Like a Lion or They Pierced? The Psalm 22 Mystery
We’ve explored several disparate passages now, and each time, the Septuagint has illuminated how the apostles read the Old Testament. Now we come to one of the most contested verses in all of Scripture—a single letter difference that changes a lion into a piercing, and a poetic lament into a crucifixion prophecy.
If you’re reading this in email, be aware that the text may cut off unexpectedly. For a smoother reading experience and all the features Substack has to offer, you can read on the website HERE or download the app for Android or iOS.
The Most Famous Psalm
Psalm 22 is burned into Christian consciousness. It’s the psalm Jesus quoted from the cross: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (v. 1). It’s the psalm that describes bones out of joint, a heart melted like wax, and evildoers surrounding the sufferer like dogs (vv. 14–16). It’s the psalm that speaks of pierced hands and feet, of garments divided, and lots cast (vv. 16, 18).
For two thousand years, Christians have read Psalm 22 as a prophetic portrait of the crucifixion. The parallels are too precise, too vivid, to be coincidental. David wrote it, but Christ fulfilled it.
But there’s one phrase— one crucial phrase —where your Bible’s translation depends entirely on which ancient text tradition you’re following.
Psalm 22:16 (KJV): “For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.”
Psalm 22:16 (WEBUS): “For dogs have surrounded me. A company of evildoers have enclosed me. They have pierced my hands and feet.”
Beautiful. Clear. Explicitly messianic. The crucifixion, predicted a thousand years before the cross.
Except... that’s not what the Hebrew says.
A Historical Aside
Crucially, this psalm was written more than five-hundred years before we have any evidence of crucifixion. Which is not to say that it didn’t exist, but the earliest evidence of crucifixion comes from Persia in 522 B.C.
According to the Greek historian Herodotos, Oroetus, the Persian satrap of Lydia, had Polycrates put to death before his lifeless body was crucified. This strongly suggests the practice was already known to the Achaemenid Empire during this time. We can extrapolate based on this that crucifixion (even if we expand the definition to include the hands and feet being bound by ropes rather than pierced with nails) was unlikely to have been known in Israel before 700 B.C. And in fact, they probably didn’t know of it until significantly later.
Admittedly, there is an earlier precursor to crucifixion. Namely, a punishment known as impalement. Which is, disturbingly, pretty much what it sounds like. I’ll save you the graphic explanation of exactly what it was and how it was done, though if you have a mind to you can read more about it HERE.
For our purposes, let us suffice to say that the victim would be impaled on a stake, frequently using some sort of paste that would slow or prevent bleeding, to prolong the suffering. It was a public form of torture and execution, therefore serving much the same purpose as later crucifixion.
The earliest known Assyrian evidence of impalement comes from the inscriptions and palace reliefs of Ashurnasirpal II in the early to mid 9th century B.C., which recount his conquests and the gruesome punishments inflicted on rebels and captives.
It is important to note, however, that impalement was a punishment had already been extensively practiced elsewhere in the near east. Our earliest evidence comes from Babylonia and The Code of Hammurabi from as early as 1772 B.C., which describes impalement as a punishment.
It is also well known in Egypt as early as the 13th century B.C., meaning it is no great stretch to imagine that Israel would have known of it from their dealings with Egypt around that time.
But since impalement never (so far as we know) entailed the piercing of hands or feet, it bears little relevance to our discussion of the “pierced” line in psalm 22. I’ve discussed this here largely as a rebuttal to any historians or other academics who might insist that when King David wrote psalm 22 he was just writing of things he might have known of rather than including details of a practice he clearly couldn’t know anything about.
What the Masoretic Text Says
Masoretic Hebrew Text (Psalm 22:17 in Hebrew verse numbering): “For dogs have surrounded me; a company of evildoers has encircled me; like a lion (כָּאֲרִי, ka’ari) my hands and my feet.”
Wait… like a lion?
That’s right. The Masoretic Text doesn’t say “they pierced.” It says “like a lion.” And grammatically, the phrase is awkward. It literally reads: “like a lion my hands and my feet.” No verb. Just a simile hanging in mid-air.
The Jewish Publication Society translates it this way: “Like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet.”
Some English translations try to smooth out the grammar by adding an implied verb: “like a lion, they maul my hands and my feet” or “like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet.”
But however you render it, one thing is clear: the Masoretic Text does not say “they pierced.”
So where did “pierced” come from?
What the Septuagint Says
Septuagint Greek Text: “For dogs have surrounded me; a council of the wicked has encircled me; they dug (ὤρυξαν, ōryxan) my hands and my feet.”
The Greek word ὤρυξαν (ōryxan) is the aorist indicative form of ὀρύσσω (oryssō), which means “to dig.” It’s the word you’d use for digging a well, digging a pit, or excavating the earth.
Now, “digging” and “piercing” aren’t exactly the same thing. But in context— when enemies are surrounding you, when your hands and feet are the object of the action —”digging” strongly implies violent penetration. The Septuagint translators saw (or read) something in the Hebrew text that led them to translate it as an act of brutal, invasive harm.
Early Christians, reading the Septuagint, understood ὤρυξαν as describing the nailing of Jesus’ hands and feet to the cross. And when later translations like the Latin Vulgate and the King James Version rendered Psalm 22:16, they followed the Septuagint’s interpretation, translating the phrase as “they pierced.”
But here’s the question: Did the Septuagint translators make a mistake? Did they have a different Hebrew text in front of them? Or is there another explanation?
The Hebrew Behind the Greek
To understand this, we need to look at the consonantal Hebrew text; the ancient text without vowel points.
Remember, ancient Hebrew was written without vowels. The Masoretes (Jewish scribes working between the 6th-10th centuries A.D.) added vowel points to standardize pronunciation. But before the Masoretes, Hebrew manuscripts contained only consonants.
The Masoretic Text reads the consonants in Psalm 22:16 as:
כָּאֲרִי = כ + א + ר + י = ka’ari (like a lion)
כ (k) = “like”
אֲרִי (ari) = “lion”
But the Septuagint translators apparently read the same (or similar) consonants differently. Scholars believe they were reading:
כָּאֲרוּ = כ + א + ר + ו = ka’aru
The only difference is the final letter: י (yod) vs. ו (vav).
In ancient Hebrew manuscripts— especially before the development of precise scribal standards —yod and vav could look very similar. A yod is a small vertical stroke. A vav is a vertical stroke that extends slightly lower. If a scribe’s handwriting was slightly unclear, or if ink faded over time, the two letters could easily be confused.
Now, here’s the thing: כָּאֲרוּ (ka’aru) isn’t actually a word in biblical Hebrew. At least, not as it stands.
But if you remove the aleph (א), you get כָּרוּ (karu), which is a word. It’s the third person plural perfect tense of the verb כָּרָה (karah), meaning “to dig.”
So the Septuagint translators apparently looked at כארו, recognized that it wasn’t a standard Hebrew word, assumed the aleph was either a scribal error or a vowel indicator, and read it as כרו, ”they dug.”
The Dead Sea Scrolls Evidence
For centuries, this was speculation. We didn’t have access to Hebrew manuscripts of Psalm 22 that predated the Masoretic Text. We had the Masoretic reading (”like a lion”) and the Septuagint’s translation (”they dug”), but no way to know which one reflected the original Hebrew or even if there might have been two textual traditions.
Until 1947.
In a cave near the Dead Sea, archaeologists discovered ancient scrolls, manuscripts of biblical texts that were centuries older than the Masoretic Text. Among these was a Psalms scroll from Nahal Hever (designated 5/6HevPs), dated to approximately 50-68 A.D.
This scroll is fragmentary. Large portions are damaged or missing. But one scrap contains Psalm 22:16.
And when scholars examined the manuscript under magnification, the word in question was clearly visible.
The Dead Sea Scroll reads: כארו (ka’aru), with a vav, not a yod.
This is huge. The Nahal Hever manuscript predates the Masoretic Text by nearly a thousand years. It’s not a Christian document, it’s a Jewish manuscript. It was produced in the context of Second Temple Judaism, decades before the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D.
And it supports the Septuagint reading.
The Septuagint translators weren’t “fooling with the text.” They weren’t inventing a Christological prophecy. They were faithfully translating the Hebrew manuscript they had in front of them. A manuscript that read כארו, not כארי.
What Does כארו Actually Mean?
Even with the Dead Sea Scrolls evidence, there’s still debate about what כארו means.
As I mentioned, כארו isn’t a standard biblical Hebrew word. But scholars have proposed several possibilities:
1. It’s a form of כָּרָה (karah) - “to dig”
This is the most common explanation. If כארו is related to כָּרָה, then it means “they dug” or “they excavated.” In the context of enemies surrounding you and attacking your hands and feet, “digging” could be understood as violent penetration; hence, “piercing.”
Genesis 26:25 uses כָּרָה to describe digging a well. Numbers 21:18 uses it for digging. So the root meaning is clear: to break through, to excavate, to make a hole.
2. It’s related to כּוּר (kur) - “to pierce, bore”
Some scholars suggest that כארו is an archaic spelling of a verb meaning “to pierce” or “to bore through.” In ancient Semitic languages, the consonants כ-ר sometimes appear with an aleph inserted for phonetic reasons. If כארו is related to this root, it would mean “they pierced” directly.
3. It’s a scribal variation or error
A few scholars argue that כארו is simply a scribal mistake, that the original text did say כארי (”like a lion”), and a scribe accidentally wrote a vav instead of a yod. This would mean the Masoretic Text preserves the original reading, and the Dead Sea Scroll manuscript contains an error.
But here’s the problem with this theory: the same scribe who wrote כארו in the Nahal Hever manuscript also made other spelling variations in the same verse. For instance, he wrote ידיה (yadeha, “her hands”) instead of ידי (yadai, “my hands”). Critics point to this as evidence that the scribe was sloppy and unreliable.
However, spelling variations were common in Second Temple period Hebrew. The standardization we see in the Masoretic Text came later. It’s entirely possible that both כארו and ידיה reflect legitimate textual variants from the Second Temple period. Therefore, not scribal errors but simply different manuscript traditions.
How Do We Make Sense of “Like a Lion”?
If we accept the Masoretic reading— כארי, “like a lion” —we’re left with an awkward, verbless phrase: “like a lion my hands and my feet.”
How do you interpret that?
The traditional Jewish reading supplies an implied verb: “like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet” or “like a lion, they maul my hands and my feet.”
This makes grammatical sense. Lions attack. They bite. They tear. The image is one of vicious assault. The psalmist is surrounded by enemies who are savaging him like wild beasts.
And there’s precedent for this imagery elsewhere in Psalm 22. Verse 13 says, “They open wide their mouths at me, like a ravening and roaring lion.” Verse 21 pleads, “Save me from the mouth of the lion!”
So the “lion” reading fits the broader metaphorical structure of the psalm. The psalmist is using animal imagery— dogs, lions, wild oxen —to describe his enemies.
But here’s the tension: if the Masoretic reading is correct, why did the Septuagint translators— native Hebrew speakers, intimately familiar with their own language and culture —translate it as “they dug”? Why didn’t they recognize כארי as “like a lion”?
The most plausible answer is that they weren’t reading כארי. They were reading כארו, as the Dead Sea Scroll confirms.
The Christological Question
Here’s where things get theologically loaded.
Christians have always read Psalm 22 as a prophecy of Christ’s crucifixion. The opening cry— ”My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” —is directly quoted by Jesus on the cross (Matthew 27:46; Mark 15:34). The description of the sufferer’s bones being out of joint, his heart melting, his strength drying up, evildoers surrounding him, and his garments being divided by casting lots… all of this maps onto the Gospel narratives of the crucifixion with stunning precision.
If Psalm 22:16 says “they pierced my hands and my feet,” the prophecy is complete. It’s explicit. It’s undeniable.
But if it says “like a lion my hands and my feet,” the reference to crucifixion becomes less direct. You have to interpret the metaphor. You have to infer the violence. The prophecy is still there— still powerful —but it’s veiled in imagery rather than stated plainly.
So which reading is original?
The Textual Evidence
Let’s summarize the evidence:
Supporting “like a lion” (כארי):
The Masoretic Text (6th-10th century A.D.)
The majority of medieval Hebrew manuscripts
The Aramaic Targum (which adds “bite” to clarify the sense)
Some modern Jewish translations
Supporting “they dug/pierced” (כארו):
The Septuagint (translated c. 250-140 B.C.)
The Dead Sea Scroll from Nahal Hever (c. 50-68 A.D.)
A handful of medieval Hebrew manuscripts (Manuscripts 39, 267, 270, 277, 288, 660 from the Kennicott collection)
The Syriac Peshitta
The Latin Vulgate
Most Christian translations
The key piece of evidence is the Dead Sea Scroll. It’s the oldest manuscript we have, and it clearly supports the Septuagint reading.
But it’s also a fragmentary, damaged text, produced by a scribe who used other spelling variations in the same verse. So some scholars remain cautious about building too much on it.
What Did David Mean?
There’s another layer to this: even if we determine the original wording, we still have to ask what David meant when he wrote Psalm 22.
Was David prophesying the crucifixion? Or was he simply describing his own suffering in vivid, poetic language? Is it possible this suffering only later came to be understood as foreshadowing Christ?
The traditional Christian answer is both. David was writing out of his own experience of distress; surrounded by enemies, feeling abandoned by God, suffering physically and emotionally. But under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, his words reached beyond his immediate situation to describe a future suffering Servant who would endure even greater agony.
This is how the New Testament reads the Psalms. Peter, in his Pentecost sermon, quotes Psalm 16 as David speaking prophetically about the Messiah’s resurrection, even though David himself didn’t rise from the dead (Acts 2:25-31). Jesus interprets Psalm 110 as David speaking about the Messiah (Matthew 22:41-45).
So when we read Psalm 22, we’re reading David’s words and the Spirit’s prophecy. The two layers coexist. David’s suffering prefigures Christ’s suffering. His deliverance foreshadows Christ’s resurrection and exaltation.
Whether the text says “like a lion” or “they pierced,” the psalm still points to Jesus. The question is merely how explicit that pointer is.
Why This Matters
You might be thinking: Okay, so there’s a textual variant. Why does it matter?
It matters because Psalm 22 is one of the most frequently cited Old Testament passages in Christian apologetics. It’s used to demonstrate that the crucifixion was prophesied centuries before it happened. It’s used to show that Jesus is the Messiah predicted by the Hebrew Scriptures.
If Christians insist that Psalm 22:16 must say “they pierced my hands and my feet,” and if Jewish scholars can point to the Masoretic Text and say, “Actually, it says ‘like a lion,’” then we have a problem.
But when we acknowledge the textual evidence honestly— when we point to the Septuagint, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the early manuscript tradition —we can say: Both readings exist in the ancient sources. The evidence strongly suggests the original text said “they dug/pierced.” But even if it said “like a lion,” the imagery still describes violent assault on the psalmist’s hands and feet, and Christians are interpreting that assault through the lens of Christ’s crucifixion.
This is why comparing the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint isn’t about undermining Scripture. It’s about understanding the transmission of Scripture. Understanding how it was copied, translated, and preserved across centuries and cultures.
The Dead Sea Scrolls vindicate the Septuagint in so many ways. They show that the Greek translators weren’t making things up. They were faithfully rendering the Hebrew text they had, a text that, in Psalm 22:16, read כארו, not כארי.
The Early Church’s Reading
The early Church universally understood Psalm 22 as a prophecy of Christ’s passion. And they read it in the Septuagint.
Justin Martyr (c. 150 A.D.), in his Dialogue with Trypho, explicitly quotes Psalm 22:16 as “they pierced my hands and my feet” and argues that this was fulfilled in Jesus’ crucifixion.
Tertullian (c. 200 A.D.) uses Psalm 22:16 to defend the doctrine of Christ’s physical suffering against Gnostic heresies that claimed Jesus only appeared to suffer.
Augustine (c. 400 A.D.) preaches on Psalm 22, interpreting the piercing of hands and feet as a direct prophecy of the nails driven through Christ’s body.
The Church Fathers weren’t inventing a prophecy. They were reading their Bible— the Septuagint —and seeing Jesus in it. And as we’ve already discussed, the manuscript evidence supports them.
Jewish Interpretation
Post-Christian Jewish interpretation has, understandably, moved away from Christological readings of Psalm 22.
Medieval Jewish commentators like Rashi and Ibn Ezra interpret the psalm as David’s lament during his persecution by Saul, or as a description of Israel’s suffering in exile. They read “like a lion” as a metaphor for enemies attacking the psalmist.
Modern Jewish translations follow the Masoretic Text and avoid any hint of crucifixion imagery.
And that’s fine. Jewish and Christian readers bring different theological frameworks to the text. We’re asking different questions and seeing different layers of meaning.
But what’s fascinating is that the ancient textual evidence— the Dead Sea Scrolls, produced by Jews —supports the reading that Christians have emphasized.
This doesn’t prove Christianity is true. But it does show that “they pierced” isn’t a Christian invention. It’s an ancient Jewish reading, preserved in both the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls.
The Beauty of Both Readings
Here’s what I find remarkable: both readings— ”like a lion” and “they pierced” —point to the same reality.
If the text says “like a lion my hands and my feet,” it’s describing brutal, tearing, mauling violence inflicted on the psalmist’s extremities. Lions don’t gently nuzzle. They rip. They destroy. The imagery is vivid and horrifying.
If the text says “they dug/pierced my hands and my feet,” it’s describing penetration, invasion, the breaking through of flesh. It’s equally violent, equally horrifying.
In both cases, the psalmist is suffering physical agony at the hands (or paws) of enemies. His hands and feet— the parts of the body used for action and movement —are under assault.
And when Christians read this psalm in light of the crucifixion, both readings fit. Jesus’ hands and feet were pierced. They were torn. The nails didn’t just puncture, they shredded tendons, crushed bones, caused excruciating pain with every breath.
The Masoretic reading gives us the metaphor. The Septuagint gives us the direct statement. Together, they give us the full picture.
Where We Go From Here
We’ve now explored five passages where the Septuagint and the Masoretic Text diverge:
Isaiah 7:14: Virgin or young woman—the Septuagint’s parthenos gives us the explicit virgin birth prophecy.
Psalm 40:6: Opened ears or prepared body—the Septuagint’s incarnational language frames Hebrews’ theology.
Genesis 3:15: Crushing or watching—the Masoretic and Septuagint together show us both victory and vigilance.
Amos 9:12: Edom or Adam—the Septuagint’s reading shaped the Jerusalem Council’s decision on Gentiles.
Psalm 22:16: Like a lion or they pierced—the Dead Sea Scrolls support the Septuagint’s Christological reading.
In each case, we’re not choosing one text over the other. We’re recognizing that God has given us His Word in multiple languages, through multiple manuscript traditions, and that comparing them enriches our understanding.
The Septuagint isn’t just an ancient curiosity. It’s the Bible the apostles used. It’s the text that shaped the early Church’s understanding of Jesus. And as the Dead Sea Scrolls continue to reveal, it often preserves older, more original readings than the Masoretic Text.
Next time, we’ll look at a passage from Daniel where the difference between the Hebrew and Greek isn’t a textual variant, but a profound theological distinction—one that shapes how we understand the nature of the fourth man in the fiery furnace.
Until then, remember: whether Psalm 22:16 says “like a lion” or “they pierced,” it points to the same Savior. The One whose hands and feet bore the marks of our redemption, the One who cried out in agony and rose in triumph, the One who fulfilled every jot and tittle of Scripture, even when those jots and tittles were separated by a single stroke of a scribe’s pen.
If you’ve found this helpful or insightful, please share it with a friend who loves Scripture as much as you do.
And if you want to go deeper with a full exploration of the “70 Weeks” of Daniel 9, a deep exploration of biblical idolatry with modern context, and other exclusive content, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Your support makes this work possible.
On the other hand, if you appreciate what I’m doing and want to support this work but aren’t interested in a membership, please consider buying me a coffee as a one-time show of support
© 2025 LXX Scrolls. All rights reserved.