Textual Criticism

I do believe that God's Word has been preserved, but these verses do not refer to that.

Neal

 

Yes he is,and yes he was!

 

Anyone who can read should see that Psalm 12 has NOTHING to do with scriptural preservation.

This is one more example of bad scriptural interpretation that the KJVonlyist use to justify their unscriptural KJV only doctrine.

 

And it is also an example of you're rejection of God's ability to preserve His pure word,the KJB.

 

I do not deny Psalm 12:6-7. I deny your gross interpretation of it. Nothing in that entire Psalm would lead a person to believe in was referring to the KJV. It doesn't even refer to the Hebrew. Nice try, but if you want a serious debate, you will have to stop wrenching Scripture from its context and meaning. You might be able to convince gullible people in your church about that meaning, but people who think through what is being said will NEVER turn to that interpretation.

Next.

 

I deny your false interpretation of it. Psalm 12:6-7 refers to the preservation of teh godly man which is in danger of perishing from off the earth. The attempt to make it refer to the preservation of God's word is illegitimaate, making God out to say something he did not say. That is twisting the word of God.

God did not perfectly preserve his word, as is evidenced by the 5000+ manuscripts of which no two are alike. The TR underlying teh KJV was compiled from less than a dozen of the differeing manuscripts, which Erasmus making choices about what the word of God really was. He cleary got it wrong in some places such as Rev 22. Interestingly enough, he got it right in 1 John 5:7-8, and then later changed it under teh pressure from some others.

When you handle the word of God so frivously as you do with Psalm 12:6-7, you do a great disservice to his word. His truth deserves better than that. Those who love his truth should treat it better.

 

Perhaps taking a cue from his predecessor Erasmus who allowed the pressure of peers to on occasion control his interpretive methods.

 

MV-neverist said:

And it is also an example of you're rejection of God's ability to preserve His pure word,the KJB.

You speak falsehood. Someone may reject the KJV-onlyists' perversion of the meaning of Psalm 12 and still believe God has perfectly preserved his Word.

As a matter of fact, I have a copy of God's perfectly preserved Word right here at my elbow: a New American Standard Bible. How do I know it is preserved? Well, here it is.

But we all really know what your code words mean: "God's ability to preserve His pure word in the KJV and only the KJV." That false belief is quite rightly to be rejected by all Bible believers.

 

Look a little closer. The KJV (as well as NKJV, NIV, and ESV) are not as accurate as possible. I believe the NASB has the most accurate translation of these two verses.

Neal