Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Doctor X · 08-12-2003, 01:36 AM

Very interesting stuff!

I whipped out my RSV and was about to congratulate myself on noticing that, according to the thin "Criticus Apparatus" the Greek Syriac and Jerome argue for the reading at verse 16b whilst the Hebrew has "like a lion."

Then I noticed that Utnapishtim beat me to it:

Quote:

Interestingly enough, I recently read the same passage in a Jewish bible, and it said "like lions at my hand and feet", not "they pierced my hands and feet".

ricksummer prints an interesting quote which would suggest that this is not a later interpretation; however, I do not have 5/6HevPs listed in my Vermes' The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English or Eisenman and Wise's The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered. Is there a reference to the document--caveQdocument?

Nevertheless, this does not seem like a strong prophecy at all--even without the lions. Regarding nails, no, you cannot nail people up through the palms--the modern "recreators" have ropes or some other manner to support the weight from the hands.

A nail in the center of the wrist will miss the two major arteries and would probably apply pressure to them as well.

The question is why would the Roman stab him in the side and, by way of explanation, why would the author need to have him die within the day . . . probably to get him to rise on time.

--J.D.

Secular Pinoy · 08-12-2003, 01:52 AM

The NETBible translates it as Yes, wild dogs surround me�a gang of evil men crowd around me; like a lion they pin my hands and feet to the ground, and has a footnote that goes:

Quote:

�like a lion, my hands and my feet.� This reading is often emended because it is grammatically awkward, but perhaps its awkwardness is by rhetorical design. After all, men being attacked by lions do not usually worry about grammatical correctness. Perhaps its broken syntax conveys the panic and terror felt by the psalmist. The psalmist may envision a lion pinning the hands and feet of its victim to the ground with its paws, a scene depicted in ancient Near Eastern art. The line has been traditionally translated, �they pierce my hands and feet,� and then taken as foreshadowing the crucifixion of Christ. Though Jesus does appropriate the language of this psalm while on the cross (compare v. 1 with Matt 27:46 and Mark 15:34), the NT does not cite this verse in describing the death of Jesus. (It does refer to vv. 7-8 and 18, however. See Matt 27:35, 39, 43; Mark 15:24, 29; Luke 23:34; John 19:23-24.) If one were to insist on an emendation of yrak (�like a lion�) to a verb, the most likely verbal root would be hrk (�dig�; see the LXX). In this context this verb could refer to the gnawing and tearing of wild dogs. The ancient Greek version produced by Symmachus reads �bind� here, perhaps understanding a verbal root irk, which is attested in later Hebrew and Aramaic and means �to encircle, entwine, embrace� (see HALOT 497-98 and Jastrow, 668). Neither one of these proposed verbs can yield a meaning �bore, pierce.� It is better not to interpret this particular verse as referring to Jesus� crucifixion in a specific or direct way.

Oddly, the NRSV has a very different (from all other versions I checked) rendering of that passage: For dogs are all around me; a company of evildoers encircles me. My hands and feet have shriveled.

Rick Sumner · 08-12-2003, 02:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Doctor X
Very interesting stuff!

I whipped out my RSV and was about to congratulate myself on noticing that, according to the thin "Criticus Apparatus" the Greek Syriac and Jerome argue for the reading at verse 16b whilst the Hebrew has "like a lion."

Then I noticed that Utnapishtim beat me to it:

ricksummer prints an interesting quote which would suggest that this is not a later interpretation; however, I do not have 5/6HevPs listed in my Vermes' The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English or Eisenman and Wise's The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered. Is there a reference to the document--caveQdocument?

Nevertheless, this does not seem like a strong prophecy at all--even without the lions. Regarding nails, no, you cannot nail people up through the palms--the modern "recreators" have ropes or some other manner to support the weight from the hands.

A nail in the center of the wrist will miss the two major arteries and would probably apply pressure to them as well.

The question is why would the Roman stab him in the side and, by way of explanation, why would the author need to have him die within the day . . . probably to get him to rise on time.

--J.D.

It's not a prophecy, it's a convenient coincidence. Find enough of them, you can build a religion.

You won't find the passage in Vermes' or WAC's translations of the DSS, because they deal with sectarian and new biblical texts.

The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible is, I believe, the only place you'll find it outside of the DJD volumes.

For what it's worth, they note that it's the only fragment, out of numerous scrolls and fragments containing Ps.22, that has that reading.

Oddly, they still translate it as such. Despite the fact that it is less attested.

Regards,
Rick

Rick Sumner · 08-12-2003, 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by rickmsumner
For what it's worth, they note that it's the only fragment, out of numerous scrolls and fragments containing Ps.22, that has that reading.

I knew I was missing a quote somewhere, apologies, I should have incorporated this in the last post

Quote:

"Psalm 22 is a favorite among Christians since it is often linked to the New Testament with the suffering and death of Jesus. A well-known and controversial reading is found in verse 16, where the Masoretic Text reads "Like a Lion are my hands and feet," whereas the Septuagint has " They have pierced my hands and feet." Among the scrolls the reading in question is found only in the Psalms scroll found at Nahal Hever (abbreviated 5/6HevPs), which reads "They have pierced my hands and feet"!-The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible, Abegg, Flint and Ulrich, p.518-519

Regards,
Rick

Doctor X · 08-12-2003, 04:05 AM

Thanks, I think that since Nahal Hever is some distance south-west from Khirbet Qumran--the site of the caves where the "Dead Sea Scroll" were found, it may not be included by some under the rubrik of "Dead Sea Scrolls."

Given the above references, I am left with the questions whether or not the translation in the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible "traditional" like the RSV. In other words would the quote by Secular Pinoy apply to the text. Since his quote notes that the LXX translation should give: ". . . the most likely verbal root would be hrk (?dig?; see the LXX). In this context this verb could refer to the gnawing and tearing of wild dogs." and ricksumner's quote states they compared to the LXX--with a traditional and presumably incorrect translation, I am suspicious that this happened.

Thus, not only a weak prophecy, a "non-prophecy"--perhaps even one "unfulfilled?" I am unaware of any NT story where Junior gets attacked by lions or dogs.

--J.D.

WinAce · 08-12-2003, 04:44 AM

Glenn Miller argues that "pierced" was the original reading here, although I'll leave it to you whether his arguments are successful.

I seem to recall reading a debate where Abegg's reading of the Dead Sea scrolls was disputed on the basis of an aleph... anyone know anything about that?

Nectaris · 08-12-2003, 08:21 AM

For a Jewish perspective of the Psalm in question (and a pretty good read, too), check out.http://www.outreachjudaism.org/like-a-lion.html

abospaum · 08-12-2003, 10:43 AM

I guess the question is where would a translation using "pieced" come from?

Even the NIV which uses pierced has a note saying that most Hebrew manuscripts as well as the Septuagint and Syriac all use "like a lion". Whey then would they go against every source and now turn to something that has no historical basis for being there.

Well it sounds good for Christians.

Lets remember that even if the Hebrew word was different on one Dead Sea Scroll and all others say something else which do you think is right. Also the writers of the NIV, KJV, etc did not have the DSS.

Rick Sumner · 08-12-2003, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by WinAce
I seem to recall reading a debate where Abegg's reading of the Dead Sea scrolls was disputed on the basis of an aleph... anyone know anything about that?

I hadn't heard that. For what my anecdote is worth, Flint gave a lecture here last year, in which I asked him what could possibly have inspired them to use a much more poorly attested translation, and I was informed that it was "a very deep question," and thus dismissed.

Regards,
Rick

Rick Sumner · 08-12-2003, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by abospaum
Lets remember that even if the Hebrew word was different on one Dead Sea Scroll and all others say something else which do you think is right. Also the writers of the NIV, KJV, etc did not have the DSS.

The translators of the KJV, NIV etc were using the LXX. They didn't need the Dead Sea Scrolls.

It's a difficult call as to what the earlier reading would be. The wide attestation of of the MT's reading, as well as the fact that none of the Christian scriptures mention it, seem to indicate that the original reading was in keeping with the MT.

On the same token, texts change. Often. Particularly at Qumran, where we can look at versions of scrolls as important as 1QS and see the development over time. Could be that "pierced" was original, and then editted.

The question of the authenticity of the LXX is made far more interesting by finds such as this among the Dead Sea Scrolls, where ancient manuscript evidence supports the LXX reading.

Apparently they weren't just imaginative scribes who couldn't read Hebrew very well.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-12-2003, 04:05 AM	#15
Doctor X Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: USA Posts: 3,794	Thanks, I think that since Nahal Hever is some distance south-west from Khirbet Qumran--the site of the caves where the "Dead Sea Scroll" were found, it may not be included by some under the rubrik of "Dead Sea Scrolls." Given the above references, I am left with the questions whether or not the translation in the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible "traditional" like the RSV. In other words would the quote by Secular Pinoy apply to the text. Since his quote notes that the LXX translation should give: ". . . the most likely verbal root would be hrk (?dig?; see the LXX). In this context this verb could refer to the gnawing and tearing of wild dogs." and ricksumner's quote states they compared to the LXX--with a traditional and presumably incorrect translation, I am suspicious that this happened. Thus, not only a weak prophecy, a "non-prophecy"--perhaps even one "unfulfilled?" I am unaware of any NT story where Junior gets attacked by lions or dogs. --J.D.

08-12-2003, 04:44 AM	#16
WinAce Beloved Deceased Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Carrboro, NC Posts: 1,539	Glenn Miller argues that "pierced" was the original reading here, although I'll leave it to you whether his arguments are successful. I seem to recall reading a debate where Abegg's reading of the Dead Sea scrolls was disputed on the basis of an aleph... anyone know anything about that?

08-12-2003, 08:21 AM	#17
Nectaris Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Detroit, MI Posts: 855	For a Jewish perspective of the Psalm in question (and a pretty good read, too), check out.http://www.outreachjudaism.org/like-a-lion.html

08-12-2003, 10:43 AM	#18
abospaum Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Delaware Posts: 14	I guess the question is where would a translation using "pieced" come from? Even the NIV which uses pierced has a note saying that most Hebrew manuscripts as well as the Septuagint and Syriac all use "like a lion". Whey then would they go against every source and now turn to something that has no historical basis for being there. Well it sounds good for Christians. Lets remember that even if the Hebrew word was different on one Dead Sea Scroll and all others say something else which do you think is right. Also the writers of the NIV, KJV, etc did not have the DSS.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.