Is the Bible incomplete?

blessing_bona · Post by **blessing_bona** » 02 Jun 2020, 20:35

Leen282 wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 15:08 Since the book is presented as fiction, I don't think it is meant to be read as trying to complete the Bible. For me one has nothing to do with the other.

I'll go with you. I'll rather not see this as completing the bible but as an attempt by the author to express his thought of what he thinks could have transpired

blessing_bona · Post by **blessing_bona** » 02 Jun 2020, 20:38

I appreciate the author's imagination of the creation era. I'd rather not attribute it to an attempt at completing the bible.

The bible has all the stories that is needed for the Christian to thrive.

Post by **Sushan Ekanayake** » 02 Jun 2020, 21:13

blessing_bona wrote: ↑02 Jun 2020, 20:35
Leen282 wrote: ↑01 Jun 2020, 15:08 Since the book is presented as fiction, I don't think it is meant to be read as trying to complete the Bible. For me one has nothing to do with the other.
I'll go with you. I'll rather not see this as completing the bible but as an attempt by the author to express his thought of what he thinks could have transpired

No one can get the authority or the right to complete the bible on his/her own. This is author's input for an attempt to interpret those stories

Post by **Sushan Ekanayake** » 02 Jun 2020, 21:14

blessing_bona wrote: ↑02 Jun 2020, 20:38 I appreciate the author's imagination of the creation era. I'd rather not attribute it to an attempt at completing the bible.

The bible has all the stories that is needed for the Christian to thrive.

Yes, the bible has the stories with necessary details for a believer to learn from it

Pearl Hijabi · Post by **Pearl Hijabi** » 03 Jun 2020, 00:29

As far as I know this book is a fiction. There's no need to compare a fiction with a religious book like Bible according to me.

Josep22 · Post by **Josep22** » 03 Jun 2020, 00:54

I believe the bible is complete and God, through the writers, communicates so clearly everything He wants us to know. I'm glad this book was listed as a fiction book.

Post by **Sushan Ekanayake** » 03 Jun 2020, 01:07

Pearl Hijabi wrote: ↑03 Jun 2020, 00:29 As far as I know this book is a fiction. There's no need to compare a fiction with a religious book like Bible according to me.

It is not a comparison, but a mere discussion whether the bible has missed out some parts

Post by **Sushan Ekanayake** » 03 Jun 2020, 01:08

Josep22 wrote: ↑03 Jun 2020, 00:54 I believe the bible is complete and God, through the writers, communicates so clearly everything He wants us to know. I'm glad this book was listed as a fiction book.

Maybe the mentioned details are the only details to be known by His believers

Lian · Post by **Lian** » 03 Jun 2020, 03:34

In the first place, the bible has never been exactly complete. It is a library of separate works that were told/written hundreds of years apart. In fact, a lot of the content was passed down through oral tradition, particularly by fishermen. As a result, the details and interpretation were always changing until Constantinople used Christianity as his political campaign. This led to the era of transcribing, finding, compiling the separate stories that make up the bible today.

LeDiplomatique · Post by **LeDiplomatique** » 03 Jun 2020, 04:30

The bible is complete on its own. Killing Abel does not add or subtract anything from the bible because it is an independent book. The author states clearly that the additions of the book are 'fictitious accounts' added in an attempt to bolster biblical text with fictional but logical text. The bible is enough to stand on its own as the Greater Light without support from independent sources.

Post by **Sushan Ekanayake** » 03 Jun 2020, 04:32

Lian wrote: ↑03 Jun 2020, 03:34 In the first place, the bible has never been exactly complete. It is a library of separate works that were told/written hundreds of years apart. In fact, a lot of the content was passed down through oral tradition, particularly by fishermen. As a result, the details and interpretation were always changing until Constantinople used Christianity as his political campaign. This led to the era of transcribing, finding, compiling the separate stories that make up the bible today.

Your's is a very logical explanation, and it answers almost all the arguments

Post by **Sushan Ekanayake** » 03 Jun 2020, 04:34

LeDiplomatique wrote: ↑03 Jun 2020, 04:30 The bible is complete on its own. Killing Abel does not add or subtract anything from the bible because it is an independent book. The author states clearly that the additions of the book are 'fictitious accounts' added in an attempt to bolster biblical text with fictional but logical text. The bible is enough to stand on its own as the Greater Light without support from independent sources.

Bible can stand on its own, there is no argument about that. But the point is that there are apparent gaps in the chronological story

Post by **Kirsi Cultrera** » 03 Jun 2020, 06:59

I believe the Bible is complete. Killing Abel is a fictional novel, and therefore I do not think that anything that was written out from someone's imagination would be able to make the Bible incomplete.

Mwangi 20 · Post by **Mwangi 20** » 03 Jun 2020, 07:08

I believe God's word is complete just as He is inspired men to write it. I believe we have everything we need for our is in the scriptures.

Dee_Robert · Post by **Dee_Robert** » 03 Jun 2020, 07:38

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?

True, they do enhance our spirituality and usually the fictionalizing of these elements work to draw us closer.
I agree with what you have said. I was wondering about the borderlines?, what happens when fiction do alter core Christian values and bring in foreign ways of thinking?
Well I suppose we can only hope it eventually doesn't