Well the current thread on Psalm 12 has become a classic, thanks primarily to our illustrative leader and his WORDS/PEOPLE drill.
You hit the nail right on the head.
Many of these preserved words however have dubious meanings.
We can only guess at others.
Has the WORD of God really been preserved if the PEOPLE don’t know what they mean?
Case in point (among many): Psalm 88:1 “ To the chief Musician upon Mahalath Lennoth”
If we have lost the meaning of various words, hasn’t there been some compromise in the process?
In other words, if the LORD speaks and we don’t understand, is there proper communication?
1. But wouldn't the person with such a question first demonstrate that meaning of words have actually been lost in translation and are therefore not even accessible in the original languages.
2. When I say lost, lost from the time the inspired writer received the words and was not able to remember
and therefore not ab to put them down on scroll for others to read and memorize.
3. Then the questioner must show that there have been times when God spoke and those whom he wished would understand, didn't understand him.
4. Then the questioner must demonstrate how this all relates to a compromise in inspiration of the sacred Writ.
Ugggh, back to WORDS!
Why bother translating then?
We have God’s word, the process of translation invites distortion of those holy words.
Well, we have them in the original language but we can only guess at their meaning.
The words meant something to the original audience but their meaning has not been preserved.
Good point; Jesus spoke in parables, only disclosing the lesson of them to his disciples.
I’m taking a different tact, I'm not discussing the aspect of inspiration but of preservation.
1. I will have to part ways with you here.
Without being too critical of your point, this sounds at a lot like literary deconstructionalism, assigning subjective meaning to the text.
2. I believe the meaning of the words have been preserved.
It is dangerous to say that the original meanings have been lost.
Give it some thought.
Did you mean the understanding of individual words (the definitions) are preserved (then we put it all together with the aid of the Holy Spirit)? This is basically debunked by all the words in scripture of 'uncertain' (lost) meaning, which Deacon gave us just one example. or
Did you mean the communication of His thoughts are not lost through human phrasing? Again, the recent example of Psalm 12 shows that some folks will get a different meaning from a passage than others; not only is it likely that one side is sorely wrong, it is possible that both interpretations are off the mark. How can we know for certain that any one has received the intended divine thought?