Psalms 12:6-7

[Ed Edwards]

The USofA - 229 years of successful
rebellion AGAINST the Crown of England.

I will read and buy my Bibles without
giving one cent to the Crown of England.

 

[Phillip]

I can just see Ed out there throwing crates of tea into the harbor.

 

[robycop3]

Looks as if the KJVOs have found themselves in yet another embarrassing situation when another piece of their doctrine has been exposed as false, and when they've tried to defend it, we let the KJV speak for itself and slam-dunk the FACTS in the faces of their false doctrine.

Here we have the KJVOs trying to tell us Ps. 12:7 is about God's words...while their very own fave version's makers show them they're wrong.

They accuse us of attacking the KJV, while we're using the KJV to disprove their false doctrine about the KJV. But that's the best they can do...they have no ammo for anything else.

They allude to history...when just about every valid pre-1611 English BV reads "him" or "us" in V7. History is AGAINST their view. Yet, they keep hollering their view is right, while the very translators of the KJV have indicated differently. The KJVO refuses to believe the very makers of the BV that he/she has placed upon the pedestal when their statements don't jive with the KJVO myth. There's a word for that kind of thinking that I'll leave unsaid.

They boost the KJV by saying a king authorized it. If that's of any importance, then we should be using the "Great Bible", the FIRST English Bible authorized by a king(Henry VIII). Was Henry any less a king than James?

Personally, I believe this whole "king" thing is a crock, a bad eisegesis of Scripture Solomon wrote while speaking of himself.

Yerp, it's a common KJVO tactic to attempt to switch the subject of a discussion when it begins to go against their myth (as it inevitably does). I insist that Psalm 12:7 is about PEOPLE, and I base this claim upon the unassailable evidence of the words of the KJV translators themselves, as well as how this verse is rendered in other English Bible translations, both old and new. Also, I would challenge anyone believing otherwise to ASK ANY JEW who's proficient in Hebrew.

What does the KJVO have to support HIS/HER view? The writings of a cult official(Wilkinson) which were plagiarized by two dishonest and error-filled authors(Ray, then Fuller), expounded & added to by more recent authors such as Riplinger, Ruckman, and Vance, who's been quoted in this thread. is there any PROOF their ideas are right? NEWP! All they have is guesswork, fishing stories, fables, and mostly, the products of some fertile imaginations. THIS is what they put against the words of the translators of the Bible version they hold most dear, as well as against older English BVs whose validity is unquestioned.

How about it, KJVOs...Can you prove Psalm 12:7 is about God's words, or are ya gonna try to change the subject again?

 

[robycop3]

Let's not forget that if it weren't for that rebellious colony that the monarch of England might be named Wilhelm V & their national anthem might be "Deutschland Uber Alles".

Didja paint yer face, Ed? Can tea chests swim?

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by Phillip:
I can just see Ed out there throwing crates of tea into the harbor.

That will be coffee for me, Bro.

 

[robycop3]

Are the KJVOs saying the AV translators' marginal note concerning Psalm 12:7 is wrong?

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by robycop3:
Are the KJVOs saying the AV translators' marginal note concerning Psalm 12:7 is wrong?

No. They are saying it makes
no difference what the margine notes say
cause nobody will let them quote the
Schofield notes as scripture so they ain't
going to let us beleive the translator
footnotes.

If you want a second opinion, i have one

Why wait until you ask?

From Ed's double standards of the KJVO document:

600 - the margin notes

---601 - the margin notes in the KJV are of Devine origin; the margin notes in the MV are of demonic origin

---602 - Marginal notes by translators should not be read; they show the divine, inspired translators were confused and we know God is NOT the author of confusion

---603 - The footnotes are not scripture in the KJV but are scripture in the nKJV.

---604 - The KJV translators can use margine notes of sources to correct their text; MV translators cannot use margine notes of sources to correct their text.

---605 - The KJV translators can use margin notes of sources to correct their text; but nobody can even use the KJV margine notes to help understand the scripture.

 

[Glory2God]

Give that man a cookie!!!!
That's exactly what we(or at least me)are saying!!And I don't even care what any of you think about it!!

Ro 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Tee hee - Ain't God good!!!

That couldn't have come out better if i'd have planned
it. (Maybe God planned it

)

/notes for the humor challenged.
Robycop3 made an ironic statement for
a KJVO#5 to say. Glory2God agreed with
Robycop3's ironic statement.
BUT (the ain't-God-good part) two minutes
before Glory2God posted, Ed posted showing
that such a statement was a sign of
KJVO#5 double standards. So now it looks like
Glory2God was posting his agreement with
MY POST//

Tee hee - Ain't God good

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

I think the agreement wasa with your post Ed

 

[Glory2God]

Pr 26:4 ¶ Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Pro 26:5 KJV1611 Answere a foole according to his folly, lest hee be wise in his owne conceit.

 

[Phillip]

Originally posted by Glory2God:

Although the Coverdale and Matthew Bibles were "set forth with the King's most gracious license," the Great Bible was the first "authorized" Bible.
----------------------------------------
The definitive list of Bibles that makes the Authorized Version the seventh Bible, thus fitting the description in Psalm 12:6 of the words of the Lord being "purified seven times," is not to be found in the opinions of the many writers on the history of the English Bible. To the contrary, the definitive list is to be found in the often-overlooked details concerning the translating of the Authorized Version.
To begin with, the translators of the Authorized Version did acknowledge that they had a multitude of sources from which to draw from: "Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syrian, Greek, or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch."
----------------------------------------------
The Wycliffe, Taverner, and Douay-Rheims Bibles, whatever merits any of them may have, are not part of the purified line God "authorized," of which the King James Authorized Version is God's last one -- purified seven times.

 

[Phillip]

Originally posted by Phillip:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Glory2God:

Although the Coverdale and Matthew Bibles were "set forth with the King's most gracious license," the Great Bible was the first "authorized" Bible.
----------------------------------------
The definitive list of Bibles that makes the Authorized Version the seventh Bible, thus fitting the description in Psalm 12:6 of the words of the Lord being "purified seven times," is not to be found in the opinions of the many writers on the history of the English Bible. To the contrary, the definitive list is to be found in the often-overlooked details concerning the translating of the Authorized Version.
To begin with, the translators of the Authorized Version did acknowledge that they had a multitude of sources from which to draw from: "Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syrian, Greek, or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch."
----------------------------------------------
The Wycliffe, Taverner, and Douay-Rheims Bibles, whatever merits any of them may have, are not part of the purified line God "authorized," of which the King James Authorized Version is God's last one -- purified seven times.

</font>[/QUOTE]I wish to clarify the words "Authorized Version" one more time. It is amazing how many people do not get this. The Words Authorized version did not start with England's king. It started when the PRINTERS started putting "Authorized Version" on their books so that people who bought it knew that it was printed under the permission of the Crown.

At the very beginning of the KJV, there was only one English printer allowed. Then there were two printers allowed. Bootleg printers in Germany and especially the rebelling United States started printing "Unauthorized Versions" of the KJV. Because of this the printers began placing their "Authorized Version" stamp right on the front. This is HOW it got started. Although the king authorized it, this is NOT how the "Authorized Version" set of words came from.

By the way, your theory 7 times purified in the English language is ridiculous. Where in the Bible does it say that it would be purified in English?

What was the perfectly purified English Bible before it was given if it was available for all generations?

It is amazing what people can twist verses to mean.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by Glory2God:
Ro 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

The LIES that changed the modern world: ALL of YOU, KJVO, MVO, liberals, conservatives, including myself are LIARS because the Bible said so.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Sorry, askjo, I totally missed the relevance of that last post to this topic. Could you clarify please?

 

[robycop3]

For that matter, Phillip, where does Scripture say God's words NEED purifying? David said His words ARE pure.

G2G, whatever gave you the idea that God's words needed purification?

Now, can you get back on topic? How can you, or anyone else, say Psalm 12:7 is about God's words when almost every English BV reads "him" or "us" and the AV men wrote that their "them" could just as easily have been written "him"? What's your AUTHORITY for such a statement in the face of plain, empirical evidence to the contrary? The ONLY "authority" we see publishing such codwallop are the error-filled KJVO authors. Where's your authority from someone actually proficient in hebrew as those various translators were? Your KJVO authors you derive your info from are proficient in PROPAGANDA and little else.

 

[neopallium]

I speak only of myself.

I was saved from hell by hearing the Good news. This was at leas five years before I even knew about the versions debate.

I am not certain which version was used, but I do know that I began my fragile Christian life reading the Today's English Version that was given to me by my platoon sergeant.

I found much love and comfort during troubled times from my Redeemer through it.

But soon, I had "moved on" from the tears that first brought me to Christ. Even though saved, I fell back into the World's temptations.

I would continue to read my TEV bible, but was never convicted by it's words.

For me, the KJV bible cut through my hardened neck and allowed me, for the first time, to grow as a Christian.

I've read other versions and they don't convict me the same way.

 

[robycop3]

Perhaps, Neo, God wanted YOU to use only, or at least primarily, the KJV. I didn't really grow as a Christian until I got away from using only the NASV. I discovered the KJV and AV 1611 as well as several other versions such as the NKJV and NIV. To me, using the various versions gives me a better perspective of the Scriptures. Now while I know one cannot fully understand any Scripture w/o the Holy Spirit's guidance, He expects us to make the effort ourselves, and He will then guide us. God has different "jobs" for each believer. After all, it was GOD who created all diversity anomg people.

What are YOUR thoughts on Psalm 12:7 ? Words, or people ?

 

[neopallium]

I believe that it means words.

In any interpretation of the Bible, I find it prudent to use scripture to examine scripture.
Otherwise, snips of words can mean almost anything to anyone. (2 Peter 1:20)

2 Timothy 3:16 "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.
17 "That the man of God may be perfect, throughly finished unto all good works."

Considering the Psalm 12 as a whole, The main theme seems to be deception from the ungodly.
Psalm 12:2 says "they speak vanity..... with flattering lips and with a double heartdo they speak."

But one the most distressing verse to me is:

Psalm 12:4 ..."with our toungue will we prevail; OUR LIPS ARE OUR OWN: WHO IS LORD OVER US?"
What rebellion and Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft.

In 2 Timothy 4 we find these same later times seducers.

Why did 'they' want to change the doctrine?

Psalm 12:5 continues:
"For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy,"
Remember the Laodicean church.... Or better yet remember when you were lost apart from Christ?
We were poor, but now we are rich. We were nakid, but now we are clothed by the Blood of Christ. We were oppressed and now we are free.

Revelation 3:17 ...."and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and nakid:"
How could the church have become so miserable, poor, blind and nakid? Certainly that Church had Preachers and manuscripts.

Christ's advice to the Church at Laodicea.
18 "I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that theou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thoumayest be clothed, and thatt he shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see."
This church didn't need just Gold tried in fire, but even clothing, because they were shamefully nekid, and they also needed eyesalve because they were blind too!

Also consider how the Lord first addresses the Church at Laodicea.
Revelation 3:14 ..."these things saith the Amen; the FAITHFUL AND TRUE WITNESS, the beginning of the creation of God;"

The church at Laodicea became carnal for a reason.

KJVo types are a very small portion of the Christian world. I don't personally think that the Laodicean Church would refer to KJO types.
The problem is too large.

Look around, Heat, plumbing, food galore, no persecution, it is almost unreal how great life is today.... But maybe with same eye-salve we can better evaluate our condition.