Where is Dr. Ward’s Ph.D. level response to Psalm 12:6-7?
Published by Dr. Peter Van Kleeck, Sr.
Dr. Peter William Van Kleeck, Sr. : B.A., Grand Rapids Baptist College, 1986; M.A.R., Westminster Theological Seminary, 1990; Th.M., Calvin Theological Seminary, 1998; D. Min, Bob Jones University, 2013. Dr. Van Kleeck was formerly the Director of the Institute for Biblical Textual Studies, Grand Rapids, MI, (1990-1994) lecturing, researching and writing in the defense of the Masoretic Hebrew text, Greek Received Text and King James Bible. His published works include, "Fundamentalism’s Folly?: A Bible Version Debate Case Study" (Grand Rapids: Institute for Biblical Textual Studies, 1998); “We have seen the future and we are not in it,” Trinity Review, (Mar. 99); “Andrew Willet (1562-1621: Reformed Interpretation of Scripture,” The Banner of Truth, (Mar. 99); "A Primer for the Public Preaching of the Song of Songs" (Outskirts Press, 2015). Dr. Van Kleeck is the pastor of the Providence Baptist Church in Manassas, VA where he has ministered for the past twenty-one years. He is married to his wife of 43 years, Annette, and has three married sons, one daughter and eighteen grandchildren. View more posts
Standard Sacred Text.com 
Have you seen this article he published in 2024? It’s available on his website.
“Does Psalm 12:6–7 Promise Perfect Manuscript Copies of the Bible? An Exegetical Examination and Multigenerational Interpretive Plebiscite,” Canadian-American Theological Review 13:1, 2024, pp. 29–53.
I haven’t read the whole thing but it looks like a response to you and an analysis of Psalm 12:6-7. He also recently posted a YouTube video specifically on Psalm 12:6-7.
LikeLike
HiES, I saw the posting of the article and the FaceBook responses from men I know. It appears, without me looking, that there is nothing new to glean from Ward’s discussion. Indeed, I made the case in 1997 at Calvin Theological Seminary for a divided interpretation. That fact is not the issue. That only one rendering is correct is the point and Ward has unsurprisingly taken the post-critical interpretation. Even pre-critical scholarship though in part agreeing with him on that passage would disagree on his critical handling of the Word of God. If the evidence will not cushion unwarranted dogmatism then study and research deteriorates into a feckless endeavor. Blessings!
LikeLiked by 1 person