The Psalm 22:16 Controversy: New Evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls

BYU Studies Quarterly Volume 44 | Issue 3 Article 9 9-1-2005 The Psalm 22:16 Controversy: New Evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls Shon Hopkin Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq Recommended Citation Hopkin, Shon (2005) "The Psalm 22:16 Controversy: New Evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls," BYU Studies Quarterly: Vol. 44 : Iss. 3 , Article 9. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol44/iss3/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the All Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in BYU Studies Quarterly by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact , . Hopkin: The Psalm 22:16 Controversy: New Evidence from the Dead Sea Scrol The Psalm 22:16 Controversy New Evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls Shon Hopkin F ew verses in the Bible have produced as much debate and commentary as Psalm 22:16: “For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.”1 The discussions center on the last character (reading right to left) of the Hebrew vrak (“pierced/dug”), assumed to be the word from which the Septuagint Greek çrujan (“they have pierced”) was translated—assumed because the original Hebrew texts from which the Septuagint was translated are no longer extant. If the last character of the Hebrew word was a waw (v), as the Greek seems to indicate, then the translation “pierced” is tenable. But a later Hebrew text called the Masoretic text has a yod (y) instead of a waw (v), making the word yrak, which translated into English reads “like a lion my hands and my feet.”2 Thus, two divergent possibilities have existed side by side for centuries, causing much speculation and debate. The controversy has often been heated, with large variations in modern translations into English, as evidenced by a brief survey of some important Bible translations: “they pierced my hands and my feet” (King James Version)3 “they have pierced my hands and my feet” (New International Version and Revised Standard Version)4 “piercing my hands and my feet” (Anchor Bible)5 “they have hacked off my hands and my feet” (New English Bible)6 “as if to hack off my hands and my feet” (New Jerusalem Bible)7 “like a lion they mangle my hands and feet” (The Psalms for Today —R. K. Harrison)8 “like a lion they were at my hands and feet” (Tanakh, Jewish Publication Society)9 “my hands and feet have shriveled” (New Revised Standard Version)10 BYU Studies 4, no. 3 (5) Published by BYU ScholarsArchive, 2005 161 1 BYU Studies Quarterly, Vol. 44, Iss. 3 [2005], Art. 9 162 v BYU Studies “they have bound me hand and foot” (Revised English Bible)11 “they tie me hand and foot” (Jerusalem Bible)12 Anciently, the debate was fought between Christians, who saw this verse as an indisputable prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, and Jews, who denied the existence of prophetic references to Jesus in the Hebrew Bible. The battle continues in modern times between traditionalist scholars, who favor the ancient Christian interpretation, and some textual critics, who deny the existence of the prophecy of future events in the Bible. Latter-day Saints should consider the debate in light of Joseph Smith’s claim that we “believe the Bible to be the word of God, as far as it is translated correctly.”13 Therefore, in studying the etymology of biblical Shon Hopkin I first became interested in the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) as an undergraduate at Brigham Young University, where I worked as a research assistant for Donald W. Parry, Professor of Hebrew Bible and a member of the international team of translators of the Dead Sea Scrolls. After graduating with a bachelor’s degree in Near Eastern Studies from BYU, where I studied Aramaic and biblical Hebrew, I continued my studies there and obtained a master’s degree in Near Eastern Studies in 2002. During my graduate program, I studied Hebrew but did little work with the Dead Sea Scrolls until, in connection with my master’s thesis, my study of Psalm 22:16 led me to check the DSS as the earliest reflection of the psalm’s original rendering. Peter W. Flint, Professor of Religious Studies at Trinity Western University, had published his translation of the DSS Psalms recently enough that no other studies had been done that included an analysis of the DSS Psalter. The text of the DSS will continue to be vital for our understanding of the earliest renderings of Hebrew scripture and, in my opinion, should be consulted in any textual study of the Old Testament. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol44/iss3/9 2 Hopkin: The Psalm 22:16 Controversy: New Evidence from the Dead Sea Scrol Psalm 22:16 Controversy V 163 assages, Latter-day Saints should use whatever tools of analysis are availp able to translate biblical texts correctly. One of these tools is to compare texts with similar texts and traditions in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Since the discovery of the Scrolls, scholars have been able to use them (mostly fragments of scrolls actually) to better understand the original meanings of Hebrew words and phrases. The same is true for the twenty-second Psalm. Evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls strongly supports the Septuagint translation “pierced” in verse 16.14 The Controversy The Jewish translators of the Greek Septuagint in Alexandria, Egypt, about 200 bc surely had no idea what textual arguments they were engendering when they translated the Hebrew text of Psalm 22:16 into the Greek çrujan (“they pierced my hands and my feet”).15 Centuries later, the passage became a serious bone of contention between Jewish translators and Christian ones. Christian authors and apologists—who, up until the last few centuries, preferred the Greek Old Testament almost exclusively over the available Hebrew texts—have seen in the Greek an explicit reference to Christ and the crucifixion.16 Many centuries after the composition of the Greek Septuagint, the two sides of the controversy were so solidified that Jews and Christians could determine who had produced a Bible by turning to this verse. A story is told that one of the early rabbinic Bibles of the sixteenth century was originally to contain the reading of vrak (“pierced/dug”) in Psalms 22:16. The Jew who was checking the proofs did not approve of this translation. He told the printer—the famous Daniel Bomberg—that if he did not restore yrak (“like a lion”), no faithful Jew would ever buy copies of his translation.17 With the advent of modern textual criticism, yrak (“like a lion”) has continued to have strong support, especially because many scholars have viewed with distrust any text that clearly fits a Christian interpretation of the Hebrew Bible, suspecting textual tampering. The arguments against these types of texts are often circular. If a person does not believe that prophecy exists, any text that would appear to predate an event of which it speaks is disallowed an (...truncated)