The Bible Controversy 1


This is a topic that has gotten some controversy. Amazingly, there’s a lot of very good apologists who are standing on the WRONG side of the issue. I say amazingly, because the position is indefensible. It’s like, “King David, the Philistine Army is coming at you. They’ve got plastic swords and shields. You’ve got your regular weapons and armor. Good luck.”

King David really only has one thing to worry about – getting overwhelmed by sheer numbers. It’s kind of like the 300 spartans. They had superior weapons, armor, and tactics. The Persians had sheer, overwhelming numbers. The Persians won eventually, but at a terrible cost.

I’m going to approach this at right angles sometimes, because there are some questions not being asked. And it blows my mind. I promise you’ll never look the same way at John Ankerberg again. Unfortunately, you’re going to percieve some other apologists I like very much in a negative light, so I’d like to come out and say – do not think bad of Charlie Campbell. I think he’s never seen the full information, just merely the position of his mentor Norman Geisler, and so he adopted it as a “Let’s just use this to answer the question, and get rid of the issue so I can get back to answering cults!”

That’s a shame. It means Charlie probably has never really examined the issue, which I promise is the case for all of them except James White.

Let me say this about James White. Everyone says he’s a master class debater. he will browbeat you, bully you, and shout at you. Trust me, I’ve seen videos of him doing it. So who does James White fear?

Will Kinney.

If Will Kinney calls James White’s radio show, then James first makes pleasantries (“How are you?”), reluctantly gets in the debate, then suddenly needs a commercial break. I’ve seen that happen a few times. And Kinney keeps hammering on the one issue James White will NEVER answer. He spotted a chink in the armor, and he hammers at it relentlessly.

“Do you believe the Bible is inspired, and inerrant? Which one?”

Here’s the point I’ll return to over and over again. The Multiple Version Only position is untenable.

Because I’m going to raise some VERY uncomfortable questions, and I’m going to bring up a LOT of proofs. And some of these proofs, there simply is no rebuttal to.

If anyone comes on and leaves challenging comments on this one, I’m going to insist they answer the points I raise. Look out below…

5,280 versus 47. That’s what this boils down to.

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. Psalm 12:6-7 (KJV)

Let’s look at this Psalm, because it sums up the issue very well. And it’s one of the first ones challenged by the critics. Why?

THey know that if you accept THIS TRANSLATION of THIS VERSE, you HAVE TO ACCEPT that God would PRESERVE THE BIBLE.

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. Psalm 12:1-8 (KJV)

אמרות יהוה אמרות טהרות כסף צרוף בעליל לארץ מזקק שׁבעתים

Amrot ()the words) Adonai (The Lord) Amrot – This is a Hebrew emphasis by repitition. It’s well recognized Biblical rule of interpretation. The words of the LORD, the words… Tahorot (pure) Kesseph (silver) Tsuruf (refined, purified) B’aliyl (crucible, furnace) L’arretz (earth) Mizqaq (purified) shevatim (sevens).

Okay, no problem there. It’s verse seven everyone flips out over.

אתה־יהוה תשׁמרם תצרנו מן־הדור זו לעולם׃

Ata (thou) Adonai (the Lord) T’shmerem (shall keep, guard) khazanu (preserve) min-hador (this generation) zu l’olam (for ever.)

There you go. A word for word translation from the Hebrew Masoretic Ben Chayim text.

The problem is, and we’ll get to WHY later, the critics, the MVO’s do not use the Hebrew texts that the Jews have used, safeguarded and preserved for millennia. Why? We’ll get to that. Because it comes down to the crux of the matter. Keep asking, “Why?” because it’s crucial to understanding the anger and vehemence the critics are using.

So, I’ve demonstrated that the correct rendering of the verses. The King James Version correctly translates Psalm 12:6-7.

The Critics do not literally believe Psalm 12:6-7.

Why?

Keep asking that question. If I answer “Why” right now, there’s going to be some shock. I want to prove the casse conclusively to you before I get into the answer. I want no doubt in your mind.

Psa 12:6-7 ASV

(6) The words of Jehovah are pure words; As silver tried in a furnace on the earth, Purified seven times.

(7) Thou wilt keep them, O Jehovah, Thou wilt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Notice the RV translates this correctly as well. Startling, because this version is the grandaddy of the modern versions. You’re going to learn a lot about it soon.

Psa 12:6-7 RV

(6) The words of the LORD are pure words; as silver tried in a furnace on the earth, purified seven times.

(7) Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Hmmm…

Psa 12:6-7 Webster

(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.

Really.

Psa 12:6-7 YLT

(6) Sayings of Jehovah are pure sayings; Silver tried in a furnace of earth refined sevenfold.

(7) Thou, O Jehovah, dost preserve them, Thou keepest us from this generation to the age.

Huh???

The emphasis of T’shmerem is wrongly applied here. It wasn’t until Young’s that suddenly we have an issue here. Young turns the literal reading (very ironic, considering the name of Young’s translation was, “Young’s Literal Translation”!) against itself. Grammatically, the Keep and Preserve both agree – which means the thing being kept is also being preserved. Not preserved from. That’s just… not in the text.

So literally, the modern versions do not take their translation from the translation of the texts used by the Jewish people. They take their translation from a text the Jewish people don’t use, and from the tradtition started by Young.

Min-H’olam always means “From now until eternity.” it’s that way in the Bible, in Jewish prayerbooks (I know – I used to read from mine three times a day – how many times has these Bible translators read their Jewish prayerbooks?Oh, they didn’t, did they?). So “T’shmerem Min- H’aolamim” means “Preserved from now until forever/eternity”.

Case Settled.

Psa 12:6-7 RSV

(6) The promises of the LORD are promises that are pure, silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times.

(7) Do thou, O LORD, protect us, guard us ever from this generation.

This translation makes absolutely no sense. It’s not what the Hebrew text says at all. It’s attempting to force the “Tshmerem” to fit verse 8. Yet the adverb “Tshmerem is clearly referring to a subject not in verse seven. We don’t adverbs to describe a noun in a sentence we haven’t spoken yet.

You don’t do that in Hebrew yet. Adverbs describe nouns we’ve already named.

“That’s a beautiful.”

“house.”

We don’t talk like that. Nobody does.

so verse 7 is describing what? Verse 6. bottom line. There’s noi arguing with this.

This (Young’s and the RSV) can only be described as Scripture Twisting. The modern translations make verse 6 a throwaway verse. In the modern translations, its as if verse 6 can just be removed. It turns Psalm 12 into another psalm about the wicked. But verse 6 is there. And verse 7 refers to it, not to verses 2-4 or verse 8. Verse 6 exists, and verse 7 refers to protecting SOMETHING forever. What? The Children of men? or the words of the Lord?

To twist verse seven to refer to verses 2-4 which we’ve already dealt with, and now moved onto the word of the LORD, is most definitely Scripture twisting.

Why? Why would they pervert the obvious meaning of verse 7?

Keep asking that. You’ll find out why soon.

Advertisements

Author: philipdean2013

Seminary graduate with a Ba. in Theology/Pastoral Studies, Happily married, Independent Baptist. I can't keep silent about what I see going on in Christianity any longer! Apostasy reigns around us, churches are sliding into worldiness, a whitewashed Gospel is preached everywhere... "Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein. Jeremiah 6:16 (KJV) So, I'm speaking out. ...Why aren't you???

1 thought on “The Bible Controversy 1”

Comments are closed.