Importance of Textual Families Part 5: Psalm 22:16 Messianic Significance Removed in the Masoretic Text?
Several peer-reviewed articles have been written on this topic.[1] They have multitudinous views to share regarding this issue. Therein seems to be zero agreement between scholars outside of a religious context.[2] Perowne writes:
“There is scarcely any passage of the Old Testament, the true reading and interpretation of which have given rise to so much discussion”[3]
The issue here is the vowel pointing of many Masoretic manuscripts, which reads כָּ֝אֲרִ֗י kā·ʾǎr “like a lion” and which is followed by Jewish Publication Society (JPS), Complete Jewish Bible (CJB), Lexham English Bible (LEB), and New English Translation (NET). The reading is then “Dogs surround me; a pack of evil ones closes in on me, like lions they maul my hands and feet.” (JPS Tanakh). Whereas the LXX has ὤρυξαν ōryxan “dug,” supplying then “they have dug my hands and feet” which early Christian interpretation understood as “they have pierced my hands and feet”. We then find a similar rendering in Syriac and Latin translations.
“The LXX may already have been trying to make sense of a corrupt text by reading from כארו ידי ורגלי. Not finding a root כאר (bind), they corrected it with the Hebrew root כרה (dig), thereby giving the sense ‘to dig.’”[5] What is even stranger is that when we look into Aquila’s version and Symmachus’s readings it seems possible that, from an early period, there was a probable attempt to avoid association with Jesus by Greek-speaking Jews to purposely eschew the translation within those two versions.
“However, not only did these readings disagree, but Aquila himself produced two different readings. The first edition rendered the problematic word ᾔσχυναν, “they have disfigured,” but in the second, he changed it to ἐπέδησαν, “they have bound” (similar to Symmachus’s ὡς ζητοῦντες δῆσαι “like those who seek to bind”). Apparently, this second-century scholar, who earned a reputation for so conscientiously trying to render a translation as close as possible to the literal meaning of the original that the resulting Greek seemed poor and stilted, was uncertain about the Hebrew from which he worked. The word כארי, “like a lion,” which was eventually accepted by the Masoretes as the best text, may have gained popularity from a Jewish reaction to the Christian reading” [6]
This seems all the more likely since we find the pierced reading in a few Hebrew manuscript witnesses along with the Dead Sea Scrolls. [7] Likewise, Tertullian reads “’ They pierced,’ says He, ‘my hands and my feet,’” [8] and Chrysostom reads here “’ They pierced My hands and My feet, and parted My garments among them, and cast lots upon My vesture’ (Ps. 22:16, 18).” [9] Likewise, we find the same reading in Augustine, albeit much later.[10]
It would make good sense to say “to dig” of the LXX and other manuscripts (MSS) has the meaning “to pierce” with reference to hands and feet mentioned in the same passage. While the writer uses several animal motifs, he never uses them to describe himself; only his enemies. For if we translate the Hebrew of the Masoretic literally without supplying any words into the text, it would read “they have encircled me like the lion my hands and my feet...”, [11] making the lion apply to the Psalmist, which is something he does not do. Interestingly, the Masora notes themselves in Numbers 24:9 expressly deny the meaning of “as a lion” for כָּ֝אֲרִ֗י kā·ʾǎr which would seemingly detract from the classical Jewish reading here in the Psalms.
As we delve deeper and deeper into this issue, it seems all the more likely that the reading of the Masorites gained popularity as a Jewish reaction to the Christian reading. In fact, some later writers have some strong words on this issue such as Martin Luther, who said,
“To us, who believe in Christ—we hold that this entire psalm spoke about Christ with gospel authority—it is easy to prove that the reading should be “they pierced,” not “like a lion.” For we do not explain the substance according to Scripture’s mysteries, but we explain Scripture’s mysteries according to the substance. That is, we illuminate the ancient Scriptures with the gospel, not the other way around.… Therefore because we are certain that Christ’s hands and feet were nailed to the cross, nor are we less certain that this psalm fits Christ, moreover, the sense marvelously agrees and absolutely demands that “they pierced” be read, especially because no grammarian’s rigidity opposes it, without controversy and hesitation we read “they pierced.” But their absurdity will urge the first sense [“like a lion”] on our adversaries.… None of their nonsense will drown out our understanding, but everything fits most appropriately, so that even if neither caari nor caru had been placed there, still the substance would clearly teach what it means.…
The only grammar that remains should yield to theology. For the words yield and are subjected to the substance, not the substance to the words. And the expression rightly follows the sense and the letter, the Spirit.” [12]
Likewise, John Calvin had this to say,
“According to the text the phrase here is “like a lion at my hands.” Now, because all the Hebraica resources agree in this reading, to depart from such a consensus would have been taboo to me, except that the scope of the passage compels such a departure and there are credible reasons for conjecturing that this passage has been fraudulently corrupted by the Jews. At any rate there is no doubt that the Greek translators [LXX] read the letter wāw where the text now has a yôd. That the Jews jabber that the literal sense has been deliberately turned upside down by our rendering [“they have pierced”] has absolutely no justification. For what need was there to trifle so audaciously in an unimportant matter? But suspicion of falsehood—not at all trivial—falls on them, who with focused zeal seek to strip the crucified Jesus of his marks, lest he be found to be the Christ and Redeemer.
If we accept what they want to be the reading, the sense will be greatly confused and obscured. First, it will be ungrammatical speech. To complete the phrase, they say that it is necessary to supply the word besieging. But what is that? “To surround hands and feet”? For a siege considers not just these members but the entire person. Recognizing this, they flee to deluded fables—according to their custom—saying that when a lion comes across some prey, it makes a circle around it with its tail before it falls on its prey. From this, it is clear enough that they have no reason for their translation. Even so, because David used the simile of a lion in the verse before, its repetition here would be superfluous. I omit what some of our expositors have observed, that this word, when the letter for similes [kāp] is attached, should almost surely be pointed differently. Still, I am not striving to convince the Jews, whose obstinacy in disputes is untameable. I only wanted to show briefly how wickedly they attack Christians on account of their different reading of this passage.” [13]
It seems as though the grammarians of our day agree with the ancient grammarians, that כארי was commonly regarded as a verb is shown by the reading of two MSS. כארו (כָּאֲרוּ) for כָּרוּ.
[Note: The remarks of Gesenius are sufficient to shew any unprejudiced reader that כָּאֲרִי in this passage, does not mean, as a lion; it is to be observed,
1. That all the ancient versions take it as part of a verb, and most of them in the sense of to pierce; and this, as Gesenius has shewn, is explicable with the present reading.
2. The Jews themselves (see the Masora on Num. 24:9.), expressly disclaim the meaning of “as a lion.”
3. Ben Chaim states that, in the best MSS., he found a ק׳ and כ׳ on the word כארי, כארו.
4. כָּאֲרוּ is actually the reading of some MSS. (see De Rossi). The sense will be just the same whether we read כארי as a participle pl., or whether we read כארו pret. of the verb; the latter is apparently preferable. We may either take it from כּוּר with א inserted, or from a kindred root כאר (compare ראם and רוּם). It is hardly needful to state how certain it is that the Psalm applies to Christ and not to David; the authority of the New Testament proves this, even if it had not been clear from the contents of the Psalm.]” [14]
According to the New Testament, this Psalm is extremely important and according to the New Testament it is a messianic Psalm and all early Christians indeed read it this way. We have made clear that the rendering of “pierced” is indeed the way it should be read. It seems as though the Masorites clearly attempted to change it in response to Christian doctrine and so here is yet another example of Masoretic corruption of the Hebrew text.
Footnotes
[1] see Gary A. Rendsburg, “Philological Notes,” HS 43 (2002): 21–30; Brent A. Strawn, “Psalm 22:17b: More Guessing,” JBL 119 (2000): 439–51; John Kaltner, “Psalm 22:17b: Second Guessing ‘The Old Guess,’” JBL 117 (1998): 503–6; Gregory Vall, “Psalm 22:17B: ‘The Old Guess,’ ” JBL 116 (1997): 45–56.
[2] cf. J. J. M. Roberts, “A New Root for an Old Crux, Ps. XXII 17c,” VT 23 (1973): 247–52. Vall, “Psalm 22:17B,” 51–52. Rendsburg, “Philological Notes,” 25–26.
[3] Perowne, J.J. Stewart (1878). The Book of Psalms; A New Translation, with Introductions and Notes, Explanatory and Critical, Vol. 1. Pg. 246
[4] Brannan, R., Penner, K. M., Loken, I., Aubrey, M., & Hoogendyk, I. (Eds.). (2012). The Lexham English Septuagint (Ps 21:17). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.’
[5] Swenson, K. M. (2004). Psalm 22:17: Circling around the Problem Again. Journal of Biblical Literature, 123, 638. see also Vall, “Psalm 22:17B,” 45. Further supporting (though not conclusively) this possibility of an early emendation of the LXX is the fact that it translates “many dogs” in the preceding clause.
[7] “The only text from the Dead Sea Scrolls that corresponds to Ps 22:17 is XḤev/Se 4 frag. 11 line 4, dating from sometime in the second half of the first century to the second century C.E.). Peter Flint records it as כארו (The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Book of Psalms [STDJ 17; Leiden: Brill, 1997], 83, 87). However, the facsimile (PAM 42.190) reveals a badly faded text that is nearly impossible to read (see Robert H. Eisenman and James M. Robinson, A Facsimile Edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls [2 vols.; Washington, D.C.: Biblical Archaeology Society, 1991]). Furthermore, Strawn notes that other instances in the fragment indicate little difference between י and ו (“Psalm 22:17b,” 448 n. 41).” – found in (2004). Journal of Biblical Literature, 123. Later studies have shown however that the reading of “to pierce” in the DSS is clear see, Barry, J. D., Mangum, D., Brown, D. R., Heiser, M. S., Custis, M., Ritzema, E., … Bomar, D. (2012, 2016). Faithlife Study Bible (Ps 22:16). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
[8] Tertullian. (1885). The Five Books against Marcion. In A. Roberts, J. Donaldson, & A. C. Coxe (Eds.), P. Holmes (Trans.), Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian (Vol. 3, p. 337). Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company.
[9] John Chrysostom. (1889). Homilies of St. John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople, on the Gospel of St. John. In P. Schaff (Ed.), G. T. Stupart (Trans.), Saint Chrysostom: Homilies on the Gospel of St. John and Epistle to the Hebrews (Vol. 14, p. 46). New York: Christian Literature Company.
[10] Augustine of Hippo. (1888). Expositions on the Book of Psalms. In P. Schaff (Ed.), A. C. Coxe (Trans.), Saint Augustin: Expositions on the Book of Psalms (Vol. 8, p. 59). New York: Christian Literature Company.
[11] checked against many Interlinears and resources such as The Lexham Hebrew-English Interlinear Bible, Hebrew English Interlinear Old Testament, Interlinear Scripture Analyzer, Reverse Interlinear’s in Logos, and a close look at each Hebrew word.
[12] Selderhuis, H. J., George, T., Manetsch, S. M., & McNutt, D. W. (Eds.). (2015). Psalms 1–72: Old Testament (Vol. VII, pp. 177–178). Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.
[13] Selderhuis, H. J., George, T., Manetsch, S. M., & McNutt, D. W. (Eds.). (2015). Psalms 1–72: Old Testament (Vol. VII, p. 178). Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.
[14] Gesenius, W., & Tregelles, S. P. (2003). Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures (p. 388). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
Importance of Textual Families Part 5: Psalm 22:16 Messianic Significance Removed in the Masoretic Text?
Several peer-reviewed articles have been written on this topic.[1] They have multitudinous views to share regarding this issue. Therein seems to be zero agreement between scholars outside of a religious context.[2] Perowne writes:
“There is scarcely any passage of the Old Testament, the true reading and interpretation of which have given rise to so much discussion”[3]
The issue here is the vowel pointing of many Masoretic manuscripts, which reads כָּ֝אֲרִ֗י kā·ʾǎr “like a lion” and which is followed by Jewish Publication Society (JPS), Complete Jewish Bible (CJB), Lexham English Bible (LEB), and New English Translation (NET). The reading is then “Dogs surround me; a pack of evil ones closes in on me, like lions they maul my hands and feet.” (JPS Tanakh). Whereas the LXX has ὤρυξαν ōryxan “dug,” supplying then “they have dug my hands and feet” which early Christian interpretation understood as “they have pierced my hands and feet”. We then find a similar rendering in Syriac and Latin translations.
“The LXX may already have been trying to make sense of a corrupt text by reading from כארו ידי ורגלי. Not finding a root כאר (bind), they corrected it with the Hebrew root כרה (dig), thereby giving the sense ‘to dig.’”[5] What is even stranger is that when we look into Aquila’s version and Symmachus’s readings it seems possible that, from an early period, there was a probable attempt to avoid association with Jesus by Greek-speaking Jews to purposely eschew the translation within those two versions.
“However, not only did these readings disagree, but Aquila himself produced two different readings. The first edition rendered the problematic word ᾔσχυναν, “they have disfigured,” but in the second, he changed it to ἐπέδησαν, “they have bound” (similar to Symmachus’s ὡς ζητοῦντες δῆσαι “like those who seek to bind”). Apparently, this second-century scholar, who earned a reputation for so conscientiously trying to render a translation as close as possible to the literal meaning of the original that the resulting Greek seemed poor and stilted, was uncertain about the Hebrew from which he worked. The word כארי, “like a lion,” which was eventually accepted by the Masoretes as the best text, may have gained popularity from a Jewish reaction to the Christian reading” [6]
This seems all the more likely since we find the pierced reading in a few Hebrew manuscript witnesses along with the Dead Sea Scrolls. [7] Likewise, Tertullian reads “’ They pierced,’ says He, ‘my hands and my feet,’” [8] and Chrysostom reads here “’ They pierced My hands and My feet, and parted My garments among them, and cast lots upon My vesture’ (Ps. 22:16, 18).” [9] Likewise, we find the same reading in Augustine, albeit much later.[10]
It would make good sense to say “to dig” of the LXX and other manuscripts (MSS) has the meaning “to pierce” with reference to hands and feet mentioned in the same passage. While the writer uses several animal motifs, he never uses them to describe himself; only his enemies. For if we translate the Hebrew of the Masoretic literally without supplying any words into the text, it would read “they have encircled me like the lion my hands and my feet...”, [11] making the lion apply to the Psalmist, which is something he does not do. Interestingly, the Masora notes themselves in Numbers 24:9 expressly deny the meaning of “as a lion” for כָּ֝אֲרִ֗י kā·ʾǎr which would seemingly detract from the classical Jewish reading here in the Psalms.
As we delve deeper and deeper into this issue, it seems all the more likely that the reading of the Masorites gained popularity as a Jewish reaction to the Christian reading. In fact, some later writers have some strong words on this issue such as Martin Luther, who said,
“To us, who believe in Christ—we hold that this entire psalm spoke about Christ with gospel authority—it is easy to prove that the reading should be “they pierced,” not “like a lion.” For we do not explain the substance according to Scripture’s mysteries, but we explain Scripture’s mysteries according to the substance. That is, we illuminate the ancient Scriptures with the gospel, not the other way around.… Therefore because we are certain that Christ’s hands and feet were nailed to the cross, nor are we less certain that this psalm fits Christ, moreover, the sense marvelously agrees and absolutely demands that “they pierced” be read, especially because no grammarian’s rigidity opposes it, without controversy and hesitation we read “they pierced.” But their absurdity will urge the first sense [“like a lion”] on our adversaries.… None of their nonsense will drown out our understanding, but everything fits most appropriately, so that even if neither caari nor caru had been placed there, still the substance would clearly teach what it means.…
The only grammar that remains should yield to theology. For the words yield and are subjected to the substance, not the substance to the words. And the expression rightly follows the sense and the letter, the Spirit.” [12]
Likewise, John Calvin had this to say,
“According to the text the phrase here is “like a lion at my hands.” Now, because all the Hebraica resources agree in this reading, to depart from such a consensus would have been taboo to me, except that the scope of the passage compels such a departure and there are credible reasons for conjecturing that this passage has been fraudulently corrupted by the Jews. At any rate there is no doubt that the Greek translators [LXX] read the letter wāw where the text now has a yôd. That the Jews jabber that the literal sense has been deliberately turned upside down by our rendering [“they have pierced”] has absolutely no justification. For what need was there to trifle so audaciously in an unimportant matter? But suspicion of falsehood—not at all trivial—falls on them, who with focused zeal seek to strip the crucified Jesus of his marks, lest he be found to be the Christ and Redeemer.
If we accept what they want to be the reading, the sense will be greatly confused and obscured. First, it will be ungrammatical speech. To complete the phrase, they say that it is necessary to supply the word besieging. But what is that? “To surround hands and feet”? For a siege considers not just these members but the entire person. Recognizing this, they flee to deluded fables—according to their custom—saying that when a lion comes across some prey, it makes a circle around it with its tail before it falls on its prey. From this, it is clear enough that they have no reason for their translation. Even so, because David used the simile of a lion in the verse before, its repetition here would be superfluous. I omit what some of our expositors have observed, that this word, when the letter for similes [kāp] is attached, should almost surely be pointed differently. Still, I am not striving to convince the Jews, whose obstinacy in disputes is untameable. I only wanted to show briefly how wickedly they attack Christians on account of their different reading of this passage.” [13]
It seems as though the grammarians of our day agree with the ancient grammarians, that כארי was commonly regarded as a verb is shown by the reading of two MSS. כארו (כָּאֲרוּ) for כָּרוּ.
[Note: The remarks of Gesenius are sufficient to shew any unprejudiced reader that כָּאֲרִי in this passage, does not mean, as a lion; it is to be observed,
1. That all the ancient versions take it as part of a verb, and most of them in the sense of to pierce; and this, as Gesenius has shewn, is explicable with the present reading.
2. The Jews themselves (see the Masora on Num. 24:9.), expressly disclaim the meaning of “as a lion.”
3. Ben Chaim states that, in the best MSS., he found a ק׳ and כ׳ on the word כארי, כארו.
4. כָּאֲרוּ is actually the reading of some MSS. (see De Rossi). The sense will be just the same whether we read כארי as a participle pl., or whether we read כארו pret. of the verb; the latter is apparently preferable. We may either take it from כּוּר with א inserted, or from a kindred root כאר (compare ראם and רוּם). It is hardly needful to state how certain it is that the Psalm applies to Christ and not to David; the authority of the New Testament proves this, even if it had not been clear from the contents of the Psalm.]” [14]
According to the New Testament, this Psalm is extremely important and according to the New Testament it is a messianic Psalm and all early Christians indeed read it this way. We have made clear that the rendering of “pierced” is indeed the way it should be read. It seems as though the Masorites clearly attempted to change it in response to Christian doctrine and so here is yet another example of Masoretic corruption of the Hebrew text.
Footnotes
[1] see Gary A. Rendsburg, “Philological Notes,” HS 43 (2002): 21–30; Brent A. Strawn, “Psalm 22:17b: More Guessing,” JBL 119 (2000): 439–51; John Kaltner, “Psalm 22:17b: Second Guessing ‘The Old Guess,’” JBL 117 (1998): 503–6; Gregory Vall, “Psalm 22:17B: ‘The Old Guess,’ ” JBL 116 (1997): 45–56.
[2] cf. J. J. M. Roberts, “A New Root for an Old Crux, Ps. XXII 17c,” VT 23 (1973): 247–52. Vall, “Psalm 22:17B,” 51–52. Rendsburg, “Philological Notes,” 25–26.
[3] Perowne, J.J. Stewart (1878). The Book of Psalms; A New Translation, with Introductions and Notes, Explanatory and Critical, Vol. 1. Pg. 246
[4] Brannan, R., Penner, K. M., Loken, I., Aubrey, M., & Hoogendyk, I. (Eds.). (2012). The Lexham English Septuagint (Ps 21:17). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.’
[5] Swenson, K. M. (2004). Psalm 22:17: Circling around the Problem Again. Journal of Biblical Literature, 123, 638. see also Vall, “Psalm 22:17B,” 45. Further supporting (though not conclusively) this possibility of an early emendation of the LXX is the fact that it translates “many dogs” in the preceding clause.
[6] Swenson, K. M. (2004). Psalm 22:17: Circling around the Problem Again. Journal of Biblical Literature, 123, 638–639.
[7] “The only text from the Dead Sea Scrolls that corresponds to Ps 22:17 is XḤev/Se 4 frag. 11 line 4, dating from sometime in the second half of the first century to the second century C.E.). Peter Flint records it as כארו (The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Book of Psalms [STDJ 17; Leiden: Brill, 1997], 83, 87). However, the facsimile (PAM 42.190) reveals a badly faded text that is nearly impossible to read (see Robert H. Eisenman and James M. Robinson, A Facsimile Edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls [2 vols.; Washington, D.C.: Biblical Archaeology Society, 1991]). Furthermore, Strawn notes that other instances in the fragment indicate little difference between י and ו (“Psalm 22:17b,” 448 n. 41).” – found in (2004). Journal of Biblical Literature, 123. Later studies have shown however that the reading of “to pierce” in the DSS is clear see, Barry, J. D., Mangum, D., Brown, D. R., Heiser, M. S., Custis, M., Ritzema, E., … Bomar, D. (2012, 2016). Faithlife Study Bible (Ps 22:16). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
[8] Tertullian. (1885). The Five Books against Marcion. In A. Roberts, J. Donaldson, & A. C. Coxe (Eds.), P. Holmes (Trans.), Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian (Vol. 3, p. 337). Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company.
[9] John Chrysostom. (1889). Homilies of St. John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople, on the Gospel of St. John. In P. Schaff (Ed.), G. T. Stupart (Trans.), Saint Chrysostom: Homilies on the Gospel of St. John and Epistle to the Hebrews (Vol. 14, p. 46). New York: Christian Literature Company.
[10] Augustine of Hippo. (1888). Expositions on the Book of Psalms. In P. Schaff (Ed.), A. C. Coxe (Trans.), Saint Augustin: Expositions on the Book of Psalms (Vol. 8, p. 59). New York: Christian Literature Company.
[11] checked against many Interlinears and resources such as The Lexham Hebrew-English Interlinear Bible, Hebrew English Interlinear Old Testament, Interlinear Scripture Analyzer, Reverse Interlinear’s in Logos, and a close look at each Hebrew word.
[12] Selderhuis, H. J., George, T., Manetsch, S. M., & McNutt, D. W. (Eds.). (2015). Psalms 1–72: Old Testament (Vol. VII, pp. 177–178). Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.
[13] Selderhuis, H. J., George, T., Manetsch, S. M., & McNutt, D. W. (Eds.). (2015). Psalms 1–72: Old Testament (Vol. VII, p. 178). Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.
[14] Gesenius, W., & Tregelles, S. P. (2003). Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures (p. 388). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.