[Just_A_Thought]

Even the older Bibles teach it is the poor being preserved. These were not money hungry people or people trying to "prevert" God's word. The Bishop's Bible (which the KJV1611 is a revision of) agree with this teaching...

6 The wordes of God be wordes pure, as the siluer tryed in a furnace of earth: and purified seuen times. 7 [Wherfore] thou wylt kepe the godly, O God: thou wylt preserue euery one of them from this generation for euer. -The Bishop's Bible (1568)

6 The wordes of the Lorde are pure wordes, as the siluer, tried in a fornace of earth, fined seuen folde. 7 Thou wilt keepe them, O Lord: thou wilt preserue him from this generation for euer. -The Geneva Bible (1587)

6 The wordes of the LORDE are pure wordes: eue as ye syluer, which from earth is tried and purified vij. tymes in the fyre. 7 Kepe the therfore (o LORDE) and preserue vs fro this generacion for euer. -Miles Coverdale Bible (1535)

6 The spechis of the Lord ben chast spechis; siluer examynyd bi fier, preued fro erthe, purgid seuen fold. 7 Thou, Lord, schalt kepe vs; and thou `schalt kepe vs fro this generacioun with outen ende. -The Wycliffe Bible (1395)

These men were translating God's word as closely as they could. It i odd that they all agree. Think about it the KJV really does agree with them to unless you take it out of context. God is preserving the poor in these verses not His word.

[bibleprotector]

God DID preserve His word but man has taken it out of context. God's words are true words but if I translate it or copie it I can mess it up. It may not be done on purpose but I am far from perfect! (Maybe this is the only thing you wil agree with me on) I can mess it up while meaning well.

Clearly, Psalm 12 says "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."

Therefore, God does promise to preserve and keep His Word, every word of it, and to keep them from the time they were first given to this very day and for ever.

If God's words are messed up, they are not God's words. However, we know that copying mistakes can happen. However, this does not negate that God's Word has been preserved, or make good copies (Traditional Majority Greek Text Manuscripts) bad, just because they may contain a copying mistake here or there. However, this cannot apply to wilful corruption of the Scripture as is exhibited in some copies and very clearly in some modern versions (e.g. New World Translation).

Of course some modern version people may mean well, yet if they do not believe that God's Word is fully true and fully available, no matter how much they "love the Lord", they are going to produce flawed and erroneous works: it is because they are in doubt and unbelief concerning God's promises and power concerning His Word.

A classic illustration of this would be the attempt to deny that Psalm 12 applies to words.

[bibleprotector]

Even the older Bibles teach it is the poor being preserved.

And since God's Word has been purified SEVEN TIMES in Protestant English Bibles, it is clear that the KJB is going to be better that the Bishops', Geneva or Tyndale, etc.

These were not money hungry people or people trying to "prevert" God's word.

No, and neither was King James or his men. They were not money hungry nor perverters. To imply otherwise is a slur and unhistorical nonsense.

The Bishop's Bible (which the KJV1611 is a revision of) agree with this teaching...

Actually the KJB is much more than a revision of the Bishops'... read the front from 1611, it says "newly translated out of the original tongues". (We don't have the word "newly" any more.)

These men were translating God's word as closely as they could.

It is good that it was so, but surely the Bible is not restricted merely to man's ability, but to God's control over history. See Daniel 2:21, 4:17, etc. If it is merely natural man who give us the Word of God, we are lots of trouble.

It i odd that they all agree.

Actually, this is a proof that ONLY the KJB is a perfect English Bible, in that they all are slightly wrong in this place.

Think about it the KJV really does agree with them to unless you take it out of context.

No, you are misunderstanding the context. Read the plain Scripture text in Psalm 12 in the KJB and you have to pervert the meaning of the words to make it say something else.

God is preserving the poor in these verses not His word.

Yes, God does preserve the poor, but He also preserves His Word. Not only is this plainly stated in Psalm 12, but it is consistent with God's character. Think about it, in Psalm 68:11 it says that God gave the Word. Would God give it and then let it fail, fall away, come to nought? Surely, the almighty God is telling the truth when He says He shall preserve His very words in full purity. If this is a lie, then we are in an atheist position because we have no exactly true Scripture ever again. (Can we be even certain that Christ is coming back again, since no translation/version would be perfect?)

It is so clear that to love the truth, to love the pure word, means that God would give the pure Word and that we receive that we have the pure Word. "Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it." (Psalm 119:140).

[Just_A_Thought]

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

No, and neither was King James or his men. They were not money hungry nor perverters. To imply otherwise is a slur and unhistorical nonsense.

I was not saying King Jame's men were. I hear this a lot when people talk of the new versions. I was making a point not attacking the KJV translators. King James on the other hand was not so great but that could be another thread.

Actually the KJB is much more than a revision of the Bishops'... read the front from 1611, it says "newly translated out of the original tongues". (We don't have the word "newly" any more.)

King James said it would be the main guide for the translation of the KJV.


Actually, this is a proof that ONLY the KJB is a perfect English Bible, in that they all are slightly wrong in this place.

No, even the KJV means the same thing if you read it as "them" being the poor.


No, you are misunderstanding the context. Read the plain Scripture text in Psalm 12 in the KJB and you have to pervert the meaning of the words to make it say something else.

I am FAR from perverting the meaning. Even if I was wrong there is a diffident difference between being off and perverting the Word of God.

Yes, God does preserve the poor, but He also preserves His Word. Not only is this plainly stated in Psalm 12, but it is consistent with God's character. Think about it, in Psalm 68:11 it says that God gave the Word. Would God give it and then let it fail, fall away, come to nought? Surely, the almighty God is telling the truth when He says He shall preserve His very words in full purity. If this is a lie, then we are in an atheist position because we have no exactly true Scripture ever again. (Can we be even certain that Christ is coming back again, since no translation/version would be perfect?)

God's word is 100% pure, accurate, etc. in Heaven. That is where His word is settled. If what you are saying is true then it is not very fair to people in another country who can not speak English and have no Bible for them. According to what you said this is against God's character. If so then they should be atheists? No, they should do their best to find truth. Pray to the "Unknown God" and let Him answer them. I know this is a little out of context of what you met by the atheist position but it is the same concept.

It is so clear that to love the truth, to love the pure word, means that God would give the pure Word and that we receive that we have the pure Word. "Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it." (Psalm 119:140).

If the KJV1611 is the pure Word of God as you are claiming it is. 100% perfect and EVERY WORD is perfect can we change any of the words in it and it still be perfect?

[Forrest]

Originally Posted by Just_A_Thought

God DID preserve His word but man has taken it out of context. God's words are true words but if I translate it or copie it I can mess it up. It may not be done on purpose but I am far from perfect! (Maybe this is the only thing you wil agree with me on) I can mess it up while meaning well.

Just_A_Thought, I sincerely pray you too will discover the word which is settled in heaven, which shall not pass away, which shall stand forever, which is preserved by the Almighty God, and is in our possession today in the King James Bible.

Please take the time to read each verse below and allow the Holy Spirit to speak to your heart through God’s word.

Ps 119:9 BETH. Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word.

Ps 119:11 Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee.

Ps 119:16 I will delight myself in thy statutes: I will not forget thy word.

Ps 119:25 DALETH. My soul cleaveth unto the dust: quicken thou me according to thy word.

Ps 119:28 My soul melteth for heaviness: strengthen thou me according unto thy word.

Ps 119:38 Stablish thy word unto thy servant, who is devoted to thy fear.

Ps 119:41 VAU. Let thy mercies come also unto me, O LORD, even thy salvation, according to thy word.

Ps 119:42 So shall I have wherewith to answer him that reproacheth me: for I trust in thy word.

Ps 119:43 And take not the word of truth utterly out of my mouth; for I have hoped in thy judgments.

Ps 119:49 ZAIN. Remember the word unto thy servant, upon which thou hast caused me to hope.

Ps 119:50 This is my comfort in my affliction: for thy word hath quickened me.

Ps 119:57 CHETH. Thou art my portion, O LORD: I have said that I would keep thy words.

Ps 119:58 I intreated thy favour with my whole heart: be merciful unto me according to thy word.

Ps 119:65 TETH. Thou hast dealt well with thy servant, O LORD, according unto thy word.

Ps 119:67 Before I was afflicted I went astray: but now have I kept thy word.

Ps 119:74 They that fear thee will be glad when they see me; because I have hoped in thy word.

Ps 119:76 Let, I pray thee, thy merciful kindness be for my comfort, according to thy word unto thy servant.

Ps 119:81 CAPH. My soul fainteth for thy salvation: but I hope in thy word.

Ps 119:82 Mine eyes fail for thy word, saying, When wilt thou comfort me?

Ps 119:89 LAMED. For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.
Ps 119:90 Thy faithfulness is unto all generations: thou hast established the earth, and it abideth.

Ps 119:101 I have refrained my feet from every evil way, that I might keep thy word.

Ps 119:103 How sweet are thy words unto my taste! yea, sweeter than honey to my mouth!

Ps 119:105 NUN. Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.

Ps 119:107 I am afflicted very much: quicken me, O LORD, according unto thy word.

Ps 119:114 Thou art my hiding place and my shield: I hope in thy word.

Ps 119:116 Uphold me according unto thy word, that I may live: and let me not be ashamed of my hope.

Ps 119:123 Mine eyes fail for thy salvation, and for the word of thy righteousness.

Ps 119:130 The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple.

Ps 119:133 Order my steps in thy word: and let not any iniquity have dominion over me.

Ps 119:139 My zeal hath consumed me, because mine enemies have forgotten thy words.

Ps 119:140 Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it.

Ps 119:147 I prevented the dawning of the morning, and cried: I hoped in thy word.

Ps 119:148 Mine eyes prevent the night watches, that I might meditate in thy word.

Ps 119:154 Plead my cause, and deliver me: quicken me according to thy word.

Ps 119:158 I beheld the transgressors, and was grieved; because they kept not thy word.

Ps 119:160 Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever.

Ps 119:161 SCHIN. Princes have persecuted me without a cause: but my heart standeth in awe of thy word.

Ps 119:162 I rejoice at thy word, as one that findeth great spoil.

Ps 119:169 TAU. Let my cry come near before thee, O LORD: give me understanding according to thy word.

Ps 119:170 Let my supplication come before thee: deliver me according to thy word.

Ps 119:172 My tongue shall speak of thy word: for all thy commandments are righteousness.

May His preserved, kept, settle, inspired, infallible, and perfect written word increase your faith.

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (Romans 10:17).

[MC1171611]

"Bill and John went with me to the bowling alley. The police pulled us over. They gave us a ticket."

Tell me that "they" in the third sentence is Bill and John, and you're an idiot. Same with Psalm 12:6-7. God wanted "them" to refer to His words, and therefore it does. It doesn't matter what anyone wants them to refer to, what anyone thinks they refer to, or what doctrine you're trying to supplant by ignoring the simple, plain fact of English, but Psalm 12:7 refers to Psalm 12:6, not verse 5. There's a period, denoting the closing of an idea, and there is nothing in the context to suggest otherwise.

[Forrest]

Originally Posted by MC1171611

"Bill and John went with me to the bowling alley. The police pulled us over. They gave us a ticket."

Brother Vince, who won? You, Bill, or John?

P.S. What did you get the ticket for?

Originally Posted by Diligent

Regarding Psalms 12:6,7

Psalms 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.

FSSL claims that the words "Thou shalt keep them" refer to the poor in verse five:

Psalms 12:5 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.

FSSL's claim is clearly incorrect simply from the grammar of the passage, but more obvious is that the "poor" of David's time were not preserved for ever.

FSSL later claims the word "from" would have to mean that the words began in David's generation. That is as incorrect as assuming that "the poor" began in that generation to the exclusion of all prior generations.

The book Thou Shalt Keep Them (ISBN 0974381705, chapter 1) offers a thorough examination of the Hebrew text proving that the modern versions that translate this passage so as to remove the promise of preservation are simply wrong. Those who have an interest in such things should read that book.

If we are to accept the incorrect reading of verse seven to make it refer to the poor instead of God's words, we must do the same in Psalm 119:110,111:

Psalms 119:110-111 The wicked have laid a snare for me: yet I erred not from thy precepts. Thy testimonies have I taken as an heritage for ever: for they are the rejoicing of my heart.

If we accept FSSL's rules of grammar in this case, we must assume David was rejoicing at the wicked, instead of God's testimonies. (Note that this verse also teaches the preservation of God's word in that they are an heritage "for ever." Just as Psalm 12:7 says they will be preserved "for ever." A little "Scripture with Scripture" by the simplest of KJV believers will yield mountains more understanding than all the scholarly works of unbelieving "original language" scholars.)

The meaning of Psalm 12 is perfectly plain. The chapter is a contrast between David's love of God's words and the vanity of men's words. Incorrectly reading verse 7 to refer to a promise to preserve the poor forever ruins the praise of God's promises David is offering. It also leaves us with the strange, untenable position that God is promising the preservation of the poor in perpetuity -- a tenet not to be found elsewhere in Scripture. (And I looked -- among all of the commentaries I have that agree with FSSL's position, none of them offer a cross-reference teaching a similar tenet.) It also contradicts the very first verse, where David states that "for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men." If we are to accept the reading FSSL offers, we must conclude that the "godly man" and "faithful" can not also be "poor" and that, oddly, the poor are therefore ungodly, faithless, and will be preserved forever.

1. Diligent....

John Gill was one of the most seasoned hebrew expert of his day. He wrote extensively about the hebrew language. He wrote about Psalms 12:7

thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever; or "thou shalt preserve him" (p); that is, everyone of the poor and needy, from the wicked generation of men in which they live, from being corrupted or intimidated by them; and who are described in the beginning of the psalm. Some take these words to be a prayer, "keep thou them, O Lord, and preserve them", &c. (q); and so the following words may be thought to be a reason or argument enforcing the request.

(p) תצרנו "custodies eum", Pagninus, Montanus, Gejerus, Michaelis; so Ainsworth. (q) "Custodi eum", Tigurine version, Vatablus, "custodito eorum quemque", Junius & Tremellius, Piscator.

He say that the text says "him" and not "them". He give the reasoning of such when be speaks of "custodies eum"

Are you saying that John Gill is wrong.

2. Did not our Lord say.

Joh 12:8 For the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always.

How can you say that our Lord is wrong and that the poor are not preserved?

I am interested to read your responses.

Sincerely
Lewis

[Diligent]

Originally Posted by llthomasjr

He say that the text says "him" and not "them". He give the reasoning of such when be speaks of "custodies eum"

Are you saying that John Gill is wrong.

Yes. He's wrong, for the reasons I already explained. My final authority is not John Gill, so this doesn't bother me much.

I suppose I could retort "are you saying John Wesley was wrong" since he agrees with my reading of the passage. But John Wesley is not my final authority either.

How can you say that our Lord is wrong and that the poor are not preserved?

Did the Lord say the poor would be preserved forever? No, there is no conflict with what I said and what the Lord said. There is no problem here because those to whom the Lord was speaking always had poor people around them. That doesn't mean the Lord preserved all of them. Can you tell me where the poor of Jesus' time are now? I'm pretty sure none of them were preserved. The poor couldn't usually afford good mummification services.

Originally Posted by Diligent

Yes. He's wrong, for the reasons I already explained. My final authority is not John Gill, so this doesn't bother me much.

I suppose I could retort "are you saying John Wesley was wrong" since he agrees with my reading of the passage. But John Wesley is not my final authority either.

Did the Lord say the poor would be preserved forever? No, there is no conflict with what I said and what the Lord said. There is no problem here because those to whom the Lord was speaking always had poor people around them. That doesn't mean the Lord preserved all of them. Can you tell me where the poor of Jesus' time are now? I'm pretty sure none of them were preserved. The poor couldn't usually afford good mummification services.

1. John Gill is not my final authority as well, but I would say he knows the hebrew language better than you or I both. That is what I meant by you consider him to be wrong.

It doesn't matter how elborate a senerio you put forth to explain that verse 7 is not speaking of verse 5.... if them... is in fact.... him.... in the verse.....your scenerio means nothing.

2. Do you mean to tell me that Jesus was only speaking about the poor that lived during his advant on this earth when He said.

Mat 5:3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

????

If you do not... then why can we not consider that Jesus was also talking about the poor of all generations upon the earth when He said

Joh 12:8 For the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always.

I am trying to understand your logic but I'm not getting it.