KJV Onlyest 1611 Psalm 12:7 note, question.

[37818]

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

1611*note: them Heb. him, i.e. every one of them

Question, how does the Hebrew "him" refer to God's word in verse 6?

Wanted, KJVONLYISM explanation.

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

I don't count, as being a KJB Apologist and not one DNA cell of me is KJVO, but I like to post, so here's my take on it.

Question, how does the Hebrew "him" refer to God's word in verse 6?

Bold Red would be The Bible and Bold Purple is for the "him"s the Psalmist has been talking about.

The first word "them" in verse 7, would refer to God's Word.

The second word "them' in verse 7, would refer to "them", meaning 'the poor', 'the needy',
and the 'him's the Lord Will Set 'in safety'.


5 "For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the LORD;
I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him."

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 forever."

= "them", meaning 'the poor', 'the needy', and the 'him's the Lord Will Keep 'in safety'

also:

7 "Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve "him" from this generation forever."

= "him", meaning 'the poor', 'the needy', and the 'him's the Lord Will Keep 'in safety'

So, the second "them" in verse 7, is already approprite to be referring to "them" men,
with "them", meaning 'the poor', 'the needy', and the 'him's the Lord Will Keep 'in safety'
which could generically be spoken as "him" = "them".
...

Otherwise, in verse 7, you would have a redundancy with "keep them|" and "preserve them".

7 "Thou shalt keep/preserve them, O LORD, thou shalt keep/preserve "them" from this generation forever."

When, that wording would have been done like this, instead.

7 "Thou shalt keep and preserve them, O LORD, from this generation forever."
...

If we say that the Lord will "preserve him" from this generation forever,"
the Lord is going to Accomplish that by using:
6; "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times"

and 7 "Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, which means God's Word will be right there along with "them"/ "him",
in order for the Lord to also 7; "preserve them", 5; "'the poor', 'the needy', and the 'him's the Lord Will Keep 'in safety'

 

[JD731]

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

1611*note: them Heb. him, i.e. every one of them

Question, how does the Hebrew "him" refer to God's word in verse 6?

Wanted, KJVONLYISM explanation.

The Psalm should be considered in this break down.

1 ¶ «To the chief Musician upon Sheminith, A Psalm of David.» Help, LORD; for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men.
2 They speak vanity every one with his neighbour: with flattering lips and with a double heart do they speak.


3 The LORD shall cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that speaketh proud things:
4 Who have said, With our tongue will we prevail; our lips are our own: who is lord over us?


5 For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the LORD; I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him.


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.

8 The wicked walk on every side, when the vilest men are exalted.

The first him in V 5 and the third him is the poor and needy, converted Jews, a collective among the Jews. The second him is also a collective who is led by an individual whose character appears and is described several times in the Psalms and Prophets as a loud mouthed and proud blasphemer and who leads a coalition of nations during the last 42 months of the tribulation in an attempt to destroy the people of Israel. However he gains his position initially with flatteries.

The key verse in this psalm for understanding it is Verse 5. Ignore it and there is no hope in understanding it.

This Psalm, as all Psalms are prophesies and David was called a prophet by the KJV Bible.

The KJV only believers are generally wrong about this Psalm as far as I can tell. However, they are not corrected with those who use the new easy readers.

 

[JD731]

WOW! There seems to be no interest in the topic presented here so if you don't mind I will just comment on the Psalm as a KJV only believer since it generates so much heat. My understanding of this Psalm has nothing to do with the preservation of the KJV itself as many KJV only believers insist, but rather, the preservation of the people of God, the remnant of Israel in a particular point in history. It is prophetic and it follows a theme in the Psalms that is connected to 12 more Psalms by the language of Ps 12:5.

It is interesting that the key verse in this Psalm is verse 5. This is when God takes full charge over his people and the government of the earth by rescuing the "poor and needy" (another name for the Jewish remnant) from the man who puffeth at them and is near to destroying them. The number 12 is the number God uses in connection with his own government and the number 5 is his number he connects with his attribute of grace. This makes this deliverance a logical placement as God takes control and gives them something they have not earned. The numerical system that God has established and faithfully maintains throughout his whole Bible is crucial for us to have a handle on for the purpose of sound doctrine. It is a gracious act of God to return in the nick of time to deliver his faithful remnant of his people before they are completely annihilated.

Now, this Psalm 12 is a prayer to God and it is the same prayer and represents the same desperate circumstance that the remnant finds themselves in in the other 12 Psalms in this theme. It is for deliverance that only God can bring. All hope in the devices of men have been taken away at this point. The difference of this Psalm and the other 12 is that in Psa 12:5, God answers the prayer in a single verse. "I will," he says. The prayer for deliverance is in the other Psalms but the LORD is silent and does not answer. Here he does.

There is much doctrine in this Psalm 12. Only people who identifies with a WORD Bible need apply for understanding Those of you who believes the words in the KJV and the placement of verse and chapter divisions are random and circumstantial and are not part of the divine instruction will never have the light that shines from this group of Psalms.

I may come back and give you the other Psalms and demonstrate how I learned these things by paying attention to words and the numerical structure and the metaphorical value of the numbers and words to arrive at my conclusions.

 

[Dr. Bob]

I may come back and give you the other Psalms and demonstrate how I learned these things by paying attention to words and the numerical structure and the metaphorical value of the numbers and words to arrive at my conclusions.

Start a thread. It will probably generate even less interest than this thread if KJVonly mentality is evident. Most of us just feel sorrow for the divisive impact of that sect and attack on the inspired Word of God by them.

 

[JD731]

Start a thread. It will probably generate even less interest than this thread if KJVonly mentality is evident. Most of us just feel sorrow for the divisive impact of that sect and attack on the inspired Word of God by them.

I said a few words about Psa 12 but did not intend for it to be an attack. Where do you think I attacked it by what I said?

 

[JD731]

The Psalmist David is prophetically describing a period of time we now know is 7 years long called "the time of Jacob's trouble. The believing remnant is very poor and needy because of the mark that is required by the wicked governor we now know as the antichrist in order to conduct commerce during these days. The relationship of God to this remnant is to be absent from the earth and he is not hearing their prayers. It is like he is asleep and the remnant are on their own.

The reason the righteous has failed from among the children of men is because of the rapture of the church of Jesus Christ. It is the only time in the history of the world that not a single justified believer is alive on the earth. This condition will prevail for a short spell. A quick note; at the end of this period there will not be a single unjustified believer left on the earth. This condition will prevail for a short time.

At the rapture of the church all believers will be taken. God will then send his two witnesses, Moses and Elijah to preach the gospel of the kingdom, at which time 144,000 Jewish men will be saved and will go two by two to preach to all the world. Many millions will be saved but a great number of them will perish for refusing the mark.

One will not see the church of Jesus Christ in the OT because God did not make it known to the prophets but that is the why of Psa 12:1.

Psa 12:1 Help, Lord; for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men.

A prayer!
Psalm 44:23
Awake, why sleepest thou, O Lord? arise, cast us not off for ever.

Mark 4:38
And he was in the hinder part of the ship, asleep on a pillow: and they awake him, and say unto him, Master, carest thou not that we perish?

 

[robycop3]

Simple TRUTH is that Ps. 12:6-7 is about PEOPLE. If it WAS about God's words, where is the KJV mentioned? More truth is, those passages aren't about the KJV whatsoever. Another KJVO claim proven false by the AV 1711 itself!

 

[JD731]

Simple TRUTH is that Ps. 12:6-7 is about PEOPLE. If it WAS about God's words, where is the KJV mentioned? More truth is, those passages aren't about the KJV whatsoever. Another KJVO claim proven false by the AV 1711 itself!

I agree that most KJV only Believers are somewhat off in their eschatological viewpoint of Psa 12. However, that does no damage to the perfection of the law of God and the faithfulness of his words in the English language preserved in the KJV. That is their problem, not Gods. He would teach any man who will be honest with the text and will believe his words. It is impossible to please God without faith and you would be one of those who would attempt to correct someone while admitting you do not believe the words you use to do the correcting.

If asked to correct the psalm with your view of what it actually teaches, (which you have never done BTW) your ideas would likely be far less accurate than the KJV treatment of it.

What I am saying is that you are not going to be able to correct false doctrine with easy readers just because they are easy readers. Easy readers are not faithful to the faithful words of God. I have read your theology over the years and admit that I have no confidence that you have the ability to rightly divide the scriptures. You are a critic of believers, not a teacher of truth, IMO. .

I have good news for you though. There is still time to repent and get it right.

 

[robycop3]

I agree that most KJV only Believers are somewhat off in their eschatological viewpoint of Psa 12. However, that does no damage to the perfection of the law of God and the faithfulness of his words in the English language preserved in the KJV. That is their problem, not Gods. He would teach any man who will be honest with the text and will believe his words. It is impossible to please God without faith and you would be one of those who would attempt to correct someone while admitting you do not believe the words you use to do the correcting.

If asked to correct the psalm with your view of what it actually teaches, (which you have never done BTW) your ideas would likely be far less accurate than the KJV treatment of it.

What I am saying is that you are not going to be able to correct false doctrine with easy readers just because they are easy readers. Easy readers are not faithful to the faithful words of God. I have read your theology over the years and admit that I have no confidence that you have the ability to rightly divide the scriptures. You are a critic of believers, not a teacher of truth, IMO. .

I have good news for you though. There is still time to repent and get it right.

The KJVO myth is simply FALSE. There's not one word of SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for it, & that one fact makes it false. MAN under influence from Satan, invented KJVO, invented KJVO, not God.

The Psalm needs no correction; it was written for the English-uswes of 400 years ago, & they understood its meaning clearly. WE should use Bibles written in CONTEMPORARY English. (Have you noticed that many KJVO preachers take time in their sermons to explain or clarify archaic words/phrases so their audiences understand the language?) Just remember-the KJVO myth ia NOT a doctrine of GOD"S !

 

[JD731]

Correct understanding of Psa 12 requires a dispensational application because it is a prophesy. The time frame for this prophesy to be realized is of utmost importance. There is no other way. It also requires the number structure of the scriptures be honoured and the KJV does that. Psa 12 is an answer to the same prayer that is recorded in 12 other psalms where the LORD had remained silent, as if he were asleep, and had not answered.

For those who understand metaphors, here is a cross reference to the events of this Psalm 12.

Lk 20:22 Now it came to pass on a certain day, that he went into a ship with his disciples: and he said unto them, Let us go over unto the other side of the lake. And they launched forth.

23 But as they sailed he fell asleep: and there came down a storm of wind on the lake; and they were filled with water, and were in jeopardy.

24 And they came to him, and awoke him, saying, Master, master, we perish. Then he arose, and rebuked the wind and the raging of the water: and they ceased, and there was a calm.

25 And he said unto them, Where is your faith? And they being afraid wondered, saying one to another, What manner of man is this! for he commandeth even the winds and water, and they obey him.

It is impossible to have a solid understanding of the NT scriptures without the OT scriptures.


Rom 15:3 For even Christ pleased not himself; but, as it is written, The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me.
4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.
5 Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be likeminded one toward another according to Christ Jesus:

Let us all get like minded concerning dispensational truth.

Note:
Understand that I am saying the gospel can be understood by a young child and they can be saved by believing it, and many are. Salvation must come first before understanding the deep things of God. Prayer, study, and rightly dividing is required for understanding and not all saved people make that investment. The depth of our knowledge of the deep things has no bearing on our salvation.

 

[JD731]

The KJVO myth is simply FALSE. There's not one word of SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for it, & that one fact makes it false. MAN under influence from Satan, invented KJVO, invented KJVO, not God.

The Psalm needs no correction; it was written for the English-uswes of 400 years ago, & they understood its meaning clearly. WE should use Bibles written in CONTEMPORARY English. (Have you noticed that many KJVO preachers take time in their sermons to explain or clarify archaic words/phrases so their audiences understand the language?) Just remember-the KJVO myth ia NOT a doctrine of GOD"S !

You might be more convincing if the latest Bibles to be produced were always the most popular ones, but as I understand it , many of you folks still promote the older (new) ones over the newer ones. Maybe you think there has been no language changes lately, Bro.

The Jewishness of the NT scriptures were maintained even though they were written in the Greek language. The Jews wrote them all and the metaphor, figures, Similitudes, etc. were from the Hebrew culture. So, God might not be as interested as you are in updating unless the NIV is your choice..

 

[robycop3]

You might be more convincing if the latest Bibles to be produced were always the most popular ones, but as I understand it , many of you folks still promote the older (new) ones over the newer ones. Maybe you think there has been no language changes lately, Bro.

The Jewishness of the NT scriptures were maintained even though they were written in the Greek language. The Jews wrote them all and the metaphor, figures, Similitudes, etc. were from the Hebrew culture. So, God might not be as interested as you are in updating unless the NIV is your choice..

I believe GOD is VERY interested in updating, as He is Master of His own word, and has updated it many times.

 

[JD731]

I believe GOD is VERY interested in updating, as He is Master of His own word, and has updated it many times.

I definitely believe God has managed his word more than once into languages but nobody has made the argument that new English translations are God's words or that it is God who is updating them. The opposite seems to be more true.

 

[Logos1560]

If God was involved in the updating of archaic English in the pre-1611 English Bibles as updated in the 1611 KJV, God could also be involved in updating of archaic English in the 1611 KJV as updated in present-day standard English. Many verifiable facts from the Bishops’ Bible and other pre-1611 English Bibles would demonstrate that the KJV translators updated and revised many archaic words and much language in the pre-1611 English Bibles.

New English Bible translations such as the NKJV are the word of God translated into English in the same sense or way that that the pre-1611 English Bibles and the 1611 KJV are the word of God translated into English.

 

[JD731]

If God was involved in the updating of archaic English in the pre-1611 English Bibles as updated in the 1611 KJV, God could also be involved in updating of archaic English in the 1611 KJV as updated in present-day standard English.

Maybe "Archaic" is your word and not God's in the context of English translation! "neither are your ways my ways saith the LORD." ISA 55"8

Many verifiable facts from the Bishops’ Bible and other pre-1611 English Bibles would demonstrate that the KJV translators updated and revised many archaic words and much language in the pre-1611 English Bibles.

God has artistic license since it is his word.

New English Bible translations such as the NKJV are the word of God translated into English in the same sense or way that that the pre-1611 English Bibles and the 1611 KJV are the word of God translated into English.

I would say you have successfully convinced the readers of your books and your commentary on pages like this that you are right. I am not much interested in a KJV only debate. What more can be said. Seems there are few of us left in these last days and you are the majority.

 

[Logos1560]

In his 1828 dictionary, Noah Webster defined archaism as “an ancient or obsolete phrase or expression.” The 1967 Webster’s Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary presented the following definitions for its entry archaic: “1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of an earlier or more primitive time: antiquated; 2. Having the characteristics of the language of the past and surviving chiefly in specialized uses; and 3. Surviving from an earlier period” (p. 46). This dictionary defined archaism as follows: “1. The use of archaic diction or style; 2. An instance of archaic usage; 3. Something archaic” (Ibid.). The unabridged 1970 Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary gave the following definitions at its entry archaic: “1. Belonging to an earlier period; ancient. 2. Antiquated; old-fashioned. 3. That has ceased to be used except in poetry, church ritual, etc.” (p. 96).

KJV-only author Douglas Stauffer wrote: “The term archaic refers to any language or word form that belongs to an earlier period but that is no longer commonly incorporated into current speech or writing” (One Book One Authority, p. 326).

Some of the language of the KJV definitely belongs to an earlier period and has the characteristics of the English language of the past [the 1500’s and early 1600’s] so that it can accurately be said to be archaic.

 

[Logos1560]

God has artistic license since it is his word.

Do you grant God the same artistic license in the NKJV?

The guiding of the Holy Spirit was just as available to the believers who made the NKJV as to the Church of England makers of the KJV.

 

[JD731]

Do you grant God the same artistic license in the NKJV?

Not if the NKJV has "tree of Life" in Re 22:19.

The guiding of the Holy Spirit was just as available to the believers who made the NKJV as to the Church of England makers of the KJV.

According to what scholar?

 

[JD731]

In his 1828 dictionary, Noah Webster defined archaism as “an ancient or obsolete phrase or expression.” The 1967 Webster’s Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary presented the following definitions for its entry archaic: “1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of an earlier or more primitive time: antiquated; 2. Having the characteristics of the language of the past and surviving chiefly in specialized uses; and 3. Surviving from an earlier period” (p. 46). This dictionary defined archaism as follows: “1. The use of archaic diction or style; 2. An instance of archaic usage; 3. Something archaic” (Ibid.). The unabridged 1970 Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary gave the following definitions at its entry archaic: “1. Belonging to an earlier period; ancient. 2. Antiquated; old-fashioned. 3. That has ceased to be used except in poetry, church ritual, etc.” (p. 96).

KJV-only author Douglas Stauffer wrote: “The term archaic refers to any language or word form that belongs to an earlier period but that is no longer commonly incorporated into current speech or writing” (One Book One Authority, p. 326).

Some of the language of the KJV definitely belongs to an earlier period and has the characteristics of the English language of the past [the 1500’s and early 1600’s] so that it can accurately be said to be archaic.

Phooey on this argument. Some of the Jewish customs , like the wedding ceremony, is harder to grasp than what you refer to as an archaic word. Who, besides maybe the NIV people , have tried to make that easy to be understood. He calls the NT church with it's unique doctrines, mysteries. Peter, an apostle, who was not taught these mysteries as Paul was, said these words;

2 Peter 3:14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

1Co 4:1 ¶ Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.

God has nowhere said he has for a goal of making his Bible easy to understand.