Danger Danger

When speaking the scriptures you are saying you understand what is written and speaking for the Lord. Only a reminder what is written for those who mis-speak.

18 I warn every one who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if any one adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, 19 and if any one takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book. Rev 22

The verse is describing adding or deleting books or verses to the Bible itself.

Theological debates have been around for thousands of years. It's overall healthy...or blood boiling. Could go either way. 😆

No, it speaks of the book of Revelation not the rest of the bible.


18 I warn every one who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if any one adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, 19 and if any one takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book. Rev 22

Even with complete knowledge and understanding, should we discuss scripture with the mind as of a Student of God rather than one with authority, we will avoid such a grave error.

A few more scriptures for consideration:

Deut 4:2 2 You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it; that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

Deut 12:32 32 [a] “Everything that I command you you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to it or take from it.

Proverbs 30:6
Do not add to his words,
lest he rebuke you, and you be found a liar.

This is perfectly clear. Tampering with the text of the Scriptures is forbidden. At the same time, we are to rightly divide or interpret what is written, and this can only be through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, comparing Scripture with Scripture.

Scripture never contradicts Scripture, and those verses or teachings which are not quite clear may be interpreted with clearer Scriptures. The danger lies in adding man-made doctrines to Bible truth, and misinterpreting or misapplying Scripture.

Christians should keep in mind that modern bibles have indeed tampered with the texts of the Bible. Therefore we must use the King James Bible exclusively (with help from legitimate Bible study tools). The King James 2000 Bible has updated the language without changing the verses.

King James Bible (KJB)
These be the words which Moses spake unto all Israel on this side Jordan in the wilderness, in the plain over against the Red sea, between Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Dizahab.

King James 2000 Bible
These are the words which Moses spoke unto all Israel on this side of Jordan in the wilderness, in the plain over against Suph*, between Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Dizahab. [Note: Suph is literally correct but not too helpful]

*Strong's Concordance
Suph: "reed," a place near which the law was given
Original Word: סוּף
Part of Speech: Proper Name Location
Transliteration: Suph
Phonetic Spelling: (soof)
Definition: "reed", a place near which the law was given

However, the original KJB has interpreted "Suph" correctly and explains what is being said:
I. Names. — The sea known to us as the Red Sea was by the Israelites called the sea (הִיָּם, Ex 14:2,9,16,21,28; Ex 15:1,4,8,10,19; Jos 24:6-7; and many other passages); and specially "the sea of Siph" (יִםאּסוּŠ, Ex 10:19; Ex 13:18; Ex 15:4,22; Ex 23:31; Nu 14:25; Nu 21:4; Nu 33:10-11; De 1:40; De 11:4; Jos 2:10; Jos 4:23; Jos 24:6; Jg 11:16; 1Ki 9:26; Ne 9:9; Ps 106:7,9,22; Ps 136:13,15; Jer 49:21). It is also perhaps written Suphcah', סוּפָה (Sept. Ζωόβ), in Nu 21:14, rendered "Red Sea" in the A.V.; and in like manner, in De 1:1, סוּŠ, without יִם. The Sept. always renders it ) ἡ ἐρυθρὰ θάλασσα (except in Jg 11:16, where סוּŠ, Σίφ, is preserved). So, too, in the New Test. (Ac 7:36; Heb 11:29); and this name is found in the Apocrypha (1 Maccabees 4:9; Wisdom of Solomon 10:18; 19:7) and Josephus (Ant. 8:6, 4). By the classical geographers this appellation, like its Latin equivalent Mare Rubrum or M. Erythroeum, was extended to all the seas washing the shores of the Arabian peninsula, and even the Indian Ocean: the Red Sea itself, or Arabian Gulf, was οΑ῾᾿ράβιος κόλπος, or Α᾿ραβικὸς κ.,, or Sinus Arabicus, and its eastern branch, or the Gulf of 'Akabah, Αἰλανίτης, Ε᾿λανίτης, Ε᾿λανιτικὸς κόλπος, Sinus Elanites, or S. Elaniticius. The Gulf of Suez was specially the Heroopolitic Gulf, ῾Ηρωοπολίτης κόλπος, Sinus Heroopolites, or S. Heroopoliticus.
https://www.biblicalcyclopedia.com/R/red-sea.html

So -- in fact -- the KJB helps us to know the location of where the Law was given. So I would stick to the KJB.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Nehemiah 6, Foremost I agree with you with the exception of KJV. I found over these 40 years there is no perfect english bible nor is it complete. The number of 66 books tells you it has the fingerprints of man all over it. I have no problem with the 66 books but it is not complete and many things that are called doctrines by man is far from the truth.

3 He answered them, “And why do you transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him surely die.’ 5 But you say, ‘If any one tells his father or his mother, What you would have gained from me is given to God,[a] he need not honor his father.’ 6 So, for the sake of your tradition, you have made void the word of God. 7 You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said:

8 ‘This people honors me with their lips,
but their heart is far from me;
9 in vain do they worship me,
teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’”

It's very easy to view God according to how we believe He is from our own imagination. We make an idol of God by many times not looking at scripture and using what we read but by how we turn those words into how we understand them. But indeed, iron sharpens iron

That is just ridiculous. Those 66 books correspond exactly to the 24 books in the Hebrew Bible (39 in the OT) + the 27 books in the NT. What happened is that several books of the Hebrew Tanakh were split in the Septuagint, and that carried over into the Protestant bibles.