Kosh

No, you came here to preach.

Run away! Run away! (oops, too late).

Wallener

The "OT" didn't even exist 3rd century BCE.

JoeWallack

JW:
In order to determine the proper meaning of the offending Hebrew word in Psalm 22:17 one should first look at the Hebrew word in Psalm 22:17:

Frum (which near as I can tell is reliable):

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/pierce.html#hev

Here is a survey of the offending word from the Masoretic text:



The majority reading of "kaari" would be in thousands of manuscripts. "kaaru" is said to be in 3 to 10. This probably means that 3 manuscripts clearly have a "vav" at the end while with 7 manuscripts its unclear whether the last letter is a "vav" or "yod". For those who don't know Hebrew like the OP you can see in the image that "kaari" has a "yod" at the end while "kaaru" has a "vav". Note that a "vav" is a "yod" which extends all the way down so if a letter made by hand was in between you couldn't be sure which was meant.
"karu" is in two manuscripts.

1) I think the first conclusion to make is that with this kind of ratio, thousands to 3-10 and 2, the default position is that "kaari" is likely original.

The next consideration is possible reasons for variation. I've already pointed out that the difference between "kaari" and "kaaru" is a "yod" vs. "vav" for the last letter. "kaaru" could be reasonably explained by a scribe mistakenly writing a "vav" instead of a "yod" by continuing the vertical "yod" down. Related to this, "kaaru" would otherwise be an unknown word. Thus we have good reason to believe that "kaaru" is a result of scribal error.

"karu" is a known word found in two manuscripts meaning "they dig". A possible explanation for scribal change to "karu" is that the sentence containing "kaari" would otherwise have no verb, "like a lion, my hands and my legs". "karu" solves the problem of no verb by supplying one that is phoenetically close to "kaari".

2) The second conclusion to make is these explanations are only guesses but as guesses go they are reasonable and the combination of the dominance of "kaari" with reasonable guesses for the slight variation makes it pretty likely that "kaari" is original. With this Type of dominant direct textual evidence it would be difficult to even imagine what other potential evidence could overcome the presumption that "kaari" is Original.

In order to consider the possibility that whatever was original was intentionally changed to "kaari" let's look at the context next.

By the way, why Am I having to do this. Where the hell is Spin?



Joseph

TRANSLATOR, n.
One who enables two persons of different languages to understand each other by repeating to each what it would have been to the translator's advantage for the other to have said.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors...yguid=68161660

http://hometown.aol.com/abdulreis/myhomepage/index.html

JoeWallack

JW:
Now let's check the Context of "kaari" in Psalm 22. Note that "ka" is the
pre-fix "like" (JW resisting the urge to go Egyptian here). "ari" is "lion". On to the Hebrew/English site:

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt2622.htm

Let's start with Specific context and see if we can find "lions" stalking Psalm 22. Emphasis Mine saith the Lord:

יד פָּצוּ עָלַי פִּיהֶ×?; ×?ַרְיֵה, טֹרֵף וְש×?Ö¹×?Öµ×’. 14 They open wide their mouth against me, as a ravening and a roaring lion.

טו כַּמַּיִ×? תִש×?ְפַּכְתִּי-- וְהִתְפָּרְדוּ, כָּל-עַצְמוֹתָי:
הָיָה לִבִּי, כַּדּוֹתָג; תָמֵס, בְּתוֹךְ מֵעָי. 15 I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint; {N}
my heart is become like wax; it is melted in mine inmost parts.

טז יָבֵש×? כַּחֶרֶשׂ, ×›Ö¼Ö¹×—Ö´×™, וּלְש×?וֹתִי, מֻדְבָּק מַלְקוֹחָי; וְלַעֲפַר-מָוֶת תִּש×?ְפְּתֵתִי. 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.

×™×– ×›Ö¼Ö´×™ סְבָבוּתִי, כְּלָבִי×?: עֲדַת מְרֵעִי×?, הִקִּיפוּתִי; ×›Ö¼Ö¸×?ֲרִי, יָדַי וְרַגְלָי. 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.

×™×— ×?ֲסַפֵּר כָּל-עַצְמוֹתָי; הֵמָּה יַבִּיטוּ, יִרְ×?וּ-בִי. 18 I may count all my bones; they look and gloat over me.

יט יְחַלְּקוּ בְגָדַי לָהֶ×?; וְעַל-לְבוּש×?Ö´×™, יַפִּילוּ גוֹרָל. 19 They part my garments among them, and for my vesture do they cast lots.

×› וְ×?ַתָּה יְהוָה, ×?ַל-תִּרְחָק; ×?ֱיָלוּתִי, לְעֶזְרָתִי חוּש×?ָה. 20 But Thou, O LORD, be not far off; O Thou my strength, hasten to help me.

×›×? הַצִּילָה מֵחֶרֶב תַפְש×?Ö´×™; מִיַּד-כֶּלֶב, יְחִידָתִי. 21 Deliver my soul from the sword; mine only one from the power of the dog.

כב הוֹש×?ִיעֵתִי, מִפִּי ×?ַרְיֵה; וּמִקַּרְתֵי רֵמִי×? עֲתִיתָתִי. 22 Save me from the lion's mouth; yea, from the horns of the wild-oxen do Thou answer me.


JW:
Roar! "Lion" appears 3 times in the Psalm. It ain't over until the Church Lady sings but isn't that conveeenient?

Note that "lion" appears as follows:

1) Verse 14 - The Psalmist's enemies are roaring at him like a Lion.

2) Verse 17 - The Psalmist's enemies are at his hands and legs/feet like a Lion.

3) Verse 22 - The Psalmist asks God to save him from the Lion's mouth.

I'd say that's pretty good evidence, based on context, that the offending word is "kaari", "like a lion". Note in General that there wouldn't be much need in the Tanakh as a whole, to use "lion" and not counting 22:17 "lion" is used twice in the Psalm. Specifically, use of the "lion" in 22:17 fits in between the Lion first roaring in 22:14 and the subsequent request to be saved from the Lion's mouth. The context of the Psalm in total is requesting to be saved from enemies who are compared to ferocious wild animals and the lion would be considered the most ferocious animal.

I think this is the point where the Judge says, "I've heard enough". With the combination of the dominant Hebrew textual evidence for "kaari" as well as the context fitting "kaari" so well for Verse 22:17 I don't think there would be any potential evidence available that could counter the conclusion that "kaari" is Likely original. The best that could be done is to look for other possible original words that are unlikely to be original.

Next, a look at "kaaru" from Nahal Hever.



Joseph

TRANSLATOR, n.
One who enables two persons of different languages to understand each other by repeating to each what it would have been to the translator's advantage for the other to have said.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Error...?yguid=68161660

http://hometown.aol.com/abdulreis/myhomepage/index.html

badger3k

JoeWalleck: :thumbs:

Apikorus

Actually, I prefer the reading karu to ka'ari Ps 22:17, because I think the latter destroys a chiastic structure built into the text (and karu strengthens it). See this post.

It goes without saying that Ps 22 is not "messianic."

badger3k

I am totally unfamiliar with this "chiasm" business, but it seems to be a literary style. Is this style supposed to have survived unchanged throughout the passage of hundreds of years and multiple authors (and multiple languages)? I guess it could be possible, it just seems really contrary to human nature.

I was curious if the karu might be a redaction by later authors to make it fit the style of the current time?

French Prometheus

He probably didn't read Ezekiel 37, though.

JoeWallack

JW:
"Karu" does not mean "pierced". I know it, Jew know it, the American public knows it, Bob Dole knows it, Pierce Brosnan knows it, Rod Carew knows it, even the Lion knows it. Your problem is Apologists are deceptively phrasing the question as a choice between "like a lion" and "pierced". Even Andrew has done that here. "Karu" means "dig". It's used 15 times in the Jewish Bible. Always with the context of digging through the ground. I'll be getting to this later and if necessary I'll show the entry in a Hebrew/English dictionary.

So, which reading is more difficult:

1) Like a lion, my hands and legs/feet.

2) They dig (in the ground), my hands and legs/feet.

Note that the Theme of the Psalm is being Threatened by wild animals and rescue is asked for Before there is injury. Hmmm, how to make "dig" work here? Maybe instead of wanting to eat him on the spot the animals just wanted to dig a trap and capture him so they could rehabilitate him?

More evidence in your favor is that in the Holy Grail when Tim was describing the Killer Rabbit he made a clawing motion with his fingers which kind of looked in the direction of digging.



Joseph

TRANSLATOR, n.
One who enables two persons of different languages to understand each other by repeating to each what it would have been to the translator's advantage for the other to have said.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Error...?yguid=68161660

http://hometown.aol.com/abdulreis/myhomepage/index.html

Apikorus

Joe, as I said, using K)RW is odd here, and I agree that the semantic range of KRH in the Hebrew Bible is circumscribed and generally means to dig in the ground (although not exclusively so -- see Ps 40:6, where the meaning is to "open"). So I agree that the reading K)RW as "they pierced" is conjecture with almost no support. Indeed, one should expect the shoresh here is K)R, which is unattested in Biblical Hebrew, although K)RW is attested in a fragment of Ps 22 found at Nahal Hever.

K)RY is also quite problematic in context, and my main point is that this reading would wreck a chiasm. So I think the text is corrupt here, which may explain the scribal variations.

Reading Jesus into the Hebrew Bible is always contrary to the plain sense of the text, for obvious reasons. But it is of course quite possible for anyone -- Christian apologists included -- to be right for the wrong reasons. I think Bob Dole knows that too.