Underlined in blue : I do not deny that the original text should certainly be the verse that we have in the massoretic text but we have the Septuagint and the manucript of Nahal Hever (Even if the text is in bad condition) which uses "pierced". I don't see why it should be a fraud. A bad translation/transcription yes. A fraud, I’m not sure.neilgodfrey wrote: ↑Tue May 24, 2022 3:10 am I had thought I posted a question relating to this point some time back but cannot see what I thought I posted so I will try again -- do excuse me if I have missed an earlier reply.
My question remains, though -- What and where is the Greek word that means "pierced" in Ps. 22:17?Sinouhe wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 11:20 pm
I think you are right that the original meaning of the verse is "like a lion...". But as you know, the word in Hebrew is very close to the word "pierced", which could have misled some scribes. This would explain why we find the form "pierced" in the Greek translation or in the Nahal Hever manuscript.
An earlier post linked to a Mormon article professing belief in God and the meaning of the Greek word as "pierced", but it lacked any supporting evidence for the claim.
Also i mentioned the prophetic text of Zechariah 12:10 which mentions a pierced man and which John uses to his advantage in the passion for the crucifixion
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/zechariah/12-10.htm
John 19:37 and, as another scripture says, “They will look on the one they have pierced.”[d]
it might be an interesting idea too.
L’argumentum a silentio in Paul concerning the crucifixion is not really relevant . He tells us that Jesus died and rose again after 3 days according to the scriptures but we still don't know 2000 years later which scripture it is.
Paul and Mark were not very precise with their scriptural references.