Copyright May 13, 2008 3:32 PM CST

By Dr. Michael J. Bisconti


Updated June 10, 2008 1:22 PM CST

Copyright June 10, 2008 1:22 PM CST

By Dr. Michael J. Bisconti




We have toned down the rhetoric of this article as being consistent with our heartfelt support of those fellow Christians with whom, in part, we do not agree but who represent the backbone of Christian society and, indeed, the backbone of American society.


– Dr. Michael J. Bisconti, Tuesday, June 10, 2008




Like other defenders of the Bible, we have the right end but, unlike other defenders of the Bible, our defense:


  • Took a lifetime to discover


  • Defends against every attack


  • Most important, has a means




We have spent a lifetime addressing the subject of this article.  Keep in mind that we are not talking about the teachings of the Bible.  We are talking about the words of the ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts of the Bible.  Today, more than ever, there is a multitude of Bible defenders.  The problem is that, while they have the right end, they have no means.  They do, however, have a supposed means.  Here is their supposed means.  It consists of the following bit of logic:


We have proof as to what constitutes the true text of the Bible.  Therefore, the Bible tells us that the Bible is the true text of the Bible.


Now, here, in the simplest terms, is the problem with this logic:


It is a classic example of circular reasoning.


What is circular reasoning?


Circular reasoning is reasoning in which the premises depend on the conclusion.


For example:


John is my best friend.  Therefore, John is a better friend than all of my other friends.


In defending what constitutes the true text of the Bible:


You cannot use the Bible alone to prove that the Bible is the true text of the Bible.


The proof of the true text of the Bible must come, in part, from outside of the Bible.


Now, going deeper:


Those who defend the true text of the Bible with teachings about inspiration and preservation found in the Bible are using circular reasoning.

Their defense, while well-intentioned, is not logical.  (Incidentally, we do believe in inspiration and preservation.)


How can you use the Bible to prove something when you have no Bible to prove it with?  At the time you are addressing the question of the true text of the Bible, you have not yet established the true text of the Bible and, therefore, have no text to learn from that will tell you what is the true text of the Bible.


Okay, we have proven that the defense of these well-intentioned defenders is not smart.  Now, what is the smart defense, the actual defense?


The smart defense, the actual defense, has many aspects.  The key aspect is what we call “idesistemology.”  See Our Churches Are Not Yet Ready for the Coming Attack but Don’t Worry! for an introduction to the subject of idesistemology.


We will resume this discussion as soon as possible.  In the meantime, be assured that you have a translation of the true text of the Bible in your hands in the King James Bible and the International Authorized Version (the only modern translation that agrees perfectly with the King James Bible).  Now, do not confuse the International Authorized Version with the corrupt New International Version, which is based on a corrupt original languages text of the Bible compiled by textual scholars with relatively, very limited knowledge (note our use of the word “relatively”; these scholars were intellectual giants who could “chew you up and spit you out in a heartbeat”).  One of these scholars was Lobegott Friedrich Constantin (von) Tischendorf (January 18, 1815 – December 7, 1874).  Tischendorf, though brilliant, did not take into consideration the full scope of human knowledge.  This means that one or more of his conclusions, even if logical, was not based on all of the facts and, therefore, was incorrect.




(3) Improved Web Page Template Adopted Sunday, May 11, 2008 3:00:56 PM CST (GMT-5)