‘For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet’ (Psalm 22.16).

Editorial Note: The issues raised in this article remain current despite the fact that it refers to the New English Bible which is now not so commonly used as at the time of writing. Current translations have similarly erroneous translations. The United Bible Societies translations are a clear example:

Contemporary English Version: ‘Brutal enemies attack me like a pack of dogs, tearing at my hands and my feet’

The Good News:  ‘An evil gang is around me; like a pack of dogs they close in on me; they tear at my hands and feet’

New Revised Standard Version: ‘For dogs are all around me; a company of evildoers encircles me. My hands and feet have shriveled’

NET Bible (by Daniel Wallace): ‘Yes, wild dogs surround me—a gang of evil men crowd around me; like a lion they pin my hands and feet’ 

Modern English Version: ‘For dogs have encompassed me; the assembly of the wicked has enclosed me; like a lion they pin my hands and my feet’

The opening words of this Psalm, ‘My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?’ were quoted by the Lord Jesus Christ while He suffered on the cross, and many generations of believers have regarded the whole Psalm as Messianic, and the sufferings described in the Psalm as those of the crucified Redeemer. Verse 16 has been understood to refer to the nails piercing His hands and feet. Modern versions of the Bible offer the reader a variety of quite different renderings, which have in common the elimination of any possible prophetic reference to the crucifixion. When mystified readers ask for an explanation of the changes, they are sometimes told that the discovery of ancient manuscripts, and progress made by scholars in the study of the ancient languages, make it necessary to surrender some of the commonly received readings. If the enquirer has the temerity to press for a detailed explanation, the answer may be that the alterations are necessitated by considerations which cannot be made intelligible to an English reader who has no knowledge of the Biblical languages.

To many earnest enquirers this kind of reply falls far short of what they need, and they are entitled to suspect that there may be some weakness in a case which, in the opinion of its own advocates, cannot be made intelligible to intelligent people. Such enquirers may also be told by their ministers that they should not rest too much on the very questionable assumption that the text followed by the 13 translators of the Authorised Version was equal or superior to the copiously amended texts favoured by the present generation of Biblical scholars. They may even be told that their preference for the old version is merely an expression of over-confident ignorance.

Important Questions

Some of the modern renderings of Psalm 22.16 may well cause the reader to enquire—Have I been resting upon questionable assumptions? Is there some good reason for changing this verse, that I am incapable of understanding? Is my preference for the AV. rendering only evidence of the depth of my ignorance? The fact is that the old rendering—‘They pierced my hands and my feet’—is supported by good evidence, and should not be given up in favour of one or other of the modern alternatives, which strip the passage of its Messianic character.

The New English Bible reads, ‘they have hacked off my hands and my feet’, and a footnote describes this as a ‘probable reading’ and states that the Hebrew is ‘like a lion’. There are several incorrect statements here, as the words do not mean ‘hacked off‘; it is a most improbable reading; and the Hebrew does not say or mean ‘like a lion’. It is not particularly difficult to explain the considerations which prompted the translators to make these statements, or the considerations which should encourage readers to hold to the AV rendering as not only ‘probable’ but correct.

The Hebrew Text

The Hebrew text handed down from generation to generation and reproduced in the printed editions of the Hebrew Old Testament is generally called the ‘Masoretic‘ text, from the Hebrew word ‘massorah’. Those who were responsible for its preservation and transmission are referred to as the ‘Massoretes’. The Massoretes were careful not to change the text which they copied, but they wrote notes in the margins drawing attention to many details which would help a copyist ensure accuracy. These notes are referred to as the ‘Massorah Major’ and the ‘Massorah Parva’.

The Septuagint

In the third and second centuries B.C. the Hebrew Scriptures were translated into Greek for the benefit of Greek-speaking Jews in Egypt, and because of the tradition that this Greek translation was the work of 70 or 72 Jewish scholars commissioned by Ptolemy Philadelphus, it is referred to as the Version of the Seventy, the Septuagint, or LXX. This Greek version was by no means uniformly accurate, and the references to it in the New Testament by our Lord and the apostles do not authenticate the whole version, but only those passages which they quote exactly as they appear in the LXX.

The Jews objected very strongly to the way in which Christians used the LXX to demonstrate that the Messianic prophecies of the Old Testament were fulfilled in the Person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ, and as a result their attachment to the LXX was weakened. About the middle of the second century Aquila produced a revision of the LXX, and as he had once professed faith in Christ and subsequently rejoined the Jews, his object was to help the Jews and to oppose the Christians. It is hardly likely that he would have rendered Psalm 22.16 in a manner favourable to the Christian interpretation unless he was absolutely convinced that the Hebrew text bore this meaning. In such cases the testimony of an unbeliever is of considerable weight. Here perhaps we should add that about the middle of the second century A.D. Justin Martyr in his Dialogues with Trypho a Jew quotes the text as in the AV without calling forth any objection from the other side. It is therefore evident that in the early years of the Christian era the Jews were familiar with and accepted as genuine the rendering ‘pierced’. Early translations in Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopic, and Arabic use words of similar meaning. The Syriac uses the word commonly used to describe boring a martyr’s feet through with an auger.

The Massorah

There are two passages where the Masoretic Hebrew has the word which gives rise to the present discussion. These are Psalm 22.16 (actually verse 17 in the Hebrew), and Isaiah 38.13 and in both places the word is spelt-ca-ari (the first vowel as in ‘father’, the second as in ‘abet’, the third as ee in ‘meet’). The Masoretic note states that this word, with these vowel points, occurs twice with different meanings. The occurrence in Isaiah can only mean ‘as a lion’, so we are led to the conclusion that the occurrence in Psalm 22 does not mean ‘as a lion’.

There is another instance in Numbers 24.9 ‘He lay down as a lion,’ but here the vowel pointing is slightly different, the first vowel being shorter than the first vowel in the word as it appears in Psalm 22 and Isaiah 38. A Massoretic note to Numbers 24.9 asserts that in Psalm 22 the manuscript reading was ca-aru, not ca-ari. In this case the essential difference is between the final letters which are very similar in appearance in Hebrew writing. In sound the difference could be compared with that between English oo and ee.

The correct text and the correct translation

Some scholars have suggested that in Psalm 22.16 the spelling and pointing should not be ea-ari-as a lion, but ca-aru, meaning ‘they dug’ or ‘they pierced’. This may explain why the LXX translators and Aquila and others so confidently wrote ‘they pierced’, but there is another reason which is more probably the explanation. Ca-ari, the reading which stands in the Masoretic text, is also a shortened form of the plural, ca-arim and may be properly understood as ‘piercers’ or ‘diggers’. The text would thus read— ‘the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me—piercers of my hands and my feet’, and in Greek or in English or in any other language it would be consistent with good translation principles to render this— ‘they pierced my hands and my feet’.

The origin of the N.E.B ‘They hacked off my hands and feet’ is difficult to ascertain, but it is possible that the translators were influenced by Isaiah 38.13 ‘as a lion, so will he break all my bones’. In this verse the verb rendered ‘break’ may suggest tearing in pieces. The effect of so handling this verse in the N.E.B. text and footnote is that the verse no longer has anything to do with the Messiah. His hands and feet were not ‘hacked off‘ but ‘pierced’.

This article was first published in Quarterly Record 433. Last updated 2 July 2025.