Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by rakovsky »

Kenneth,
It's an interesting literary issue. Literature can be enjoyable and sublime. People make lots of intelligent discussions about the meaning of poetry and literature of all kinds like that of Shakespeare and Homer, trying to guess what the real meaning is. There are techniques used to read and understand poetry. For me, I like the poetry of the Psalms. The most important thing for me is understanding the Psalm correctly, rather than making it come out to some ideologically preferred meaning. (Christian idea of pierced with nails vs. a nonmessianic nonfatal experience)

If you are working with a Haiku, you know it has a certain order, so that if you are missing a word, you can make certain guesses of how it can be filled in. In Hebrew poetry there was a form called a chiasm, where the beginning and end mirror each other.

Psalm 22 also has a set order. Verse 11 begins "Be not far from me" and Verse 19 begins But be not thou far from me. These verses essentially bookend verses 12 to 18. Each line in 12 to 18 is made of ordely repetitions: HARMFUL ACTION or HARMED STATUS + BODY PART or ENEMY

12. Many bulls have compassed me: strong bulls of Bashan have beset me round. (2X: animals, surrounding action, me)(2 phrases)

13. They gaped upon me with their mouths, as a ravening and a roaring lion. (They, action, me; two action adjectives, enemy simile) (2 phrases)

14. I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels. (harming action, simile; body part harming status; body part, harmed status; body part, harmed status; harmed status, body part)(5 phrases)

15. My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death. (My Bodily nonmaterial power, ruinous action;my body part, ruinous action; ruinous action, bodily matter)(3 phrases)

16. For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: __________ my hands and my feet.
(Enemies, surrounding action, me; Enemies, surrounding action, me; ? my body parts, my body parts)

17. I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me. (action, body parts; action, me)(2 phrases)

18. They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture. (action, enemies; action, clothes) (2 phrases)

Based on the structure of the passage, we are looking at this order:
2 phrases X2; 5 phrases; 3 phrases X2; 2 phrases X2.
Each phrase consists of (1) an ruinous action and (2) a body part or enemy. The only proposed exception to this set pattern is verse 16, where in the last phrase two kinds of body parts are listed, but Masoretic texts diverge on whether an action or enemy should be listed.

The poetic order of the passage definitely requires that a ruinous action should be listed.

What ruinous action does the Psalm writer believe happened to the arms and and legs? (In Hebrew, Arms & hands and Legs & feet are the same words, respectively.) He writes that the arms and legs are out of joint, and that he feels like a worm, which is limbless,not a man.

How did the arms and legs get out of joint? The enemies must have pulled them out of joint.

How did the enemies, whose weapons were hornlike, jawlike, and "the sword", pull them out of joint? They must have stuck pointy objects in the joints and then pulled them out. In other words, they "dug out" the arms and legs using their weapons. "They dig out" in Hebrew is Karu.

What examples are there in ancient times of using pointed weapons to take limbs out of joint? In crucifixion what happens is that pointy weapons (nails) are put into the limbs and the body is hung and the limbs go out of joint. Are there any others?

Did they have crucifixion in David's time? I don't know. They did in Alexander the Great's time, centuries later.

So was the Psalm writer supposed to be some kind of prophet, predicting methods of killing not invented until centuries later? The Tanakh did portray David as a prophet, speaking the divinely inspired words....

This feels kind of tenuous. Do you believe Prophecy is for real, Kenneth?

What we can say confidently is that:
(A) The structure of the Psalm demands in verse 16 (A) a ruinous action worddone to (B) the body parts.
(B) Based on all the texts we have, the action resembled Karu/Kru/Kari/Greek "they dug". Karah in the Torah is digging done with long pointed instruments - staffs and scepters.
(C) The body parts, limbs, are described as out of joint, so the ruinous action must have made the limbs out of joint.
They dug/gouged out my arms and legs using pointed weapons, like staffs dig a hole in the Torah or like my ears were dug in Psalm 40.
Hacking off the limbs at the joint would make the narrator feel like a worm, but that is not comparable to the way a pointy object gouges a hole. Hacking also does not make limbs out of joint, because hacking is not done exactly between the arm and the shoulder.

I do believe the Psalmist is suggesting that the enemies attack like a lion. How does a lion's mouth (v.13) attack? It has pointy teeth that pierce flesh. The lion's teeth pierce and gouge the limbs when it bites.
I think it may not be a coincidence that Ka'Ari and Karu sound and are written similarly. The Psalmist may have chosen the word Karu/Kaari for this reason. This is a figure of speech used in poetry called a double entendre.
A double entendre is a figure of speech or a particular way of wording that is devised to be understood in either of two ways, having a double meaning. Typically one of the meanings is obvious, given the context whereas the other may require more thought.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_entendre
The rabbis had a method of interpreting the scriptures as if a single phrase had multiple meanings, and one writer I cited earlier in the thread claimed that the rabbis gave both meanings to Karu/Kari in this verse. I believe that both meanings are suggested in the text.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com
User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by rakovsky »

Kenneth,
You are asking fine questions, and I think this thread has lots of good information.

The Psalms have other Double Entendres. Psalm 59 says:
6 They return at evening: they make a noise like a dog, and go round about the city.
7 Behold, they belch out with their mouth: swords are in their lips: for who, say they, doth hear?
...
14 And at evening let them return; and let them make a noise like a dog, and go round about the city.
15 Let them wander up and down for meat, and grudge if they be not satisfied.
This reminds me of Psalm 22, where the enemies are like dogs and a lion and its jaw with sharp weapons. In Psalm 22, the enemies do kill the narrator, since he is poured out and they divide up his clothes, like prey drained of blood and like a predatory pack divides up the prey's flesh, respectively.
In Psalm 59, the dog/enemies has swords in its mouth, but it does not attack the city and stays hungry. Put together, the two chapters are like a situation where a warrior gives up his life for his city.

John Kselman writes in his essay Double Entendre in Psalm 59 about the four verses I cited:
the verb [return] is taken in its political sense, as "turn away", ie be disloyal. This political sense is reinforced by the preceding all malicious traitors in v. 6. ...

In the second colon, while the verb can mean howl, bay of dogs, it can also be used of the roar of attacking enemies (Ps 46:7; 83:3; Isaiah 17:12). And on the simile in this colon, two observations can be made. First, the description of enemies as savage predators is a common motif in biblical poetry.... Second, we turn to an extrabiblical source, the Amarna letters. ... dog.... can be part of a self-abasement formula in a subject's self presentation to the king. Far more frequent is the use of dog for an enemy, specifically a traitorous and rebellious vassal. ...

In the third colon, the verb is understood to mean roam or the like: they roam around the city. The verb has this intransitive meaning in several biblical texts. But more commonly the verb is transitive, meaning encircle, surround, besiege.
See his essay here for more:
https://books.google.com/books?id=00ECW ... ms&f=false
The phrase "Kol HaNeshama" comes from the last verse of Psalm 150, the Psalm that many of us know simply as "Hallelu", perhaps the most joyous of all the Psalms. ... The Hebrew spelling of "Kol" is K-L, Kaf-Lamed, meaning "all".

The root of Neshama, N-SH-M, Nun-Shin-Mem, means "breath" or "breathing", thus a "living thing". The simple meaning is: "Every living thing" (will praise God). Some have expanded this to "The breath of every living thing praises God." The translation in our prayer book, which just happens to be named Kol HaNeshama, is "Let every living thing Yah's praises sing".

Another translation would be "all that breathes" or "all of humanity", signaling a universality in Judaism that includes all of humankind as one entity.

If you change the first Hebrew letter, Kaf, to a Kuf, the pronunciation is identical, but the meaning changes to "the voice of" the living being. Many Jewish musicians play on this double entendre, since the rest of the Psalm is a description of the use of many musical instruments in the ancient Temple in Jerusalem, culminating with the human voice (breath) in song and prayer.
http://congkh.org/kolhaneshama-translation.html
So Kol HaNeshama is a homophone containing a double entendre in this Psalm - the the breath of the living being or the voice of the living being, with the Psalm being a voice of singing about the breath of the being.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com
User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by rakovsky »

kennethgreifer wrote:rakovsky,

You don't have a problem with a rare word kaaru spelled with an alef (in only this one quote),
I think it's a weak point, so it's a problem, but:
A. Biblical writings have a practice of adding an alef as an alternate spelling, and
B. Some Masoretic texts don't have the problem, don't spell it with the alef and just say Kru.
but you can't accept the less common, but not rare word for lion, ari, being in a psalm because it has to be used many times to prove that it existed then.
The other issue is not whether it existed, but whether it's part of the author's habit of speaking.
Plenty of English words have alternate spellings that I know of, but my own lexicon generally uses only one of them.
How many times should it have been used in the psalms for you to believe it existed then?
It doesn't need to exist in Psalms to show it existed. Numbers 23-24 shows it reasonably probably did, but someone would want to see it more often in pre-Psalm writings to be totally sure.

Do you have a different standard for kaaru then ari for proof that these words existed at that time?
Numbers 23-24 as we have it today is a piece of evidence that Ha-ari existed in David's time. Is it known that there was a practice in David's time of exchanging yeh for i (like in Aryeh and Ari)?

The LXX saying dug, the two Masoretic texts saying KRU, are two nonChristian pieces of evidence that the word was KRU or that the word KAARU existed at the time of the NH Fragment and meant KRU. A third piece of evidence is the five Masoretic texts saying KAARU, since KRU and not KARI is the only meaning of KRU. This is because it is known that there was a Biblical practice of adding an aleph to words as multiple spellings.





In my opinion, you shouldn't say that that word for lion is never used in the psalms if it is only used once.
I have said it is never used in the Psalms except maybe for the verse in question.
Your word kaaru is only used once with an alef, so you are willing to accept the existence of rare words and spellings when it fits your belief.
The belief in the rare word's existence is based on the belief of the LXX translators, the belief of the minority of Masoretes, and the known practice of adding an aleph.

So it is not necessarily my belief or a Christian belief, but also a nonChristian/pre-Christian Judaic belief.
Like I said in my original posting with my own alternative translation, David is calling himself a lion too,
Where did he compare himself anywhere in the Psalm to anything resembling a lion, other than the verse in question?
so he might have spelled lion differently to show it was a different lion than the one threatening him.
Can you give an example where people do this, either in the Bible or in modern normal speech?

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com
User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by rakovsky »

kennethgreifer wrote:rakovsky,

Also see Judges 14:8 and 9 which have the word lion with the letter hay three times and Judges 14:18 which has it without the letter hay once.
Judges 14:8
Some time later, when he went back to marry her, he turned aside to look at the lion's carcass, and in it he saw a swarm of bees and some honey.
hā-’ar-yêh;

Before sunset on the seventh day the men of the town said to him, "What is sweeter than honey? What is stronger than a lion?" Samson said to them, "If you had not plowed with my heifer, you would not have solved my riddle."
mê-’ă-rî;

Yes.
When Judges wants to say "than a lion", he says "me ari", even though elsewhere he writes ha-aryeh.
It's the only time "me ari" is used in the Bible.

2 Samuel 1:23 says "me aryeh".

Judges is circumstantial evidence from a nonDavidic writing that David could have known of the word "ari" and could have used it in the same chapter as other words saying Aryeh.

I actually do think David knew of this word Ari and was at least thinking of it in Psalm 22.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com
kennethgreifer
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 8:12 am
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by kennethgreifer »

rakovsky,

I don't write "Rakovsky" with a capital "R" because that is how you wrote it, not to insult you. Just in case you think that.

I can't show other quotes in Psalm 22 where he compares himself to a lion. Does everything have to be written twice. Where else does it say his heart is melted, etc.? Not every thing in Psalm 22 is repeated.

At the same time, you posted your latest posting, I put up a posting about your not answering what I said, but it turns out you did. So if my posting goes through, just ignore it.

I have to take time to think about some of the stuff you wrote. I am not sure I have an answer right now or even if I will later.
kennethgreifer
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 8:12 am
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by kennethgreifer »

What is your proof that David knew the verb kaaru with an alef or do you mean that a later scribe added the alef to the word? I don't know what you mean when you say that alef was added to some words. Do you mean the writer of Psalm 22 added it or a later scribe added it?

Kenneth Greifer
User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by rakovsky »

kennethgreifer wrote:rakovsky,

You said that Amos and Ezekiel could have used both spellings of the word "lion" as poetry, so David could have used both spellings of "lion" the same way. The argument about the rareness of the shorter spelling is very weak and is not important to your case.
One of the ways that scholars judge authorship is by looking at vocabulary.
Many scholars think later chapters of Isaiah were written by a different author.
So vocabulary is an important part of text criticism and judging what authors meant or wrote.
Writing "ari" is known to exist in Amos and Ezekiel, but other than the place in question in Psalms, it's not known as part of David's normal usage.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com
User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by rakovsky »

kennethgreifer wrote:rakovsky,

I forgot to answer what you asked about the some Masoretic manuscripts that have the vav at the end like it was a verb. I think that the quote has been misunderstood for thousands of years, and some people thought it was a verb because they can't understand it as "like a lion." That does not mean they were right. I think the quote can make sense as "like a lion" in my alternative translation and explanation. That is my opinion. For thousands of years, people have had different opinions.
Well, in this case we are not just talking about non-Jewish people with Christian biases, or even about random Jewish people, but about authoritative Jewish sources, the Jewish translators of the LXX and the rabbinical nonChristian (or maybe even antiChristian) Masoretes.

And this is not just any writing, but the Psalms, a centerpiece of Judaism, next to the Torah. For those two thousand years, synagogues would gather together and say the Psalms together. They spent their whole lives reading, discussing, and repeating this passage. I read that if the scribes got even a letter wrong, they had to tear the scroll out and start all over. They were very scrupulous.

This doesn't mean they couldn't actually get the interpretations wrong, I just think it was extremely rare for them to get the words themselves wrong.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com
User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by rakovsky »

Also, let me clarify:
I am not saying that the original version said Kaaru.

The original version could have said (A) KRU like the two masoretic copies, or (B) Kaaru like 5 + the DSS, and either way it was interpreted to mean Gouge like the LXX understood it.

The other alternative is Ka'ari, but the poetic arrangement of the Psalm (and not just the grammar) does demand reading the word in question as a ruinous verb word about harm to the body parts.

I think scholars should make a note of the variant text readings, like they usually do.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com
User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by rakovsky »

kennethgreifer wrote:rakovsky,

I don't write "Rakovsky" with a capital "R" because that is how you wrote it, not to insult you. Just in case you think that.

I can't show other quotes in Psalm 22 where he compares himself to a lion. Does everything have to be written twice. Where else does it say his heart is melted, etc.? Not every thing in Psalm 22 is repeated.
I understood your original claim to be that David compares his arms and legs in particular to a lion, rather than himself to a lion.
I don't write "Rakovsky" with a capital "R" because that is how you wrote it, not to insult you. Just in case you think that.
You have been polite in your thread to me.
Thank you.

Normally in a discussion situation about serious scholarship people are expected to be respectful like you have been, and there would be no need to thank you. When people make low class insults they risk hurting their own case.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com
Post Reply