Stripping Away Hyperpreterism's False Use of the Bible

Supposed ex-hyperpreterist, Sam Frost caught on to something.  In my opposition to the Clarkian method as opposed to the Mathison-Wilson-Gentry method of combating heresy (see here), Frost said this:

"[Roderick]  is trying to strip away the very thing from them that allows [full preterists] to START. He wants some vague “God sustains” axiom."

Well, Sam partially seems to understand it.  I'm trying to get hyperpreterists to tell me 3 things:

1. WHAT IS THE BIBLE? (why 66 books and no more or less)
2. WHY IS THE BIBLE THE BIBLE? (and not just any text)
3. HOW IS THE BIBLE THE BIBLE? (where did the Bible come from)

Indeed I AM fully admitting that I am trying to STRIP AWAY the false use of the Bible by the hyperpreterists.  Frost and his fellow Clarkians approach the Bible as if it was a logician primer text rather than the SUSTAINED Word of God.  The axiom that God Sustains is not vague.  If God doesn't sustain basic truth and the basic understanding of truth then all the Clarkian propositions in the world aren't going to help anyone.

When hyperpreterists act like they go to the "Bible Alone", Clarkians let them START there; probably because many of the Ken Talbot Clarkians are supposed ex-hyperpreterists themselves.  Or rather, as Talbot himself said, they are "AKIN" to a "modified" form of full preterism; something Talbot is calling "Realized Preterism" (listen to Talbot say it himself in this 6 second audio).  But historic Christians (not Clarkians) should not allow a hyperpreterist to misuse the Bible.  We MUST not allow them to claim they use the Bible Alone without telling us WHAT, WHY, and HOW the Bible is the Bible.  If and when they answer, they will reveal they too HAVE TO believe that God sustains....sustains what we call the Bible.  When they do that, we merely need to point out the contradiction.  Hyperpreterists HAVE TO believe God has sustained basic truth and the basic understanding of that truth, through and despite fallible men, YET then hyperpreterists wants us to believe that while 2000 years of Christianity has been UNITED on the four basics of eschatology, somehow it has all been wrong.  REALLY?

Frost and his fellow Textualists Clarkians would rather try to show how smart they are by endlessly arguing a text with hyperpreterists even though the hyperpreterist has no business operating in the text of the Bible when they can't tell us WHAT, HOW, and WHY the Bible is the Bible.  Hyperpreterists can't START with the Bible because the hyperpreterist overarching premise denies God sustains...and apparently so does the Clarkian.