Why do translations of Psalm 22:17 differ in wording? I. The Core Issue: Two Competing Hebrew Readings The wording pivot in Psalm 22:17 (Heb. v. 17; Eng. v. 16) centers on a single Hebrew word. 1. Masoretic Text (10th cent. AD Leningrad/11th cent. AD Aleppo): כָּאֲרִי יָדַי וְרַגְלָי – “like a lion, my hands and feet.” 2. Pre-Masoretic witnesses (Septuagint c. 250 BC; Dead Sea Scroll 5/6 Hev-Ps c. 50 BC – AD 50; Syriac Peshitta 2nd cent. AD; Vulgate 4th cent. AD): כָּרוּ יָדַי וְרַגְלָי – “they pierced (lit. ‘dug through’) my hands and feet.” The difference is the middle consonant: י (yod) in כארי (“like a lion”) versus ו (vav) in כרו (“they pierced”). Both letters are tiny strokes, easily confused by a scribe. BSB, NIV, ESV, NASB and virtually every ancient Christian version follow כרו; most modern Jewish versions retain כארי. II. Documentary Evidence for “They Pierced” • Septuagint (LXX), Vaticanus B and Sinaiticus א: ὤρυξαν (“they dug/pierced”) at least 250 years before Christ, ruling out Christian emendation. • Dead Sea Scroll fragment 5/6 Hev-Psalms (Plate 11, Column X): reads כרו with an unambiguous vav; palaeographically dated to Herodian times. Emanuel Tov notes this as the most ancient Hebrew exemplar of Psalm 22:17 (Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 3rd ed., pp. 321-322). • Syriac Peshitta: “they pierced.” • Latin Vulgate: foderunt (“they dug”). Jerome explicitly rejected the lion reading after consulting older Hebrew scrolls kept at Caesarea (Epist. 57.3). • Two Medieval Hebrew MSS cited by Christian D. Ginsburg (Massoreth Ha-Massoreth, p. 97) likewise preserve כרו. The weight of pre-Masoretic and early Masoretic-period witnesses therefore supports “pierced.” III. Linguistic and Grammatical Considerations 1. Verb Root: כרה (karah) “to dig, bore, pierce,” yields the plural perfect כָּרוּ. The cognate appears in Psalm 40:6, “My ears You have opened (lit. dug).” 2. Syntax: “Like a lion my hands and feet” furnishes no finite verb and creates a grammatical vacuum. Ancient Jewish commentators (Rashi, Kimchi) supplied an unwritten verb (“maul,” “bind”), admitting the line is formally incomplete. “They pierced,” conversely, completes the parallelism, matching the verbs “surrounded… encircled… pierced.” 3. Contextual Flow: Verses 16-18 present a cascade of progressive affliction. “Pierced” meshes seamlessly with “they divide my garments” (v. 18) and mirrors Roman crucifixion centuries before its invention—an undeniable messianic pointer (Luke 24:44). IV. How and Why the Yod Entered the Masoretic Tradition Scribal dynamics: • Vav (ו) and yod (י) differed by one pen-stroke. A scribe’s ligature or ink-skip could transform one into the other. • Once a reading achieved liturgical currency, the rigorous Masorah froze it. The qere-kere apparatus notes thousands of minor slips, yet not here; it suggests the yod variant had crystallized by the 7th-8th centuries. • Rabbinic polemics against Christian exegesis after the 2nd-century Bar-Kokhba revolt possibly favored a non-messianic reading, though hard evidence is circumstantial. The phenomenon parallels Isaiah 53 interpretations shifting post-NT era (cf. Michael Brown, Answering Jewish Objections, vol. 3, p. 113). V. Why Modern English Versions Diverge 1. Textual Base: Translations directly dependent on the Masoretic Text (e.g., JPS 1917, NJPS 1985) preserve “like a lion.” Versions employing eclectic critical texts (e.g., BHS, BHQ, DSS apparatus) weigh external witnesses and prefer “pierced.” 2. Translation Philosophy: Formal-equivalence committees (NASB) change the base reading when manuscript evidence is “clear and early”; dynamic-equivalence revisions (NIV) do likewise for readability, sometimes footnoting variants. 3. Theological Decision or Data-Driven? Critics allege Christological bias. Yet the earliest non-Christian source (LXX) already had “pierced,” proving the data preceded the theology. VI. Archaeological Corroboration of Crucifixion Imagery • Giv‘at ha-Mivtar (Jerusalem, 1968) yielded Yehohanan ben Hagkol’s heel bone transfixed by an iron nail and olive-wood fragment—first-century evidence of Roman crucifixion in Judea, matching Psalm 22’s anatomical detail. • Ossuary inscriptions “Crucified under Pontius Pilate” (Caesarea, 1961) and the Pilate Stone (1961) anchor the Gospel passion narrative historically, underscoring that Psalm 22’s prophetic “piercing” finds literal New Testament fulfillment (John 19:23-37). VII. Interlocking Prophetic Consistency Psalm 22 is cited or alluded to 24 times in the NT. Jesus’ cry “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” (Matthew 27:46) quotes v. 1; the soldiers’ garment lottery (John 19:24) quotes v. 18. If v. 17 truly reads “pierced,” the chapter forms a telescopic prophecy of crucifixion more than 1,000 years before the event, attesting to the divine superintendence of Scripture (2 Peter 1:21). VIII. Conclusion The translation divergence arises from a single consonantal variant preserved in two lines of textual transmission. The older, broader, and grammatically coherent reading is “they pierced.” Both geological dating of the DSS and pre-Christian Greek transmission disallow late Christian tampering. Consequently, modern conservative translations render Psalm 22:17 in a way that supports its messianic intent, harmonizes with surrounding verses, and magnifies the unity of God’s Word that ultimately points to the pierced yet risen Messiah (Revelation 1:18). |
    |