[PeterAV]

You are a real blessing Steven!
Thanx 4 letting God's word be God's word.

[chette777]

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.
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?
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.
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.

The above bold words are what will be preserved. simply on a literary level the the LORD speaks his word of promise in verse five not to preserve people but that he will rise up against the wicked.

David goes on to tell us the Lords word is pure as silver purified to the limit of purity. meaning he will keep his word to rise up and set them in safty even unto a future time. even if they or we don't see it God will keep his word. so we can rest in the fact God will keep his words and promises.

but the verse has the meaning in and of it self to keep ALL his words and to preserve it as well. not just to rise up as promised but to keep his words pure and preserved, that is, if we divorced it from the context of the chapter. Verse 1-5a and verse 8 are the circle of context. Verse 6,7 are the promise to keep his word to rise up against the wicked and proudful.

in this case both meanings are accepted. This is one of those rightly dividing verses it can be kept together or divided.

Also Brandon hit on the contrasting of mens words and God's words. we can always trust the Lord to keep his words pure and purfect unto every generation.

[Will Kinney]

Good points, Brandon. Thanks.

Will K

It is ridiculous to think anything other that the preservation was talking about anything other than the pure words of God. Why the credence to such nonsense?

[Forrest]

Originally Posted by Diligent

The meaning of Psalm 12 is perfectly plain.

It is to me also.

“For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven” (Psalm 119:89).

“Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away” (Matthew 24:35; Mark 13:31; Luke 21:33).

“The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever” (Isaiah 40:8).

How can we ever proclaim and teach the true meaning of Scripture without first believing God has preserved every Word?

[Just_A_Thought]

Originally Posted by Forrest

It is to me also.

“For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven” (Psalm 119:89).

Exactly, God's perfect word is settled in HEAVEN. No where does it teach that it is one earth.

“Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away” (Matthew 24:35; Mark 13:31; Luke 21:33).

Yes, again if it were on earth then it would be burnt up when God destroys the earth. It will not be! It is settled in Heaven.

“The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever” (Isaiah 40:8).

It was before the foundations of the earth and will be here after it is destroyed.

How can we ever proclaim and teach the true meaning of Scripture without first believing God has preserved every Word?

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]

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?