Featured Does Psalm 12:7 refer to the words of God?

Psalm 12:6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Many times, Non-KJO people will claim that the phrase "them" of vs 7, refers not to the words of the Lord of vs 6, but to actual people. the claim is made that due to Hebrew Grammatical rules, that it is not possible.

However, Dr. Thomas Strauss (B.S. in industrial engineering from Purdue University, an M.Div. in theology and Biblical languages from Maranatha Baptist Graduate School of Theology, and a Ph.D. in theology from Bob Jones University. Strouse was a founding member of the Dean Burgon Society (1979) ) demonstrates this to be false:

"It is important for the careful exegete of the Hebrew Scriptures to recognize the biblical phenomenon wherein the biblical writers employed masculine pronouns in reference to feminine antecedent nouns when those feminine nouns were synonyms for the Words of God (cf. Ps. 119). Since the words of Jehovah are an extension of this strong patriarchal God, the OT writers occasionally seemed to use masculine pronouns for the following synonyms. The Hebrew words Law (torah hr'AT), Testimony (`eduth tWd[e), Commandment (mitzwah hw"c.mi), Statute (chuqqah hQ 'xu), and Word ('imrah) hr'm.ai ) are feminine in gender. The normal Hebrew grammatical pattern is that concordance occurs between the gender and number of the pronoun with its respective antecedent noun. For instance, a masculine singular (m.s.) noun would take a masculine singular pronoun, and a masculine plural (m.p.) noun would take a masculine plural pronoun. However, the biblical writers deviated from this "grammatical norm" for theological purposes, emphasizing specific truths. The inspired Scripture is the only authority for the biblical languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek), including their respective vocabulary and grammar. There are examples in all three divisions of the Tanak illustrating this Scriptural Hebrew phenomenon of gender discordance for theological purposes. The following are examples of the phenomenon:

Law (torah) 1. "That thou mayest observe to do according to all the law (torah--f.s.)…turn not from it (mimmennu--WNM ,mi m.s.)," (Josh. 1:7). 2. "For he established a testimony (`eduth--f.s.) in Jacob, and appointed a law (torah-- f.s.) in Israel, which he commanded our fathers, that they should make them (lehodiy`am- -~['ydIAhl . m.p. suffix) known to their children" (Ps. 78:5).

Testimony (`eduth) 1. Ps. 78:5 (see above) 2. "Thy testimonies (`edoth--f.p.) have I taken as an heritage for ever: for they (hemmah--hM 'h e m.p.) are the rejoicing of my heart" (Ps. 119:111). 3. "Thy testimonies (`edoth--f.p.) are wonderful: therefore doth my soul keep them (netzaratham--~t;r 'c'n> m.p. suffix)" (Ps. 119:129). 4. "Concerning thy testimonies (`edoth), I have known of old that thou hast founded them (yesadtam--~T'd>s ;y > m.p. suffix) for ever" (Ps. 119:152). 5. "My soul hath kept thy testimonies (`edoth--f.p.), and I love them (wa'ohavem-- ~beh ]aow" m.p. suffix) exceedingly" (Ps. 119:167).

Commandment (mitzwah) 1. "Therefore shall ye keep my commandments (mitzwoth--f.p.), and do them ('otham-- ~t'ao m.p.): I am the LORD (Lev. 22:31). 2. "If ye walk in my statutes (chuqqoth--f.p.), and keep my commandments (mitzwoth-- f.p.), and do them ('otham--~t'ao m.p.)" (Lev. 26:3). 3. "And remember all the commandments (mitzwoth--f.p.) of the LORD, and do them ('otham--~t'ao m.p.)" (Num. 15:39). 4. "If thou wilt walk in my statutes (chuqqoth-f.p.), and execute my judgments (mishpat-- m.p.), and keep all my commandments (mitzwoth--f.p.) to walk in them (bahem--~h ,B' m.p. suffix)," (I Ki. 6:12).

Statute (chuqqah) 1. "And you shall keep my statutes (chuqqoth--f.p.), and do them ('otham--~t'ao m.p.)" (Lev. 20:8). 2. Lev. 26:3 (see above). 3. I Ki. 6:12 (see above). 4. "For they have refused my judgments (mishpat--m.p.) and my statutes (chuqqoth--f.p.), they have not walked in them (bahem--~h ,B' m.p. suffix)" (Ezk. 5:6). 5. "And hath kept all my statutes (chuqqoth--f.p.), and hath done them ('otham--~t'ao m.p.)" (Ezk. 18:19). 6. "They shall also walk in my judgments (mishpat--m.p.); and observe my statutes (chuqqoth--f.p.), and do them ('otham--~t'ao m.p.) " (Ezk. 37:24).

Word ('imrah) 1. "The words ('imroth--f.p.) of the LORD are pure words ('amaroth--f.p.)…thou shalt keep them (tishmerem--~r em.v.Ti m.p. suffix), O LORD, thou shalt preserve them (titztzerennu--WNr ,C.T i m.p. suffix) from this generation for ever" (Ps. 12:6-7).

Throughout the Hebrew OT, pronouns usually correspond to their antecedent nouns in proximity and with gender/number concordance. However, a phenomenon exists, which fresh Hebrew exegesis observes,17 that feminine synonyms for Word of God are addressed by masculine pronouns for the apparent purpose of masculinzing the patriarchal Jehovah God. The second verb "thou shalt preserve them" has the masculine singular pronominal suffix (titztzerennu WNr ,C.Ti) which refers to the individual Words. Since Hebrew does not have the neuter pronoun "it," the pronoun "him" (v. 7) refers to the individual item of "them" (v. 6).18 The KJV has the marginal note "Heb. him: i.e., everyone of them," which of course would then refer to every individual word. The first verb refers to all the Words that the Lord preserved, and the second to the very individual Words He preserved (cf. Lk. 4:4)."

http://www.bbc-cromwell.org/Seminary_Articles/Psalm-12-Expanded.pdf

Someone on another thread resorted to name calling without actually dealing with the substance of Strouse's arguments, I would prefer to hear someone actually respond to the substance of the argument, rather than using rhetorical fallacies.

 

"The structure of the psalm is asymmetric. This structure causes the focus to be on the middle or odd strophe, "C" The Promises of God (v. 5). David's lament carries the reader from the need for divine help, because of the words of the ungodly, to a focus on the promises of God for deliverance, which include the permanent preservation of His Words, the antidote to the word of the ever-present wicked. Graphic Structure of English Text A. The Recognition of the Need for Divine Help (v. 1) B. The Threat of the Words of the Ungodly (vv. 2-4) C. The Promises of God (v. 5) B.' The Antidote of the Words of God (vv. 6-7) A.' The Recognition of the Need for Divine Help (v. 8)"

 

"The structure, context and exegesis, both preparatory and immediate, of the Masoretic Hebrew text of Psalm 12 all argue forcefully and irrefragably for the promise of everlasting preservation of the perfect Words of the LORD. This is one of several clear passages in which the Lord promised to preserve His canonical Words for every generation. Man's pervasive words are lies and are temporal; God's ever-present Words are Truth and are everlasting. This is the tangible help that the righteous man has in every generation--the perfectly preserved Words of the LORD."

 

Well, I would contend that they had weaker translations of the word of God, and that God did still in fact use them, though they did not yet have a pure English translation, I will say though that they did still have access to the Hebrew Masoretic text and the Greek Textus Receptus as the inspired and preserved word of God. This argument in my opinion is not really valid, while modern translations may contain the word of God, just as some of the pre KJV bibles did, I do not think there is warrant to use them when we have an accurate and pure translation in the KJV. It's like the difference between riding a bicycle that has broken pedals and a bent frame, compared to driving a brand new perfectly working car.

secondly I have never argued that you cannot be saved unless you use the KJV

 

I cannot accept the principles and theories behind the critical texts.
I firmly believe in the TR over any critical text.

 

To give the impression that doctrines are not affected or impacted by the different text types and versions is flat out wrong:

http://brandplucked.webs.com/nodoctrinechanged.htm

 

And please tell me why it is bad to cite Will Kinney?