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.
Jul 18, 2017
25,123
13,300
113
#21
Hell is not the lake of fire as studied and stated in the KJV.
You are simply not bothering to check the Greek, which is the original language in which the divinely inspired Word was written. To be accurate and reliable, an English translation must translate (or transliterate) the actual word in the Received Text. So you are mistaken about Hell.

Let me show you: And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. (Mark 9:43,44) There is your eternal fire. But what is the Greek word for Hell (The Lake of Fire).
Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550
Καὶ ἐὰν σκανδαλίζῃ σε ἡ χείρ σου ἀπόκοψον αὐτήν· καλόν σοι ἐστίν κυλλὸν εἰς τὴν ζωὴν εἰσελθεῖν ἢ τὰς δύο χεῖρας ἔχοντα ἀπελθεῖν εἰς τὴν γέενναν [ Gehenna] εἰς τὸ πῦρ τὸ ἄσβεστον
This is not a matter of "Greekifying" but making sure that the Greek is translated word-for-word (as far as possible).
Hell fire is eternal since it is cast into the lake of fire. The KJV defines itself. No sense greekifying it.
This is incorrect. Hades is cast into the Lake of Fire metaphorically, since the occupants of Hades are cast into the Lake of Fire.
Whale is a great fish, meaning large.
True, But the actual Greek text has "great fish". "Whale" would be a good translation with interpretation.
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?
I think we need to clear up some misunderstanding. So let me clarify my position:

1. The Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Greek Received Text were divinely inspired and became printed texts. The Received Text fairly represents the MAJORITY of Greek manuscripts. This is what we mean by "perfect, complete, and sufficient". If our Bibles went back to the Hebrew there would be only 24 books, but those 24 are properly represented by the 39 books in the KJB Old Testament.

2. The goal of the King James translators was to produce an outstanding English translation, and they achieved their goal. The KJB (or Authorized Version) became the Holy Bible" or the Word of God for over 300 years. And even today it is recognized as such by many. The majority of commentators simply assumed that it was the Word of God without question.

3. At the same time a translation is not inspired and is subject to improvement. So the KJB was "revised" (improved would be more accurate) in 1629, 1638 and 1760. The changes were minor and related to (1) printer's errors (2) italics (3) minor changes to the text (4) spellings (5) marginal references and removal of references to the Apocrypha (6) capitalization and (7) punctuation. See this article Has the King James Bible Been Revised? - Thomas Nelson Bibles Even with capitalization, there could be a few changes today such as consistently capitalizing "Holy Spirit", and a few other words.

So if we compare Mark 9:33 with the original 1611 printing here is what we see:
And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: It is better for thee to enter into life maimed, then hauing two hands, to goe into hell, into the fire that neuer shall be quenched:
This is exactly the same except for those spellings. So if you want to be picky, you would stick with these spellings.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
16,843
3,587
113
#22
You are simply not bothering to check the Greek, which is the original language in which the divinely inspired Word was written. To be accurate and reliable, an English translation must translate (or transliterate) the actual word in the Received Text. So you are mistaken about Hell.

Let me show you: And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. (Mark 9:43,44) There is your eternal fire. But what is the Greek word for Hell (The Lake of Fire).
Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550
Καὶ ἐὰν σκανδαλίζῃ σε ἡ χείρ σου ἀπόκοψον αὐτήν· καλόν σοι ἐστίν κυλλὸν εἰς τὴν ζωὴν εἰσελθεῖν ἢ τὰς δύο χεῖρας ἔχοντα ἀπελθεῖν εἰς τὴν γέενναν [ Gehenna] εἰς τὸ πῦρ τὸ ἄσβεστον
This is not a matter of "Greekifying" but making sure that the Greek is translated word-for-word (as far as possible).
This is incorrect. Hades is cast into the Lake of Fire metaphorically, since the occupants of Hades are cast into the Lake of Fire.
True, But the actual Greek text has "great fish". "Whale" would be a good translation with interpretation.

I think we need to clear up some misunderstanding. So let me clarify my position:

1. The Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Greek Received Text were divinely inspired and became printed texts. The Received Text fairly represents the MAJORITY of Greek manuscripts. This is what we mean by "perfect, complete, and sufficient". If our Bibles went back to the Hebrew there would be only 24 books, but those 24 are properly represented by the 39 books in the KJB Old Testament.

2. The goal of the King James translators was to produce an outstanding English translation, and they achieved their goal. The KJB (or Authorized Version) became the Holy Bible" or the Word of God for over 300 years. And even today it is recognized as such by many. The majority of commentators simply assumed that it was the Word of God without question.

3. At the same time a translation is not inspired and is subject to improvement. So the KJB was "revised" (improved would be more accurate) in 1629, 1638 and 1760. The changes were minor and related to (1) printer's errors (2) italics (3) minor changes to the text (4) spellings (5) marginal references and removal of references to the Apocrypha (6) capitalization and (7) punctuation. See this article Has the King James Bible Been Revised? - Thomas Nelson Bibles Even with capitalization, there could be a few changes today such as consistently capitalizing "Holy Spirit", and a few other words.

So if we compare Mark 9:33 with the original 1611 printing here is what we see:
And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: It is better for thee to enter into life maimed, then hauing two hands, to goe into hell, into the fire that neuer shall be quenched:
This is exactly the same except for those spellings. So if you want to be picky, you would stick with these spellings.
In your estimation, the word hell should never be used? Got it.

And in your estimation, a translation cannot be inspired? Got it.
 
Jul 18, 2017
25,123
13,300
113
#25
In your estimation, the word hell should never be used? Got it.
I did not say that. Gehenna is correctly translated as hell.
And in your estimation, a translation cannot be inspired? Got it.
Not in my estimation, but in the estimation of all Bible-believing Christians. Divine inspiration is strictly limited to the original manuscripts. Show me where in the preface to the original KJB ("The Translators to the Reader") do the translators make such a gross mistake, and say they were "inspired". Here is what they said "..we have at the length, through the good hand of the Lord upon us, brought the work to that pass that you see." That speaks of divine help and guidance.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
16,843
3,587
113
#26
I did not say that. Gehenna is correctly translated as hell.
Not in my estimation, but in the estimation of all Bible-believing Christians. Divine inspiration is strictly limited to the original manuscripts. Show me where in the preface to the original KJB ("The Translators to the Reader") do the translators make such a gross mistake, and say they were "inspired". Here is what they said "..we have at the length, through the good hand of the Lord upon us, brought the work to that pass that you see." That speaks of divine help and guidance.
What language did Joseph speak to his brothers? He spoke in Egyptian and needed a translator. Was Egyptian part of the originals? Wow, God took what was spoken in Egyptian and had it perfectly translated into Hebrew, and the Hebrew translation is considered the inspired word of God. I believe God has done the very same thing with the KJV. Inspiration without preservation is useless.

Btw, how many of the original writers knew they were writing down inspired words?
 

Omegatime

Well-known member
Apr 29, 2023
999
349
63
Pennsylvania
#27
What language did Joseph speak to his brothers? He spoke in Egyptian and needed a translator. Was Egyptian part of the originals? Wow, God took what was spoken in Egyptian and had it perfectly translated into Hebrew, and the Hebrew translation is considered the inspired word of God. I believe God has done the very same thing with the KJV. Inspiration without preservation is useless.

Btw, how many of the original writers knew they were writing down inspired words?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph was sold at 17 years of age so the Hebrew language was known to him. Where is the scripture that Joseph needed a translator?
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
16,843
3,587
113
#28
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph was sold at 17 years of age so the Hebrew language was known to him. Where is the scripture that Joseph needed a translator?
Genesis 42:
22 And Reuben answered them, saying, Spake I not unto you, saying, Do not sin against the child; and ye would not hear? therefore, behold, also his blood is required.
23 And they knew not that Joseph understood them; for he spake unto them by an interpreter.
 

Omegatime

Well-known member
Apr 29, 2023
999
349
63
Pennsylvania
#29
Genesis 42:
22 And Reuben answered them, saying, Spake I not unto you, saying, Do not sin against the child; and ye would not hear? therefore, behold, also his blood is required.
23 And they knew not that Joseph understood them; for he spake unto them by an interpreter.
But he was hiding his identity so Im not sure if I agree with you
 

Jimbone

Senior Member
Aug 22, 2014
2,811
874
113
44
#30
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.
Who said this? The only problem I have with the King James Only cult ideology is the raising up of a version of His word to the point of making it an idol. This standard that YOU are lifting this version up to, is impossible for it to measure up to. You put this "magical mysterious standard" on it that you think put's it on a level above even the manuscripts that were used to write it. How does this make sense? God's word is living, it endures, and one of it's biggest strengths in history was the shear amount of copies we have all around world that we can always compare and contrast to see the amazing power of God to preserve His word, as He says He will in His word. One of the biggest problems with this belief is the fact it's not supported by His word...... Which means this belief HAS to originate with man. I don't trust that. To be honest it seems like a Childs security blanket to me, that you just don't feel right unless your version of the bible is better than the other Bible's everyone else uses.

In my opinion this unbiblical view of the KJV supremacy shows a distrust of God and His ability to preserve His word that is biblical. You create this standard about "perfect" and "inerrant" in a way that the KJV (nor any other version) meets. Period. How can you call something inerrant when mistakes have been pointed out to you? Mat. 28:20, where it says "end of the world", should be "end of the age". This is not debatable and has cause SO much trouble in the church, especially the last 100 years. These can have completely different meanings. See, if I bought into this belief of KJVO before I was saved, and later come to learn of this, could it not topple my whole belief system? Especially if not yet founded on the TRUTH and I haven't been born again with His Spirit to keep me. I find this topic as hard to discuss this with the KJVO crowd as it is to discuss Trumps accomplishments with a rabid Leftist. You won't look or deal with reality while digging into these false beliefs. Again you won't be convinced by anything, Can't prove this with His word, and can't see the cult like behaviors it takes to accept this as you do. I don't know, maybe 6 more walls of text will convince me, have a good day man.
 

Omegatime

Well-known member
Apr 29, 2023
999
349
63
Pennsylvania
#31
23 They did not know that Joseph understood them, for there was an interpreter between them.

6 Now Joseph was governor over the land; he it was who sold to all the people of the land. And Joseph’s brothers came, and bowed themselves before him with their faces to the ground. 7 Joseph saw his brothers, and knew them, but he treated them like strangers and spoke roughly to them. “Where do you come from?” he said. They said, “From the land of Canaan, to buy food.” 8 Thus Joseph knew his brothers, but they did not know him.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
16,843
3,587
113
#32
But he was hiding his identity so Im not sure if I agree with you
Yes, he was hiding his identity, but the words he spoke in Egyptian were translated to Hebrew and the Hebrew translation became the inspired words of God. A translation can be inspired.
 

Omegatime

Well-known member
Apr 29, 2023
999
349
63
Pennsylvania
#33
Yes, he was hiding his identity, but the words he spoke in Egyptian were translated to Hebrew and the Hebrew translation became the inspired words of God. A translation can be inspired.
Not understanding what you are saying? Joseph understood his brother words so he knew the Hebrew language
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
16,843
3,587
113
#34
Not understanding what you are saying? Joseph understood his brother words so he knew the Hebrew language
Joseph’s words he spoke to them to hide his identity were in Egyptian, yes? Those words became part of the Hebrew Scriptures, yes? In order for those words to become part of scripture, they were translated into Hebrew, yes? And that translation became the inspired word of God.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
16,843
3,587
113
#35
I did not say that. Gehenna is correctly translated as hell.
Not in my estimation, but in the estimation of all Bible-believing Christians. Divine inspiration is strictly limited to the original manuscripts. Show me where in the preface to the original KJB ("The Translators to the Reader") do the translators make such a gross mistake, and say they were "inspired". Here is what they said "..we have at the length, through the good hand of the Lord upon us, brought the work to that pass that you see." That speaks of divine help and guidance.
When the New Testament writers would quote the Old Testament (Mt. 1:23; Mk. 1:2; Lk. 4:4; Jn. 15:25; Acts 1:20; 7:42; I Cor. 2:9; Gal. 3:13, etc.), they had to TRANSLATE from Hebrew to Greek, because the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, but THEY wrote in Greek. So, if a translation cannot be infallible, then EVEN THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE "ORIGINAL GREEK" ISN'T INFALLIBLE, because it contains translations from the Hebrew text!
 

JohnDB

Well-known member
Jan 16, 2021
5,862
2,300
113
#36
Of the 900 different English translations of the scriptures apparently the OP is stuck on one which was done 400 years ago.

As if all people are better at deciphering language from 400 years ago than they are modern English.

So....if this is the case then we should instead be reading Bibles in original language....because the idiomatic and metaphoric languages are much better understood than translations anyway.
 

Omegatime

Well-known member
Apr 29, 2023
999
349
63
Pennsylvania
#37
It was Moses that wrote down Genesis! Wondering why you are even debating why Joseph needed a translater? Scripture is clear that Joseph understood his brother's words
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
16,843
3,587
113
#38
It was Moses that wrote down Genesis! Wondering why you are even debating why Joseph needed a translater? Scripture is clear that Joseph understood his brother's words
His brothers needed the interpreter because Joseph spoke to them in Egyptian. Moses wrote what Joseph spoke in Egyptian, and translated it into Hebrew, yes? Although, Egyptian was the original language that was used.
 

Omegatime

Well-known member
Apr 29, 2023
999
349
63
Pennsylvania
#39
His brothers needed the interpreter because Joseph spoke to them in Egyptian. Moses wrote what Joseph spoke in Egyptian, and translated it into Hebrew, yes? Although, Egyptian was the original language that was used.
---------------------------------------
Good Grief--Lord have mercy--Im done