Introduction

The digital reconstruction has been given its own website.  You can download it at Ironwrit.

This department of Lionwrit deals with the first, historic digital reconstruction of the autographs of the Bible.

First, this is a reconstruction, not a physical discovery.  Nevertheless, this is an historic event…for many reasons.  Not the least of which is that it reconciles the King James Bible community with the non-King-James-Bible community.

One point of contention between these two communities has been whether the Greek-Hebrew text of the Bible can change over time.  Until now, this has been rejected by the King James Bible community on principle, sound principle, digigraphic principle, Bible principle – the Word of God does not change.

Continued soon.

Taking up where we left off, the new discoveries do not contradict the Constancy Principle; that is, the Word of God does not change.

Now, non-King-James-Bible people believe that the Word of God does change but only effectively;  that is, they believe there is an unchanging Word of God but that no one has discovered it yet.  Therefore, they view their changes to the Hebrew-Greek Bible to be discoveries, not changes.  Note that the principal area of contention is the Greek New Testament text since the Hebrew Old Testament text is generally accepted as settled.  However, what we have to say addresses the entire Bible.

To be continued.  Phone call.

To simplify the difference between the two sides we can say it is this:

One side says the Hebrew-Greek text of the Bible does not effectively (as if) change and the other side says it does.

Well, here is one of our discoveries:

Both sides are right!

Continued later.  O’Reilly Factor is starting.

Now, how can both sides be right?  The answer lies in our concept of the object of translation.  The object of translation is what it is that you are translating.  The average person believes that we translate words.  Well, when a translator goes to translate something they bring something with them.  They bring, mentally and/or physically, a translation dictionary; for example, a Greek-to-English dictionary.  In other words, a translator translates words plus a translation dictionary.

To be continued.

We call this combination of words and dictionary, an “L-matrix,” which stands for “language matrix.”  Every translation task involves an L-matrix.  Now, here is where our digital research begins to come into play.  When textual critics, we call them “compilers,” go to create a compilation (essentially, a collection of documents with all duplicate documents removed) out of ancient manuscripts of the Bible they must first translate the manuscripts.

This means they must translate an L-matrix.  This means they need a translation dictionary, either mentally and/or physically.  Now, things get more complicated.  The average person thinks of a dictionary as a group of words with definitions.  That’s fine for everyday life.  However, in translation work, the dictionary is actually an encyclopedia that includes rules of translation.

Let’s take a break.

So, summarizing, a compiler uses words, a dictionary, and rules of translation to form a document collection.  Now, fractal analysis (recursive [repetitive] computerized dissection of a text) has revealed a correlation between one’s rules of translation and the compilation they produce.  In a nutshell:

One’s rules of translation always change with changes in their compilation.

Continue later.

Now, we’re not going anywhere; so, there will be plenty of time for you to ask questions and for us to provide the answers.  Resuming, we call the statement above the “Linkage Principle.”  Another way of stating the Linkage Principle is to say:

One’s compilation always changes with changes in their rules of translation.

We will be providing extensive data, information, and documentation for everything we have to say.

So, how does the Linkage Principle allow the coexistence of the Constancy Principle (God’s Word does not change) and the Discovery Principle (God’s Word changes)?  Note that, although non-King-James-Bible advocates say they don’t really believe that God’s Word changes, the products that they produce in the here and now are a Word of God that changes.  This means that they are, in effect if not actually, anti-Constancy-Principle supporters.

But, getting back to coexistence, the Linkage Principle led us to study the history of compilations.

Taking a break.

The history of compilations is consistent with the Linkage principle; however, like a prosecutor in a court of law, who knows the defendant is guilty, we must supply you with proof of what we assert.

Taking another break.  We’ve been up for 23 hours straight.

We are working on the proof documentation but we feel we need to publish the essential concepts and principles of these crucial discoveries now.  Cutting to the chase, here is what we have proven:

Every compilation that has been produced is valid in light of its associated rules of translation.

This means:

The Textus Receptus is valid in light of the principles (rules) of translation of the King James Bible translators and the Westcott & Hort Greek text is valid in light of the principles of Westcott and Hort.

Now, if you are a Westcott and Hort supporter, don’t get too excited…because Westcott and Hort did make a mistake and their mistake has caused countless people considerable grief.

Another break.

Westcott and Hort’s mistake was that their rules of translation were incomplete.  Why does this matter?  In addition to the Linkage Principle, there is another principle at play, the “Governance Principle,” (this is what Westcott and Hort missed) which states:

Every change in one’s rules of translation must be governed by the digigraph principles.

One application of the Governance Principle is the “Persistence Principle”:

A newly adopted rule of translation cannot change the meaning of the Biblical text.

If Westcott and Hort had known and followed the Governance Principle and the Persistence Principle, their Greek text would have been uncontested.

Now, more needs to be said.  While the Textus Receptus and the Westcott & Hort compilations can coexist, they cannot coexist in the same dimension.  That is, the Textus Receptus is the dominant text and the Westcott & Hort text is the recessive text.  A dominant text is one that satisfies all of the digigraph principles.  A recessive text is one that satisfies some of the digigraph principles.  This leads us to the “Distribution Principle”:

The dominant text is the Word of God for the people but the recessive text is the Word of God for the academician.

Finally, the most critical point, the “Priority Principle”:

The Word of God of the academician must have the same meaning as the Word of God of the people.

The proof of the Priority Principle is:

The rules of translation must be digigraphically compliant.

Okay, we have given you the brief explanation and we know that many of you have many questions and concerns.  We will be addressing all of your questions and concerns in the days to come.

Dr. Michael J. Bisconti