Like Manner or Similar (1)
Dave Gaban drrod@slip.net
Sun, 28 Feb 1999 17:02:34 -0800 (00920271754, 36D9E72A.43BE@slip.net)
JAlw@aol.com wrote:
>
> TILL
>
> Matt Bell's position has been that "ken" can mean "like" or "similar," and so
> if the magicians of Egypt had turned only a pot or two of water into blood, it
> would have been correct to say that they did "like" or "similar" to Moses and
> Aaron, who had turned ALL of the water of Egypt into blood, including water in
> the rivers, lakes, ponds, and even vessels of wood and stone. Even if I should
> grant (as I will later) that "ken" could apparently mean "like" or "similar,"
> one would have to stretch imagination to impossible extremes to think that
> changing a pot or two of water into blood would be like or similar to changing
> into blood all of the water in rivers, lakes, ponds, etc. throughout an entire
> nation.
>
> <snip example>
> ==============
> Joe Alward:
>
> Till wins yet one more argument against a man of straw. It certainly would
> be a victory for skeptics if the inerrantist were forced to argue that the
> magicians converted two pots of water to blood, because such a position is
> ridiculous, in my opinion. However, I don't think it is necessary to assume
> that only a couple of pots of non-Nile water were available. Rainwater
> collected in thousands of pools and ponds may have been the water converted by
> the magicians, IF they converted any water at all.
> ========
> TILL
>
> Matt cited what he called Hebrew scholarship that supports his opinion, but in
> reality the best that he can claim is that a couple of sources who apparently
> have knowledge of Hebrew agree only that "ken" can mean "like" or "similar";
> they have not agreed with his premise that the magicians changed a pot or two
> of water into blood and that this constituted doing "like" or "similar" to
> Aaron's feat of changing all of the water of Egypt into blood.
> ================
> Joe Alward:
>
> I corresponded with Naves three times a couple of months ago and I agree that
> she offered no opinion on the meaning of the magicians verse; she only stated
> that "ken", in general, can mean "similar", and doesn't have to mean "same in
> kind and extent".
> ================
> TILL
> <snip>
>
> As for the scholarship of one of his sources, I must point out that the
> credentials of Yudith were never established.
> ================
> Joe Alward:
>
> Yudith Naves, the correspondent from the Hebrew Institute of Boston, declined
> to state her credentials when I requested them a few weeks ago. I got the
> impression that she didn't understand my request, that she thought that I was
> asking her to participate in our discussion. She said she didn't care to be a
> member of the errancy list. After that exchange, I was left with doubts about
> her understanding of English.
> =================
> TILL
> <snip>
>
> Readers will find that the textual evidence in these passages is in direct
> conflict with Bell's persistent claim that Exodus 7:22 meant that the
> magicians did the "same" as Aaron and Moses but just NOT to the same extent or
> degree.
> ==================
> Joe Alward:
>
> This "ken" debate has been maddening since the beginning, months ago. When I
> first came on the list this second time (November), all anyone was talking
> about for weeks was ken ken ken ken. I said then that Bell and Till were
> putting the cart before the horse. Till assumed that the magicians did
> everything that Aaron had done (convert the Nile and all the ponds and streams
> and containers of water to blood), while Bell said something less than that
> actually occurred.
>
> How do they know ANYTHING happened when the magicians waved their rod?
>
> In the frogs, lice, and blood plagues the Exodus author tells us that the
> magicians "did so" (ken), imitating Aaron's lowering his rod to bring plagues
> down upon Egypt, and skeptics believe that the words "did so" (ken) imply that
> the magicians did EVERYTHING that Aaron did. However the evidence shows
> that these words probably refer only to the act of stretching out the rod in
> an attempt to cast a spell; they do not imply that the spell was successful.
> Here is the evidence:
>
> In the frogs plague story we're told that the magicians did the same thing
> ("did so") with their rods as had Aaron, and frogs came up from the river just
> as they had when Aaron waved his rod:
>
> The Frogs Plague
> 5 And the LORD spake unto Moses, Say unto Aaron, Stretch forth thine hand with
> thy rod over the streams, over the rivers, and over the ponds, and cause frogs
> to come up upon the land of Egypt. 6 And Aaron stretched out his hand over the
> waters of Egypt; and the frogs came up, and covered the land of Egypt. 7 And
> the magicians did so [stretched forth their hands with their rods] with their
> enchantments, and brought up frogs upon the land of Egypt. 8 Then Pharaoh
> called for Moses and Aaron, and said, Intreat the LORD, that he may take away
> the frogs from me, and from my people; and I will let the people go, that they
> may do sacrifice unto the LORD. (Exodus 8:5-8)
Dave G.
With all the frogs that "covered the land of Egypt," how would one
determine
a few extra frogs were added by the magicians? And why wouldn't Pharaoh
tell
his magicians to knock it off, as they had quite enough frogs already?
>
> In the lice plague story the magicians did the same thing ("did so") with
> their rods as had Aaron, but NO LICE CAME UP from the ground as they had after
> Aaron waved his rod:
>
> The Lice Plague
> 16 And the LORD said unto Moses, Say unto Aaron, Stretch out thy rod, and
> smite the dust of the land, that it may become lice throughout all the land
> of Egypt. 17 And they did so; for Aaron stretched out his hand with his rod,
> and smote the dust of the earth, and it became lice in man, and in beast; all
> the dust of the land became lice throughout all the land of Egypt. 18 And the
> magicians did so [stretched out their hands] with their enchantments to bring
> forth lice, but they could not: so there were lice upon man, and upon beast.
> 19 Then the magicians said unto Pharaoh, This is the finger of God: and
> Pharaoh's heart was hardened, and he hearkened not unto them; as the LORD
> said. (Exodus 8:16-19)
>
Dave G.
Again, how would one determine if, or if not, the number of lice
increased?
> In the blood plague story we're told that the magicians did the same thing
> ("did so") with their rods as had Aaron, but unlike the rod-waving in the
> frogs story where we're told that the magicians succeeded, and in the lice
> story where we're told the magicians failed, the author doesn't tell us what
> happened:
>
> The Blood Plague
> 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, 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. 21And the fish
> that was in the river died; and the river stank, and the Egyptians could not
> drink of the water of the river; and there was blood throughout all the land
> of Egypt. 22 And the magicians of Egypt DID SO [stretched out thine hands]
> with their enchantments [but we're not told what happened, if anything]: and
> Pharaoh's heart was hardened, neither did he hearken unto them; as the LORD
> had said. 23 And Pharaoh turned and went into his house, neither did he set
> his heart to this also. 24 And all the Egyptians digged round about the river
> for water to drink; for they
> could not drink of the water of the river. 25 And seven days were fulfilled,
> after that the LORD had smitten the river. (Exodus 7:19-25)
>
Dave G.
Since it is not detailed in the story, how could the magicians have
replicated the event, unless THE water had been changed back to water
from blood,
or another source of water was available? If the magicians had done the
same,
wouldn't they be changing blood into blood? Without a water source, not
already
affected by the initial change into blood, how could the magicians do
the same?
> Thus, God tells Aaron to take his rod and stretch it out over the waters. The
> ordering of the subsequent words is crucial to an understanding of the meaning
> of "ken", in my view.
>
> "20 And Moses and Aaron did so, as the LORD commanded; and he lifted up the
> rod, and smote the waters that were in the river. . . and all the waters that
> were in the river were turned to blood"
>
> Is it not clear that the "did so" in 20 might refer only to taking the rod and
> stretching it out over the waters? AFTER stretching the rod over the rods,
> Aaron smote the waters, then they turned to blood. Thus, "did so" in the
> blood plague story doesn't necessarily mean the conversion of the water; it
> refers only to the waving of the rod. This was obviously the meaning of "did
> so" in the lice plague story, so might it not mean the same thing in the blood
> plague story?
>
> Can anyone read the blood plague story now and conclude with reasonable
> certainty that the magicians accomplished ANYTHING with their rod waving? If
> we can't get beyond that question, then should we be faulting the Exodus
> author for that, and not worrying about the extent and kind of the magician's
> water conversion?