Psalm 12 and KJVO misuse

[bibleprotector]

And I highlighted quotes from them showing that you had distorted their arguments.

Yet you conveniently ignore that they, including Calvin, referenced the interpretation existed that "them" = words, and also smudge over the fact that a number made reference to the words in relation to their interpretation that "them" = people. So there was no distortion on my part.

You cannot be a KJV-onlyist without at the same time being dishonest.

That is untrue, or at least, a grossly distorted perception ... and we know who is behind such distortion, even the God who has called some to be vessels of wrath, those who who are made to be abased and examples of destruction. So, go down your implacable line.

 

[subllibrm]

To me, the purification process prophecy postulated petulantly by Petey is painting a picture of Scripture (and God) as powerless, or at least pretty weak.

8)

Don't sit in the front pew when prophet preaches. There are enough "p's" in that post to cause a flash flood!

Preposterous!

Pshaw!!

Poppycock

Piffle!

 

[subllibrm]

Yet you conveniently ignore that they, including Calvin, referenced the interpretation existed that "them" = words ...

Aren't you the one that first made the argument that "them" had no antecedent? Then when pressed you claimed "them" = God. Now because Calvin said them = words you use that as "proof" that it couldn't possibly be that them = people!

Getting you to stand still on a point is like trying to stick a pin into a marble.

 

[FSSL]

If BP cannot understand himself correctly, how can he possibly understand someone else?

 

[Ransom]

Yet you conveniently ignore that they, including Calvin, referenced the interpretation existed that "them" = words

Which he then rightly dismisses.

I could probably dig up the names of people who believe in Nazi flying saucers. Doesn't mean I should take them seriously. You, on the other hand, apparently think that the existence of crackpottery makes the crackpots credible.

 

[Steven Avery]

Then when pressed you claimed "them" = God.

I think you meant "words" here.

 

[subllibrm]

The "object" is in relationship with a verb and a subject. So, the verb would be in the "keep" or "preserve", but the object is the word "them". The word "them" is the object.

Who/what is the antecedent of "them?"
1. Scripture
2. Poor
3. Scripture and Poor

The "object" is in relationship with a verb and a subject. So, the verb would be in the "keep" or "preserve", but the object is the word "them". The word "them" is the object.

Who/what is the antecedent of "them?"
1. Scripture
2. Poor
3. Scripture and Poor

Antecedent in the passage is Thou, i.e. God.

lol... do you even know what an antecedent is?

Why do I even bother?

Try it again... let me try to make it clearer to you.

"shall keep them" and "preserve them"

Who is "them?" Certainly NOT God.

As a discernible thread in the Protestant tradition even indicates, the words are meant, with the promise for the people:

1. The immediate interpretation, when David saw the evil men around him, and yet He trusted in God's tried Word (having the nature of being fully pure), that would establish him for God's greater cause (Covenant)

2. The prophetic interpretation, when in Infidel times evil men surround God's people, yet they trust the KJB (the seventh purification), that would enrich and aid the believer for God's greater cause of latter days evangelism (Gospel)

No wonder you reject a grammatical-historical approach. You are unable/unwilling to discuss what the text says.

And you are avoiding answering the question, which is what relevance does verse 6 have which you deem parenthetical?

You will never be able to tell us what the text means and why it means something if you cannot discern what the text says.

A strange accusation, since we actually have the text, the KJB, and believe it.

Again... Beginning with the grammar of the text, who/what is the antecedent of "them?"

The word "them" is in no way derivative of anything, and therefore does not have an antecedent. The word "them" is a pronoun, meaning that it stands for something previously mentioned in the text. And so, as we interpret the Scripture by actually believing what is stated in the KJB, we understand that God has preserved the words which are power for the believers, since it is those words which therefore have the preserving affect onto the believers.

Considering the convoluted reasoning you displayed throughout the “debate” on antecedents, I am surprised that I only made one mistake in parsing what you pass of as English.  :-\