I'm not talking about the KJV. I'm talking about what's commonly known as The Dead Sea Scrolls. The parts of the Bible (and other texts not included in the Bible and other other texts not at all related directly to Judaism or Christianity) that have been found preserved there do corroborate EXACTLY with other copies of texts hundreds or thousands of years apart.
So, you can argue about translations of those texts, but not that the texts themselves are different.
Sure, there are some books and letters that may possibly should have been included in cannon, but, they aren't necessary to the cohesive narrative of the while Bible. The one that I would have included is the first and second book of Enoch, since they are quoted by Jesus and others. (The 3rd and 4th books are later additions from what I understand from linguistic studies and are not cohesive to the narrative of the Bible as the first two parts are.)
None of this matters much, IMO, other than proving that the stories told in the Bible were preserved exactly for thousands of years.
You can reject the Bible as Truth or not, but, it is the most well preserved collection of books that I know of, though some argue that honor should go to various Hindu or Zoroastrian documents. It's an interesting question to ponder.