Why the Psalm 22:16 is genuine

[Ben C. Smith]

First, I am asking when the translation of this entire psalm into Greek was made.

This suspicion assumes that the verse as it stands supports the reading of a crucifixion in it. Hence your doubt about when it was translated.

Incorrect. This question (not suspicion) stems from my desire to know the history of the Greek translations. I feel secure about the "real" LXX (the Pentateuch), but not so much about the other books.

Second, I do wonder, even if the initial translation was earlier than Christianity, whether later Christian scribes might not have retranslated (note: not interpolated) the key word in favor of Christianity.

This suspicion assumes that the verse as it stands supports the reading of a crucifixion in it. Hence your doubt about a new translation being happened after Christ.

Partially correct. The word ὀρύσσω is, on its face, the translation of the Hebrew word for "like a lion" with the change of a single letter. This could be accidental, or it could be "accidentally on purpose" so as to get closer to a crucifixion without simply introducing a novelty into the text.

Third, nobody inserted a verb for "pierced" into the text; there really is no verb for "pierced" in the text. The Greek verb means "dug," and Psalm 22.16 is the only place in which ὀρύσσω is translated as "pierce" in the entire RSV, for example.

this remark points out a suspicion that the verse as it stands doesn't support really the reading of a crucifixion in it.

Is not the latter suspicion in strong contrast against the first two objections, hence sufficient alone to confute them?

If so, then what is your point? It would be unlikely, in that case, for anyone to derive the idea of a crucified deity/Messiah from Psalm 22.16.

But, for me, the entire matter is unclear. This is my actual point. I have no firm conclusions.

[Ethan]

Christians indeed corrupted the all the Psalms, removing any reference to any musical instrument they meant to be played on, since Music was a sin in Catholicism, an example is nonsensical reading of Aijeleth Shahar rather then αὐλῶν σχοίνου (aulodic schoinion).

כארי ידי ורגלי
- παρῶσι γυῖα μου καὶ ἄρθρα "incapacitate my hands and feet" (παρόω/אכאר) or adj. παροί
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/mor ... ek#lexicon

If the verb was ὤρυξαν, then the Hebrew would be ויכרו or ויחפרו as in Genesis 26:19, thus the Septuagint is unreliable and כארי is undefinable in the Hebrew lexicon, since no explanation is given for the א.

πᾶρος
disabled in a limb, maimed, made him helpless or blind, of the mind, incapacitated for practising virtue (metaphor)

κύνες
to denote shamelessness or audacity in women, rashness, recklessness in men (metaphor)
of offensive persons, compared to yapping dogs, of the Cynics

[Giuseppe]

Third, nobody inserted a verb for "pierced" into the text; there really is no verb for "pierced" in the text. The Greek verb means "dug," and Psalm 22.16 is the only place in which ὀρύσσω is translated as "pierce" in the entire RSV, for example.

this remark points out a suspicion that the verse as it stands doesn't support really the reading of a crucifixion in it.

Is not the latter suspicion in strong contrast against the first two objections, hence sufficient alone to confute them?

If so, then what is your point? It would be unlikely, in that case, for anyone to derive the idea of a crucified deity/Messiah from Psalm 22.16.

I think it is a non-sequitur. In my view, the fact that the Greek verse doesn't support fully the crucifixion idea (in virtue of the his still having the allegory of a lion in mind, for the your and J_Robert's point above) doesn't imply that the crucifixion idea couldn't be derived by who wanted to derive in first place the mythical Christ from the entire psalm 22. It implies only that a Christian interpolator couldn't be so astute to create a verse being able in the same time to refer to both the lion and the cross. He would have referred uniquely to the cross without shadow of doubt (for example, about the victim being a man and not even allegorized as a lion).

But if a form of death had to be derived from the verse, for a man as distinct from a lion, the crucifixion idea comes suddenly in mind. Since the only form of death that was very lethal (=leading to death) by hurting only the hands and the feet, was the hanging on a tree by piercing the hands and the feet. Afterall, a man can still live without hands and feet. But he dies if the hands and feet have him hanged on a tree for a while.

[Ben C. Smith]

The Greek word, though, again, is ὀρύσσω, which means to dig; there is no binding specified. This would seem to reflect the Hebrew כָּאֲרוּ, which I am told means to dig (I have no personal experience with this verb, and am relying upon Frederick Field), whereas the Masoretic instead seems to have כָּאֲרִ֗י, "like a lion." So the question is how naturally the idea of "digging my hands and my feet" in the OG would lead to the idea of crucifixion.

I completely agree with you that a Christian interpolator would probably have been clearer about any reference to the crucifixion. But I am talking about a potentially Christian translator, and that is a different matter. Given the Hebrew word כָּאֲרִ֗י, and being unable to understand the sense of it (I like Robert's suggestion, but it is not very common to understand the verse in that way), a Christian translator might well suppose, on the basis of Christian belief, that the original word was actually כָּאֲרוּ. The fit with the crucifixion would not be perfect, but that is because the source material is unclear and the options are limited; this attempt to wring meaning from an unclear original need not be fraudulent; it would merely be conditioned by Christian belief. The thing is, this result could also be the result of a simple mistake, since the difference between the two Hebrew verbs is the difference between a yod and a vav, which two letters are pretty easy to confuse.

So, if it was a simple mistake, then the Greek text could easily predate Christianity; if it was not a mistake, then the Greek text presupposes Christianity. This is my conundrum. I cannot (yet) cleanly eliminate either option.

But if a form of death had to be derived from the verse, for a man as distinct from a lion, the crucifixion idea comes suddenly in mind.

Maybe, but the "if" is what gives me pause.

[Giuseppe]

Note that the Psalm 22:18 :

They divide my clothes among them
and cast lots for my garment

...had surely inspired the exhibition of the naked victim during the his agony/death. In addition to Psalm 22:16, this could only confirm further the idea of a crucifixion as form of death of the Son.

Note that the Messiah Cyrus was crucified, too.

It's from Diodorus Siculus, 2.44.2

For instance, when Cyrus the king of the Persians, the mightiest ruler of his day, made a campaign with a vast army into Scythia, the queen of the Scythians not only cut the army of the Persians to pieces but she even took Cyrus prisoner and crucified him; and the nation of the Amazons, after it was once organized, was so distinguished for its manly prowess that it not only overran much of the neighbouring territory but even subdued a large part of Europe and Asia.

What is the probability a priori that two historical people were:

• Both crucified

• Both called Messiah

[Ethan]

Psalm 22:18 expressing the common phrase founded throughout ancient Greek writing
יפילו גורל/ἔβαλον κλῆρον

Homer Iliad 23.351
Then they mounted their cars, and cast in the lots (κλήρους ἐβάλοντο)

Homer Odysseus 14.191
Fates of death bore him away to house of Hades, his proud sons divided among them his substance and cast lots therefor (κλήρους ἐβάλοντο)

The first word יחלקו from ἔλλαχον also in Homer, but Mark and Luke in emulation of the Septuagint write διεμερίζον in Mark 15:24 and Luke 23:34 instead of ἔλλαχον. Lt. sortītus est.

Diodorus Siculus 2.44.2
For instance, when Cyrus the king of the Persians, the mightiest ruler of his day, made a campaign with a vast army into Scythia, the queen of the Scythians not only cut the army of the Persians to pieces but she even took Cyrus prisoner and crucified him.

Κύρου μὲν γὰρ τοῦ Περσῶν βασιλέως πλεῖστον ἰσχύσαντος τῶν καθ᾽ αὑτὸν καὶ στρατεύσαντος ἀξιολόγοις δυνάμεσιν εἰς τὴν Σκυθίαν, ἡ βασίλισσα τῶν Σκυθῶν τό τε στρατόπεδον τῶν Περσῶν κατέκοψε καὶ τὸν Κῦρον αἰχμάλωτον γενόμενον ἀνεσταύρωσε

Herodotus 1.214
Cyrus himself fell there, after having reigned for one year short of thirty years, Tomyris filled a skin with human blood, and searched among the Persian dead for Cyrus' body; and when she found it, she pushed his head into the skin and insulted the dead man.

Luke 23:36
The soldiers also mocked him, coming to him, and offering him vinegar,

Mark 15:36
One ran and filled a sponge full of vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink, saying, Let alone; let us see whether Elias will come to take him down.

[JoeWallack]

JW:
"Pierced" is not an interesting Textual Criticism question as it lacks the minimum amount of evidence to be a candidate for originality:

• Hebrew = no support (even the Christian Hebrew manuscripts apparently did not have it).
  
  Greek = The early tradition is a combination of "dug" and confusion.
  
  Latin = The early tradition is "pricked".

For The Superior Skeptic what is commonly underappreciated is the value of Theme:

22:17

1 For the Leader; upon Aijeleth ha-Shahar. A Psalm of David.
2 My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me,
And art far from my help at the words of my cry?
3 O my God, I call by day, but Thou answerest not;
And at night, and there is no surcease for me.
4 Yet Thou art holy,
O Thou that art enthroned upon the praises of Israel.
5 In Thee did our fathers trust;
They trusted, and Thou didst deliver them.
6 Unto Thee they cried, and escaped;
In Thee did they trust, and were not ashamed.
7 But I am a worm, and no man;
A reproach of men, and despised of the people.
8 All they that see me laugh me to scorn;
They shoot out the lip, they shake the head:
9 ‘Let him commit himself unto the LORD! let Him rescue him;
Let Him deliver him, seeing He delighteth in him.’
10 For Thou art He that took me out of the womb;
Thou madest me trust when I was upon my mother’s breasts.
11 Upon Thee I have been cast from my birth;
Thou art my God from my mother’s womb.
12 Be not far from me; for trouble is near;
For there is none to help.
13 Many bulls have encompassed me;
Strong bulls of Bashan have beset me round.
14 They open wide their mouth against me,
As a ravening and a roaring lion.
15 I am poured out like water,
And all my bones are out of joint;
My heart is become like wax;
It is melted in mine inmost parts.
16 My strength is dried up like a potsherd;
And my tongue cleaveth to my throat;
And Thou layest me in the dust of death.
17 For dogs have encompassed me;
A company of evil-doers have inclosed me;
Like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet.
18 I may count all my bones;
They look and gloat over me.
19 They part my garments among them,
And for my vesture do they cast lots.
20 But Thou, O LORD, be not far off;
O Thou my strength, hasten to help me.
21 Deliver my soul from the sword;
Mine only one from the power of the dog.
22 Save me from the lion’s mouth;
Yea, from the horns of the wild-oxen do Thou answer me.

Theme is often the most important Internal evidence criterion as it has scope, containing quantity and quality.
Note that in this Psalm there is no physical suffering, it is ALL mental/spiritual suffering. The whole point of the Psalm is to save David from physical harm.

In contrast to "pierced" which is obviously an English thing, what is interesting is that the theme of this Psalm is opposite of the theme that "Mark" (author) fleshed out (so to speak) from Pauline theology. In GMark Jesus' suffering is only physical and not mental/spiritual as the strong emotions Jesus has in the Teaching & Healing Ministry are exorcised (and transferred to Jesus' opposition) and Jesus has no emotion in the Passion. As that great 20th century philosopher ALF said, "Look it up."

In an irony then, that I think the author of GMark would really appreciate, Christians falsely believe that "The Jews" did not understand their own Bible and have to have a Jew tell them the truth of what their Bible says.


Joseph

Psalm 22:17, Hebrew Text, "Like A Lion". Who's Lion?

[Steven Avery]

Joe
> Hebrew = no support (even the Christian Hebrew manuscripts apparently did not have it).

First question - specifically to which manuscripts are you referring?