Is the Bible incomplete?

[Amesthenerd]

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.

I have always wondered who got the final say of what goes and what doesn't go and why some things are left out. The Old Testament is particularly in unconventional time.

One thing I know is that it was people who always had the final say of what was “canon” and what is “non canon” so to speak. I think it would be interesting to find out how to determine to include something or why they wouldn’t include something.

[Julyet_Chris]

This is a fictitious book which the author wrote to the best of her understanding so there is no need to compare and contrast.

[Xenolyph]

The parts of the Bible found are found by man. Therefore, there is room for error. Some parts could be missing or the Bible could be complete as is. For now, I choose to believe that the Bible is complete. It seems that everything inside applies to at least one aspect of human life.

[Glory Oghenerukevwe]

I believe the Bible is complete but the details are a little bit scattered amongst the pages of the Bible. If you want to find out whether it's complete or not, you mustn't read it like you'd read any other fictional book but search carefully while reading.

[Sheila_Jay]

We can only say Bible is incomplete is we accurately know the whole story. However, we do not. Therefore, it is right to say that the Bible is complete as it is. We can only add few things in areas where we feel that there are gaps, just like the author did; and I do not see anything wrong with that.

[Ari Martinez]

I don't think the bible is incomplete, it has just enough detail for what its purpose is. However, since this book is fiction, of course the author had to add details to make it interesting to a reader. If the bible included every thing that Jesus did and all other details, it would be extremely long to be able to read.

[Kelyn]

I don't know that I'd call it 'incomplete,' but there was certainly much of what happened that was left out. We were given the 'highlights' as it were, enough information that we could get the gist of what happened. The Bible would be a far larger book if every detail had been included.

[Sushan Ekanayake]

I have mentioned it before (not sure if on this site or another) but the Bible was ultimately decided on by Man. It was supposed to be with God's intervention, but who's to say if man truly listened to God's will or their own? The Bible isn't exactly incomplete, but it does leave out a LOT of small details. I have always felt that was so that man could imagine for themselves and think on the relevant parts and decide for themselves what to truly believe. Since this book is fiction, it's in no way trying to compete with the Bible or anything, simply to be a fiction book based on those events.

That is a good question. Did the man really considered God's will when making the bible, or did he do it according to his own will?

[Sushan Ekanayake]

Firstly, I do not think the Bible is incomplete. As humans, we cannot know of each detail that happened in the time of God. The Bible is as complete as God wants it to be. Secondly, as the book is fictional, it is safe to assume a few details for the sake of the story.

Yeah, in fiction you can assume things, but this fiction is clearly based on the bible

[Sushan Ekanayake]

Furthermore, he made it clear that this is purely a work of fictional. I don't see any problem with the book.

Yes, the author has not left any space to anyone to be confused

Yeah, and this is exactly why I'm wondering why some people find the book offensive and out of context. In fact, I've seen some get angry because it's not compliant with the Christian teachings.

There is no need to get offended over a fiction. Anyone can get what they want from it

[Sushan Ekanayake]

That's right. But I don't think the author intended that the readers use their imaginations to come up with stories that would replace the biblical ones.

No need to replace what you already know. The imagination is only needed for the facts that you don't know

Yes, and for entertainment too. We shouldn't take the book literally and too serious. At least the author used his imaginations to entertain us.

Yes. Anyway, the author himself believes that the left out details are for the imagination of humans

[Sushan Ekanayake]

This is why I insist that the Bible only covers the important parts. Not everything could fit in.

Well, that is a fair point. But those important points have very lengthy gaps in between each of them, and that was the reason for my humble question

It's complete if you see it in the spiritual perspective. But it doesn't cover all the events. Eventwise, it's incomplete.

That is the exact point. Whatever the missing parts are, they are the events

[Sushan Ekanayake]

I agree with you. The Bible mostly record events that are considered impactful. The minor details were intentionally omitted. But this doesn't mean it's incomplete. In fact, it is as complete as they wanted it to be.

That is acceptable. The bible is complete up to the extent that the church wanted it to be. The rest is left for imagining

Yeah, and that's where our author here has chipped in with his imaginations and created this amazing book.

Yes, the author has clearly mentioned it in the book introduction

[Sushan Ekanayake]

The Bible is obviously not complete. But I think that's because of how much longer it would have been if every detail was included.

It would have been far more lengthy. It is obvious considering this very book, which contains only a fraction of the bible

[Sushan Ekanayake]

Seeing the book is presented as fiction, I see no reason for the comparison. As Christians, I don't think our mind should be after the completeness of the bible. Rather it should be about the significance of the bible we have at hand in our life.

Absolutely correct. the bible's significance is the key.

That thought is correct. Complete or incomplete, the effect of it on one's self is the importance