A Jewish response: Three Old Testament Biblical Passages Misinterpreted as Referencing Jesus

Recently, PJ Media published a piece purporting to demonstrate that three Biblical passages refer to the crucifixion of the Messiah. The piece erroneously refers to all three of these passages as “prophecies,” and wrenches them out of context in the attempt to make the point. I have been asked to offer a response indicating what these passages really mean.

The first, which is not a “prophecy,” is Psalms XXII, 16-18. The salient passage is actually at the end of verse 17, which the author renders as follows: “They have pierced my hands and my feet.” On the basis of this reading, he concludes that “the Psalmist” (who is unambiguously identified in verse 2 of the Psalm as King David; we need no vague “ascription” in either Jewish or Christian tradition since it is part of the text) is predicting an event said to have occurred some 900 years in the future from his time.

The problem is that the original text says nothing of the sort. This is how verse 17 reads in the original (in transliteration, for those who don’t read Hebrew): Ki sevavuni kelavim, ‘adath mera‘im heqifuni, ka’ari yadai veraglai. An accurate English translation is: “For dogs have surrounded me, a community of evil-doers has hemmed me in, like a lion, my hands and feet.”

The verb “pierce” doesn’t occur anywhere in the passage; the reader will also note the verb tense, which is perfective, referring to a situation which has already occurred and is a current fact.

Putting this into the context of the rest of the Psalm, it is a lament by King David who feels G-d-forsaken and abandoned, beset by his enemies on all sides -- E-li E-li lamma ‘azavtani (“My G-d, my G-d, why have you abandoned me?”) -- and goes on to discuss his trials. He then prays: Ve’atta Ha-Shem al tirchaq eyaluthi le‘ezrathi chisha. Hatzila mecherev nafshi, miyad kelev yechidathi. Hoshi‘eni mipi arye, umiqarnei remim ‘anithani (“And You, Ha-Shem, my strength, be not distant, hasten to my aid. Rescue from the sword my life, from the hand of a dog my soul. Save me from the mouth of the lion, You have answered me from the horns of remim” [the rem was a large, horned beast, now extinct, which was apparently still around in David’s day].) It goes on in this vein until the end.

We can’t know for certain, but this Psalm was probably composed about the time King Sha’ul was hunting David down, or perhaps during the revolt of his son Avshalom, when he was also being pursued. In this vein, it is similar to other Psalms which David composed at times of great stress, when it seemed his prayers weren’t being answered; see Psalms CXVIII, 10-12: Kol goyim sevavuni, beshem Ha-Shem ki amilam. Sabbuni gam sevavuni, beshem Ha-Shem ki amilam. Sabbuni kidvorim do‘achu ke’esh qotzim, beshem Ha-Shem ki amilam (“All nations have surrounded me, for in the name of Ha-Shem I will destroy them. They enveloped me, also surrounded me, for in the name of Ha-Shem I will destroy them. They enveloped me like bees, thorns stung like fire, in the name of Ha-Shem I will destroy them.”)

This is the problem with Martin Luther’s version of “sola scripture”: which version shall we follow?

The Septuagint was created by Jews and was utterly unambiguous. It is this version (or perhaps a related Hebrew version that the Septuagint was translated from) that Jesus cited.

The differences were pointed out to St. Jerome, who largely went with the Hebrew version he had been given by Jews, instead of the Septuagint, even pointing out the total absence of seven entire books. He was accused of denying the scriptural authority of those books, a charge he bitterly resented.

The Catholic church used the translation created by St. Jerome, but continued to use the seven books absent from St. Jerome’s Hebrew source, and continued to use the New Testament’s Greek verbatim, even where doing so created pretty big contradictions between the New Testament and the Old Testament passages it cites.

So which version should Christians follow

The important things to note:

1) The Septuagint was NOT a poor translation, as St. Jerome had been led to believe. We can read Hebrew texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls which corroborate that the Septuagint was a good translation, just from a slightly different source than the Jews now use.

2) The Septuagint was made by Jews for use by Jews before Christ. As such, any foretelling in the Septuagint was still prophetic.

3) The Septuagint, or perhaps the Hebrew text on which it was based, was the version cited by Christ, so it should be regarded as authoritative for Christians, wherever the Septuagint and the Masoretic text differ. (How does a woman giving birth outside wedlock prove the majesty of God? The Septuagint tells us that the sign of the coming of the messiah will be a virgin giving birth!)

Therefore, no Christian should be troubled in their faith by claims that the New Testament’s prophecy fulfillments were mere a misunderstanding or deliberate misreading of the Tanakh (”Old Testament”).

However,

Since Jews do not recognize the authority of the Septuagint, it is useless to attempt to persuade Jews to convert to Christianity based on portions of the Tanakh found only in the Septuagint, or using wordings unique to the Septuagint.

THIS is what many historical Church leaders were stating when they argued against basing doctrinal arguments solely on the books “missing” from the Jewish Tanakh. They were NOT advocating that Christians should regard them as inferior books for their own spiritual growth, nor that they be removed from the bible (they weren’t removed), nor from the mass (again, they weren’t removed).

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.