“¢ Introduction

“¢ Part 2: The Biblical Argumentation Used for KJV Onlyism

“¢ Part 3: Interpretation, Inspiration, Preservation (part 1)

“¢ Part 4: Preservation (part 2) — Ps. 12:6-7

Recap

This series covers how the Bible impacts the KJV Only Debate. It is designed to be a positive presentation of what Scripture actually says about preservation and other issues. I don’t want it to be just an “anti-KJVO” position. Yet interacting with the KJVO interpretation of passages is inevitable and necessary.

We have only begun looking at preservation, having tackled Ps. 12:6-7 in the last post. That passage, at best, is merely a general promise that God would preserve His words. Yet it is likely, especially in light of this recent comment, that those verses have no direct bearing on the doctrine of preservation (of Scripture) at all.

Now we turn to a look at other pertinent Scriptures on this issue.

Ps. 105:8-9

He hath remembered his covenant for ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations. Which covenant he made with Abraham, and his oath to Isaac;

Italicized words are words added to help explain the text, but they aren’t in the Hebrew text. I say that because verse 9 has “covenant” as an explanatory word. If you take that word out, this is the flow of the verses: “God remembered his covenant…the word he commanded…which he made with Abraham…” From this it should be clear that “word” refers to the covenant specifically. It does not refer to the Bible or Scripture, but rather to God’s covenantal promise made with Abraham. That promise extends to everyone who is in Christ, by the way (cf. Gal. 3).  

So this verse does not directly apply to preservation. Instead, it declares that God’s covenant with Abraham is sure and lasts forever, essentially.

Ps. 111:7-8

The works of his hands are verity and judgment; all his commandments are sure. They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness.

The context of this psalm is all about God’s works being sure. His “righteousness endureth for ever”. His works are “to be remembered”. “He will ever be mindful of his covenant”. “He hath commanded his covenant for ever”. And finally, “His praise endureth for ever”. What God has done, in promising His blessings for His people, is a sure thing. It lasts forever. It is authoritative. His commandments or precepts/statutes, these “stand fast for ever and ever”. And they are “done in truth and uprightness”. This last phrase points to our understanding this verse as relating to the sureness and goodness, the permanence of what God has promised and established in His Word.  

What God says is sure and final. This seems to be what the passage is stressing, rather than the fact that all of God’s words will endure perfectly for ever with no threat of textual corruption. It’s not talking about whether all of God’s words stay together on one manuscript or in one family of manuscripts, it is affirming that whatever God says and does is faithful and authoritative.  

This passage therefore informs us as to God’s character and the character of God’s Word, but it doesn’t directly bear on the preservation discussion. At best this is merely a general promise that God’s words are permanent and endure forever. No specifics as to how and to what extent they will be preserved are mentioned or alluded to.

Ps. 119:89

For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.

In examining this verse, we must remember that “word” may or may not be referring to Scripture. Often in the OT, God’s word refers to his commands or decrees — His will. This includes God’s promises and indirectly applies to God’s written Word. The following 2 verses in the context of this verse, lend support for seeing this understanding of “word” to be what is meant in vs. 89.

Even if God’s written word is expressly in view here, the verse itself does not tell us anything as to the quality and status of that word here on earth. It says nothing about the preservation of that word. Just because the perfect archetype of the Temple exists in Heaven, does not necessitate that the earthly copy of it is exact and that it should remain. And in fact, the earthly copy of the Temple has been destroyed. Similarly, just because a Heavenly pure copy of Scripture exists, it does not follow that a perfect copy of it must always remain on earth. [See footnote 1 for an extended quote from John Gill.]

I’ll conclude discussion on this verse with a quote from God’s Word in Our Hands: The Bible Preserved for Us, “…the Psalmist has asserted the immutability of God’s truth. Still, he has not actually said anything about the durability of the text of Scripture.” [2]

Ps. 119:152

Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them for ever.

With this verse, there is  little question that “thy testimonies” refers to Scripture. This is clear from the overall context of Ps. 119 as well as the section this verse is in. Also, “founded them for ever” can be understood as the NIV has it, “established them to last forever”. So at face value this could very well be a direct promise of the preservation of the text of Scripture.

But what is the emphasis here? Is the emphasis of the passage that God’s words are all of them made to last forever, that none of them would be lost. Or even more directly, that none of them would be cease to be accessible or identifiable? While possible, this does not seem to be what the context would indicate.

From the context of the immediate section, we see the psalmist in a dire situation. He is pleading with God for God to help him. He is also encouraging himself concerning God’s faithfulness. The last two verses (151 & 152) end the section on a note of triumph. God is near. What he has promised is sure (because his commandments are truth). And God’s promises are always true. [3]

The point seems to be that what is contained in the Scripture — the message (promises, declarations, truths) — is unchanging and permanent. What Scripture says can be trusted and relied on always, because it is unchanging and sure. It is eternally stedfast. Gill brings this idea out when commenting on this verse:

…that the things contained in them are sure and certain, established and eternal truths; the moral law and the precepts of it are eternal, and of perpetual obligation; not one jot or tittle of them shall ever fail; the Gospel, and the truths of it, are everlasting, and shall ever remain; in spite of all the opposition, craft and cunning, fury and force of men, to undermine and root them out; see Ps 119:89 [you can reference Gill’s comments on vs. 89 at footnote 1 below]. [4]

Based on this contextual teaching, I lean toward the view that this verse is not teaching that the very text of God’s Word is promised to be fixed and always in an inviolable state, in regards to its textual purity. [5] The point seems to be that the message doesn’t change and is always applicable. God intends His Word to always be authoritative and sure.

However, William Combs’ point in regard to this verse is not easily dismissed. “But since the Psalmist would have come to know these ‘testimonies’ from the written Torah, probably through his own reading, it is difficult to imagine that he could divorce their being ‘founded,’ established, or caused to ‘last forever’ apart from a preserved written form, the written form from which he was reading.” [6] And yes the meaning of the Scripture, which meaning is stedfast, always applicable, always true and faithful — that meaning must stay around and be able to be understood and seen. That would necessitate the eternality of the text of Scripture — its preservation.

So I am ready to conclude that this verse is a promise or declaration that God’s Word will remain stedfast forever. And this includes the text of God’s Word — it will endure. The meaning and authority of Scripture, tied up to the text as they are, will surely be preserved since they are “founded… for ever”.

Ps. 119:160

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

The first clause of this verse could also be understood as “the sum of Thy word is true”. The Hebrew has a word for “head”. It often means “beginning” but can mean “sum total”. In opposition to the NIV’s translation of “all your words” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary argues that the phrase in Hebrew is literally “the head of your word”, and this would mean “from the beginning God’s word is true” — very much like the KJV’s rendering. [7] The second part of the verse refers to Scripture when it talks of “thy righteous judgments”. We see this from the context of Ps. 119 and this passage particularly.

Based on the literal understanding of the text, we see the passage teaching something very similar to what vs. 152 stressed: that God’s words are everlastingly stedfast and faithful, they’re sure. Calvin shows how this verse is understood in this way:

These two clauses hang very well together — that God has been true to his word from the beginning, and that he will continue to be so everlastingly and immutably….Let us then retain this sense, That from the time when God began to speak he has always been faithful to his promises, and has never disappointed the hope of his people; and that the course of this faithfulness has been so uniform, that from the beginning even to the end his word is true and faithful. [8]

So again, the main point of the passage is the eternal truth and goodness and applicableness of God’s Word. Just as with vs. 152, this seems to imply that the text of God’s Word — His righteous judgments — is also eternal, so as to witness to the eternality of the truth of the message of Scripture.

At this point, I do see what may be a helpful parallel with Ps. 12:6-7.    There, the psalmist declares the purity  or truthfulness (the sure-ness) of God’s words in vs. 6. And he concludes from the fact that God’s word is pure, that God will keep his promise and thus preserve the psalmist (along with  all of God’s oppressed, yet  godly people). “Preserve” is used of people, and the fact  that God’s word is pure was declared. In Ps. 119:159-160, we see the same kind of an argument. In vs. 159, the psalmist asks  that God would preserve his life. Vs. 160 is the basis for his request. Because God’s word is true and righteous (from the beginning and even for all time), the psalmist is confident to trust that God will preserve his life. Once again, a fact about God’s Word (It’s trustworthiness and permanence) becomes the basis for believing that God would preserve His people. In neither passage does “preserve” explicitly become connected to “God’s words”. This fact makes clear that both passages are at best indirect teaching on preservation. Preservation can be implied from their teaching, but it is not explicit in the text. [9]

Summary and Preview

We have tackled at least half (if not more) of the key texts dealing with preservation of the text of Scripture. Since this study is coming one post at a time, and since I’m going to have to conclude this post, I thought it would help to summarize where we are so far, and give a little preview as to what’s coming up.

We have surveyed the concept of “Word of God” (concluding it often does not refer to written scripture, although it can), and looked closely at Ps. 12:6-7; Ps. 105:8-9; 111:7-8; 119:89, 152, 160. So far, we have concluded that Ps. 119:152 and 160 seem to strongly suggest that the text of Scripture is eternal and hence will be preserved for us by God. Also, Ps. 12 may directly state that God will preserve the words of Scripture. However, we should also stress that none of these verses give explicit statement as to how that preservation will take place. We are not told that the words of Scripture will endure always in one manuscript or family of manuscripts. We are not told if it will happen in the majority of copies or a minority. We are not assured, explicitly at least (we will discuss the topic later), that the preserved Word will always be accessible to all of God’s people. Nor are we explicitly told to what extent the words will be preserved.

But we have not yet examined all the direct teaching in Scripture on this topic. So the next post will hopefully cover the following verses: Is. 40:8 (with 1 Pet. 1:23-25), Is. 59:21, Matt. 5:17-18, Matt. 24:35. We may examine a few others.  

When we are done examining the texts of Scripture we will proceed to look at other indirect arguments (Scriptural and logical) for preservation. Then we’ll go on to look at accessibility or general  availability. Finally, we will begin to look in Scripture for other  examples and teachings which weigh in on this issue. And we will test (with Scripture)  some of the assumptions and logical arguments which are vital to the KJV Only doctrine of perfect preservation.

I’m striving to be concise on the one hand, yet I find the need to be thorough on the other. I hope to at a later date compile and edit these posts into a single essay on the topic. And I hope to follow the series with a couple summaries of all the many posts in the series.

Thanks for reading, and I hope this study proves profitable and helpful to you all. It has been for me.

———————————————————–

Footnotes

[1]  

The decrees and purposes of God, what he has said in his heart that he will do, these are firm and sure; these counsels of old are faithfulness and truth; they are mountains of brass settled for ever, and more unalterable than the decrees of the Medes and Persians. The revealed will of God, his word of command, made known to angels in heaven, is regarded, hearkened to, and done by them: the word of the Gospel, published in the church, which is sometimes called heaven, is the everlasting Gospel, the word of God, which lives and abides for ever; what remains and will remain, in spite of all the opposition of men and devils. The word of promise in the covenant made in heaven is sure to all the seed; everyone of the promises is yea and amen in Christ, and as stable as the heavens, and more so; “heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away”, Mt 24:35; The firmness of God’s word is seen in the upholding and continuing the heavens by the word of his power, by which they were first made; and the certainty of the divine promises is illustrated by the perpetuity of the ordinances of heaven; see Jer 31:35.

— John Gill’s commentary on Ps. 119:89 (accessed at biblecentre.net)

[2] The Editorial committee (presumably editors James B. Williams and Randolph Shaylor), God’s Word in Our Hands: The Bible Preserved for Us (Greenville, SC: Ambassador Emerald International, 2003), pg. 92.

[3] Calvin brings this understanding of the text out in the following quote:

[commenting on vs. 151] The concluding sentence of the verse is to this effect, That God never forsakes nor disappoints his people in their necessity, because he is true to his promises…let us retain a settled belief of the truth, that he does not in vain promise in his word to be the guardian of our welfare….[commenting on vs. 152] This indeed is the chief point of faith, That the word of God is not only distinguished for fidelity and steadfastness for a time, but that it continues unchangeable for ever. Were it otherwise, it could not include within it the hope of eternal salvation. That the assurance of this immutabiliy of God’s word may be rooted in our minds, the inward revelation of the Holy Spirit is indeed necessary; for until God seal within us the certainty of his word, our belief of its certainty will be continually wavering.

— John Calvin’s commentary on Ps. 119:151-152 (accessed at biblecentre.net)

[4] Cited from John Gill’s commentary on Ps. 119:152 (accessed at biblecentre.net).

[5] The following quote adds to this point:

The word translated “founded” (yasad) means “to be established or set up.” While some assume that this is a promise of God’s continual maintenance of His Word on earth, there is nothing in the word yasad that implies a continuaing relationship. It communicates a fixed condition of stability, not a perpetual activity of sustenance….

— The Editorial committee, God’s Word in Our Hands, pg. 94.

[6]   William Combs, “The Preservation of Scripture,” Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 5 (Fall 2000): pg. 18, accessible online at http://www.dbts.edu/journals/2000/combs.pdf.

[7] Willem VanGemeren, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, (edited by Frank Gaebelein), (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1991) vol. 5 (Psalms thru Song of Songs), pg. 760.

[8] Cited from John Calvin’s commentary on Ps. 119:160 (accessed at biblecentre.net).

[9] This reflects my becoming even more sure that Ps. 12 does not connect “them” in vs. 7 to “words” in vs. 6. The possibility that Ps. 12 is a direct yet general teaching that God will preserve His words, which in my post on Ps. 12,  I allowed, is very unlikely. See the comments under that post which  discuss other arguments  leading me to conclude as I have here.

Click   here   for all posts in this series.

“¢ Introduction

“¢ Part 2: The Biblical Argumentation Used for KJV Onlyism

“¢ Part 3: A Positive Presentation of the Scriptural Support for non-KJV Onlyism — Interpretation, Inspiration, Preservation (part 1)

Continuing the series now, I hope in this post to continue letting the Bible speak for itself as to the doctrine of preservation.  

We finished the last post by discussing the phrase “Word of God”. We saw that that term can refer to Scripture, but often in Scripture it does not. Instead it refers to the oral message of the Gospel or the body of revealed truths that make up orthodox Christian doctrine, or even God’s purposes and determinative will. Therefore as we move into a discussion of individual passages, we must remember to take pains to find from the context whether Scripture is in view or not.

Psalm 12:6-7

We must begin our study with the most used passage concerning the preservation of Scripture: Psalm 12:6-7. Since this Scripture is so pivotal, it takes up a whole post’s length of discussion! So I will pick up with other passages in the next post.

Ps. 12:6-7     The words of the LORD are pure words: assilver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.   Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them [Heb. him. i. every one of them.]  from this generation for ever.   — KJV

Ps. 12:6-7     The words of the LORD are pure words, like silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times. You, O LORD, will keep them; you will guard us [or guard him] from this generation forever. — ESV

Just to clarify, the words in brackets are  from footnotes or marginal notes  in the KJV 1611 or ESV respectively.

Now to understand this passage we must see the context. The Psalm starts with a prayer for help. The problem in view is the oppression of the godly at the hands of the wicked. Of specific note is the flattering, lying, and deceitful speech of the wicked (see vs. 3-4). The Lord speaks in verse 5 and promises to act on behalf of the righteous and put him in safety. Then in vs. 6 we are reminded that the words of the Lord are pure, as pure as extremely refined silver.

If we stop here, we are prepared to see “words of the LORD” as referring specifically to God’s promises made in verse 5. Indeed all of God’s promises are sure because when he speaks, his words are pure. Yet  I would  say the “words of the LORD” definitely includes  Scripture here, too.  

Now in verse 7, we are faced with two “them”s in the KJV. What is meant by the first “them”?    The context coupled with a  strong grammatical argument from the Hebrew grammar would make us see the antecedent of them as the “needy” or the “poor” in verse 5 (more on that later). In fact, this is how the many, if not most, conservative Christian Bible commentators have understood this passage (see for instance, John Calvin; Matthew Henry; Adam Clarke; Albert Barnes; John Gill; Keil & Delitsch; John Darby; Jamieson, Faussett, and Brown; and Charles Spurgeon). In fact I only found one commentator which said “them” refers to “words”: John Wesley (interestingly, he did not give an argument for why), although a few of the commentators above mentioned that others viewed it as referring to “words”, especially a Jewish rabbi.

Now understanding the first  “them” to refer to the godly people mentioned in verse 5, the second “them” (which in Hebrew is literally “him” as the marginal or foot-notes in both the KJV and ESV show) could refer to the psalmist himself, or “him” from verse 5. It can also refer as the KJV marginal note indicates, to every one of the “them”. In other words God preserves his people generally and each one specifically. It must be granted that this interpretation makes good sense of the grammar and context of the psalm. In fact it seems to have been a majority view among Christians with regard to the interpretation of this psalm.

Now “them” could also possibly refer to “words of the LORD” from verse 6. And almost all KJV Onlyists would take this position. And I must agree the context could be referring to God “keep”ing his promises in verse 5. So the words of the Lord are kept. And then you could say “every one of them” are preserved as well.    Or if you translate the Hebrew literally here, as the Geneva Bible does, it could refer to God keeping His words or promises  always, and so thus God will preserve “him” referring to the man mentioned in verse 5 or the psalmist. One other thing to bear in mind is that this psalm is Hebrew poetry. The ESV and other modern versions represent how the poetry would look by dividing the psalms in poetic verses or stanzas. In this case verses 5-6 go together and verses 7-8 go together. So the flow of the passage would not necessarily argue in favor of “words of the LORD” being seen as the antecedent of “them”, because “them” is at the beginning of a new stanza.

To save time, I am going to deal with the KJV Only response to the grammar argument in the footnotes to this article, see [1]. But even if we grant the KJV Only position, that verse 7 is to be understood as a Scriptural teaching that God will preserve His words, we still encounter a problem. The passage merely says God will keep and preserve His words. It does not state whether those words will be made available to all believers or not. It does not state if those words would be generally accessible or if they will be all in one manuscript or group of manuscripts. It doesn’t even say specifically that they will be perfectly preserved, although we could assume that the statement “God will preserve ‘the words of the LORD'” would of necessity imply that such preservation would extend to all of those words. And again, “words of the LORD” seems to refer specifically to God’s promises and not necessarily scripture. So at most this passage declares generally that God will preserve His words. It is not an emphatic or clear declaration that God will perfectly preserve them in such a way that all of them will always be available and identifiable to God’s people.

Again, I am sorry that this post was so long, but Ps. 12 is a pivotal piece of the Scriptural passages which bear on preservation. Tomorrow, I will aim to have the next post ready for you all.  

————————————————————–

Footnotes

[1] Here is the KJVO counter argument to the Hebrew grammatical problem in this passage. The “them” is masculine plural in Hebrew, and “words” in verse 6 is feminine plural. The closest masculine plural words are “needy” and “poor” in verse 5. Now Dr. Thomas Strousse, leaning on some research done by Pastor Kent Brandenburg, points out three factors which unite to persuade him to conclude that “them” refers to “words”. First, he declares that the closest antecedent possible would naturally be “words”. Second, he quotes Gesenius to the efect that it is not infrequent for “masculine suffixes (especially in the plural)” to be “used to refer to feminine substantives.” Finally, he argues on the basis  of a pattern they have found elsewhere in Psalms:  feminine plural words referring to Scripture as antecedents of masculine plural pronouns (or verb suffixes). The following examples were cited: Ps. 119:111, 129, 152, and 167.

My response is that other commentators more versed in Hebrew than I have not seen this. Also all the examples are from Ps. 119. It is possible that this is a stylistic characteristic of Ps. 119. Also, does this peculiarity limit itself to only those four occurences in Ps. 119? And are there examples outside of Ps. 12? Also, consider my points under Ps. 12:6-7 above. At this time I am unconvinced of these counter arguments. Unfortunately I am not well versed in Hebrew but if I did some digging maybe I could come up with other grammars which would differ with Gesenius. Perhaps some of my readers could speak up on this point as well.

see: Strousse, “The Permanent Preservation of God’s Words Psalm 12:6-7”, Thou Shalt Keep Them: A Biblical Theology of the Perfect Preservation of Scripture, edited by Kent Brandenburg (El Sobrante, CA: Pillar and Ground Publishing, 2003), pg. 32.

Click   here   for all posts in this series.