Matt the Medic

This is about the most absurd thing ever. If I ran a handsaw (You know, looks like VVVVVVVV) over your arm, would you then describe in writing the injury made by one of the sawtooths as piercing your flesh?*

*Ignoring the fact I just sawed your arm off so you'd be unable to write.



Similarly, a lion doesn't pierce one in the way that a singular sharp object would. Many teeth bite down and constrict until you suffocate or your neck breaks depending on where you get bit.

To make analogous such an injury- a combination of puncturing, crushing, and tearing- to having nails passed through the hands and feet is simply a big stretch.

Even more so when you realize that the hands and feet weren't actually punctured in a crucification but instead the ankles and wrists were.

You know as well as I do Hebrew has different words for wrist and hand.

Diogenes the Cynic

David isn't talking at all. David did not write the Psalms. David probably never even existed, or at least had a minimal relationship to the Biblical character.

Having said that, the author of Psalm 22 is clearly talking about himself. You can tell by the extensive use of the first person singular. Not only is not a prophecy about the Messiah, it's not even a prophecy, at least not in the sense of an attempt to fortell the future. It's not a prediction it's just a lament about personal suffering.
It doesn't sound like the guy is being crucified at all. It sounds like he's drawing a poetic metaphor about being surrounded by wild animals.
There is nothing about "pierced hands and feet" in the Psalm. There is nothing in the passions about "bones out of joint." The dislocated shoulder in Mel Gibson's movie was Gibson's own invention and is not from the gospels.

Luke probably did take the "casting lots" thing from the Psalm. As I said. The authors of the gospels used out of context verses from the OT to fabricate much of their narratives.
Yes, it's a mistranslation and no, it can't be used as a verb. The Hebrew word kaari means "like a lion." There is another word.karu which means "they dig" (DIG, not PIERCE). The Masoretic text says kaari. Early Christian tampering tried to change it to karu and that tampered rendering made its way into the KJV. Not only is that rendering incorrect, the word STILL wouldn't be "pierce" but "dig."
Sure look for prophecies. Knock yourself out. Psalm 22 is not a prophecy.
None of the authors of the gospels saw any such thing. The authjors of the gospels were not eyewitnesses of Jesus, nor did they know any eyewitnesses of Jesus.

There is actually no evidence that anyone ever claimed to have seen a physically resurrected Jesus. There are certainly no first hand accounts of such a thing.
It makes them less reliable, yes.
Because it means they had no factual source for their stories. It means they were making things up.
The fact that they all did it, or copied from others who did it.
It never occurred to me to think that being a mod would afford me any sort of academic authority. There are several BCH regulars who are not mods who leave me in the weeds academically.

As far as evidence. It is you who are making assertions about magical prophecies. The onus is on you to prove it, not me to disprove it. All I've done is correct some factual errors.

Diogenes the Cynic

1.The LXX says oruxan, "they dug." It does not say "pierce." Pierce is a mistranslation of oruxan.

2.The LXX was hopelessly corrupted by the end of the first century and varied from the Masoretic text in many ways. The MT says kaari, and the MT is the only text that counts.
I never said anything like that.

jonesg

Jesus read Isaiah and knew what he must do and did it, or let them do it to him.

funinspace

Though one can easily find garbage on the web, there are plenty of quality sites. The site I quoted is from a conservative Christian site ( http://www.bible.org/netbible/ ), that publishes the New English Translation (NET). As I previously pointed, out in their footnote 38 regarding Psalms 22:16 "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". So it's hardly just us bad atheists who do not agree with many Christian desires to read prophecy into the texts where it doesn't exist. Like other have pointed out, the LXX is of very poor quality, and most Christian theologians have not considered these a primary source in many decades. So I would also recommend that you stop relying on cheap Latin translations, translated into English.

Thomas II

No part?
He was looking for it...To go to the temple,insult the clergy, and start kicking the ass of the money lenders who brought money to the temple, on the steps, was like signing a death wish...
:wave:

John A. Broussard

I thought the whole point, according to Christian dogma, is that Jesus' dad sent him to earth specifically to suffer and die for your sins and mine. Talk about a death wish!!

But the Catholic Church just came out with a new catechism which I'll have check out to catch up on the latest.

andrewcriddle

The Syriac Peshitta IIUC has a similar reading to the Septuagint. The Hebrew as it stands here is very difficult and the versions may go back to a Hebrew text different from the Masoretic.

One of the dead sea scrolls reads 'pierced' or 'dug' ie karu here.

Andrew Criddle

Diogenes the Cynic

The DSS fragment says kaaru which is either a misspelling of kaari or karu but is not a known word in itself.

Thomas II

We have been programmed by the Church,John. That is a fact like a house!
And it bothers me...