An Analysis of the Foundation for Textual Preservation in Scripture
Introduction
Psalm 12:6-7 has become central in discussions on the doctrine of providential preservation, see Mark Ward’s recent video in which he fumbles the ball, especially within the debate surrounding various Bible translations. Some interpreters, including Thomas Ross and Kent Brandenburg, see these verses as affirming God’s commitment to preserving His Word. For them, Psalm 12 emphasizes a promise that God’s words are pure and eternally preserved, though they reject being labeled as “KJV-onlyists.” This article explores the interpretation of Psalm 12:6-7, its linguistic complexities, and historical interpretations by the Reformers and John Gill who was the greatest Hebraist to ever live. The ultimate goal is to address how the doctrine of preservation ties directly to sanctification as illustrated in John 17:17, underscoring the theological importance of understanding Psalm 12 in the context of God’s unwavering preservation of His Word and, consequently, His people.
Introduction to Psalm 12:6-7 and Interpretive Implications
Psalm 12:6-7 in the KJV reads:
“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.”
Advocates of providential preservation interpret this passage as a promise from God to safeguard His Word through all generations. The KJV translation of verse 7—“Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever”—is often viewed as affirming that God’s words, as “pure words” refined like silver, are unalterable and enduring. This interpretation hinges on understanding “them” in verse 7 as referring to the “words” of the Lord in verse 6, thus promoting the view that God has ensured that His words remain pure and accessible to every generation.
Key Figures and Their Use of Psalm 12
While commonly mischaracterized as “KJV-onlyists” by some critics, figures such as Thomas Ross and Kent Brandenburg have engaged with Psalm 12:6-7 to support a doctrine of providential preservation, focusing on the text’s assurance of the preservation of God’s Word rather than promoting any single translation as the only legitimate version. They interpret the psalm as indicating that God’s words are divinely preserved, providing a reliable foundation for believers across generations.
For Ross and Brandenburg, Psalm 12 serves as a basis for a commitment to the doctrine of preservation in a broader sense, transcending any one translation or version. Their position is centered on the enduring purity of God’s Word and the belief that Scripture, in its essence and message, remains preserved in accessible forms to every generation. This approach underscores the conviction that believers can trust the continuity and accuracy of God’s Word, though they diverge from any assertion that exclusively elevates the KJV above all other translations.
Linguistic and Textual Analysis of Psalm 12: Gender Discordance and Pronoun Ambiguity
The Hebrew text of Psalm 12 presents notable linguistic challenges, especially regarding gender discordance in the pronouns. In Hebrew, pronouns have grammatical gender, with the term “words” (דְּבָרִים) in verse 6 being feminine, while the pronouns in verse 7 are masculine. This has led some scholars to argue that the masculine pronouns in verse 7 refer more naturally to “the poor and needy” from earlier verses, rather than “words.”
However, some proponents of providential preservation suggest that gender discordance is a poetic technique frequently employed in Hebrew. They argue that masculine pronouns are used here to emphasize the authority and enduring strength of God’s Word. In this view, the psalmist is purposefully assigning masculine pronouns to “words” as a reflection of their divine power and permanence, thus supporting the interpretation that “them” in verse 7 refers to the words of God.
Translation Variations and Interpretive Divergence
Various translations handle Psalm 12:7 differently, which has led to interpretive divergence:
- NIV and ESV: These translations interpret “them” as referring to “the righteous” or “the needy,” emphasizing God’s protective promise over His people.
- KJV: The KJV translation, however, interprets “them” as referring directly to the “words” of the Lord, aligning with the doctrine of textual preservation.
Proponents of the KJV’s rendering argue that this interpretation best captures the psalm’s emphasis on the purity of God’s words and His promise to preserve them. They believe that other translations diminish the implications of Psalm 12 by redirecting the promise of preservation away from God’s words themselves. For these interpreters, the KJV offers a reading that upholds the doctrine of preservation and affirms the unaltered and accessible quality of God’s words across generations.
Reformers’ Interpretations of Psalm 12:6-7
The interpretations of prominent Reformers such as Martin Luther, John Calvin, Matthew Henry, and John Gill provide historical insight into how Psalm 12:6-7 has been understood within the Christian tradition.
- Martin Luther: Luther viewed Psalm 12 as underscoring the reliability of God’s promises in times of moral decay. He interpreted the “words” of the Lord as providing assurance and spiritual sustenance for the faithful, emphasizing their purity and divine reliability. Luther’s interpretation did not specifically address a doctrine of textual preservation but rather highlighted the moral and spiritual strength derived from God’s promises.
- John Calvin: Calvin interpreted God’s words in Psalm 12 as “purified silver,” symbolizing their flawless and dependable nature. He viewed the psalm as a reassurance of God’s faithfulness to protect His people amid societal corruption. Calvin’s interpretation focused on the reliability of God’s promises to protect His people rather than asserting a doctrine of word-for-word preservation.
- Matthew Henry: Henry’s interpretation aligned closely with Calvin’s, contrasting human deceitfulness with divine truthfulness. He saw God’s words as a refuge for believers, spiritually supporting them in difficult times. For Henry, the psalm emphasized God’s enduring commitment to His people and His promises, rather than a specific promise of textual preservation.
- John Gill: Gill’s exposition on Psalm 12:6-7 emphasized the purity and enduring quality of God’s words. He understood the phrase “words of the Lord” as an expression of the reliability and eternal nature of divine promises. Gill interpreted verse 7 as a divine commitment to preserve God’s people, linking it to God’s unchanging Word. Though he did not specify a doctrine of textual preservation, Gill’s interpretation closely resonates with the belief that God’s words, in their purity, continue to stand through all generations, supporting the faithful.
Together, these Reformers reflect a consensus on the purity and dependability of God’s words, primarily focusing on their spiritual power and role in the lives of believers. However, they do not explicitly articulate a doctrine of textual preservation as understood by later proponents.
Theological Necessity of Preservation for Sanctification
One of the strongest theological arguments for textual preservation is rooted in the doctrine of sanctification as described in John 17:17: “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.” This statement by Jesus underscores the integral role of God’s Word in the sanctification and preservation of believers. Here, the “truth” of God’s Word is the means by which His people are set apart, sustained, and grown in holiness.
If God’s Word is the truth that sanctifies His people, then the preservation of this Word becomes essential to the spiritual growth and ultimate preservation of believers. Without a preserved Word, the sanctifying truth would be unavailable or unreliable, rendering the promise of sanctification void. This doctrinal connection suggests that denying the preservation of Scripture ultimately undermines God’s commitment to preserve His people since the two are intrinsically linked.
To deny that Psalm 12:6-7 relates to the preservation of Scripture implies that the truth by which believers are sanctified may not be available to every generation. This interpretation would question God’s faithfulness in providing His Word consistently and completely, which in turn would suggest a lack of commitment to sanctify His people. Thus, the doctrine of providential preservation is essential for maintaining the promise of sanctification and the assurance that God’s people are kept by His Word.
Historical Interpretations and the “Referendum” on Psalm 12
A survey of historical interpretations reveals that early church figures and many Reformers largely understood Psalm 12 as a declaration of God’s faithfulness to protect His people. Figures like Augustine, Luther, and Calvin interpreted Psalm 12:6-7 as affirming the protection and reliability of God’s promises but did not view it as a doctrinal basis for textual preservation. They perceived the psalm as emphasizing the unwavering truthfulness of God’s words and His commitment to safeguard the righteous.
However, proponents of the providential preservation doctrine argue that Psalm 12:6-7 provides an enduring foundation for the preservation of Scripture. They believe that the passage promises both the stability of God’s words and the assurance that His people can rely on these words without alteration through all generations. This perspective asserts that the language of the psalm highlights the lasting purity of God’s Word as a means of preserving His people, in contrast to modern interpretations that may focus solely on protecting the faithful.
Conclusion on Psalm 12 and Preservation
In conclusion, Psalm 12:6-7, when interpreted as a statement on the preservation of Scripture, emphasizes that God’s Word remains unaltered and accessible across generations. Historical interpretations by the Reformers centered more on the reliability and spiritual sustenance provided by God’s promises than on a literal doctrine of textual preservation. However, the doctrine of preservation remains crucial to understanding how God sustains and sanctifies His people, as underscored by John 17:17.
To deny that Psalm 12:6-7 includes an assurance of textual preservation would challenge the basis for believers’ sanctification, as the truth that sanctifies must be reliably available across generations. Thus, the doctrine of preservation is essential for maintaining the integrity of God’s commitment to His people, ensuring that His Word, in its purity, continues to sanctify and sustain them through time.
