Is the Bible incomplete?

Post by **Sushan Ekanayake** » 02 Jun 2020, 07:29

evraealtana wrote: ↑02 Jun 2020, 04:04 If the Bible is "incomplete" because details are missing from the times between the events that are discussed, then every history book ever written is likewise "incomplete". We can't know what Nero ate for breakfast or what songs Hitler got stuck in his head. We can only know what is written down, which is by necessity limited to events deemed noteworthy by those who were present and, later, by those who studied what was left behind.

I am not a religious person, so to me the question has little weight. But if I were a person who gave credence to the Bible, I would not see its lack of fine-grain detail as evidence of incompleteness. A blow-by-blow account of Biblical history would be so unwieldy as to be virtually worthless.

This is not about fine details like details about breakfast ingredients or songs of that era, but about the major gaps in the chronological writing. Maybe such things are not worthy when looked in a spiritual point of view

Nerea · Post by **Nerea** » 02 Jun 2020, 08:31

Sushan wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 20:05
Nerea wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 14:46 I believe that the Bible is complete. When you read the book of Revelation 22:18,19 you'll realize that adding or subtracting contents into or from the Bible is not right whatsoever.
I thought the same. But what about the feeling of 'stories are jumping from one point to the other', when reading the parts of creation?

You mean the creation story has parts that are missing? I haven't noticed. I believe the creation account in the Bible is complete.

Post by **Sushan Ekanayake** » 02 Jun 2020, 08:36

Dee_Robert wrote: ↑02 Jun 2020, 05:11
Sushan wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 20:05
Nerea wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 14:46 I believe that the Bible is complete. When you read the book of Revelation 22:18,19 you'll realize that adding or subtracting contents into or from the Bible is not right whatsoever.
I thought the same. But what about the feeling of 'stories are jumping from one point to the other', when reading the parts of creation?
I understand your view Sushan, some parts are left out of the stories in the Bible. Does it make the Bible incomplete, I doubt that. Infact I think it makes it beautiful in its own way, God allows for the use of imagination here.
Remember the use of the Holy Spirit, to bring us into all truth, to show us these ancient paths.

I believe God told stories necessary for our learning in the Bible as previously quoted but we can't know everything that happened, every thought every character had. There'd be no place for development of Christians. Just spoonfed babies

That is a nice way of thinking. So even in the Bible there is space for free will and imagination

Post by **Sushan Ekanayake** » 02 Jun 2020, 08:37

Dee_Robert wrote: ↑02 Jun 2020, 05:22
Sushan wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 20:15
B Creech wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 18:13
I do not believe the Bible is incomplete. There would not be enough room to write everything about God! I believe it is as complete as God wants it to be, we are not meant to know everything because we are not on the same realm as God. We are human, He is spiritual so we could not comprehend it all in our present state. That is just my opinion. Is it righteous to add after-notes to a religious book like the Bible? I say it is not righteous. I understand the author is using his imagination to fill in the gaps, which is what makes the book fiction. However, in the story of Adam and Eve, there wasn't just gaps being filled in, there were changes made to what the Bible actually says, which I have a problem with. I will continue reading to see how it goes unless I feel too much is being changed and not just being 'filled in.' Thanks for these questions!
Changing the original scripture is not acceptable. Yet, if the whole thing is a fiction, can't it be taken as fair?
This may be where people will have problems. I have seen Christian writers who develop fictional stories from the Bibles plot making it more relatable taking care to remain on the original track.
The problem is when someone veers off, trying to rewrite history, develop a spinoff series or something
Christians may have problems with that

But really, just how much freedom does a writer have with the original plot?
What's considered fair?

There is no clear demarcation for that. I think, a writer can improvise until his readers accept him/her as a sane person

Post by **Sushan Ekanayake** » 02 Jun 2020, 08:39

espo wrote: ↑02 Jun 2020, 05:23 The author was very straightforward in claiming that this is a work of fiction. The Bible is not incomplete but it needs to be interpreted. For example, Jesus spoke in parables, but this does not mean that the New Testament is incomplete. I might not agree with some interpretations but I firmly believe that all religious texts should be interpreted and talked about with an open mind. We must also remember that some parts of the Bible have been left out or heavily edited through the centuries.

That is correct. Many religious scriptures, including the Bible, need to be interpreted, but only by a person who knows the religion very well

Post by **Sushan Ekanayake** » 02 Jun 2020, 08:55

espo wrote: ↑02 Jun 2020, 05:41
Dee_Robert wrote: ↑02 Jun 2020, 05:22
Sushan wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 20:15

Changing the original scripture is not acceptable. Yet, if the whole thing is a fiction, can't it be taken as fair?
This may be where people will have problems. I have seen Christian writers who develop fictional stories from the Bibles plot making it more relatable taking care to remain on the original track.
The problem is when someone veers off, trying to rewrite history, develop a spinoff series or something
Christians may have problems with that

But really, just how much freedom does a writer have with the original plot?
What's considered fair?
I am Christian and I have no problem with fictional stories about the Bible, as long as the authors make it clear that they are fictional and make no claim to authenticity. Religious texts will always be talked about and interpreted. These interpretations will always be embodied and contextualized in the societies through which they travel. This is inevitable and I have no problem with that. As long as the core messages of Christianity are left intact, which I think they often are in these fictional stories, I do not see it as offensive or unrighteous.

Growing up, I was often told stories about the Bible and saints which I am sure were heavily "fictionalized," but the purpose behind it was always to bring me closer to God in a way that was suitable to my age. I think everything is considered fair as long as there are no claims to authenticity to the Scriptures and the core Christian values are not altered. After all, do we not see images of Jesus and saints that might not be even close to reality? And have they not contributed to us feeling closer to them and enhancing our spirituality?

That is very correct. None of us know whether what we see and hear are 100% correct, but it doesn't matter until they serve their purpose

Post by **Sushan Ekanayake** » 02 Jun 2020, 08:56

Wuoketch wrote: ↑02 Jun 2020, 05:52 This was a fiction novel, therefore, the author had his own opinions on what to add and what to subtract. This otherwise should not change our minds on the completion of the bible.

Yes, this is the speaking of author's own mind. Yet, those imaginations are fitted into the gaps of the Biblical stories

Post by **Sushan Ekanayake** » 02 Jun 2020, 08:57

AmyMarie2171 wrote: ↑02 Jun 2020, 07:26
Sushan wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 20:11
AmyMarie2171 wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 16:12 I don't think the two are connected at all. If the Bible had included every detail about every story beyond what is absolutely critical, then we'd never be able to finish reading it. Since the Bible was put together by councils who chose what would be canon, we know that some of what was originally written was left out. Nevertheless, 2 Timothy 3:16 says that "All scripture is given by inspiration of God," so I tend to believe that what is in the Bible now is complete due to divine inspiration.
That is reasonable. So the bible might have been more lengthy in the early days of writing it?
Absolutely. When the early church was in development stages, they formed a council to choose what books of the Bible were most accurate and appropriate to serve as the foundational text of the church. That is what became the traditional Christian Bible. There are quite a few texts that were left out for one reason or another that are not considered "scripture," but they are interesting reading! Definitely worth checking out!

That is a fact that is nice to know. So for some reason, those parts which were left out might have been too fictional to be included in a religious scripture

Post by **Sushan Ekanayake** » 02 Jun 2020, 09:00

Nerea wrote: ↑02 Jun 2020, 08:31
Sushan wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 20:05
Nerea wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 14:46 I believe that the Bible is complete. When you read the book of Revelation 22:18,19 you'll realize that adding or subtracting contents into or from the Bible is not right whatsoever.
I thought the same. But what about the feeling of 'stories are jumping from one point to the other', when reading the parts of creation?
You mean the creation story has parts that are missing? I haven't noticed. I believe the creation account in the Bible is complete.

Sorry if I made you understand it wrong. The chronological story seems that it has left out some parts in the initial days, from creation, through Eve's sin, and what came next

Kelebogile Mbangi · Post by **Kelebogile Mbangi** » 02 Jun 2020, 10:05

The bible is complete and contains a common theme through its 66 books. That theme is the vindication of God's sovereignty. God's right to rule was questioned by Satan in the very first bible book, Genesis.

Post by **Sushan Ekanayake** » 02 Jun 2020, 10:28

Kelebogile Mbangi wrote: ↑02 Jun 2020, 10:05 The bible is complete and contains a common theme through its 66 books. That theme is the vindication of God's sovereignty. God's right to rule was questioned by Satan in the very first bible book, Genesis.

Theme is common, and all the books contribute to that. My problem is with the chronological storyline

Brenda Creech · Post by **Brenda Creech** » 02 Jun 2020, 10:58

Sushan wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 20:15
B Creech wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 18:13
Sushan wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 10:06 The author gives additional descriptions, which are not found in the original Bible, to the story from creating Adam and Eve, up to the worldwide flood. Most of who has studied the Bible must have had his/her own thoughts regarding these lacking parts. Does this mean that the Bible is incomplete? On the other hand, is it righteous to add after-notes to a religious book like the Bible?
I do not believe the Bible is incomplete. There would not be enough room to write everything about God! I believe it is as complete as God wants it to be, we are not meant to know everything because we are not on the same realm as God. We are human, He is spiritual so we could not comprehend it all in our present state. That is just my opinion. Is it righteous to add after-notes to a religious book like the Bible? I say it is not righteous. I understand the author is using his imagination to fill in the gaps, which is what makes the book fiction. However, in the story of Adam and Eve, there wasn't just gaps being filled in, there were changes made to what the Bible actually says, which I have a problem with. I will continue reading to see how it goes unless I feel too much is being changed and not just being 'filled in.' Thanks for these questions!
Changing the original scripture is not acceptable. Yet, if the whole thing is a fiction, can't it be taken as fair?

You're right about changing the original scripture is not acceptable. If the whole book is fiction then most would say it's fair; but I feel like it is making fun of the Bible and for me, personally, I don't think anyone should do that.

Bhuvana Subramanyam · Post by **Bhuvana Subramanyam** » 02 Jun 2020, 11:46

I'm not a Christian and never read the Bible. But, what I know is that, with ancient texts, we can't possibly debate on their completeness or incompleteness. It all depends on our belief and how we perceive it!

_Lindsey_ · Post by **_Lindsey_** » 02 Jun 2020, 12:44

I think whether something is complete or not is a very ambiguous concept. It's down to the person interpreting and reading a text on whether or not they feel like it's complete.

Amy Murdoch Coleman · Post by **Amy Murdoch Coleman** » 02 Jun 2020, 14:17

Sushan wrote: ↑02 Jun 2020, 08:57
AmyMarie2171 wrote: ↑02 Jun 2020, 07:26
Sushan wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 20:11

That is reasonable. So the bible might have been more lengthy in the early days of writing it?
Absolutely. When the early church was in development stages, they formed a council to choose what books of the Bible were most accurate and appropriate to serve as the foundational text of the church. That is what became the traditional Christian Bible. There are quite a few texts that were left out for one reason or another that are not considered "scripture," but they are interesting reading! Definitely worth checking out!
That is a fact that is nice to know. So for some reason, those parts which were left out might have been too fictional to be included in a religious scripture

Yeah, it could have been that their credibility was questionable, or they didn't have enough relevance to the overall purpose of the Bible.