Psalms 12:6-7

[Ransom]

neopallium said:

In any interpretation of the Bible, I find it prudent to use scripture to examine scripture.

I agree. But you have done this in an illegitimate fashion, by avoiding the immediate context almost entirely, atomizing Psalm 12 and allowing other contexts to interpret its individual verses.

A psalm is a work of poetry. Unlike most of the rest of the Bible, a chapter from Psalms is its own context.

There are many types of psalms. Each has its own typical form and features. Specifically, Psa. 12 is a lament. This means it has a few features that are common to all such psalms, specifically, sections of:

</font>

• Address: Who is it addressed to? God, of course (Psa. 12:1): "Help, Lord."</font>
• Complaint: The psalmist spells out what's on his mind, in this case, that the wicked are acting treacherously against the righteous:
  

  [T]he godly man ceases to be,
  For the faithful disappear from among the sons of men.
  They speak falsehood to one another;
  With flattering lips and with a double heart they speak. (1-2)

  </font>
• Trust: If God were not trustworthy, the psalmist would not cry out to him for help. This part expresses what the psalmist wants God to do:
  

  May the LORD cut off all flattering lips,
  The tongue that speaks great things;
  Who have said, "With our tongue we will prevail;
  Our lips are our own; who is lord over us?" (3-4)

  </font>
• Deliverance: A call to God to deliver the complainant comes next:
  

  "Because of the devastation of the afflicted, because of the groaning of the needy,
  Now I will arise," says the LORD; "I will set him in the safety for which he longs." (5)

  </font>
• Next comes the assurance that God will deliver:
  

  The words of the LORD are pure words;
  As silver tried in a furnace on the earth, refined seven times.
  You, O LORD, will keep them;
  You will preserve him from this generation forever. (6-7)

  </font>
• Typically a lament psalm also has an element of praise, but in this case it is more implicit than explicit. (See Psa. 3:8 for a more typical example.) In this case, the psalm closes at verse 8 with a repeat of the complaint:
  

  The wicked strut about on every side
  When vileness is exalted among the sons of men. (8)

  </font>

(The above structure was borrowed from Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, 3rd ed. [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003] pp. 215-18. I don't agree with everything in this book, but I do recommend it to anyone interested in good hermeneutical practice that takes seriously the literary genre of the various parts of the Bible.)

Not every psalm fits the typical mold perfectly, but when you say that vv. 6-7 breaks out of the mold completely and changes the subject, based on proof-texts not having anything to do with the psalm, you simply do violence to the psalmists intent. Such poor hermeneutics are beneath the people of God and show no respect for his Word.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Amen, Brother Ransom -- Preach it!

 

[robycop3]

Me:G2G, whatever gave you the idea that God's words needed purifying?

Glory2God: Are you for real!!!! This is coming from the man that says there is no 100% perfect and without error bible on the entire Earth!!! The only place that you believe there is one is in your imagination!! Come on Cranston, where oh where is the perfect word of God!!

Why can't you simply answer the question? Were God's words that He spoke to His prophets pure or not when He spoke them? The translations made by man are limited to the abilities of those who made them. each of them

Prov 6: 16 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
17 A proud look, a lying tongue , and hands that shed innocent blood,
18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations , feet that be swift in running to mischief,
19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

The above verses describe KJVO perfectly in 6 of 7 of their points.

I have done nothing but defend God's word. All you do is cast doubt.

No, all you've done is defend a KJVO point that was wrong from the gitgo, a point introduced into their party line, part of the myth they've been trying to hawk since the 1950s. It COULD be said you're SLANDERING God's word by telling us it says something it does NOT say. Plainly, the evidence shows Ps.12:7 is about PEOPLE, and to say otherwise is simply incorrect.

 

[robycop3]

Neopallium:

First, Samuel was almost certainly written AFTER Psalms, since David wrote the Psalms and Samuel records David'a last words.(Samuel was originally one book.)

Next, Psalm 12 is a SONG, & we all know how thoughts within a song jump back & forth. David took time to PRAISE GOD because he BELIEVED God 100%; thus david proclaims His words are pure. The whole subject of Ps.12 is God's deliverance of the righteous from evildoers. God had said He would arise to deliver His people, and David is praising Him for saying those words. In V7, David is affirming what God said.

This is the view of most of the translators of Scripture, whom I believe know much more about it than do you and I.

 

[robycop3]

Glory2God: And again I ask, where is your perfect word????????????? Why do you all refuse to answer??????? [Tear]

We've answered umpteen times...Every valid Bible version or edition is perfect for its intended readership.

You guys are sraining on typos(GNATS) and swallowing Roman Catholic Versions that take entire verses out without batting an eyelash(CAMELS)

I hardly believe the NKJV, etc. are RC Bibles. And where's your proof that verses have been left out? There's at least as good a case that material has been ADDED to some versions. F'r instance? The words "the image of" in the KJV's Romans 11:5 are certainly ADDED; they're not found in any Greek ms nor in the OT verse being quoted by Paul.

Mt 23:24 Ye blind guides , which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.

Right there's ONE error...OUT, not "at".

Editions, NOT REVISIONS!!!!TYPOS MAN. They didn't have spelling rules when the KJB was written, but you don't care, do you??? You WILL give account for every idle word.

But so will the KJVO, for spreading a set of lies.

Ac 7:54 ¶ When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth.

Do you really think by being willfuly ignorant you will escape the judgement of God.

That's what we ask the KJVO every day.

1Pe 4:17 For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?


Better think that one over very closely before you continue to trumpet a PROVEN-FALSE doctrine such as the KJVO myth.

The evidence CLEARLY ahows the "Ps.12:7 is about words" thingy to be WRONG. The KJV translators themselves plainly indicated they believed the Hebrew literally reads "him". I believe those men knew a little more about their own work than YOU do. Yet, you choose to support an idea presented by a CULT OFFICIAL over the empirical proof provided by the very makers of your fave Bible version. I'm not gonna expound upon what kind of thinking THAT is!

I've said this many times...the whole idea that Ps.12:7 is a "words preservation" verse is SO-O hilarious in the face of many other Scriptures plainly stating God has preserved His word! It tells me that KJVOs think more of their myth than they do of the BV they're "defending". With THAT kind of "defense"-disregarding the words of its very MAKERS-who needs to ATTACK it?

 

[Phillip]

Robycop3, it is amazing how the KJVo will say the KJV is from the TR and is 100% accurate, then turn around and say the NKJV, which truly WAS translated from the TR (unlike the real KJV, which had everything including the Vulgate) is not accepted as a good translation.

I have heard the one complaint about "servant", and besides that the only other complaint was the footnotes. Obviously, these KJVo's have not read the footnotes in the original 1611 KJV.

 

[HankD]

Editions, NOT REVISIONS!!!!TYPOS MAN. They didn't have spelling rules when the KJB was written, but you don't care, do you??? You WILL give account for every idle word.

G2G, I happen to agree with you concerning Psalm 12:6-7.

I call you to task however with the statement above because it is KJVO folks who have come here to the BB with this typical shrieking and shouting tantrum telling us that the Bibles which we read, memorize and worship with are "satanic counterfeits".

So, it shouldn't surprise you when you are treated with the lex talionis of "an eye for an eye"

For months we heard the following mantra "things which are different are not the same" unless of course it is the hundreds of differences between the "editions" of the King James Bible (Not that it ever really mattered to us but the KJVO coined the mantra and rehearsed it in our ears, so again, eye-for-eye).

All the while many of us were totally dedicated to the Word of God (some prefering the KJV above all others).

Granted (for the sake of the discussion) the differences between the KJV editions and the KJV/MVs are of lesser quantity and quality, however that then means that although God is not capable of making big mistakes He can make little ones (but not that many).

HankD

 

[robycop3]

That's why I said, Phillip, that many KJVOs think more of their myth than they do of the very Bible version they think they're defending...and that the vary MAKERS of the KJV knew more about their own work than WE do.

What else can anyone with a lick of sense make of the translators' note for Ps.12:7 except what it plainly says?

The later KJV editions leave out most or all the translators' notes, and their preface. In their preface, the translators share their reasons for making some renderings as they did, as well as their thoughts on other versions, and the purpose behind their notes. I believe those translators have told us the basis of their work more plainly and candidly than has any other translator or group of translators.

They act as if God is ignorant about the languages He's created, trying to restrict Him to THEIR view of how he should be presenting His word in English. Clearly, the AV men indicated that Psalm 12:7 woulda read "him" in the AV had they chosen to have placed the strictly-literal translation into their text.

They say the Holy Spirit guided the AV men...EXCEPT WHERE THOSE MEN WROTE THINGS CONTRARY TO THEIR MYTH THAT APPEARED OVER 300 YEARS LATER!

I believe you're absolutely right, Phillip, in saying not too many KJVOs have read the notes in the AV 1611. let me add that if they HAVE read them, they show a selective believership of them, placing the KJVO myth ahead of those notes that don't jive with it. The proof is right here in this thread with the translators' note about Ps. 12:7.

 

[natters]

Originally posted by Glory2God:
And again I ask, where is your perfect word????????????? Why do you all refuse to answer???????

(broken record)

I have answered, repeatedly. The KJV is the perfect word, as is the Geneva, as is the NASB, as are many many many others. The perfect word is not defined by patterns of ink on the paper, but by the correct interpretation one can arrive at from those patterns of ink on the paper.

In your view, if ONLY the KJV is perfect word, then it denies that God's perfect word existed prior to 1611. Ya, you say the KJV is in "our mother tongue" or whatever, but so are the other Bibles. The KJV translators already had the word of God in their mother tongue, yet they produced the KJV anyway.

 

[AVL1984]

They don't want to hear the truth, natters. It's hard for them to think outside the circular reasoning!

 

[Glory2God]

Got a copy of the NKJV ??? Go get it and read the ENTIRE preface. Now if you know ANYTHING about textual criticism, which most of you don't, you will see something about a guy named Kittel and a Hebrew text OTHER than the Masoretic text. The historic ben Chayyim Rabbinic Bible, used by the KJV, was altered in 1937 by liberal German theologian Rudolf Kittel, using Leningrad Ms B 19a (ben Asher text). His family’s conviction for their involvement in the death of millions of Jews during Hitler’s holocaust makes his alterations to the Old Testament highly suspect. The NKJV’s use of recent discoveries like the Septuagint, Vulgate, and Dead Sea cave manuscripts (see NKJV preface) contradicts the bible’s doctrine of preservation (Ps. 12:6-7) “to a thousand generations” (Ps. 105:8). Did God skip the generations from the fourth century to the nineteenth century? READ THIS LINK!!!! DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT!!!!

Who is Kittel

 

[Trotter]

Oh, puh-leaeese!

 

[natters]

Blah blah blah. Do you know anything about Erasmus' view on the Jews? Does his highly negative view negate the TR?

 

[Glory2God]

[attack snipped] Read the link. What are you afraid of ???

[ February 09, 2005, 12:10 AM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob ]

 

[natters]

Originally posted by Glory2God:
Are you folks even saved???

Why do you even ask that question???? Because I don't pat you on the back and say "Amen brother" every time you post?

Read the link. What are you afraid of ???

Wasting my time with yet another dozen KJV-only double standards and twisted half-truths.

 

[Bro Tony]

Are you folks even saved??? Read the link. What are you afraid of ???

Regardless of what view you have in this debate, you have crossed the line with this comment. You have shown that you are ignorant of what it takes to be genuinely saved. You have clearly shown another false view that of only those who subscribe to KJVO are saved.

You need to apologize to the brothers you have offend and slandered. If you choose not to then you reveal the condition of your own heart.

Bro Tony

 

[natters]

Originally posted by Bro Tony:
You need to apologize to the brothers you have offend and slandered.

Oh, I don't mind. At least he asked, rather than just provided the answer for me.

 

[Glory2God]

Strange,
Both your profiles say your "in transition" concerning a church. Your replies do not surprize me at all. By the posting rules, neither of you should even post(Not that I care)How about some proof on your claims on Erasmus?? I'm not afraid!

Pr 18:13 ¶ He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.

Tony,
I slandered nobody, I simply asked a question.

 

[Bro Tony]

G2G,

You know the implication of your question. You are far to intelligent to play the dumb card now. Why don't you just step up to the plate and apologize---it would do what your handle implies--bring glory to God.

I assume the transition statement has nothing to do with me.

Bro Tony

 

[Glory2God]

Tony,
Being you are a pastor, I find it hard to believe that you should think I should assume someone is saved just because they're on a "Christian" posting board. I was always taught to assume everyone was lost until I see fruit or hear a testimony. These folks are not members of any church according to their own testimony. That arouses suspicion. I ask out of genuine concern,
not because I want to harass. [attack snipped] Why this dosen't concern a Pastor is beyond all understanding. [attack on the Word of God snipped] If you are truley a man of God you should be in perfect agreement with me. The Pope is an abomination to the Lord, and I will expose him and all that support them for what they are. Did you read the link? God DOES get the glory when I earnestly contend for the faith!!

[ February 09, 2005, 12:22 AM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob ]