Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
kennethgreifer
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 8:12 am
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by kennethgreifer » Sun Jan 01, 2017 8:50 am

rakovsky,

My understanding is that you believe that David knew about the word "ari" as lion, but you want proof that he would have been using it too. Ezekiel only has the word once, but you seem to believe that he used the word. I assume that you believe that David read the word in the Bible in Numbers 23 and 24, so there is no question that he knew it, just if he actually used it. When I showed you 1 Samuel 17 with three quotes by David using the word, you said it might not be accurate. I think you have made it very difficult to prove that he would use that word. I am not sure how many times Judges has the word ari, but you accept that it was used by that writer.

I can't argue about something impossible to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt when you only seem to doubt it in Psalms, but not everywhere else the word is used.

Kenneth Greifer

iskander
Posts: 1405
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by iskander » Sun Jan 01, 2017 9:19 am

rakovsky wrote:
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.
rakovsky,
Interpreting religious texts creatively is the sacred duty of every faithful : the word of God/Hashem/ Allah /Brahma / etc is eternal and immutable and yet these words are to guide a changing humanity for many thousands of years. Those eternal and fixed words of the one God ; those words in primitive languages written down by primitive people are declared to have consequences for every human in the never-ending life after death!!! .

If there is any truth in any of those words, then God gave only a sketch to be interpreted and reinterpreted by every generation and by every man in liberty under the law of the land: the duty to improve on the blueprint suggested by each one of the many religions that have been known to mankind.
The torah has been interpreted by the Hashemite faithful in an abusive and grotesque manner. There is nothing wrong with Christians finding a new interpretation to the same text, which includes also idiosyncratic translations into different languages.
I still don't understand why " like a lion " is of any importance to Christians.
As Paul said :Galatians 4 : 4-7
4 But when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, 5in order to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as children. 6And because you are children, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our* hearts, crying, ‘Abba!* Father!’ 7So you are no longer a slave but a child, and if a child then also an heir, through God.*
http://bible.oremus.org/?passage=Galatians+4

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 859
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by rakovsky » Sun Jan 01, 2017 10:06 am

kennethgreifer wrote: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
See my message two places above.
David could have written KRU like two Masoretic texts say and then later due to Aramaic influence some other texts added an A per the known practice.
Or David could have written Kaaru adding A as per the known Hebrew practice of adding vowels. Doing this he could have been making a double entendre (Like a lion and they gouged). It's quite interesting that in Hebrew in Judaism the letters are sometimes even drawn in aberrational ways, as if they have a hidden meaning.

From my website:
Sometimes ancient Hebrew an aleph to words as an alternate spelling. Hebrew professor James Price gives examples from Hebrew of other word variants with an added “aleph” (which he writes as ‘ instead of ‘a): "bo'r, bor (pit, cistern) from the verb bur (dig); da'g, dag (fish) from the verb dug (fish for); la't, lat (secrecy) from the verb lut (be secret); m'um, mum (blemish); n'od, nod (skin); q'am, qam (he arose); ra'sh, rash (poor) from the verb rush (be poor);" (James Price, Response to a Skeptic, http://www.messianicart.com/chazak/yesh ... keptic.htm)

The scholars Keil and Delitzsch also note that Zechariah 14:10 and Daniel 7:16 have added alephs in the words ra’ama and ka’amaiya. (Keil and Delitzsch, "Commentary on the Old Testament", Volume 5, page 319).

”The long-standing consensus has been that ka'aru is the Hasmonean-era spelling of the Hebrew word karu (כרו), which means "they have dug." At this time in history, spelling was not standardized, and Hebrew was heavily influenced by its sister language Aramaic, which could introduce the letter aleph.” (Ruben Barrett, Bible Q&A: Psalm 22, http://www.hadavar.net/articles/45-bibl ... tions.html).
I don't want to make too big an issue out of the letter drawing issue and cryptic meanings - I don't see it as essential, but it's true that in Hebrew the letters are considered to have special cryptic meanings.

In David's time, the neighboring Egyptian empire used a pictoral based alphabet, and so did Israel, called Paleo-Hebrew. I think since then Israel switched to the "Assyrian" script for Hebrew, which we have today. In Egyptian, for example, each letter referred to a word. NTR (meaning God or divinity) spelled out would be Water + Bread + Mouth (it looked a bit like w ^ o ). A common opinion is that NTR also refers to the essential animating life force. It's a personal guess that water and bread and mouth could be referring to eating to live.

To give you an example of what I am talking about with Hebrew, note the hooks on the Shin Ш on the Torah.
When we look at words in the Torah scroll, we notice unusual decorations on the letters.

Image

What are they? Why are they there? A very few seconds’ thought tells us that they are not vowels or cantillation, the more usual “decorations” of Hebrew letters.

...
Image
Three tagin per hey, see? This doesn’t happen on all heys, nor yet on all instances of YHVH–just on certain ones. Why?

One scholar explains: There are tagin on the Name to indicate that this is the crowned, distinguished Name, the superior, explicit Name.
http://hasoferet.com/cbh/2012/04/01/tag ... the-torah/

The Chabad website explains:
The letter shin actually has four different forms. There’s a shin with a dot above the right column,a shin with a dot above the left column, a shin with four columns instead of three, and finally a silent shin. When the dot is on the right, the shin emphasizes Chessed, the concept of kindness. When the dot is on the left, the shin (pronounced “sin”) emphasizes the aspect of judgment or severity. These two forms are illustrated by the words shaar and sei’ar. The shin of the word shaar (gate) has its point on the right, שׁער,as a gate allows people to pass in and out, an aspect of openness or chessed. This shin is full of energy, potential and benevolence.

If we switch the shin’s dot to the left side, which is Gevurah (i.e., contraction), the resulting word is sei’ar, שׂער,or hair. Hair has the properties of life, but a life-force that is tremendously diminished or weak. One can pull out or cut a strand of hair and not feel any pain, unlike when one cuts a finger or other part of the body. A hair is rooted in a follicle, a concentrated, restricted opening. We thus say that the shin with a point on the left side represents severity and constraint.

The shin with four columns is found on the tefillin that is worn on the head. One side of the head tefillin has a shin with three lines and the other has one with four lines. In his personal notes7 the Rebbe offers two reasons for this. First, the four-lined shin is the shin of the Luchos, the Tablets of the Ten Commandments. The four lines represent the awesomeness and holiness of the engraving of G‑d’s word into physical stone. To visualize this, imagine the three lines of the shin etched into stone. If you focus on the stone that remains around the shin, there will be four columns. These are the four lines of this form of the shin. They are the wake, the reflected light of the Luchos.
Here is a page about the four pronged aberrational Shin used in Tefillim:
http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Gramma ... /shin.html

This happens with WAW too sometimes. In Numbers 25:12, the Waw is intentionally written as broken. (http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Gramma ... v/vav.html)

Turning to the letters in Psalm 22, an Interesting thing is that the letter Yod refers to the hand in Hebrew, and Waw refers to a nail or hook.
Waw
Sixth letter of the Hebrew alphabet. The name possibly means "nail" or "hook," and the shape of the letter in the Phenician alphabet bears some resemblance to a hook.
Jewish Encyclopedia, http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14651-vav
So if we are sure that it was Ka Aru, then is this a reference to a lion with a nail/hook(waw) attacking the hands?

The writer below sees such a connection in the U of Karu:
https://onedaringjew.wordpress.com/2010 ... to-my-hand

He brings up an interesting issue. In Hebrew, the H was meant to refer to "behold" or "look".
The original pictograph for this letter is Image, a man standing with his arms raised up. The Modern Hebrew, and original name for this letter, is hey, a Hebrew word meaning "behold," as when looking at a great sight. This word can also mean "breath" or "sigh," as one does when looking at a great sight. The meaning of the letter is behold Image, look, breath, sigh, reveal and revelation from the idea of revealing a great sight by pointing it out.
http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/alphabet_letters_hey.html
So the inner meaning of the Hebrew letters in the Tetragrammaton Y H W H, drawn with a man holding up his arms, is:
THE ARM _ BEHOLD _ THE NAIL _ BEHOLD

Image

That sounds kind of weird, doesn't it? Where does the Bible ever say God is pierced?

Zechariah 12 comes to mind as a possibility:
8 In that day shall the Lord defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them.

9 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
My normal assumption would be that it is not talking about the inhabitants of Jerusalem looking at a pierced God.
Back in Genesis, after God visited Abraham in the form of three beings, people in Sodom and Gomorrah tried to abuse two of those beings of God staying there, but Lot protected them. So I guess within the Biblical mindset it's rationally conceivable. But it would be very unusual.
Going strictly by the Grammar in Zech 12, we have:
They[inhabitants of jerusalem] shall look Hibbitu
upon me e lay
, et
whom asher
they have pierced daqaru
and they shall mourn sapadu
for him/them [3rd person pronoun] a law


I liked this listing of all times when "Et Asher" is used in the Tanakh:
http://williamwelty.com/docs_et-asher.htm
The writer persuasively discusses opposes claims, the JPS translation "upon me, because of those whom they thrust through", and the pre-Christian LXX translation of "upon me, the man whom they pierced".
Last edited by rakovsky on Sun Jan 01, 2017 10:34 am, edited 3 times in total.

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

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 859
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by rakovsky » Sun Jan 01, 2017 10:09 am

kennethgreifer wrote:rakovsky,

My understanding is that you believe that David knew about the word "ari" as lion, but you want proof that he would have been using it too. Ezekiel only has the word once, but you seem to believe that he used the word. I assume that you believe that David read the word in the Bible in Numbers 23 and 24, so there is no question that he knew it, just if he actually used it. When I showed you 1 Samuel 17 with three quotes by David using the word, you said it might not be accurate. I think you have made it very difficult to prove that he would use that word. I am not sure how many times Judges has the word ari, but you accept that it was used by that writer.

I can't argue about something impossible to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt when you only seem to doubt it in Psalms, but not everywhere else the word is used.
I am not aware of any divergences in either the LXX or Masoretic texts from Ari in those other places you mentioned, but there is for both in Psalms 22, which puts the word in doubt based on the available texts.

When David's known vocabulary and that of 150+ Psalms is to use Aryeh, Ka'aryeh, Karah, and Karu, but never Ari or Ka'Ari (except maybe the place in question) you are right that it makes it difficult to prove that he or the Psalms would use the word Ari or Ka'ari.

#1 Proof I see for Ka'ari is that most (but not all) post-Christian (anti-Christian?) Masoretic copies say Ka'ari
#2 Proof is that the text compares the enemies and their weapons to a lion and its jaws.

I think David is suggesting to the reader that the enemies attacked and gouged/dug the limbs like a lion's jaws.

How could most (anti-Christian?) Masoretic copies be wrong?
One possibility is changing the text due to bias.
If you check the DSS and LXX, it turns out the Masoretes censored the word "Light" out of Isaiah 53, a removal that makes the chapter less of a resurrection/divine life passage.

Joe Wallack thinks the text should not say KARU and it's "worse than naughty" for people like me to say it's there.
If you give a community of scribes with this censoring mentality the responsibility to pass down this text in Hebrew, I would not trust the way that they copied disputed verses.

I believe the right thing is for everyone to openly recognize and make note of the divergence in the manuscripts for their readership.
Last edited by rakovsky on Sun Jan 01, 2017 10:29 am, edited 3 times in total.

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

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 859
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by rakovsky » Sun Jan 01, 2017 10:12 am

iskander wrote:I still don't understand why " like a lion " is of any importance to Christians.
I think the text implies both meanings (like a lion and gouged), and that Christians have used both meanings (nails gouged Jesus' arms like a lion's jaws)

Thanks for writing.

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

iskander
Posts: 1405
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by iskander » Sun Jan 01, 2017 10:56 am

rakovsky wrote:
iskander wrote:I still don't understand why " like a lion " is of any importance to Christians.
I think the text implies both meanings (like a lion and gouged), and that Christians have used both meanings (nails gouged Jesus' arms like a lion's jaws)

Thanks for writing.
Thank you for responding.
It is not important to my Christian friends. It seems that some others want to understand God as actors reading from a script.
Thanks again for your attention. Have fun. :)

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 859
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by rakovsky » Sun Jan 01, 2017 1:36 pm

iskander wrote: Thank you for responding.
It is not important to my Christian friends. It seems that some others want to understand God as actors reading from a script.
Thanks again for your attention. Have fun. :)
Yes, sometimes these discussions are fun for me, so long as people are respectful. Thanks for being nice.

It is interesting that some Muslims are more faithful and supportive of some major Christian teachings than some educated Christians, like the virgin birth. Check out Surah 3:45-47 in the Quran:
Behold! the angels said: "O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah;

"He shall speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. And he shall be (of the company) of the righteous."

She said: "O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?" He said: "Even so: Allah createth what He willeth: When He hath decreed a plan, He but saith to it, 'Be,' and it is!

See:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/s ... _birth.htm

OR:
https://quran.com/3
I understand that Christianity and Islam teach Jesus was born of a virgin, and that as Surah 3 says, God can do anything, but it's the kind of thing that is hard for me to think that this occurred in the "real world", so to speak.

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

iskander
Posts: 1405
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by iskander » Sun Jan 01, 2017 2:27 pm

rakovsky wrote:
iskander wrote: Thank you for responding.
It is not important to my Christian friends. It seems that some others want to understand God as actors reading from a script.
Thanks again for your attention. Have fun. :)
Yes, sometimes these discussions are fun for me, so long as people are respectful. Thanks for being nice.

It is interesting that some Muslims are more faithful and supportive of some major Christian teachings than some educated Christians, like the virgin birth. Check out Surah 3:45-47 in the Quran:
Behold! the angels said: "O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah;

"He shall speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. And he shall be (of the company) of the righteous."

She said: "O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?" He said: "Even so: Allah createth what He willeth: When He hath decreed a plan, He but saith to it, 'Be,' and it is!

See:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/s ... _birth.htm

OR:
https://quran.com/3
I understand that Christianity and Islam teach Jesus was born of a virgin, and that as Surah 3 says, God can do anything, but it's the kind of thing that is hard for me to think that this occurred in the "real world", so to speak.
Yes Muslims are very nice people , Muslim charity I suppose.Hashemite fanatics also find Muslims more attractive than the idol worshipping Christians and they can't stand the Manzer idol son of a bitch. Catholics also prefer Muslims because they respect the eternal virginity-- Mary has no husband in Islam-- of Mary , while the Reformed churches say Mary was a virgin when she conceived Jesus , but a loving wife thereafter

The sceptic gurus use foul aggressive language to bully the stupid sceptics into submission: say , Jesus had no siblings. The gurus keep regurgitating their kurios litany like Catholics recite the rosary.


But God behaving like actors reading from a script ???

kennethgreifer
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 8:12 am
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by kennethgreifer » Sun Jan 01, 2017 2:58 pm

rakovsky,

The Masoretic scholars did not change Zechariah 12:10 and many other proof quotes Christians use. Isaiah 53 "light" is not as important as Zechariah 12:10 and some other proof quotes.

The oldest copies of the LXX, when were they written? I mean the actual dates of those manuscripts that they have.

Kenneth Greifer

kennethgreifer
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 8:12 am
Contact:

Re: Psalm 22: an alternative explanation

Post by kennethgreifer » Sun Jan 01, 2017 3:14 pm

Here is another interesting possibility. If the psalm writer was wearing armor in battle and possibly was on a horse or maybe not, it doesn't matter, the person's hands and feet or hand and foot (it doesn't have to be plural) could have been pierced and not the person's body. What do you think of that possibility?

Kenneth Greifer

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Giuseppe, Google [Bot], JoeWallack and 36 guests