View Single Post
  #8  
Old 01-08-2009, 11:02 AM
Tmonk Tmonk is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 82
Default

Yes the KJV translators did use it as a word reference given the odd nature of the Hebrew language. Also they used the OT of the Latin as a comparison. Along with previous English translations. In the 1611 preface it is referred to as "The Seventy"

The pierce or lion argument is somewhat complicated. The entire debate is whether the Hebrew reads k'aru (pierced) or k'ari (like a lion). The difference between the Yud and Vev are small but the DSS has kaaru which seems to agree with the LXX and Syriac and also the Latin.

"Among the Dead Sea Scrolls, the reading in question is not preserved at Qumran, but in the Psalms scroll from Nahal Hever (5/6HevPs), which is textually very close to the Masoretic Text. In line 12 of column 10 we read: "They have pierced my hands and feet"! For the crucial work () the Hebrew form is grammatically difficult; but it is clearly a verb, not a noun and means they have bored or they have dug or they have pierced."

So obviously have a Jewish misinterpretation of the verse to deny Christ. I hope clears it up for you. Also, the same word is translated as dig or opened throughout the rest of the OT, but literally means to dig in, bore through.


"My friend says that before the uncovering of the DSS (Dead Sea Scrolls), there were virtually no authoritative mss with a Hebrew basis for this reading. The only textual foundation for this reading was the LXX. He also says the only difference in rendering this passage differently is whether there is a jod or a vav."

True, but the Jewish translation of this passage also pretty much stands alone. The "lion" rendering is basically a Jewish bias. The majority of the ancient translations read pierced. Only the MT, Targums and the Symmachus greek read "like a lion".

There is more evidence of a Jewish altering than anything