Blood, Water and Magicians (1b)
Farrell Till jftill@midwest.net
Thu, 01 Oct 1998 11:06:58 -0700 (00907283218, 2.2.32.19981001180658.00892d9c@midwest.net)
At 04:16 PM 9/30/98 +0100, Matthew Bell wrote:
>> > CCBE
>> > Your contention is that the feat was logistically impossible. This is based
>> > on what the text does not implicitly state, i.e. that in the magicians
>> > doing like-wise, what is meant is that they performed the same feat to the
>> > same extent as had done Moses and Aaron. Please show from the text
>> > that this is the only valid understanding one can take from the passage?
>> >
>> F.TILL
>> Well, okay, let's look at what various translations say, and then base our
>> decision on what the text actually says and not what you would like for it
>> to say. Literal translations such as Young's and Hendrickson's say, "And
>> the magicians did so with their magic arts." [Young's uses the word
>> "flashings" for secret arts but otherwise agrees with Hendrickson's.] The
>> translation of the Jewish Publication Society says, "And when the Egyptian
>> magicians DID THE SAME with their spells, Pharaoh's heart stiffened...." So
>> here are Jews who translated their own scriptures, and they rendered this
>> expression as "did the same," so this is again a good indication that those
>> who know Hebrew understand that "doing in like manner with their
>> enchantments" meant that the magicians had duplicated the feat. But let's
>> look at what other translations say:
>>
>> KJV: And the magicians of Egypt did so with their enchantments.
>>
>> NKJV: Then the magicians of Egypt did so with their enchantments.
>>
>> The word translated "so" in this verse was "ken" in Hebrew, and it was a
>> word that meant "so" in the sense of "in the like or same manner." It so
>> happens that the word was used four other times in Exodus 6, so let's look
>> at how the writer used it in these other places.
>>
>CCBE
>It is Exodus 7, not 6.
>>
TILL
So I made a mistake. Go back over my postings and see how many times I have
referred to Exodus 7 in this discussion. After all, the 6 and 7 keys are
side by side on a keyboard.
>> F.TILL
>> 6 And Moses and Aaron did as the LORD commanded them, SO [ken] did they.
>>
>> Prior to this Yahweh had commanded Aaron and Moses to speak to Pharaoh to
>> demand that he let Yahweh's people to go, and "Moses and Aaron did as the
>> LORD commanded them." Does this not mean that Moses and Aaron did exactly
>> what Yahweh had commanded them. If so, then in the last part of the verse
>> "SO [ken] did they" would mean that what Moses and Aaron had done was an
>> exact duplication of what Yahweh had commanded them. If not, why not?
>
>CCBE
>Yes, Moses and Aaron did exactly as the LORD commanded them. We have no
>difficulty in accepting that, however we would point out to you that there is
>no restrictions indicated in the passage that would have made it impossible for
>them to do so. If you think there is please point them out?
>>
TILL
Did I say or imply that there was such a restriction? The point of this
posting was to show that "ken" in Hebrew was used to signifying doing the
same. If the word "ken" in the expression "so [ken] did they" meant that
Aaron and Moses had done the same as what Yahweh had commanded them, then
why wouldn't the statement that the magicians of Egypt did "so" (or in like
manner) with their enchantments mean that the writer was claiming that what
Aaron and Moses did was what the magicians did? That's the issue, so why
don't you confront it instead of engaging in petty quibbling like this?
>> F.TILL
>> 7 And Moses was fourscore years old, and Aaron fourscore and three years
>> old, when they spake unto Pharaoh.
>> 8 And the LORD spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying,
>> 9 When Pharaoh shall speak unto you, saying, Show a miracle for you: then
>> thou shalt say unto Aaron, Take thy rod, and cast it before Pharaoh, and it
>> shall become a serpent.
>> 10 And Moses and Aaron went in unto Pharaoh, and they did SO [ken] as the
>> LORD had commanded: and Aaron cast down his rod before Pharaoh, and before
>> his servants, and it became a serpent.
>>
>> Would not "ken" in verse 10 mean that what Yahweh had commanded Aaron and
>> Moses to do was exactly what they did?
>
>CCBE
>Again we have no difficulty in accepting this, but would reiterate that there
>is no restrictions indicated in the passage which would have made doing so
>impossible? If you consider there is please point it out?
>>
TILL
See my statement above and try to answer it. Your quibbling is a sure sign
that you know your position is in trouble. Just as Aaron and Moses did "so"
[ken] in executing what Yahweh had commanded them, the writer of Exodus
alleged that the magicians did "so" [ken] (or in like manner) with their
enchantments. If exactitude was conveyed by "ken" before the magicians did
"so" [ken] with their enchantments, then by what line of reasoning do you
conclude that "ken" did not mean exactitude when applied to the actions of
the magicians?
>> F.TILL
>> 19 And the LORD spake unto Moses, Say unto Aaron, Take thy rod, and
>> stretch out thine hand upon the waters of Egypt, upon their streams, upon
>> their rivers, and upon their ponds, and upon all their pools of water, that
>> they may become blood; and that there may be blood throughout all the land
>> of Egypt, both in vessels of wood, and in vessels of stone.
>> 20 And Moses and Aaron did SO [ken], as the LORD commanded; and he lifted
>> up the rod, and smote the waters that were in the river, in the sight of
>> Pharaoh, and in the sight of his servants; and all the waters that were in
>> the river were turned to blood.
>>
>> Again the word "ken" (v:20) was clearly intended to show that what Yahweh
>> told Moses and Aaron to do was exactly what they did, so in verse 22, which
>> says that the magicians did SO [ken] with their enchantments, why would this
>> not mean that what Moses and Aaron did was exactly what the magicians did.
>
>CCBE
>We again concur with you that Moses and Aaron did exactly what was commanded of
>them, there being no restriction that we can see indicated in the passage which
>would have prevented them from doing so. The reason why the same would not
>apply with the magicians is because there was a restriction in them exactly
>duplicating the feat, i.e. Moses/Aaron previous act.
TILL
So you recognize that the previous act of Moses and Aaron would have made it
impossible for the magicians to do exactly as M & A did? Progress at last!
CCBE
> In light of this it would not have been possible for them to do exactly
the same in >extent as Moses/Aaron, but there would be nothing to prevent
them doing exactly >the same in nature as Moses/Aaron.
>>
TILL
Where does the text speak of the magicians' having done "the same in nature
as Moses/Aaron"? The text says that they did SO [ken] or "in like manner"
with their enchantments, so the text is saying that what Moses and Aaron did
the magicians also did. If not, why not?
>> F.TILL
>> I have shown three of the other places where "ken" was used in Exodus 7, so
>> where was the fourth place?
TILL
I hope that Bell noticed that I said "Exodus 7" here.
CCBE
>> That was in a verse where the KJV did not translate "ken" with the
English >>word "so."
>>
>> 11 Then Pharaoh also called the wise men and the sorcerers: now the
>> magicians of Egypt, they also did in like manner [KEN] with their
>enchantments.
>> 12 For they cast down every man his rod, and they became serpents....
>>
>> So here is clear evidence that the writer of this text was using the Hebrew
>> word "ken" in the sense of "so" or "in duplication of." Aaron threw his rod
>> down, and it became a serpent. The magicians did SO or IN LIKE MANNER,
>> threw their rods down, and they became serpents. What Aaron did the
>> magicians did.
>>
>> Here is the textual evidence that the CCBE requested, but if this isn't
>> sufficient, I can walk them through various translations to show that in the
>> opinion of the translators "ken" meant to do the same. To show that this is
>> so, let's juxtapose Exodus 7:11 (changing the rods to serpents) with Exodus
>> 7:22 (changing the water into blood) as the two verses are rendered in the
>> version of the Jewish Publication Society:
>>
>> 7:11, And the Egyptian magicians, in turn, DID THE SAME with their spells.
>>
>> 7:22, But when the Egyptian magicians DID THE SAME with their spells....
>
>CCBE
>We ask you to note that in your last reference although it could be argued that
>'every man' exactly duplicated the feat of Aaron, the collective result
>exceeded that of the initial feat which involved one rod and one serpent, in
>contrast to the rods/serpents the magicians worked with. This of course
>necessitated a further demonstration of the superiority of Moses/Aaron's God.
>We also point out that as with the other quotes you provided there is
>absolutely nothing in the passage restricting the magicians from duplicating,
>indeed exceeding, the initial feat.
>
TILL
Well, certainly, the magicians' duplication of Aaron's feat "necessitated a
further demonstration of the superiority of Moses/Aaron's God," because that
was the whole point of the way the writer was trying to plot his story. As
I have previously explained, he was obviously attempting to convey the
superiority of Yahweh's power. Hence, when the magicians of Egypt did "in
like manner" [ken] and changed their rods into serpents, Aaron had to engage
in a bit of one-upmanship and have his serpent swallow the magicians'
serpents. None of this, however, disputes the fact that "ken" meant to do
the same, and that was the obvious intention of the writer when he said that
he magicians did "in like manner with their enchantments" and even went on
to specifically state that this was his intended meaning: "For they [the
magicians] cast down every man his rod, and they became serpents." So
please tell us why the writers' claim that the magicians did "in like manner
with their enchantments" does not mean exact duplication in this incident,
and then tell us why if it meant exact duplication here, it did not mean
exact duplication in 7:24.
CCBE
>So we have no argument that 'ken' means to do the same,
TILL
But I had an argument that "ken" meant to do the same, and I presented it.
Apparently, you can't refute it.
CCBE
>but would suggest to you that this needs to be considered in the
>context of the passage and in consideration of any restrictions or limitations
>that the passage puts upon this.
TILL
Once again you are trying to argue from the assumption that the text was
accurate in everything it said, or in other words, you are trying to prove
inerrancy by assuming inerrancy. In evaluating a text, there are always two
possibilities: (1) The text is factually accurate in what it says. (2) The
text is errant in what it says. I would never try to argue from assumption
number 2, and if I should try to do so, I suspect that you would spot the
fallacy in the blink of an eye. Yet you expect everyone to allow you to
argue from assumption number 1. You are contending that if the text says
that the magicians did "so" or in "like manner" with their enchantments,
then this must be factually correct, and so you search around for innovative
interpretations that can make this statement true even though the actual
language of the text supports the view that the writer thoughtlessly made a
logistically impossible claim. Therefore, you cannot talk about
"restrictions or limitations that the passage" puts on the claim that the
magicians did in like manner with their enchantments, because the writer
could easily have been unaware of what he was actually claiming. In view of
the way that he used "ken" throughout Exodus 7, this is a more reasonable
approach to the text than your desperate attempt to find some way--just any
way--to salvage the text.
To show you the predicament you are in, let's consider your agreement that
individually the magicians of Egypt did exactly what Aaron did, i. e., each
person cast his rod down and each person's rod became a serpent, just as
Aaron's rod had become a serpent. We can see, then, how that the writer's
claim that the magicians did "in like manner" [ken] with their enchantments
was intended to be understood that the magicians did exactly what Aaron had
done and nothing less. As the story is told, Aaron's serpent saved the day
by swallowing the magicians' serpents. Now let's suppose that after
relating this incident, the writer had said, "but the magicians of Egypt did
in like manner with their enchantments, and their serpents swallowed Aaron's
serpent." In that case, would you not be able to see that the writer had
made a colossal boo-boo? He would be claiming that the magicians' serpents
did something that was logistically impossible, because we cannot see how
that serpents that had already been swallowed by another serpent could have
swallowed the serpent that had swallowed them. This, in effect, is the
problem that you have in the story of the first plague. The accomplishment
of Aaron's and Moses's feat in changing all of the water of Egypt into blood
made it impossible for the magicians to do "so" [ken] or in like manner with
their enchantments.
CCBE
>Our conclusion from this is that you have failed to prove your argument
TILL
Well, that's a big surprise that you would actually conclude that I have
failed to prove my argument. I don't suppose my conclusion that you have
failed to explain away the problem in this story would faze you in the
least, would it? That may give you an idea of just how deep my concern is
that your conclusion is that I have failed to prove my argument.
CCBE
> and indeed have provided an unintentional
>clarification of our argument that doing the same does not not necessarily
>refer to the extent of the original act.
TILL
Just where did I provide "an unintentional clarification" of your argument?
If as you said each magician "exactly duplicated Aaron's feat," that would
merely confirm my claim that "ken" in Hebrew signified duplication.
Farrell Till
Skepticism, Inc.
jftill@midwest.net