Why the Psalm 22:16 is genuine

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Why the Psalm 22:16 is genuine

Post by Giuseppe »

A challenge for who denies the authenticity of the psalm 22:16 (or for who denies that in it the crucifixion could be "read" and accordingly assigned to the Suffering Servant of Isaiah):

They have pierced my hands and my feet

(psalm 22:16)

Is also this passage in Plautus a late Christian interpolation?

I'll give a talent to that man who shall be the first to run to the cross for me; but on condition that twice his feet, twice his arms are fastened there.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... %3Aact%3D2

Or, in alternative, can't a crucifixion be read there too?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8015
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Why the Psalm 22:16 is genuine

Post by Peter Kirby »

What's the context for mentioning "who denies the authenticity of the psalm 22:16"? Who denies it, and why?
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
Steven Avery
Posts: 987
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: Why the Psalm 22:16 is genuine

Post by Steven Avery »

"(or for who denies that in it the crucifixion could be "read" and accordingly assigned to the Suffering Servant of Isaiah)"

Maybe that was added?

The question is whether this is a picture of the crucifixion, a Messianic prophecy. We actually had a lot of good discussion of this in the old IIDB days, is the search working?
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Why the Psalm 22:16 is genuine

Post by Giuseppe »

Peter Kirby wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 7:24 pm Who denies it, and why?
Our Ben.
Ben C. Smith wrote: Fri Sep 06, 2019 9:06 am
I should add the Psalm 22:16, also.
That verse is a minefield, with arguments being made that the "pierced" interpretation postdates early Christianity's fixation on the cross. I would want to investigate thoroughly before placing much weight upon it.
Note that the great mythicists of the past (Couchoud in primis) have claimed that it was in that psalm that the crucifixion was read as being happened to the mythical Christ.

The mythicist Max Rieser (in the past) and the mythicist Nanine Charbonnel (today) have introduced, independently between them, a similar explanation.

NOTA BENE:
I don't want to discuss a priori with Christian apologists who deny that a crucifixion could be read in that Psalm. It would be equivalent to a discussion with Creationists.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Steven Avery
Posts: 987
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: Why the Psalm 22:16 is genuine

Post by Steven Avery »

Giuseppe wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 12:17 amI don't want to discuss a priori with Christian apologists who deny that a crucifixion could be read in that Psalm.
Does that mean you do want to discuss with Christian apologists who accept that a crucifixion is foreshadowed in the Psalm.

Or did you mix up one of the negatives?
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Why the Psalm 22:16 is genuine

Post by Giuseppe »

Steven Avery wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 3:21 am
Giuseppe wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 12:17 amI don't want to discuss a priori with Christian apologists who deny that a crucifixion could be read in that Psalm.
Does that mean you do want to discuss with Christian apologists who accept that a crucifixion is foreshadowed in the Psalm.
precisely.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Why the Psalm 22:16 is genuine

Post by Giuseppe »

Further evidence that the Psalm 22:16 was used by the early Christians:

Revelation 1:7
Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him

Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Why the Psalm 22:16 is genuine

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Giuseppe wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 12:17 am
Peter Kirby wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 7:24 pm Who denies it, and why?
Our Ben.
Ben C. Smith wrote: Fri Sep 06, 2019 9:06 am
I should add the Psalm 22:16, also.
That verse is a minefield, with arguments being made that the "pierced" interpretation postdates early Christianity's fixation on the cross. I would want to investigate thoroughly before placing much weight upon it.
You list me as denying the authenticity of Psalm 22.16, and then you quote me doing no such thing.

Also, to deny the authenticity of Psalm 22.16 is to suggest that it is an interpolation into the text. What you mean to say is that many people deny that there is a crucifixion going on in that verse (on the grounds that the extant Hebrew has "like a lion" and the extant Greek has "they dug"). That is not the same as denying the verse's authenticity.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Why the Psalm 22:16 is genuine

Post by Giuseppe »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 5:50 am
Giuseppe wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 12:17 am
Peter Kirby wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 7:24 pm Who denies it, and why?
Our Ben.
Ben C. Smith wrote: Fri Sep 06, 2019 9:06 am
I should add the Psalm 22:16, also.
That verse is a minefield, with arguments being made that the "pierced" interpretation postdates early Christianity's fixation on the cross. I would want to investigate thoroughly before placing much weight upon it.
You list me as denying the authenticity of Psalm 22.16, and then you quote me doing no such thing.
the implicit inference is that even a blind can realize that I am going rapidly here and I can be easily forgiven.
Also, to deny the authenticity of Psalm 22.16 is to suggest that it is an interpolation into the text. What you mean to say is that many people deny that there is a crucifixion going on in that verse (on the grounds that the extant Hebrew has "like a lion" and the extant Greek has "they dug"). That is not the same as denying the verse's authenticity.
frankly, I know well that the Tanak talks about lions and not about cross, but the Septuaginta is what matters here. And the Greek is explicit about a crucifixion. Hence I am polemizing here against who claims that the Greek formula is an interpolation.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Why the Psalm 22:16 is genuine

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Giuseppe wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 7:16 am
Ben C. Smith wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 5:50 am
Giuseppe wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 12:17 am
Peter Kirby wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 7:24 pm Who denies it, and why?
Our Ben.
Ben C. Smith wrote: Fri Sep 06, 2019 9:06 am
I should add the Psalm 22:16, also.
That verse is a minefield, with arguments being made that the "pierced" interpretation postdates early Christianity's fixation on the cross. I would want to investigate thoroughly before placing much weight upon it.
You list me as denying the authenticity of Psalm 22.16, and then you quote me doing no such thing.
the implicit inference is that even a blind can realize that I am going rapidly here and I can be easily forgiven.
Also, to deny the authenticity of Psalm 22.16 is to suggest that it is an interpolation into the text. What you mean to say is that many people deny that there is a crucifixion going on in that verse (on the grounds that the extant Hebrew has "like a lion" and the extant Greek has "they dug"). That is not the same as denying the verse's authenticity.
frankly, I know well that the Tanak talks about lions and not about cross, but the Septuaginta is what matters here. And the Greek is explicit about a crucifixion. Hence I am polemizing here against who claims that the Greek formula is an interpolation.
I am not sure what you mean here, but it matters little. Carry on.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Post Reply