So you're saying that the "poor" is like silver purified seven times? Thou shalt preserve the poor from this generation forever?

It is all about recognizing antecedents properly. The KJV is clear.

vs 6: The words of the LORD are pure. "pure" modifies "words"
vs 7: Thou shalt keep "them" goes back to the "poor" in verse 5

Thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever. The "poor" will be preserved FROM (from the Hebrew min) this generation of wicked people. That is the promise to these people. They can trust the words of the LORD. The poor will survive!

Your interpretation has a strange problem. How is it that the Word of the LORD will be kept from this generation? That would be a strange thing to say.

[Diligent]

Originally Posted by freesundayschoollessons

Your interpretation has a strange problem. How is it that the Word of the LORD will be kept from this generation? That would be a strange thing to say.

The KJV is clear. Read this article:

http://av1611.com/kjbp/ridiculous-kj...2-verse-7.html

[Paladin54]

You are stretching your understanding of scripture just to "be right". That is dangerous.

On what grounds do you think verse 7 is referring to something described two verses ago, when it would also make sense to be referring to something in its immediate context?

YOUR interpretation is strange. In the middle of this plan to preserve "the poor" (as you claim), the Pslamist just randomly inserts verse 6? Talking about how pure the words are, describing their puity,a nd then go right back to talking about the oppression of the poor? That does not make sense.

About the article by John Hinton: While I enjoyed his explanation of the epenthetic nun, his article does not handle the issues involved here.

1) He does not deal with the context of Psalm 12. It is clearly established in verse 1 that the subject is godly man is afraid of "ceasing" to exist.

2) He does not treat the antecedent issue. The Hebrew "them" (vs 7) is masculine. The Hebrew for "words" (vs 6) is feminine. "Them" cannot refer to "words" because they do not match gender.

3) If this was clearly a "preservation of Scripture" passage, you would expect to see the commentaries present this. They don't. In fact, they are unanimously agreed that vs 7 refers to the poor.

4) I find it a curious thing, but am pleased, that you will go to a Hebrew scholar for information on this. In my discussion on other threads, I find definitive statements that going to "The Greek" and "scholars" is wrong. I am starting a thread on that very topic.

If you want a more clear treatment of Psalm 12, go to page 15 of this article on Preservation of Scripture.

[bibleprotector]

1. The appeal to "context" is often subjective, unless it is on the higher principle of the proper conference of Scripture with Scripture, which is to say, how does this word fit in with the same word throughout the Bible, various other passages and the Bible as a whole, etc.?

2. The appeal to the "Hebrew" is often subjective, for God clearly was able to use men of God to bring the full Scripture from the Hebrew to English in 1611. Therefore, the full sense is discernable in the English, and the Holy Ghost is yet present to help.

3. The appeal to the wisdom of man is misguided, in that there are those who have taught that Psalm 12 refers to the preservation of Scripture. It is more like being selective at which "commentary" one looks at, or a deliberate ignoring of certain sources.

4. Going to a "Hebrew scholar" is (at least almost always) today's form of Nicolaitanism, a continuation of the Romanist practice, and can even be likened to consulting a diviner/witch.

4. Going to a "Hebrew scholar" is (at least almost always) today's form of Nicolaitanism, a continuation of the Romanist practice, and can even be likened to consulting a diviner/witch.

Before you charge me with Nicolaitanism, you had better reread the thread. It was Diligent who referred me to the interesting by an impressive Hebrew scholar's article here at av1611.org

So, bibleprotector, what is your take on this passage? What is the context?

[Renee]

FSSL,

I have only the below to say to you:

Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

Beware of the words you put in God's mouth.

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.

Are you calling God a liar?

2 Corinthians 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

Are you corrupting God's word?



Revelation 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

Revelation 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Think before the plagues of the book are bestowed upon you.

In Christ Love,
Renee

Renee: Why not show me where I am wrong here instead of throwing verses at me that have to do with the damnation of unbelievers? I am nice to people here. I used to be KJVOnly and know why you think I am a reprobate, but these inflated comments are not good for edifying. I am edifyable (just coined this term) and will retract where I am wrong.

Our impass with this passage has nothing to do with me correcting the KJV. I am simply challenging you to rethink your interpretation of this passage. I have supported my comments with all but one exception without going to the biblical languages on this one.

Read the context of Psalm 12 in the KJV.
Who is the subject throughout the Psalm?
What are they afraid of?
What does God promise?

I memorized Ephesians 2.8-9 when I was a child. It was not until I was in college that the meaning "jumped out at me" when I read the context. The same thing is happening here. KJVOnlys use Psalm 12.6-7 to support their position while ignoring the context.

Adopt the KJV translators approach which is quoted in my signature line...