Why do some translations of Psalm 22:16 differ in wording? Verse in Question (Psalm 22:16) “For dogs surround me; a band of evildoers encircles me; they pierced my hands and feet.” The Divergent Renderings English Bibles divide into two main camps: 1. “They pierced my hands and feet” (BSB, ESV, NASB, CSB, NET, NLT, etc.). 2. “Like a lion, my hands and feet” (JPS 1917, Tanakh 1985, some foot-notes in NIV, certain marginal readings). The difference turns on a single Hebrew word that appears in two forms across the manuscript tradition. The Hebrew Textual Variant: כארי (ka’ari) vs. כארו (ka’aru) • Masoretic Text (MT, c. AD 1000): כָּאֲרִי “like a lion.” • Most pre-Masoretic witnesses (Septuagint, Syriac Peshitta, Latin Vulgate, some Dead Sea Scrolls, 5/6 Hev-Ps) read כָּֽאֲרוּ “they pierced,” the final letter being a waw (ו) instead of yod (י). The two letters are easily confused in paleo-Hebrew scripts; a single pen stroke distinguishes them. Ancient Witnesses Supporting “They Pierced” • Septuagint (LXX, 3rd–2nd c. BC): “ὤρυξαν χεῖράς μου καὶ πόδας” – “they dug/pierced my hands and feet.” • Dead Sea Scrolls, Nahal Hever (5/6 Hev-Ps, c. 50–70 AD): reads כארו (“pierced”). • Syriac Peshitta (2nd c. AD) and Latin Vulgate (Jerome, 4th–5th c. AD) likewise render “they pierced.” • Early Jewish Greek translators Aquila (2nd c. AD, revision of LXX) and Symmachus retain the sense of piercing. These witnesses all pre-date the oldest complete MT codices by several centuries. Ancient Witnesses Supporting “Like a Lion” • The medieval Masoretic manuscripts: Aleppo Codex (10th c.), Leningrad B19A (AD 1008). • Targum Psalms paraphrases: “As a lion they maul my hands and feet,” indicating the same consonantal base but trying to supply the missing verb. Internal Linguistic Evidence 1. Grammar: ka’ari (“like a lion”) lacks a verb and an object; the phrase “like a lion my hands and feet” is syntactically awkward in Hebrew and breaks the parallelism of the surrounding verbs (“surround,” “encircle,” v. 16). 2. Semantics: The root כוּר (“to bore, dig through”) underlies ka’aru; it matches the violent bodily imagery of vv. 14–18 (bones out of joint, heart melted, garments divided). 3. Comparative OT usage: elsewhere “lion” imagery always contains an action verb (“tear,” “devour,” etc.; cf. Psalm 7:2; 10:9). Psalm 22:16, if “lion,” would be unique in omitting the verb. Scribal Transmission and Possible Copyist Error • Visual similarity: In the archaic Hebrew script both waw (ו) and yod (י) are tiny strokes; a tired scribe in dim light could shorten a waw, creating a yod. • Harmonization tendency: Post-A.D. Jewish scribes, increasingly aware of Christian use of Psalm 22 as messianic prophecy, may have preferred the non-Christological reading retained in the MT. Yet the earlier evidence shows no such motive. Prophetic and Theological Coherence “They pierced” fits the psalm’s progression toward explicit fulfillment in the crucifixion: exposure of bones (v. 17), casting lots for garments (v. 18, fulfilled in John 19:24), universal proclamation of deliverance (vv. 27-31). Zechariah 12:10 likewise forecasts a “pierced” Messiah. All first-century New Testament authors quote Psalm 22 with this Christ-centered lens (e.g., Matthew 27:35, Hebrews 2:12). Implications for Translation Philosophy Formal-equivalence translations weigh earliest, widest, and most coherent evidence; thus they adopt “pierced.” Some committees, desiring strict MT conformity for the Hebrew canon used in modern Judaism, retain “lion” but often footnote the earlier reading. Why Modern English Versions Differ • Textual base chosen (MT vs. eclectic critical text). • The translator’s view of prophetic reference to Jesus. • Target audience: Jewish-Christian dialog editions favor MT to avoid perceived bias, whereas evangelical editions prioritize pre-Masoretic witnesses. Addressing Common Objections Objection : “The MT is the preserved Jewish text; changing it undermines inspiration.” Reply : Inspiration attaches to the autographs, not any one medieval copy. Earlier, geographically diverse manuscripts with consistent sense offer a more exact window into the original. Objection : “Christians read their theology back into the verse.” Reply : The Septuagint translators, pre-Christian Jews in Alexandria, had no motive to bolster a future gospel they could not foresee; yet they rendered “pierced.” This is data, not retroactive bias. Conclusion The preponderance of ancient textual, grammatical, and theological evidence favors the reading, “They pierced my hands and feet.” Differences among modern translations arise from varying priorities in textual sources and translation philosophies, not from contradiction within God’s Word. The consistent witness of Scripture, confirmed by the earliest manuscripts and fulfilled in the risen Christ, remains intact: the suffering Messiah’s hands and feet were indeed pierced for our salvation. |
    |