Psalm 22, "They have pierced my hands and my feet."

[patrick457]

Originally Posted by demetrios423

The NAB is the only Catholic Bible I have ever owned, why is it considered infamous?

The 1991 Third Edition of the NAB is particularly 'infamous' because its translation of the Psalms was completely rewritten to introduce the use of extensive gender-neutral language, which led to the rejection of it (the Psalms) for liturgical use. Some Catholics (you can find a number of them here) also have some trouble with the NAB in general mainly because of its footnotes and prefaces.

[demetrios423]

Originally Posted by patrick457

The 1991 Third Edition of the NAB is particularly 'infamous' because its translation of the Psalms was completely rewritten to introduce the use of extensive gender-neutral language, which led to the rejection of it (the Psalms) for liturgical use. Some Catholics (you can find a number of them here) also have some trouble with the NAB in general mainly because of its footnotes and prefaces.

doesn't the NABr include gender neutral language? Which Bible should I be reading? I always thought the NAB was the best since it is what is used during mass.

Please excuse my ignorance. New Catholic.

[chosen people]

Well the first thing you may have noticed is how Christians make a translation from the Hebrew to Greek and then to English ( The Septuagint is a translation of the Rabbis of the Torah [not of the prophets or writings] to Greek. In order to insure that their translation would not be tampered with they inserted 15 key passages in the Talmud - 13 of these passages appear in corrupted form in later Christian translations - not something that bodes well for relying on Christian translations of the text).

The second thing you might notice is how the Christian translation puts "Me" and "My" in capital letters to change the meaning to being a reference to the Christian god. This use of capitals is used repeatedly in Christian translations from the Hebrew. The thing is that there are no capitals in Hebrew. (For now lets put aside how antithetical that Christian concept of their god is to the Jewish scriptures and Jewish beliefs).

The third thing is how strange the word for piercing is. If the meaning was for pierced, why not use the word dakar- דקר or even ריצץ which would be far more usual.

The fourth thing is how we got to the word in the Christian translations. Instead of כארי (as a lion) supposedly what was written is כארו, in other words in a hand written manuscript the scribe lengthened the letter yod י and changed it into a vav ו - seemingly a simple scribal error.

The fifth thing is that the reference to a lion (אריה) which appears twice more in the Psalm is correctly translated as lion in the Christian translation - "like a raging and roaring lion - save me from the lion's mouth.

The proper translation from the Hebrew is clear: "For dogs have surrounded me; a pack of evildoers have enclosed me, like (the prey of) a lion, are my hands and my feet."

King David's metaphor of the dog and the lion (menacing beasts) symbolizes David's bitter foes that continually sought to destroy him. The verse is not in the future tense and is describing an historical event, not a messianic prophesy.

[meltzerboy]

Originally Posted by chosen people

Well the first thing you may have noticed is how Christians make a translation from the Hebrew to Greek and then to English ( The Septuagint is a translation of the Rabbis of the Torah [not of the prophets or writings] to Greek. In order to insure that their translation would not be tampered with they inserted 15 key passages in the Talmud - 13 of these passages appear in corrupted form in later Christian translations - not something that bodes well for relying on Christian translations of the text).

The second thing you might notice is how the Christian translation puts "Me" and "My" in capital letters to change the meaning to being a reference to the Christian god. This use of capitals is used repeatedly in Christian translations from the Hebrew. The thing is that there are no capitals in Hebrew. (For now lets put aside how antithetical that Christian concept of their god is to the Jewish scriptures and Jewish beliefs).

The third thing is how strange the word for piercing is. If the meaning was for pierced, why not use the word dakar- דקר or even ריצץ which would be far more usual.

The fourth thing is how we got to the word in the Christian translations. Instead of כארי (as a lion) supposedly what was written is כארו, in other words in a hand written manuscript the scribe lengthened the letter yod י and changed it into a vav ו - seemingly a simple scribal error.

The fifth thing is that the reference to a lion (אריה) which appears twice more in the Psalm is correctly translated as lion in the Christian translation - "like a raging and roaring lion - save me from the lion's mouth.

The proper translation from the Hebrew is clear: "For dogs have surrounded me; a pack of evildoers have enclosed me, like (the prey of) a lion, are my hands and my feet."

King David's metaphor of the dog and the lion (menacing beasts) symbolizes David's bitter foes that continually sought to destroy him. The verse is not in the future tense and is describing an historical event, not a messianic prophesy.

In so many of passages like this, Jewish scholars always point to historical events and Christian scholars always point to future prophecies. I don't know if tense per se always matters, since one may be describing something in the past from the vantage point of after it already happened (the future anterior). However, the context of the passage, both within the text itself and across related texts, does matter and whether that context is more logically referring to the historical past.

[Verbum]

Hui Demetrios,

If your bible uses the old numeration, then the verse is in Psalm 21.

Verbum

[Publisher]

As I understand Psalm 22 is not as much "prophesy" as it was a prayer Jews used in times of trouble.....Jesus began praying this very Jewish-in-times-of-great-trouble prayer when he was crucified.

Christian writers used the LXX as their basis for much if not all the OT text quoted in the NT.....to me...it's no surprise Jesus a Jewish man would pray a very Jewish prayer as his execution was conducted.

[itullian]

Originally Posted by Publisher

As I understand Psalm 22 is not as much "prophesy" as it was a prayer Jews used in times of trouble.....Jesus began praying this very Jewish-in-times-of-great-trouble prayer when he was crucified.

Christian writers used the LXX as their basis for much if not all the OT text quoted in the NT.....to me...it's no surprise Jesus a Jewish man would pray a very Jewish prayer as his execution was conducted.

yes, but he could have been making a statement too.

[Publisher]

Originally Posted by itullian

yes, but he could have been making a statement too.

"Could have"....but we know Psalm 22 WAS a prayer recited by Jews in time of trouble and suffering.....and since Jesus was a Jew....I see no reason to ascribe "more" to Ps 22 than used by his contemporaries.

[itullian]

Originally Posted by Publisher

"Could have"....but we know Psalm 22 WAS a prayer recited by Jews in time of trouble and suffering.....and since Jesus was a Jew....I see no reason to ascribe "more" to Ps 22 than used by his contemporaries.

he could have picked another. i don't think it was coincidence. He knew what he was doing.

[Publisher]

Originally Posted by itullian

he could have picked another. i don't think it was coincidence. He knew what he was doing.

Yes he did...he was following a long line of Jews who recited Psalm 22 in the midst of suffering and pain. He was a contemporary and product of his time.

[bengland]

Well. We could look at the casting of lots for the garments Ps 22:18 - Mat 27:35; Mk 15:24; Lk 23:34; Jn 19:23-24
The dry mouth Ps 22:15 - Jn 19:28 I thirst
The general anguish which is part of most of the psalm.
Poured out like water Ps 22:14 - Jn 19:34 blood and water flowed out.
He trusted in God - Let the Lord deliver him Ps 22:8 - Mat 27:43
The tearing of the hands 22:16
Jesus crying out "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me" Ps 22:1 - Mat 27:46; Mk 15:34;
and the promise of deliverance to the coming generation Ps 22:31

It's not just a single verse, but it seems that we're being told that this is a fulfillment of a prophecy from Ps 22.

Lk 24:44 He said to them, These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you,
that everything written about me in the law of Moses and in the prophets and psalms must be fulfilled.

I agree that it doesn't seem like a mere coincidence, although I certainly do believe that Jesus was expressing his anguish through the Psalm as well as making a reference to the fulfillment of prophecy in Psalm 22. There doesn't have to be only one meaning. It can be seen more than one way.

[itullian]

just like riding in on the donkey, he was fulfilling prophecy.

[Publisher]

Originally Posted by bengland

Well. We could look at the casting of lots for the garments Ps 22:18 - Mat 27:35; Mk 15:24; Lk 23:34; Jn 19:23-24
The dry mouth Ps 22:15 - Jn 19:28 I thirst
The general anguish which is part of most of the psalm.
Poured out like water Ps 22:14 - Jn 19:34 blood and water flowed out.
He trusted in God - Let the Lord deliver him Ps 22:8 - Mat 27:43
The tearing of the hands 22:16
Jesus crying out "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me" Ps 22:1 - Mat 27:46; Mk 15:34;
and the promise of deliverance to the coming generation Ps 22:31

It's not just a single verse, but it seems that we're being told that this is a fulfillment of a prophecy from Ps 22.



I agree that it doesn't seem like a mere coincidence, although I certainly do believe that Jesus was expressing his anguish through the Psalm as well as making a reference to the fulfillment of prophecy in Psalm 22. There doesn't have to be only one meaning. It can be seen more than one way.

Since I believe the gospel writers used OT passages to frame and "flesh out" the gospel story...Mark and Matthew were written as "supplements" for the Jewish liturgical year.....and pattered the stories of the gospels in sections so that they could be read in conjunction with the Law and Prophets as the liturgical year unfolded in synagouge.....it is no surprise they would scour the OT and use events found in it's passages and "retell" the story of Jesus in that frame work.....so using he LXX the writers of the gospels found various passages in the OT and ascribed them anew in the "Jesus story"....God was again at work in Israel's life.....by using the OT stories recast with Jesus of Nazareth as it's main character.....the gospels took their form.

I realize much of what I believe concerning the development of Christianity and the scriptures don't "affirm" a lot of people's established belief systems.....but it makes sense to me.....it was only after I began studying modern scholars and critics that I began to find a faith that meant something.....I see the hand of God again in history...moving thru history in a way very "natural".

[patrick457]

Originally Posted by Publisher

Since I believe the gospel writers used OT passages to frame and "flesh out" the gospel story...Mark and Matthew were written as "supplements" for the Jewish liturgical year.....and pattered the stories of the gospels in sections so that they could be read in conjunction with the Law and Prophets as the liturgical year unfolded in synagouge.....it is no surprise they would scour the OT and use events found in it's passages and "retell" the story of Jesus in that frame work.....so using he LXX the writers of the gospels found various passages in the OT and ascribed them anew in the "Jesus story"....God was again at work in Israel's life.....by using the OT stories recast with Jesus of Nazareth as it's main character.....the gospels took their form.

I realize much of what I believe concerning the development of Christianity and the scriptures don't "affirm" a lot of people's established belief systems.....but it makes sense to me.....it was only after I began studying modern scholars and critics that I began to find a faith that meant something.....I see the hand of God again in history...moving thru history in a way very "natural".

Question. Which do you hold: 'prophecy historicized' or 'history Scripturalized'?