Do we have a complete, perfect, and sufficient Bible?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
#1
There are many today who refuse to accept the fact that our Protestant Bible (and I refer to the King James Bible or KJB) is not complete, perfect, and sufficient.
Firstly we have the Catholic Church, which has insisted that the seven apocryphal books in the Catholic bible are necessary (in spite of Jerome).
Then we have the Orthodox churches which also include twelve apocryphal books in their bibles.
Then we have almost all the textual critics since Westcott and Hort, who claim that the Received Text is corrupt and their corrupt Critical Text is “pure”.
Then we have all the translators and translations of modern English bibles, which claim that they have to make revisions to their bibles every few years, since what they originally claimed to be perfect is really not so. So we have revision, after revision, after revision,
Then we have the thousands of deceived evangelical Christians, evangelists, pastors, and teachers who believe that their modern versions are superior to the KJB.
Then we have almost all the seminaries and bible schools which believe that the Critical Text and the modern bible versions are more reliable than the KJB.
Then we have the deluded Christians who believe that they need prophets and new prophecies today, because presumably the existing Bible is inadequate. They do not wish to believe that prophecies would cease.

With such a major onslaught on our Protestant Bible, is it any wonder that most churches have abandoned the King James Bible?

So what is the truth about our Bible?

1. The first thing to understand and believe is that the Lord Jesus Christ Himself approved the entire Old Testament as the Word of God and as Scripture. He was using the Hebrew Tanakh (not the corrupt Greek Septuagint which has all the apocryphal books). And Christ made it crystal clear that the three major divisions of the Hebrew Bible were totally reliable.

27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself… 44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. 45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, 46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: 47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 And ye are witnesses of these things. (Luke 24:27,44-48)

What do we see here? Christ calls the Hebrew Bible “all the Scriptures”. Then He goes on to speak of the three major divisions which are (1) the Law or Torah (5 books), (2) the Prophets or Nevi’im (8 books), and (3) the Psalms or Ketuvim (11 books) for a total of 24 books (corresponding to our 39 OT books). This is now what we have in the Masoretic Text which supports the KJB.

Paul told Timothy that the OT Scriptures were able to bring a person to salvation.
And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. (2 Tim 3:15). But as an apostle-prophet, he anticipated the complete Bible, so he followed up with this: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. (2 Tim 3:16,17)

When we come to the New Testament (NT), we find that the canon of the NT was already established by the second century AD. Here is what we read about the Original Peshitta: “This is a translation of the complete Peshitta Aramaic Bible into English- the 39 Old Testament books and the 27 New Testament books. The Peshitta Bible was very likely written in the 1st century AD. The Peshitta Old Testament is an Aramaic translation of proto-Massoretic Hebrew manuscripts, similar to those from which the Greek Septuagint was translated in the 3rd century BC. The Peshitta New Testament is the original Aramaic New Testament text from which the Greek manuscripts were translated and disseminated for the Greek speaking Roman citizens of the 1st century” . The Peshitta Holy Bible Translated (lulu.com)

Please note that the 27 books of the NT were already in this Syriac translation as early as the first century (no later than the second century). The Gospel of Mark was probably the first book of the NT, written in the 50’s. Revelation was the last book written around 95-96 AD. All the other books were written between those dates. Fourteen out of the 27 books in the NT were penned by Paul, and Peter put all of them at the same level as the OT Scriptures (2 Pet 3:15,16). But he also included his own Scriptures as divinely inspired (“a more sure word of prophecy"). The apostles who wrote the NT books were Matthew, John, Peter, and Paul. Jude was not an apostle but one of the brothers of Christ who was later converted and wrote Jude.

The whole Bible is deemed to be “prophecy”, since prophecy means divinely inspired speech or writings. It also means forthtelling and foretelling. Moses was already considered a prophet, but Christ called the rest of the OT “all the prophets”. At the same time, the apostles and writers of the NT were also prophets, as we see in their writings. And Paul – speaking prophetically – said that prophecies would cease (1 Cor 13:8). While the KJB has “they shall fail” the Greek katargeo means “cease”.

Strong's Concordance
katargeó: to render inoperative, abolish

Original Word: καταργέω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: katargeó
Phonetic Spelling: (kat-arg-eh'-o)
Definition: to render inoperative, abolish
Usage: (a) I make idle (inactive), make of no effect, annul, abolish, bring to naught, (b) I discharge, sever, separate from. And John confirmed this in the last chapter of the last book of the NT.

So how did the Received Text develop?

Firstly there were many translations of the Greek NT since the first century. At the same time the Greek Orthodox Church had what are known as Lectionaries or Lesson Books, which quoted the Greek NT. Then we have the quotations of the Early Church Fathers. At the same time, the NT was copied and recopied over the centuries between the 1st and the 14th centuries, and now there are over 5.000 Greek manuscripts (and only a few have been collated).

So when Erasmus sat down to produce a printed Greek NT (finished in 1516), he had a wealth of evidence. But he chose only nine manuscripts, along with the Complutensian Polyglott (which used many other manuscripts). In the end there was little difference between the two and this became the basis of the Received Text (or Textus Receptus).

Then came Stephanus with four editions (between 1546 and 1551), followed by Beza (1565-1611), then followed by the Elzevir brothers (1624-1641) with three editions. The KJB used the 1550 edition of Stephanus (Robert Estienne) but also included readings from other editions. This edition of Stephanus became the Textus Receptus.

For the Old Testament, the King James translators used the Great Rabbinic Bible (Mikraot Gedolot) of Jacob ben Chayyim (1524-25), who was a Masoretic scholar who became a Christian. This is the Masoretic Text of the KJB.

The King James translators had one goal – to make an outstanding English translation to which no one could take exception. They succeeded in this, and for over 300 years, this was regarded as "the Bible" by everyone in the English-speaking world. But then came the critics who wanted to promote corrupt Gnostic Greek manuscripts, and now we have all the modern versions. The OT was also corrupted by Rudolf Kittel, and is now used instead of the traditional Hebrew text.


Every Christian owes it to himself or herself to know which is the true Bible, since it is the Word of God, and is totally sufficient to bring sinners to salvation and saints to perfection. God speaks to us through His Word, and the words of Christ are the words of life.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
#2
So how did the Received Text develop?

Firstly there were many translations of the Greek NT since the first century. At the same time the Greek Orthodox Church had what are known as Lectionaries or Lesson Books, which quoted the Greek NT. Then we have the quotations of the Early Church Fathers. At the same time, the NT was copied and recopied over the centuries between the 1st and the 14th centuries, and now there are over 5.000 Greek manuscripts (and only a few have been collated).

So when Erasmus sat down to produce a printed Greek NT (finished in 1516), he had a wealth of evidence. But he chose only nine manuscripts, along with the Complutensian Polyglott (which used many other manuscripts). In the end there was little difference between the two and this became the basis of the Received Text (or Textus Receptus).

Then came Stephanus with four editions (between 1546 and 1551), followed by Beza (1565-1611), then followed by the Elzevir brothers (1624-1641) with three editions. The KJB used the 1550 edition of Stephanus (Robert Estienne) but also included readings from other editions. This edition of Stephanus became the Textus Receptus.

For the Old Testament, the King James translators used the Great Rabbinic Bible (Mikraot Gedolot) of Jacob ben Chayyim (1524-25), who was a Masoretic scholar who became a Christian. This is the Masoretic Text of the KJB.

The King James translators had one goal – to make an outstanding English translation to which no one could take exception. They succeeded in this, and for over 300 years, this was regarded as "the Bible" by everyone in the English-speaking world. But then came the critics who wanted to promote corrupt Gnostic Greek manuscripts, and now we have all the modern versions. The OT was also corrupted by Rudolf Kittel, and is now used instead of the traditional Hebrew text.

Every Christian owes it to himself or herself to know which is the true Bible, since it is the Word of God, and is totally sufficient to bring sinners to salvation and saints to perfection. God speaks to us through His Word, and the words of Christ are the words of life.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
61,161
30,312
113
#3
Then we have all the translators and translations of modern English bibles, which claim that they have to make revisions to their bibles every few years, since what they originally claimed to be perfect is really not so. So we have revision, after revision, after revision,
The King James Version of the Bible was first published in 1611, and the Revised Version was published in 1881. One source says that since then, over 30,000 changes have been made to the text, most of them in the interest of consistency or modernization. However, more than 5,000 of those changes represent differences between the Greek text used for the Revised Version and the one used for the King James Version. Another source says that from 1611 until now, the King James Bible has undergone a grand total of 421 word changes. But KJ onlyists always downplay any errors or inconsistencies in their adherence to their preference. However, it should be said that revisions to any translation serve mostly to make the Bible more accessible to more people.
 

Lafftur

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2017
6,896
3,636
113
#4
I do love the King James Version of The Holy Bible. I also enjoy the New King James Version and the Amplified Bible.

Satan has always been twisting God’s Word and using It out of context. We need the Holy Spirit of God the Spirit of Truth to rightly divide and understand God’s Word, no matter what version we read.

The Holy Spirit leads us and guides us into all Truth. For me, at this point in my journey… the Bible the Holy Spirit wants me to read is the King James Version, New King James Version and the Amplified Bible.
 

Omegatime

Well-known member
Apr 29, 2023
1,193
433
83
Pennsylvania
#5
I know Nehemiah6 likes pushing the KJV and he and I have butted heads more than once. IMO there is no perfect english version nor is the Bible complete Do you think we do not have the Holy Spirit within us to make judgement on scriptures. Having knowledge of the Hebrew and Greek is the best way to decide with the guidance of the H. S. I have no trouble with the 66 books but itis not complete. When I see 66 books i see the fingerprints of man all over it for 6 is the number of man, just like 666.
 

Lafftur

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2017
6,896
3,636
113
#6
I know Nehemiah6 likes pushing the KJV and he and I have butted heads more than once. IMO there is no perfect english version nor is the Bible complete Do you think we do not have the Holy Spirit within us to make judgement on scriptures. Having knowledge of the Hebrew and Greek is the best way to decide with the guidance of the H. S. I have no trouble with the 66 books but itis not complete. When I see 66 books i see the fingerprints of man all over it for 6 is the number of man, just like 666.
Didn’t John say….

And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John.21.25&version=NKJV


I agree that there are easily more books and writings… however, for me at this point of my journey… the KJV, NKJV and Amplified Bible are the green pastures where God is feeding me His Word.

Sounds like you’re enjoying the green pastures God is currently feeding you at too. :love:(y)
 
Jun 30, 2024
12
15
3
#7
Personally, I read the NIV, and use the KJV as my study Bible. But the Geneva Bible has been helpful at times also, like the AMP version. But the reason that I'm posting this is because we must always look to the Holy Spirit as being our Perfect Version of the Bible. There are many Bible teachers and commentaries that help in areas where we're still unsure, but it is ultimately the Holy Spirit that will lead us into all truth.

Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. (KJV)

Joh 16:13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. (NIV)

When I was first born again all I had was a KJV that was given to me as a teenager. I tried reading it, but finally got to the point where I found it more frustrating than anything. But, I believe that's because I started reading in Genesis 1:1, instead of going to the Gospels first. When I got to the genealogies I threw up my hands and went to the book store...hello NIV, AMP, PARRALLEL, STRONGS CONCORDANCE, AND MATTHEW HENRY.

I looked at many different versions before I chose the NIV. Most of them seemed watered down. I wanted something that sounded like it was from God. I felt the NIV had the strength I was looking for, along with the readability that I needed. Now I have all my Bibles at my side where I read and study each day. The Lord helps me understand when there is something that He wants me to understand more fully. That's when I turn to the KJV, and Strong's. But I also scroll through many commentaries on various sites until I'm satisfied with my findings. And if something still seems amiss I will ask the Lord to show me somehow, somewhere where I can find His truth.

I do understand another person's dilemma when it comes to which version to read. But, I do believe that you must have a KJV and Strong's Concordance. But more than anything you must be truly born again. This is the one thing that I am frustrated about concerning the churches...they don't teach John 3:3.

Joh 3:3 Jesus replied, "Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again."

There is one more thing that I would like to add concerning this "version" topic. When I was born again, it was very supernatural...God wanted to make sure that I understood what was happening to me. But, before that day I hated reading anything. The only book I ever read from cover to cover was CONTACT. But once I got my NIV you couldn't stop me from reading it. God gave me such a thirst for His Word that I could never get enough, and I still haven't. That's why I was looking for a forum or chat to converse with other born again Believers, where I could continue to learn.

Holy Spirit is the key when it comes to Bible versions, IMHO.

God Bless,

WatchmanOpie aka Mike

Born Again in 2001
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
#8
from 1611 until now, the King James Bible has undergone a grand total of 421 word changes...
And what else should one expect? Today's English --- or even 19th century English -- is different from 17th century English. But word chances are just that. The Bible has remained EXACTLY THE SAME. Proof?

17th century English
“[A Psalme of Dauid.] The earth is the Lords, and the fulnesse thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein.” Psalms 24:1 (KJV)

Today's English
(A Psalm of David.) The earth is the LORD'S, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
61,161
30,312
113
#9
The Bible has remained EXACTLY THE SAME. Proof?
That is not true. What you prove is as I said: KJ onlyists always downplay
any errors or inconsistencies in their adherence to their preference.
And they do this to the point of irrationality.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
#10
I have no trouble with the 66 books but it is not complete.
You could always recall that it is actually 24 +27 = 51 books. And 5 +1 is also 6! 66 without the last 6 means nothing. But 6 +6 = 12 means the number of divine government (hence 12 apostles or 12 tribes of Israel).

And if Scripture is not complete then you are questioning the fact that Christ gave John "the Revelation o Jesus Christ" as the very last book. So you have just three other options: (1)go along with the Catholic Church, (2) go along with the Orthodox churches, or (3) go along with the Mormons.
 

Omegatime

Well-known member
Apr 29, 2023
1,193
433
83
Pennsylvania
#11
You could always recall that it is actually 24 +27 = 51 books. And 5 +1 is also 6! 66 without the last 6 means nothing. But 6 +6 = 12 means the number of divine government (hence 12 apostles or 12 tribes of Israel).

And if Scripture is not complete then you are questioning the fact that Christ gave John "the Revelation o Jesus Christ" as the very last book. So you have just three other options: (1)go along with the Catholic Church, (2) go along with the Orthodox churches, or (3) go along with the Mormons.
---------------------------------------------------------------
I have decided to ignore you as I am reading from a blind man
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,177
3,700
113
#12
However, it should be said that revisions to any translation serve mostly to make the Bible more accessible to more people.
And that’s the great hoax, that the KJV is not accessible or so difficult to understand. Here, let’s dumb it down for you so you can understand…
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,177
3,700
113
#13
I know Nehemiah6 likes pushing the KJV and he and I have butted heads more than once. IMO there is no perfect english version nor is the Bible complete Do you think we do not have the Holy Spirit within us to make judgement on scriptures. Having knowledge of the Hebrew and Greek is the best way to decide with the guidance of the H. S. I have no trouble with the 66 books but itis not complete. When I see 66 books i see the fingerprints of man all over it for 6 is the number of man, just like 666.
Scripture doesn’t contain everything we want to know, it contains everything we need to know.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,177
3,700
113
#15
There are many today who refuse to accept the fact that our Protestant Bible (and I refer to the King James Bible or KJB) is not complete, perfect, and sufficient
No disrespect brother, but there have been many occasions where you have corrected or cast doubt on the words of the KJV. You can’t have it both ways. Either you believe every word to be true, or you don’t, which would signify that you don’t believe it to be the perfect word of God. I sincerely hope you believe.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,177
3,700
113
#16
Have you no prayer life? Do you ask, seek and knock?
Absolutely I pray. Anything the Spirit leads me to do is aligned with scripture. If not, big red flag that it’s probably my desires creeping in and not of the Lord.
 

Omegatime

Well-known member
Apr 29, 2023
1,193
433
83
Pennsylvania
#17
No disrespect brother, but there have been many occasions where you have corrected or cast doubt on the words of the KJV. You can’t have it both ways. Either you believe every word to be true, or you don’t, which would signify that you don’t believe it to be the perfect word of God. I sincerely hope you believe.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A direct answer for you---Nooooo, I do not believe the KJV is the perfect english understanding of the original scriptures. My prayer for you is that that Lord may open your eyes for your lack of knowledge.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
#18
No disrespect brother, but there have been many occasions where you have corrected or cast doubt on the words of the KJV. You can’t have it both ways. Either you believe every word to be true, or you don’t, which would signify that you don’t believe it to be the perfect word of God. I sincerely hope you believe.
Your criteria of perfection are not necessarily the true criteria. You claim that the KJB cannot be made better. But there were improvements made to it at least a couple of times. And the King James 2000 Bible does exactly what is needed to clarify, something which has caused confusion. This does not detract from the perfection of the KJB. So take a look at this:
King James Bible
Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
King James 2000 Bible
Because you will not leave my soul in hades, neither will you allow your Holy One to see corruption.

The Greek Received Text should be the taken as the starting point. And the word in Greek is hadou which is translated as Hades.

Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550
ὅτι οὐκ ἐγκαταλείψεις τὴν ψυχήν μου εἰς ᾅδου, οὐδὲ δώσεις τὸν ὅσιόν σου ἰδεῖν διαφθοράν

We know that Hades is NOT the actual Hell -- the Lake of Fire -- for which the Greek is Gehenna. And Hell is not Tartarus either. As to why the translators did not simply transliterate these words is something we will never know. They did transliterate all the Hebrew names which are spelled differently in Greek, instead of translating them. So we have "Jonas" for "Jonah" and "Noe" for Noah.

King James Bible
For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
King James 2000 Bible
For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Did the King James 2000 faithfully translate the exact Greek? Yes it did.
Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550
ὥσπερ γὰρ ἦν Ἰωνᾶς ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ τοῦ κήτους [in the belly of the great fish] τρεῖς ἡμέρας καὶ τρεῖς νύκτας οὕτως ἔσται ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ τῆς γῆς τρεῖς ἡμέρας καὶ τρεῖς νύκτας

So all I am saying here is that in spite of its 99.9% accuracy and reliability, there is room for improvement. But the modern versions are in fact corruptions.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,177
3,700
113
#19
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A direct answer for you---Nooooo, I do not believe the KJV is the perfect english understanding of the original scriptures. My prayer for you is that that Lord may open your eyes for your lack of knowledge.
What if I’m wrong? What if I go through my whole life believing God preserved his word perfectly in the KJV? What have I missed out on? But what if it is the preserved word of God?
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,177
3,700
113
#20
Your criteria of perfection are not necessarily the true criteria. You claim that the KJB cannot be made better. But there were improvements made to it at least a couple of times. And the King James 2000 Bible does exactly what is needed to clarify, something which has caused confusion. This does not detract from the perfection of the KJB. So take a look at this:
King James Bible
Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
King James 2000 Bible
Because you will not leave my soul in hades, neither will you allow your Holy One to see corruption.

The Greek Received Text should be the taken as the starting point. And the word in Greek is hadou which is translated as Hades.

Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550
ὅτι οὐκ ἐγκαταλείψεις τὴν ψυχήν μου εἰς ᾅδου, οὐδὲ δώσεις τὸν ὅσιόν σου ἰδεῖν διαφθοράν

We know that Hades is NOT the actual Hell -- the Lake of Fire -- for which the Greek is Gehenna. And Hell is not Tartarus either. As to why the translators did not simply transliterate these words is something we will never know. They did transliterate all the Hebrew names which are spelled differently in Greek, instead of translating them. So we have "Jonas" for "Jonah" and "Noe" for Noah.

King James Bible
For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
King James 2000 Bible
For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Did the King James 2000 faithfully translate the exact Greek? Yes it did.
Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550
ὥσπερ γὰρ ἦν Ἰωνᾶς ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ τοῦ κήτους [in the belly of the great fish] τρεῖς ἡμέρας καὶ τρεῖς νύκτας οὕτως ἔσται ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ τῆς γῆς τρεῖς ἡμέρας καὶ τρεῖς νύκτας

So all I am saying here is that in spite of its 99.9% accuracy and reliability, there is room for improvement. But the modern versions are in fact corruptions.
Hell is not the lake of fire as studied and stated in the KJV. Hell fire is eternal since it is cast into the lake of fire. The KJV defines itself. No sense greekifying it.

Whale is a great fish, meaning large. The KJV is more precise. 99.9% accuracy is still not considered the word of God. Imagine telling God one day that his word is 99.9% accurate? 😳