Does Psalm 12:7 refer to the words of God?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Jordan Kurecki, Apr 22, 2016.

  1. Jordan Kurecki

    Jordan Kurecki
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,452
    Likes Received:
    60
    Psalm 12:6 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.

    Many times, Non-KJO people will claim that the phrase "them" of vs 7, refers not to the words of the Lord of vs 6, but to actual people. the claim is made that due to Hebrew Grammatical rules, that it is not possible.

    However, Dr. Thomas Strauss (B.S. in industrial engineering from Purdue University, an M.Div. in theology and Biblical languages from Maranatha Baptist Graduate School of Theology, and a Ph.D. in theology from Bob Jones University. Strouse was a founding member of the Dean Burgon Society (1979) ) demonstrates this to be false:

    "It is important for the careful exegete of the Hebrew Scriptures to recognize the biblical phenomenon wherein the biblical writers employed masculine pronouns in reference to feminine antecedent nouns when those feminine nouns were synonyms for the Words of God (cf. Ps. 119). Since the words of Jehovah are an extension of this strong patriarchal God, the OT writers occasionally seemed to use masculine pronouns for the following synonyms. The Hebrew words Law (torah hr'AT), Testimony (`eduth tWd[e), Commandment (mitzwah hw"c.mi), Statute (chuqqah hQ 'xu), and Word ('imrah) hr'm.ai ) are feminine in gender. The normal Hebrew grammatical pattern is that concordance occurs between the gender and number of the pronoun with its respective antecedent noun. For instance, a masculine singular (m.s.) noun would take a masculine singular pronoun, and a masculine plural (m.p.) noun would take a masculine plural pronoun. However, the biblical writers deviated from this "grammatical norm" for theological purposes, emphasizing specific truths. The inspired Scripture is the only authority for the biblical languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek), including their respective vocabulary and grammar. There are examples in all three divisions of the Tanak illustrating this Scriptural Hebrew phenomenon of gender discordance for theological purposes. The following are examples of the phenomenon:

    Law (torah) 1. "That thou mayest observe to do according to all the law (torah--f.s.)…turn not from it (mimmennu--WNM ,mi m.s.)," (Josh. 1:7). 2. "For he established a testimony (`eduth--f.s.) in Jacob, and appointed a law (torah-- f.s.) in Israel, which he commanded our fathers, that they should make them (lehodiy`am- -~['ydIAhl . m.p. suffix) known to their children" (Ps. 78:5).

    Testimony
    (`eduth) 1. Ps. 78:5 (see above) 2. "Thy testimonies (`edoth--f.p.) have I taken as an heritage for ever: for they (hemmah--hM 'h e m.p.) are the rejoicing of my heart" (Ps. 119:111). 3. "Thy testimonies (`edoth--f.p.) are wonderful: therefore doth my soul keep them (netzaratham--~t;r 'c'n> m.p. suffix)" (Ps. 119:129). 4. "Concerning thy testimonies (`edoth), I have known of old that thou hast founded them (yesadtam--~T'd>s ;y > m.p. suffix) for ever" (Ps. 119:152). 5. "My soul hath kept thy testimonies (`edoth--f.p.), and I love them (wa'ohavem-- ~beh ]aow" m.p. suffix) exceedingly" (Ps. 119:167).

    Commandment (mitzwah) 1. "Therefore shall ye keep my commandments (mitzwoth--f.p.), and do them ('otham-- ~t'ao m.p.): I am the LORD (Lev. 22:31). 2. "If ye walk in my statutes (chuqqoth--f.p.), and keep my commandments (mitzwoth-- f.p.), and do them ('otham--~t'ao m.p.)" (Lev. 26:3). 3. "And remember all the commandments (mitzwoth--f.p.) of the LORD, and do them ('otham--~t'ao m.p.)" (Num. 15:39). 4. "If thou wilt walk in my statutes (chuqqoth-f.p.), and execute my judgments (mishpat-- m.p.), and keep all my commandments (mitzwoth--f.p.) to walk in them (bahem--~h ,B' m.p. suffix)," (I Ki. 6:12).

    Statute (chuqqah) 1. "And you shall keep my statutes (chuqqoth--f.p.), and do them ('otham--~t'ao m.p.)" (Lev. 20:8). 2. Lev. 26:3 (see above). 3. I Ki. 6:12 (see above). 4. "For they have refused my judgments (mishpat--m.p.) and my statutes (chuqqoth--f.p.), they have not walked in them (bahem--~h ,B' m.p. suffix)" (Ezk. 5:6). 5. "And hath kept all my statutes (chuqqoth--f.p.), and hath done them ('otham--~t'ao m.p.)" (Ezk. 18:19). 6. "They shall also walk in my judgments (mishpat--m.p.); and observe my statutes (chuqqoth--f.p.), and do them ('otham--~t'ao m.p.) " (Ezk. 37:24).

    Word ('imrah) 1. "The words ('imroth--f.p.) of the LORD are pure words ('amaroth--f.p.)…thou shalt keep them (tishmerem--~r em.v.Ti m.p. suffix), O LORD, thou shalt preserve them (titztzerennu--WNr ,C.T i m.p. suffix) from this generation for ever" (Ps. 12:6-7).

    Throughout the Hebrew OT, pronouns usually correspond to their antecedent nouns in proximity and with gender/number concordance. However, a phenomenon exists, which fresh Hebrew exegesis observes,17 that feminine synonyms for Word of God are addressed by masculine pronouns for the apparent purpose of masculinzing the patriarchal Jehovah God. The second verb "thou shalt preserve them" has the masculine singular pronominal suffix (titztzerennu WNr ,C.Ti) which refers to the individual Words. Since Hebrew does not have the neuter pronoun "it," the pronoun "him" (v. 7) refers to the individual item of "them" (v. 6).18 The KJV has the marginal note "Heb. him: i.e., everyone of them," which of course would then refer to every individual word. The first verb refers to all the Words that the Lord preserved, and the second to the very individual Words He preserved (cf. Lk. 4:4)."

    http://www.bbc-cromwell.org/Seminary_Articles/Psalm-12-Expanded.pdf

    Someone on another thread resorted to name calling without actually dealing with the substance of Strouse's arguments, I would prefer to hear someone actually respond to the substance of the argument, rather than using rhetorical fallacies.
     
  2. Jordan Kurecki

    Jordan Kurecki
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,452
    Likes Received:
    60
    "The structure of the psalm is asymmetric. This structure causes the focus to be on the middle or odd strophe, "C" The Promises of God (v. 5). David's lament carries the reader from the need for divine help, because of the words of the ungodly, to a focus on the promises of God for deliverance, which include the permanent preservation of His Words, the antidote to the word of the ever-present wicked. Graphic Structure of English Text A. The Recognition of the Need for Divine Help (v. 1) B. The Threat of the Words of the Ungodly (vv. 2-4) C. The Promises of God (v. 5) B.' The Antidote of the Words of God (vv. 6-7) A.' The Recognition of the Need for Divine Help (v. 8)"
     
  3. Jordan Kurecki

    Jordan Kurecki
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,452
    Likes Received:
    60
    "The structure, context and exegesis, both preparatory and immediate, of the Masoretic Hebrew text of Psalm 12 all argue forcefully and irrefragably for the promise of everlasting preservation of the perfect Words of the LORD. This is one of several clear passages in which the Lord promised to preserve His canonical Words for every generation. Man's pervasive words are lies and are temporal; God's ever-present Words are Truth and are everlasting. This is the tangible help that the righteous man has in every generation--the perfectly preserved Words of the LORD."
     
  4. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,970
    Likes Received:
    128
    Couple things...

    1. The author's position that this is an asymmetric psalm is quite debatable.
    Psalm 12 (Symmetric Structuring)

    The Godly man ceases to be (12:1)
    They speak falsely (12:2)
    God condemns the wicked (12:3,4)
    God vindicates the righteous (12:5)
    God’s words are pure (12:6,7)
    Wicked wander freely (12:8.9)
    2. The author is correct that the argument of connection based upon gender is weak (however it is not without substance).

    3. Reading historical translations (particularly the LXX) gives us some understanding of how this passage was understood in the distant past.

    Psalm 11:8 (LES)
    You, O Lord, will guard us,
    and you will preserve us from this generation and ⌊forever⌋.

    4. The best argument IMO isn't grammar but a simple reading of the psalmist's concern/complaint in the psalm. The psalm deals with the faithfulness of God in protecting the frail, unfaithful people of God (vs 1). His conclusion: God is faithful and will protect them.

    Rob
     
  5. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,165
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    Don't bother. Their KJVO guru said it refers to the "words" and not to the "poor and needy" so they have to toe the mark or they will be thrown out of the KJVO club. Facts don't matter. Only what their KJVO guru tells them matters really matters. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
     
  6. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,165
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    The greatest Hebrew commentary, written by the greatest Hebrew scholars, Karl Fredreich Keil and Franz Delitzsch say, regarding Psalms 12:7-8:
    -----
    The supplicatory complaint contained in the first strophe has passed into an ardent wish in the second; and now in the fourth there arises a consolatory hope based upon the divine utterance which was heard in the third strophe.

    The suffix eem in Psalm 12:8 [Note: Hebrew numbering is different from English numbering by 1 so subtract 1 for the English bible verse number] refers to the miserable and poor; the suffix ennu in Psalm 12:8 (him, not: us, which would be pointed תצרֵנוּ, and more especially since it is not preceded by תִשְׁמְרֵנוּ) refers back to the man who yearns for deliverance mentioned in the divine utterance, Psalm 12:6. The “preserving for ever” is so constant, that neither now nor at any future time will they succumb to this generation.

    [Note: Just as the KJV of 1611 says in the marginal note. Why do KJVO people continually deny the KJV?]
    -----

    First Strophe: A Prayerful Complaint - The Godly Are Under Attack
    Psalm 12:1 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.

    Second Strophe: The Desired Correction - Divine Intervention
    Psalm 12:3 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?

    Third Strophe: The Promise of God - To Protect His People, the Godly

    Psalm 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.
    6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

    Fourth Strophe: The Consolation of Hope - God Will Protect and Preserve His People.
    Psalm 12:7 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.
     
  7. SovereignGrace

    SovereignGrace
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2015
    Messages:
    2,781
    Likes Received:
    493
    Now, what about those who died pre-1611. The KJVO'ers say all other translations are corrupt. If someone died whilst studying from the Geneva bible, did he die lost? Per the KJVO'ers, it is a corrupted translation.
     
  8. Jordan Kurecki

    Jordan Kurecki
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,452
    Likes Received:
    60
    Well, I would contend that they had weaker translations of the word of God, and that God did still in fact use them, though they did not yet have a pure English translation, I will say though that they did still have access to the Hebrew Masoretic text and the Greek Textus Receptus as the inspired and preserved word of God. This argument in my opinion is not really valid, while modern translations may contain the word of God, just as some of the pre KJV bibles did, I do not think there is warrant to use them when we have an accurate and pure translation in the KJV. It's like the difference between riding a bicycle that has broken pedals and a bent frame, compared to driving a brand new perfectly working car.

    secondly I have never argued that you cannot be saved unless you use the KJV
     
  9. SovereignGrace

    SovereignGrace
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2015
    Messages:
    2,781
    Likes Received:
    493
    The KJV is a translation of God's word. What makes it better? What makes you think God preserved His word solely in the KJV?

    I used to be right where you're at now. Brother, please come out of it!!! I am begging you!! Please come out from those ppl!!!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    I know nothing of Greek and far less of Hebrew but "words" is not the antecedent of "them" because "words" is female and them is male. Carry on.
     
  11. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,165
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    I think it (and the NKJV) are better than most of the contemporary English versions because (1) they are translated from a superior underlying textform, (2) using a superior translation technique, and (3) being translated by superior translators.

    (1) I believe the proper application of the proper rules of textual criticism point to the Byzantine textform NT and Ben Chayyim textform OT (Bomberg) as being most accurate and most likely to reflect the original readings given by Inspiration of God.

    (2) I believe the verbal and formal equivalence translation technique is superior to other translation techniques as it best preserves the verbal inspiration of the original as given by Inspiration of God.

    (3) I believe the educations and knowledge of the translation committees was superior to the educations and knowledge of contemporary translators. Our system of education today is not nearly as thorough as was the educational system that produced the men who translated the KJV. There is not a single translator of any modern version that can even come close to the stature of these men. And there is a reason for that. In the late 1500s, when these men were educated, 95% of England's educational resources were spent on only 5% of the population. Most of the common people of England couldn't read or write. But the gentry were given the best educations imaginable. Today, with our egalitarian social order we place everyone at the same level and nobody gets any special consideration (yeah, yeah, I know - affirmative action - the exact opposite of what I am talking about). :)

    But, with all that said, is the KJV the ONLY word of God in English? Not by a long shot.

    As I already said, earlier, if you believe the bible, then any bible "able to make thee wise unto salvation" is the "holy scriptures." :)
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,165
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    With all of the above I would like to add that the Hebrew text which underlies most of the contemporary English versions, differs from the Ben Chayyim text, which underlies the KJV (Bomberg), in only 8 places that would have an effect on translation: Proverbs 8:16; Isaiah 10:16; Isaiah 27:2; Isaiah 38:14; Jeremiah 34:1; Ezekiel 30:18; Zephaniah 3:15; and Malachi 1:12.

    And the Alexandrian text, which underlies most of the contemporary versions, differs from the Byzantine textform in only about a half page worth of words and most of those are minor spelling differences. There is NO major doctrine affected by textual variants. :)
     
  13. Greektim

    Greektim
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    May 22, 2010
    Messages:
    3,143
    Likes Received:
    118
    Speaking of which, did you all hear that Ruckman died this week?
     
  14. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,970
    Likes Received:
    128
    The Doc posted something about his death on a thread in this forum earlier in the week.

    Rob
     
  15. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,303
    Likes Received:
    784
    I think sometimes we let the numbered divisions in the Bible pigeon hole us to an improper understanding of scripture. My take on this is the following:

    1.) We have the declaration of the problem:

    2.) We have a judgment pronounced:

    3. We have a promise of hope declared:

    4.) We have the reason for the promise:

    5.) We have the reason why this hope is trustworthy:

     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Jordan Kurecki

    Jordan Kurecki
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,452
    Likes Received:
    60
    I cannot accept the principles and theories behind the critical texts.
    I firmly believe in the TR over any critical text.
     
  17. Jordan Kurecki

    Jordan Kurecki
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,452
    Likes Received:
    60
    To give the impression that doctrines are not affected or impacted by the different text types and versions is flat out wrong:

    http://brandplucked.webs.com/nodoctrinechanged.htm
     
  18. Greektim

    Greektim
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    May 22, 2010
    Messages:
    3,143
    Likes Received:
    118
    Citing brandplucked (what is his old BB moniker???) is a fast way to loose credibility.
     
  19. Jordan Kurecki

    Jordan Kurecki
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,452
    Likes Received:
    60
    And please tell me why it is bad to cite Will Kinney?
     
  20. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,204
    Likes Received:
    611
    This game of such-and-such version omits verses, or changes meanings can be played against the KJV.


    KJV OMITS Holy Spirit, denying inspiration

    Acts 4:25
    25 You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David:
    " 'Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain? [NIV]

    25 Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? [KJV]


    KJV REMOVES God as “Holy One“, instead uses generic term “holy”

    Proverbs 9:10 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding. [NIV]

    Proverbs 9:10 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, And the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding. [NKJV]

    Proverbs 9:10 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding. [KJV]


    KJV OMITS Jesus Christ our Lord

    Jude 25
    25 to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen. [NIV]

    25 To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen. [KJV]


    I could go on and on...
     
    • Winner Winner x 1

Share This Page

Loading...