Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 3
Using Psalm 22:16 (“like the lion” vs. “they have pierced”), Adam treats the Septuagint reading as obviously superior because the Masoretic reading “makes very little sense”; what standard is being used to decide between readings (clarity, meaning, theology, manuscript evidence), and how comfortable should Christians be letting “what makes sense” influence textual decisions?
Another way to ask: In Psalm 22:16, Adam prefers “they have pierced” because “like the lion” seems to not make sense. What should decide between readings—meaning, theology, manuscript evidence, or what sounds clearer—and how much should “what makes sense” matter?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
In that example Adam mainly uses intelligibility and internal coherence—does the reading produce meaningful sense?—supported by a plausible scribal-error explanation (one-letter difference). He seems comfortable letting “what makes sense” matter, but as part of a broader textual-evidence judgment, not as mere preference.
- He contrasts MT “Like the lion, my hands and my feet” with LXX “They have pierced my hands and my feet,” saying the MT reading is “hard to make sense out of.”
- He notes nearly all English Bibles choose the LXX here: “that’s why nearly every English Bible… goes with the Septuagint.”
- He adds a manuscript-mechanics argument: the Hebrew forms differ by “only different in one letter,” and the two letters “look very similar in shape,” making scribal confusion “very easy.”
- His logic is not only theological; it is also about how copying errors happen (damaged manuscripts, similar letters).
- Across the talk he uses multiple criteria: clarity/flow, alignment with NT quotations, and identifying corruption/omissions.