Psalm 22:16

[Curry]

Anyone know/understand why Dr. Peter Flint in his recent books translates the Psalm 22:16 Dead Sea Scrolls/Nahal Hever fragment (5/6HevPs) as they have pierced? As currently rendered (in one of his books), the word has no meaning in either Hebrew or Aramaic.

[barryrob]

Anyone know/understand why Dr. Peter Flint in his recent books translates the Psalm 22:16 Dead Sea Scrolls/Nahal Hever fragment (5/6HevPs) as they have pierced? As currently rendered (in one of his books), the word has no meaning in either Hebrew or Aramaic.
When you have a little time see the rendeing of this verse in the LXX, it might help.
Barryrob

[barryrob]

When you have a little time see the rendeing of this verse in the LXX, it might help.
Barryrob
Or better still try rendering

[Menachem]

When you have a little time see the rendeing of this verse in the LXX, it might help.
Barryrob


the rendering in the Scrolls from Nehal Hever have no connotation of the word pierced....The word is in fact the word כארי with and extended י (Yod). Reading this incorrectly as a Vav would make the word a nonexistant hebrew word..

The Greek word "Oruskan" used in the Modern Septuagint LXX according to An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon By Henry George Liddel comes from the word Orusso and does not have the meaning of pierced but rather that of "to dig[a trench]." The rendering of this verse int he LXX does not Help but rather the Hebrew does and should be read as "Like a Lion." The rendering of "like a lion" is also shown in the ancient Aramaic Targumim for the Psalms...

Hope this helps...

[dizzle]

Eli is incorrect. I spoke with Flint on this issue, and it is clear what the word in fact is and it appears in two DSS fragments

Iit is incorrect that this is not a legitimate word, and it even appears in some MT manuscripts. The Hebrew Publishing Society Interlinear Bible even preserved that word on the Hebrew side, though the English did have the lion rendering.

Glenn Miller does a great job with this issue

[BlueFalcon]

The Greek word "Oruskan" used in the Modern Septuagint LXX according to An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon By Henry George Liddel comes from the word Orusso and does not have the meaning of pierced but rather that of "to dig[a trench]."

"To dig" is a simple gloss but in Ps 22:16 wruxan most certainly has the meaning of to gouge, i.e., to pierce.

Yours,

GreekBlueFalcon

[Menachem]

Eli is incorrect. I spoke with Flint on this issue, and it is clear what the word in fact is and it appears in two DSS fragments

Funny, I spoke with Emanuel Tov and he seems to uphold my claim...The DSS actually dont preserve this Psalm so that claim would be in error...see DJD xxxviii pg. 162

Iit is incorrect that this is not a legitimate word, and it even appears in some MT manuscripts. The Hebrew Publishing Society Interlinear Bible even preserved that word on the Hebrew side, though the English did have the lion rendering.

which MT texts were those.. I'll bet you ten dollars they were sribal copying errors and were discarded texts that were found by chance...The Hebrew publishing society you say, I just did a search on Amazon for this bible and came up empty. Please provide a link so that I can examine this more closely....

Glenn Miller does a great job with this issue

and so does Geza Vermes:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/080063229X/qid=1093533271/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-1452387-3006529?v=glance&s=books

He does an even better Job

[Menachem]

"To dig" is a simple gloss but in Ps 22:16 wruxan most certainly has the meaning of to gouge, i.e., to pierce.

Yours,

GreekBlueFalcon

Henry George Lydell seems to disagree with that...also in his dictionary He doesnt seem to even list this in any way associated with "piercing" or "goughing."