kudos to 1moreMuslim for the amazing video!
I advance the idea James White is looking ludicrously inconsistent, to the extent of “silly”, due to what he is working with. He is desperate to make a case for the New Testament, thus all levels of reasonable consistency and scholarship go out of the window.
Now, if James White is shown to be so whimsical in making argumentations for the preservation of the NT you must start asking yourself with regards to the reliability of the NT. Why is it this man is incapable of presenting a reasonable and consistent argument for the NT?
We have already seen, in the debate with Dr Bart Ehrman, Christians do struggle to present the NT as a reliable document. See footnote two for the link to the review.
A few further points
Preservation of the Quran
Sadly, James White has misunderstood Quranic preservation or communicated unclearly – or was simply being disingenuous. Uthman’s (ra) controlling of the text was carried out in agreement with (and alongside) the community (a community consisting of Prophetic companions). Sadly, White represents it as an “Uthmanic” act – if he looked into it further he would have realised, through Ali’s (ra) statement, that the actions of Uthman were indeed agreed upon by everyone 
In fariness, perhaps White is simply being unclear due to time constraints. However, there is no excuse for the illogical supporters of White who are influenced to present an illogical line of reasoning.
Facts for the logical, not for the illogical
Does the New Testament have those who sat down with Jesus (p) controlling the text? No - the text, which Jesus never saw nor sanctioned, was controlled by scribes (many of whom were poorly skilled and we KNOW some were dishonest to the extent of DELIBERATELY CHANGING the text!
Does the Quran have those who sat down with Muhammad (p) controlling the text? Yes - this was within a community of Muslim saints who had amonsgt them huffaz (people who had memorized the whole Quran). Oral transmission as well as written preservation of the Quran amongst the most trustworthy Muslims is obviously a better mode of preservation than leaving it in the hands of unknown "scribes" who we KNOW were unskilled and/or dishonest.
Only the most desperate (or illogical) would try to present the NT preservation as superior to the Quranic preservation. Sadly, I have encountered at least one commentator who was influenced by White's irrational thoughts - he was soon corrected!
Are they serious?
In addition, Muslims KNOW the contents of the Quran, whilst our Christian friends admitted they do not know the content of the NT for certain – they believe (faith conviction) they have the NT preserved in the manuscript tradition BUT when it comes to the variants the Christians are NOT certain as to which variant is from the original NT. 
Now, are Christians really serious in telling us their method of preservation is better because they have more “manuscripts” in an “uncontrolled” environment? Erm, the forgeries which were plucked out from the NT due to Von Tischendorf’s find in the 1800’s tell us James White and those Christians who espouse such “hopeful” argumentation are indeed on to a loser! 
The Holy spirit and the Bible?
James White says he knows Arabic, but does not...
Invitation to Islam
Would you like a relationship with your Creator? Would you like to worship the God of Jesus – the same God Jesus worshipped? Would you like to become a brother/sister of Jesus? If yes, come to Islam.
Bible: Muslims are blessed
Feedback: email@example.com (If you want to conatact the video maker please see here)
 Ibn Abi Dawud, al Masahif, p22; see also pp 12, 23 (sourced from Sheikh Al Azami, The History of the Quranic Text, UK Islamic Academy, 2003, p94
 See the debate review: Does the Bible misquote Jesus
 Dr Von Tischendorf discovered the Codex Sinaiticus (from Saint Catherine’s monsatery), this codex does NOT contain the last 12 verses in the gospel of Mark. These are believed to be forgeries. Sadder still, Christians, prior to this find believed those words to be faithful to the New Testament.