Anti-Missionary Arguments

Tampering with the Text: Psalm 16:9-10

The Anti-missionary’s charge:

Psalm 16:9-10 “Therefore my heart is glad and my glory rejoiceth: my flesh also shall rest in hope. (10) For thou will not leave my soul in hell, neither will you suffer thine Holy One to see corruption”. Why not continue to the next verse? They can't because David wasn't talking about Jesus. David was talking about himself. 16:11 “You will show me the path of life, in your presence is fullness of joy; at your right hand there are pleasures for evermore”.

Psalm 16:9-10 “Therefore, my heart rejoiced and my soul was glad; even my flesh shall dwell in safety. (10) For You shall not forsake my soul to the grave; You shall not allow Your pious one to see the pit.” Where is HELL and CORRUPTION as the New Testament puts it?

The Hebrew translation of Psalm 16:10 tells of David again talking to God, rejoicing that God will not forsake his soul to the grave. While David is alive he will dwell in safety because God will protect his flesh from injury. In the very next verse (11) David wrote, Does verse 11 relate to Jesus?

HaDavar response

Jacob, we have some significant areas of agreement here. First let me refer my earlier comments entitled “The Four Ways the Brit Chadashah (New testament) Uses the Hebrew Scriptures.” There I stated the New Testament consistently uses the Hebrew Scriptures in four ways. This is example of Literal Prophecy plus a philosophical or typical fulfillment (Remez). Let me just paste in some comments from the Bible Knowledge Commentary. I think they deal with the passage quite well, and I think you will agree. The Bible Knowledge Commentary is written by conservative, dispensational scholars from Dallas Theological Seminary. Dallas Theological Seminary is an independent seminary unaffiliated with any particular denomination and very solid theologically.

David was assured that the Lord would preserve his life in the face of death. He rejoiced because God enabled his body to rest securely even when confronted with death. The reason he could rest is that God would not abandon him to the grave, nor . . . let His holy one see decay. This verse refers to David, who describes himself as God’s “holy one,” that is, one of God’s saints (cf. v. 3). He took comfort in the fact that God would not, at that time, allow his body to die and decay in the grave. In fact God had caused him to know the path of life so he anticipated experiencing further joy in God’s presence (v. 11).

Verses 8-11 were cited by Peter on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:25-28) and Psalm 16:10b was quoted by Paul at Antioch (Acts 13:35-37) in reference to Christ’s resurrection. So the words of David are also typological; they transcended his own experience and became historically true in Christ. Preservation from the decaying grave is the idea behind both David’s and Jesus’ experiences, but with David it came through a deliverance from death, whereas with Jesus it came through a resurrection from death.

Now let me paste in Peter’s comments.

Acts 2:25-32

25 “For David says of Him, ‘I was always beholding the Lord in my presence; For He is at my right hand, that I may not be shaken.

26 ‘Therefore my heart was glad and my tongue exulted; Moreover my flesh also will abide in hope;

27 Because Thou wilt not abandon my soul to Hades, Nor allow Thy Holy One to undergo decay.

28 ‘Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; Thou wilt make me full of gladness with Thy presence.’

29 “Brethren, I may confidently say to you regarding the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 30 “And so, because he was a prophet, and knew that God had sworn to him with an oath to seat one of his descendants upon his throne, 31 he looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that He was neither abandoned to Hades, nor did His flesh suffer decay.

32 “This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all witnesses.

First of all please note that Peter does quote verse 11 (Acts 2:28). He considers the verse germane to his argument so he includes it. His main point is that this Psalm could not be totally true of David because David’s body did indeed suffer corruption and decay when David eventually died. David cannot be referring only to himself. David’s words transcend David’s personal experience. However, Peter has been part of another literal event that fits David’s words without qualification. Therefore, in Peter’s thinking David’s words foreshadow what happened in regard to Jesus. David was a prophet and was looking ahead to the Messianic King.

Now it’s Paul’s turn.

Acts 13:35-37

35 “Therefore He also says in another Psalm, ‘Thou wilt not allow Thy Holy One to undergo decay.’

36 “For David, after he had served the purpose of God in his own generation, fell asleep, and was laid among his fathers, and underwent decay;

37 but He whom God raised did not undergo decay."

Note that Paul does not quote verse 11. He did not consider verse 11 necessary to his argument. However, his point is still the same as Peter’s (verse 37). Paul also says that we cannot limit the message in this Psalm to David because David doesn’t fit the statement—David eventually experienced corruption. However, Jesus did not experience physical corruption, because He was resurrected. Again, a literal prophecy with at typical fulfillment (Remez).

Both are arguing from the lesser to the greater. David was temporarily preserved from the grave during his lifetime and eventually did undergo the grave and corruption. That's the lesser. However, Jesus conquered the grave and corruption through resurrection. That's the greater.

Finally, the Hebrew word for hell (KJV) is Sheol, the place of the dead, the grave, the pit, the underworld. I agree with you, “Hell” is not a very good translation since it is really the rendering of a Saxon word rather than the Hebrew. However, while the KJV translators did a poor job in 1611, modern translators have not. Sheol is the word of choice in the NASB, ASV, RSV, The NIV uses “grave” which is quite acceptable and the JPS uses “nether-world”—also quite acceptable.

The Hebrew word for corruption (KJV) is Shahat which means “pit” (both a literal pit and the pit of Sheol), and destruction. The JPS and RSV choose pit—certainly an acceptable choice. Other solid translations focus on this idea of destruction and so use appropriate terms—NASB, NIV (decay), ASV, KJV (corruption). Certainly these are acceptable choices as well.

The 1st century Messianic Jews Peter and Paul obviously understood the term to refer to decay and corruption. It is up to the reader to hear their message and decide whether they agree or not. However, I don’t see a tremendous amount of difference between “pit” and “corruption.” Jesus conquered both the “pit” and “corruption” through resurrection. David did eventually experience the “pit” and his body underwent “corruption.” However, I am quite confident that David’s soul was not abandoned to the “nether world” (JPS) because of his personal relationship of trust in God. David’s earthly body may be dust today, but I am confident that he lives on experiencing the glory of God at this very moment.

I guess my final comment is again the fact that I don’t see tampering with the text here. The KJV is not the unassailable and unquestionable standard of English translation. The text is available to us and every English translation, Jewish or Non-Jewish, has its strength and weaknesses. Nobody is trying to deceive anybody in order to get them to change religions. However, we are attempting to get a message of “Good News” out to the entire world. If you had the cure for cancer you would try to do the same thing.