Are you sure? This passage is quoted by first time by Justine Martyr (middle of the second Century). See here:
http://vridar.org/?s=pierced+my+hands .
If I had suggested the contrary in this forum I apologise. I suspected that there was something no clear and I have confirmed it.
That’s why we know that Paul assigns to Scriptures “that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures” and “that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures”. (1 Cor. 15:3–8). No mention of the cross here and no quotes of biblical passages that had suggested his interpretation of the crucifixion of the Lord. This reinforces my presumption that Paul has other sources that the Bible and revelations. Perhaps you can provide us with a Pauline passage where we can identify his biblical source of crucifixion. The epistle to Corinthians is not the case.
David, have a look at the Wiki entry on this Psalms-22 passage (see link and first paragraph reproduced below).
However - it really does not matter what your link to Vridar says on this at all. Because I am not saying that Paul could find any literally specific mention of a crucified messiah in the original Hebrew OT.
All that I am saying is that Paul
believed that certain OT prophecies, and possibly other earlier religious writing too (eg the Dead Sea Scrolls) had various passages for which Paul believed God had given him the power to understand a true meaning as references to the messiah … whatever was actually written, Paul believed that the passages actually contained hidden meaning telling him that the messiah had been persecuted, killed, and raised on the third day. And that’s what it means in Paul’s letters when it repeatedly insists that his knowledge of the messiah has been revealed to him by God and Jesus in accordance with scripture.
Apart from which, also keep in mind that the earliest copy we have of what Paul was supposed to have originally written about a crucifixion, dates to around c.200AD as P46. And that is about 50 years after the usual date of the writing from Justyn Martyr.
In that Vridar article, I think it merely says that quote
“ … it is clear that the earliest indisputable knowledge of this Greek text of Psalm 22:16 is from the mid-second century with Justin Martyr.” … but that is by no means saying that the Septuagint text saying “pierced” (or similar mistranslation) was not in fact in common circulation in the early 1st century at the time of Paul … it (Vridar) is only saying that the earliest definite known mention is mid second century … whereas, according to the Wiki entry (see below) the Septuagint was written as early as 2nd-3rd century BC, and afaik both the Septuagint and various other Greek translations were in common use in Greece, Egypt and Israel from around that date, and where iirc Jews in that region inc. Paul and the gospel writers were all by that time speaking and writing mostly in Greek (see the various Wiki passages quoted below, and note the highlighted parts). In which case it seems likely to me that Paul and the others were probably first learning, and then preaching, what had been written in those Greek translations, and probably doing that as a result of what they had themselves received as word-of-mouth learning rather than ever reading any original ancient Hebrew OT texts themselves.
There is a great deal more to say about all this, inc. the way in which the significant letters in the original Hebrew words were hand written using very similar pen strokes to mean quite different things, leaving the interpretation of those words open to quite subjective conclusions, and including also the fact that the original handwritten texts which we are talking about, seem to be only very poorly preserved and faded anyway, so that it is really by no means clear what actual word was written or meant in the original.
But anyway, see what Wiki says below -
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/They_have_pierced_my_hands_and_my_feet
They have pierced my hands and my feet
Text of Psalm 22:16
This verse, which is Psalm 22:17 in the Hebrew verse numbering, reads in the Masoretic Text as: כארי ידי ורגלי ("like a lion my hands and my feet"). The full verse of the Masoretic text reads: כי סבבוני כלבים עדת מרעים הקיפוני כארי ידי ורגלי׃
The syntactical form of the Hebrew phrase appears to be lacking a verb, and this is supplied in the Aramaic targum which reads "they bite like a lion my hands and my feet". The Septuagint has ωρυξαν χειράς μου και πόδας ("they have dug/pierced my hands and feet"), evidently taking the Hebrew to be based on the root כרה, supported by the Dead Sea Scrolls, Hahal Hever (5/6Hev1b f8_9:12) כר[ו ]ידי . 'Dig' has been understood in the sense of 'pierced' (as in Psalm 40:7/6), hence the rendering in the Syriac ("they have pierced my hands and feet").
Aquila of Sinope, a Christian convert to Judaism, undertook two translations of the Psalms from Hebrew to Greek. In the first, he renders the verse "they disfigured my hands and feet"; in the second he revised this to "they have bound my hands and feet". Jerome, translating the Psalms for the Latin Vulgate also made two versions. The earlier, from the Hexaplar Greek, reads "they have dug my hands and feet"; the later, made directly from pre-Masoretic Hebrew texts, reads with Aquila "they have bound my hands and feet".
Explanations and interpretations
The Masoretic Text reading presents the word ארי . An additional form of the word for lion ( אריה ) Arie, (without the prefix that denotes, like or as; as in [כָּ אֲרִ י] K'ari) occurs twice in Psalm 22, in verses 13/14 and 21/22. This translation in English is not fixed, providing the various rendering we see in English translations.
Gregory Vall noted that is possible that the LXX translators were faced with כארו; i.e. as in the Masoretic text, but ending with the longer letter vav (ו), rather than the shorter yod (י). This word is not otherwise known in Biblical Hebrew, but could be an alternative spelling derived from the root כרה, "to dig".[2] Vall proceeds to note nineteen conjectural emendations,[3] while Brent Strawn appeals to iconographical data in support of the MT reading.[4] A Psalms scroll was uncovered at Qumran, but is damaged at this point. However the editors of a psalms fragment from Nahal Hever do find in that text the word in question written as כארו, as Vall had previously speculated, and hence they support the reading "they dug at my hands and my feet". [5]
While it is true that an interpretation of "they have pierced" was preferable to many Christian commentators on account of its christological implications, there is no evidence that either the Jews or the Christians tampered with the text. The phrase is not quoted anywhere in the New Testament, despite the Septuagint reading being of a form that might be thought to prefigure the piercing of Jesus' hands and feet. So the phrase remains an unresolved translation dispute.
See also below re. Paul writing his Epistels in Greek language and his use of the Greek Septuagint word Kyrios -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyrios_(biblical_term)
The Greek word Kyrios (Κύριος) means "lord, Lord, master".[1] In religious usage it designates God. It is used in both the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Bible and the Greek New Testament.[2][3][4][5] Kyrios appears about 740 times in the New Testament, usually referring to Jesus.The use of kyrios in the New Testament has been the subject of debate among modern scholars, and three schools of thought exist on that topic. The first is that based on the Septuagint usage, the designation is intended to assign to Jesus the Old Testament attributes of God. The reasoning here being, that at the time the Septuagint was written, when reading out loud, Jews pronounced Adonai, the Hebrew word for "Lord", when they encountered the name of God, "YHWH", which was thus translated into Greek in each instance as kyrios. And the early Christians, the majority of whom were speakers of Greek, would have been deeply familiar with the Septuagint. The second is that as the early Church expanded, Hellenistic influences resulted in the use of the term. The third is that it is a translation of the Aramaic title Mari applied to Jesus.[6]
In everyday Aramaic, Mari was a very respectful form of polite address, well above "teacher" and similar to rabbi. In Greek this has at times been translated as kyrios. While the term Mari expressed the relationship between Jesus and his disciples during his life, the Greek kyrios came to represent his lordship over the world.[7]
The Gospel of John seldom uses kyrios to refer to Jesus during his ministry, but does so after the Resurrection, although the vocative kyrie (meaning sir) appears frequently.[8] The Gospel of Mark never applies the term kyrios as a direct reference to Jesus, unlike Paul who uses it 163 times.[9] When Mark uses kyrios (e.g., in 1:3, 11:9, 12:11, etc.) it is in reference to God. Mark does, however, use kyrios in passages where it is unclear whether it applies to God or Jesus, e.g., in Mark 5:19 or Mark 11: 3.[9]
One consequence of the use of kyrios to refer to Jesus in the New Testament is that almost all Old Testament references to God (except God the Father and the Holy Spirit) can then apply to Jesus.[2] Kyrios is a key element of the Christology of Apostle Paul. Most scholars agree that the use of kyrios, and hence the Lordship of Jesus, predated the Pauline Epistles, but that Saint Paul expanded and elaborated on that topic.[6] More than any other title, kyrios defined the relationship between Jesus and those who believed in him as Christ: Jesus was their Lord and Master who was to be served with all their hearts and who would one day judge their actions throughout their lives.[10]
The kyrios title for Jesus is central to the development of New Testament Christology, for the early Christians placed it at the center of their understanding and from that center attempted to understand the other issues related to the Christian mysteries.[11]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_languages
Languages of the New Testament
The books of the Christian New Testament are widely agreed to have originally been written in Greek, specifically Koine Greek, even though some authors often included translations from Hebrew and Aramaic texts. Certainly the Pauline Epistles were written in Greek for Greek-speaking audiences. See Greek primacy for further details. Koine Greek was the popular form of Greek which emerged in post-classical antiquity (c.300 BC – AD 300), and marks the third period in the history of the Greek language.[1] It is also called Alexandrian, Hellenistic, Common, or New Testament Greek.
Some scholars believe that some books of the Greek New Testament (in particular, the Gospel of Matthew) are actually translations of a Hebrew or Aramaic original. A famous example of this is the opening to the Gospel of John, which some scholars argue to be a Greek translation of an Aramaic hymn. Of these, a small number accept the Syriac Peshitta as representative of the original. See Aramaic primacy.
However, the received text of the New Testament is Greek, and nearly all translations are based upon the Greek text.
