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

[spin]

Psalms
21
16 ἐξηράνθη ὡσεὶ ὄστρακον ἡ ἰσχύς μου, καὶ ἡ γλῶσσά μου κεκόλληται τῷ λάρυγγί μου, καὶ εἰς χοῦν θανάτου κατήγαγές με.
16 For many dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked doers has beset me round: they pierced my hands and my feet.
http://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-te ... 24&page=21
Amen

Don't trust this translation supplier. (The Greek you've supplied is for the previous verse—different numbering). The translation contains "pierced" when there is no equivalent in the Greek. The verb ορυσσω means "to dig". Check the link out. The notion of piercing in this verse seems to be modern apologetics.

[iskander]

Well spotted. Here is verse 17 from the same source.
17 ὅτι ἐκύκλωσάν με κύνες πολλοί, συναγωγὴ πονηρευομένων περιέσχον με, ὤρυξαν χεῖράς μου καὶ πόδας.
Tradition understands this verse as "pierce", and that is how some read it. It is fine by me.

Viewing the original 1611 KJV with archaic English spelling.
Click to switch to the Standard KJV.
Psalms
Chapter 22

16 For dogges haue compassed me: the assembly of the wicked haue inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feete.

[Ulan]

Does this discussion actually come closer to the question which of the readings is original, given that the "like a lion" translation has also problems with regard to its understanding? This is not meant as a rhetorical question, as I would be fine with whatever result the investigation has. Are there any old manuscripts that support the "dug through", aside from what's left of the LXX and maybe or not the snippet that is argued over in this thread?

I was looking at the most common German Bible translations how they handle this verse. The last Two "Luther" translations (Protestant) have "they have dug through my hands and feet", without footnote. That's a literal translation of the LXX and not exactly meaningful German. The "Elberfelder (commented Protestant) has the same translation, but the footnote at least mentions that this translation follows the LXX and that the MT has "like those of a lion". It also mentions an older translation "bound" (wherever that comes from). The "Einheitsuebersetzung" (Catholic) uses "pierced" and has two comments regarding this verse. Concerning the "pierced" it says "translation unsure; text corrected according to G; H: "like a lion"). Most less literal translations use "pierced". The "Neue Genfer Uebersetzung" (trying to go for sense and structure over literal translation) tries to circumvent the problem by mixing both translations: "People have encircled me like dogs, a bunch of ruffians surrounds me. Like a lion bites into its prey, they hold fast to me and don't let my hands and feet go free".

Anyway, this is just a side note. I looks as if most translators are aware of the issue, and the better translations at least mention the alternative in a footnote.

[rakovsky]

Does this discussion actually come closer to the question which of the readings is original, given that the "like a lion" translation has also problems with regard to its understanding?

Hello, Ulan.
I invite you to look at the section on my website on Psalm 22.
Jerome's vulgate from the 4th c. was generally based on the Masoretic and I think it says delve.
Based on the fact that the Psalms never use ari for lion, and the lions in Psalm 22 are twice called aryeh, the lexicon of Psalms points to a different word than kari.

[spin]

Does this discussion actually come closer to the question which of the readings is original, given that the "like a lion" translation has also problems with regard to its understanding?

Hello, Ulan.
I invite you to look at the section on my website on Psalm 22.
Jerome's vulgate from the 4th c. was generally based on the Masoretic and I think it says delve.

"Delve"—my eye. Ulan is, of course, correct with (bind)/bound. Anyone interested can check the verb vincio or the derivation of the form of the verb used in the Latin verse vinxerunt. The translator, be it Jerome or not, imported his own take on the verse, given he couldn't make much sense of the Greek. This process of making sense not found in the text is the sort of eisegesis, you employ, Rakovsky. You should quit while you're behind. You just make things worse by continuing.

Based on the fact that the Psalms never use ari for lion, and the lions in Psalm 22 are twice called aryeh, the lexicon of Psalms points to a different word than kari.

Here's some homework: how many times is כ:ארי used as compared to כ:אריה? You'll find the answer quite unhelpful for your cause.

---

As we see, no ancient source supports this "pierced" nonsense. Not Hebrew. Not Greek. Not Latin.

Rakovsky has tried to ignore rather than respond to the damning alef in the Hebrew word he wants to mean "dug" (worming then to "gouged" and finally umm... "pierced"!!)

He now has his head in the sand over the waw/yod confusion noted in the DSS era. We have a very easily understandable error in the Greek translation (given the waw/yod confusion). The Latin translator didn't like the Greek "dug" and went with "bound (my hands and feet)", quite sensible, though not from the source.

This verse, Ps 22.16, is one of those I've listed in the past as how to tell if you've got a crap translation. Does it have "pierced"? If the answer is "yes", then the translator is tendentious. (A few others are Gen 1:1 "In the beginning God created..." and Isa 7:14, a) "virgin" and b) "will". These indicate work of a dishonest translator.)

[rakovsky]

Does this discussion actually come closer to the question which of the readings is original, given that the "like a lion" translation has also problems with regard to its understanding?

Hello, Ulan.
I invite you to look at the section on my website on Psalm 22.
Jerome's vulgate from the 4th c. was generally based on the Masoretic and I think it says delve.

"Delve"—my eye. Ulan is, of course, correct with (bind)/bound. Anyone interested can check the verb vincio or the derivation of the form of the verb used in the Latin verse vinxerunt.

Thanks for clearing that up.
It might have been Wycliffe who used delve in his 14th c. Bible.

The translator, be it Jerome or not, imported his own take on the verse, given he couldn't make much sense of the Greek. This process of making sense not found in the text is the sort of eisegesis, you employ, Rakovsky. You should quit while you're behind. You just make things worse by continuing.

Based on the fact that the Psalms never use ari for lion, and the lions in Psalm 22 are twice called aryeh, the lexicon of Psalms points to a different word than kari.

Here's some homework: how many times is כ:ארי used as compared to כ:אריה? You'll find the answer quite unhelpful for your cause.

I found that the Bible uses karyeh " like an aryeh" ten times and kari only three, none of which are in Psalms:

http://biblehub.com/hebrew/kaari_738.htm

http://biblehub.com/hebrew/kearyeh_738.htm

In fact, ari is never used in Psalms.
So if a Bible writer was going to use the phrase like a lion, he would be more than 3 times likely to say karyeh, and the Psalmist in particular would use the word aryeh. In fact twice in Ps. 22 he speaks of aryeh, never ari. Why switch to something not in his lexicon and not in the Greek text?

How come some Masoretic texts are saying karu and kru in Psalm 22? Are they getting that from copying Christian Masoretic manuscripts in Hebrew?

[rakovsky]

Rakovsky has tried to ignore rather than respond to the damning alef in the Hebrew word he wants to mean "dug" (worming then to "gouged" and finally umm... "pierced"!!)

When I cited numerous examples earlier in this thread of Alef being added as an alternate Aramaic influenced spelling, and asking you how they got dug in the LXX if it said karI and not karu or kru, how did you consider my answer to be ignoring you?

[rakovsky]

This verse, Ps 22.16, is one of those I've listed in the past as how to tell if you've got a crap translation. Does it have "pierced"? If the answer is "yes", then the translator is tendentious. (A few others are Gen 1:1 "In the beginning God created..." and Isa 7:14, a) "virgin" and b) "will". These indicate work of a dishonest translator.)

Using synonyms based on context is normal in translation, and the context is the enemies attacking the narrator using piercing objects like the sword, horns, and teeth. One of the rabbinical translations says "like a lion they attacked".
Considering the LXX gouged as with staffs and Masoretic variants karu and kru, gouged and synonym pierced is reasonable or acceptable.
There will always be scholars who notice this issue due to variants in text. So ultimately the issue will always be there for scholars who actually want to know what it says.

[Nathan]

... the waw/yod confusion noted in the DSS era.

It might be worth mentioning some pertinent comments from Peter Flint, from his treatment of the Psalms scroll in the Discoveries in the Judaean Desert series:

As is characteristic of the late Herodian period, waw and yod [in the fragments] are usually distinguished, with waw generally longer than yod.

On the reading in question he writes:

With waw and yod clearly distinguishable in this hand...this important variant reading is assured.

[rakovsky]

... the waw/yod confusion noted in the DSS era.

It might be worth mentioning some pertinent comments from Peter Flint, from his treatment of the Psalms scroll in the Discoveries in the Judaean Desert series:

As is characteristic of the late Herodian period, waw and yod [in the fragments] are usually distinguished, with waw generally longer than yod.

On the reading in question he writes:

With waw and yod clearly distinguishable in this hand...this important variant reading is assured.

Good scholarly quote.
If Spin or Joe W. wish to reach a different conclusion, it would help if they picked the fragment photo they most approve of and circle all waws and yods at the end of words.