In debating Robert Turkel, who parades under the phony name James Patrick Holding, I have noticed that he will take whatever position is advantageous to his doctrine du jour. What he says today may not be what he will say tomorrow. An example of this, can be found in our debate on preterism when he attempted to rebut an argument of mine, which I had based on the dating of 1 Clement at AD 95, which is the date that most reputable scholars assign to this book. He said in his "reply" that 1 Clement had been written before AD 70. For those who may not know that Turkel has been so humiliated by my arguments that he has expunged my name from his site, I should inform them that I am "Skeptic X" in his statement below.
Skeptic X continues on this same line of "why didn't they know," however, with a couple of points from other later writers who he thinks should have known that the parousia had alreayd [sic] happened. One of these is plain old Clement, author of two epistles to the Corinthians.
On this one Skeptic X goes with a late date of 95-96 AD. I do not follow this line; Clement's letters are just as well dated pre-70.
Here he was trying to defend preterism, a doctrine that is inconsistent with statements that Clement made, if his first epistle were written as late as AD 95-96; hence, Turkel took the position that this epistle could "just as well [be] dated pre-70." However, in another of his hackwork articles, Turkel was trying to defend the Pauline authorship of the book of Ephesians, at which time he found it advantageous to his position to date 1 Clement at, guess when? That’s right. AD 95.
Attributions by patristic writers, by orthodox and heretical alike, are unanimous in favor of Paul... Ephesians is quoted in 1 Clement (95 AD), Ignatius, and Ploycarp, three late first century/early second century writers.
No wonder this fellow argues that there are no inconsistencies or contradictions in the Bible. He can’t even see when he is contradicting himself. I’m sure, however, that he will have a way to explain to us that his two statements quoted above are perfectly harmonious.
I have found that whatever position Turkel may take on the meaning of specific scriptures will depend on what direction the wind is blowing at the time. If it is advantageous to his doctrine du jour to argue that scripture A means X, he will take that position, but if later on it is advantageous to argue that scripture A means not X, he will so argue. Either that, or else the guy cranks out so much hackwork that he can’t even remember from one day to the other what he has said about whatever issue he is discussing. I could cite some other examples of his inconsistency, but if I did, I’m sure that he would declare it "fluff" and omit the examples from any unlinked "replies" that he puts on his website.
He has been up to his old blowing-in-the-wind antics in the
land-promise debate. Having recognized that his attempts to rebut my
first-round rebuttals left him looking silly, he zipped his original
response (which, of course, would guarantee that some would not go to
the trouble to unzip it and read it) and then wrote a "fluff-free"
version. Of course, he set
himself up as the sole judge and jury of what was fluff, and then
proceeded to quote selectively what he thought he could do a creditable
job of answering. I’m going to reply to one section of his "fluff-free"
version so that readers can see just how lost in Never-Never Land
Turkel is in his attempts to find unity in the OT passages about
Yahweh’s land promise to Abraham’s descendants. When readers see the
absurdity of Turkel’s "reply" to parts of my rebuttals that he thought
he could answer, they can then decide for themselves if Turkel writes
"fluff-free" versions of my articles in order to get down to the
nitty-gritty (as he claims he is doing) or if he quotes selectively
because he doesn’t want to embarrass himself with responses that even
some of his own choir members might see are patently inadequate as
"explanations" of biblical discrepancies.
In his "fluff-free" version, Turkel has tried to show that there was no contradiction between Deuteronomy 9:3 (which said that Yahweh would drive out the Canaanite nations quickly) and Deuteronomy 7:22 ( which said that Yahweh would drive them out "little by little" or gradually).
Brace yourself, because you are about to see quibbling that outdoes anything Turkel has yet written on this subject.
This section begins at the subtitle "Deut. 9 Again," at the location cited above. The (1) and (2) after the Till and Turkel headers identify what round (first or second) is being quoted.
Till(2)
All Turkel has done is point out another inconsistency, because the
promise was that Yahweh would drive the nations out quickly.
Till:
Why do I suspect that Turkel, who often displays an appalling ignorance
of the Bible when he isn’t cutting and pasting from his "sources," was
caught completely off guard by the inconsistency in Exodus
23:30/Deuteronomy 7:22, which said that Yahweh would drive the nations
out "little by little," and Deuteronomy 9:3, which said that he would
drive them out "quickly"? Whenever he is caught with an inconsistency
like this, he will always try to improvise an "explanation," and this
time, as we will soon see, he came up with a doozy. In a cut-and-pasted
job on the
book of Deuteronomy, Turkel took the position that "quickly" in
Deuteronomy 9:3 should have been translated "easily," so the verse is
actually saying that Yahweh would drive the Canaanite nations out
"easily" rather than "quickly."
Turkel (article just cited):
9:3 is cited as contradictory to this verse, 7:22 --
The LORD your God will drive out those nations before you, little by little. You will not be allowed to eliminate them all at once, or the wild animals will multiply around you.
But the problem is one of translation, for "quickly" is better rendered "easily" -- which makes sense in context, for the point is that the Anakites are a supposedly difficult enemy to overcome. (Wein.Dt111, 375-6, 406 -- See this word also used in Eccl. 4:12.)
Till:
It is singular that Turkel quoted no lexicographical authorities on his
quibble that the Hebrew word mahar would have been "better
rendered" easily, and the reason why he didn’t quote such
authorities is
that the
scholarly evidence is not on his side. He likes to quote Strong when he
thinks it is to his advantage, so let’s take a look at what Strong said
about mahar.
4116. mahar, maw-har'; a prim. root; prop. to be liquid or flow easily, i.e. (by impl.); to hurry (in a good or a bad sense); often used (with another verb) adv. promptly:--be carried headlong, fearful, (cause to make, in, make) haste (-n, -ily, (be) hasty, (fetch, make ready) X quickly, rash, X shortly, (be so) X soon, make speed, X speedily, X straightway, X suddenly, swift (emphasis added).
Strange, isn’t it? Turkel claims that mahar should have been translated easily in Deuteronomy 9:3, but his own favorite authority used the word easily only in giving the etymology of the word, which came from a primary root that meant "to be liquid or flow easily," but the actual meanings of the word as it was used in the OT conveyed the sense of speed: hurry, promptly, haste, hasty, quickly, rash, shortly, speedily, etc., etc., etc. It’s a pity that Turkel wasn’t around to serve as Strong’s co-editor. He could have informed Strong that he was all wrong on the meaning of mahar.
Well, what about the actual usage of mahar, in the OT? What does this tell us? The best way to answer that question is to look at actual examples of its usage. I will emphasize in bold print the English word that was used to translate mahar or its derivatives, so by substituting easily for the words in bold print, readers can test Turkel’s claim of how the word should have been translated.
When Yahweh appeared to Abraham [snicker, snicker] at the oaks of Mamry, Abraham invited him to stay for a meal and gave Sarah instructions on what to do.
Genesis 18:6 And Abraham hastened into the tent to Sarah, and said, "Make ready quickly three measures of choice flour, knead it, and make cakes."
We know, of course, that Abraham was actually telling Sarah to make the cakes "easily." Just ask Turkel. He’ll tell you.
As readers will notice, I highlighted "hastened" in the verse above. I did so because the word here in the Hebrew text was mahar. Well, what do you know about that? Did Abraham hasten or hurry into the tent to tell Sarah to get some chow ready for Yahweh, or did he just mosey into it in a good, leisurely, "easy" pace? I’m sure Turkel can tell us that too.
Genesis 27:18 So he [Jacob] went in to his father, and said, "My father"; and he said, "Here I am; who are you, my son?" 19 Jacob said to his father, "I am Esau your firstborn. I have done as you told me; now sit up and eat of my game, so that you may bless me." 20 But Isaac said to his son, "How is it that you have found it so quickly, my son?" He answered, "Because Yahweh your God granted me success."
In the broader context of these verses, Isaac had sent Jacob’s brother Esau to hunt venison and bring back to him "savory" food. Rebekah then conspired with Jacob to deceive Isaac into pronouncing a blessing on him instead of Esau, the firstborn. This was done by putting goat skins on Jacob’s arms to trick the nearly blind Isaac into thinking that Jacob was the hairy son Esau. Isaac fell for the trick but was perplexed enough to ask Jacob how he had found the venison so "quickly." Turkel, of course, thinks that Isaac was really asking Jacob how he had found the venison so "easily," but I will leave it to readers to decide if Isaac had in mind easiness or quickness.
Exodus 32:7 Yahweh said to Moses, "Go down at once! Your people, whom you brought up out of the land of Egypt, have acted perversely; 8 they have been quick to turn aside from the way that I commanded them; they have cast for themselves an image of a calf, and have worshiped it and sacrificed to it, and said, 'These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!'"
While Moses was on Mt. Sinai chatting with Yahweh [snicker, snicker], the Israelites down below had persuaded Aaron to fabricate a golden calf for them to worship. I suppose that Yahweh didn’t mean that the Israelites had been "quick" to turn aside from his commandments but only that it had been "easy" for them to do so. Perhaps Turkel can tell us what Yahweh meant. After all, he thinks that he is fulfilling prophecy by enlightening the ignorant masses on what the Bible actually means. Readers who don’t believe that he thinks this can click here and see for themselves that he made the statement quoted below.
Exhaustive accurate knowledge of what the Bible says specifically is beyond the reach of most people, certainly. Basic knowledge of sin, who Jesus was, and [sic] He accomplished is quite simple, and is sufficient to lead to salvation. Demanding "more recent prophets" is a demand of laziness and also begs the question that I am not myself (along with others like Glenn Miller) in some sense fulfilling that function for Ebon and others.
But enough about Turkel‘s Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Let’s return to OT passages where mahar was used.
In this passage, Korah, Moses’ cousin, had led a rebellion against his leadership, which had ended when Yahweh caused the earth to open and swallow the rebels. The next day, the people questioned the harshness of the punishment, so in typical fashion Yahweh zapped the entire congregation with a pestilence. Moses ordered Aaron to take a censor filled with incense and wave it around [snicker, snicker] to save the people from the plague. Of course, Moses wasn’t telling Aaron to do this "quickly" but just to do it "easily." Just ask Turkel; he’ll tell you. After all, he fulfills prophecy every time he explains the meaning of a biblical text.Numbers 16:46 Moses said to Aaron, "Take your censer, put fire on it from the altar and lay incense on it, and carry it quickly to the congregation and make atonement for them. For wrath has gone out from Yahweh; the plague has begun."
Deuteronomy 9:12 Then Yahweh said to me, "Get up, go down quickly from here, for your people whom you have brought from Egypt have acted corruptly. They have been quick to turn from the way that I commanded them; they have cast an image for themselves."
This is the Deuteronomic version of the golden-calf incident referred to in Exodus 32:8 (quoted above). In the Exodus account, Yahweh just told Moses to go down to the camp, but the Deuteronomic version says that Moses was told to go down "quickly." Of course, Yahweh wasn’t telling Moses to hurry down; he was just telling him to go down "easily." Just ask the prophet Turkel, and he’ll tell you that this was what Yahweh meant. Then, as we noted after quoting the parallel in Exodus, when Yahweh said that the Israelites had been "quick" to turn from the way that Yahweh had commanded, he meant only that it had been "easy" for them to do this. Why not? Why wouldn’t it have been "easy" for them to turn aside from what Yahweh had commanded them? After all, these were a people who had seen Yahweh going before them in a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night, doing such wonders as parting the Red Sea for them to cross on dry land, speaking to them from the entry of the tabernacle and zapping those who bellyached, etc., etc., etc., so after having seen all of these marvels, why wouldn’t it have been "easy" for them to turn aside? Maybe Turkel is on to something.
The "easiness" with which the Israelites had turned aside was repeated further along in this same chapter.
Deuteronomy 9:16 Then I saw that you had indeed sinned against Yahweh your God, by casting for yourselves an image of a calf; you had been quick to turn from the way that Yahweh had commanded you.
Later, Moses warned the people that they would "easily" perish off the land that Yahweh was giving them if they didn’t straighten up and fly right.
Deuteronomy 11:16 Take care, or you will be seduced into turning away, serving other gods and worshiping them, 17 for then the anger of Yahweh will be kindled against you and he will shut up the heavens, so that there will be no rain and the land will yield no fruit; then you will perish quickly off the good land that Yahweh is giving you.
Of course, I guess it would have been "easy" for the people to perish "easily" as long as they had a loving, merciful god to zap them with a plague every time they miscued. What can I say? Turkel has convinced me.
Deuteronomy 28:20 Yahweh will send upon you disaster, panic, and frustration in everything you attempt to do, until you are destroyed and perish quickly, on account of the evil of your deeds, because you have forsaken me.
As I just noted, it would be "easy" for the people to perish as long as they had a god sending upon them plagues, disasters, and panic. I just wonder if Turkel thinks that this meant that the people would perish "easily" but would do so "little by little," much in the same way that the gorilla ate his bananas. (That last comment will be clarified later on.)
Joshua 2:3 Then the king of Jericho sent orders to Rahab, "Bring out the men who have come to you, who entered your house, for they have come only to search out the whole land." 4 But the woman took the two men and hid them. Then she said, "True, the men came to me, but I did not know where they came from. 5 And when it was time to close the gate at dark, the men went out. Where the men went I do not know. Pursue them quickly, for you can overtake them."
I wonder if Turkel thinks that the king of Jericho thought that Rahab was telling him to pursue the men [spies] "easily." If so, maybe Turkel can tell us how the king thought that he could overtake the men if he just pursued them "easily" and not quickly.
Joshua 8:18 Then Yahweh said to Joshua, "Stretch out the sword that is in your hand toward Ai; for I will give it into your hand." And Joshua stretched out the sword that was in his hand toward the city. 19 As soon as he stretched out his hand, the troops in ambush rose quickly out of their place and rushed forward. They entered the city, took it, and at once set the city on fire.
Of course, this doesn’t mean that the Israelites lying in ambush rose "quickly" out of their place. Somehow, they rushed forward to enter the city but did so "easily" and not quickly. Just ask the prophet Turkel; he’ll tell you.
But wait a minute! It seems that the word translated "rushed forward" in verse 19 above was... well, what do you know? The word was mahar! So the men lying in ambush rose "quickly" [meherah] ] and "rushed forward" [mahar], so apparently they didn’t just rise "easily"; they also rushed forward "easily."
Joshua 10:6 And the Gibeonites sent to Joshua at the camp in Gilgal, saying, "Do not abandon your servants; come up to us quickly, and save us, and help us; for all the kings of the Amorites who live in the hill country are gathered against us."
The Gibeonites were the ones who had deceived Joshua into making a treaty with them, and even though Joshua later realized that he had been duped, he vowed to keep his commitment, because in those days when one made a vow, by golly, he kept it. In Joshua 10, the Gibeonites found themselves under attack by the forces of Adonizedek, king of Jerusalem, so the Gibeonites sent a message to Joshua asking for his help. We know, of course, that the Gibeonites weren’t asking the Israelites to hurry to their defense. They could take their good sweet time getting there. The Gibeonites just wanted them to come "easily" to their aid.
Joshua 23:16 "If you transgress the covenant of Yahweh your God, which he enjoined on you, and go and serve other gods and bow down to them, then the anger of Yahweh will be kindled against you, and you shall perish quickly from the good land that he has given to you."
This was the conclusion of Joshua’s swan song, spoken as he lay dying, but he was not telling the Israelites that they would perish "quickly" if they worshiped other gods but only that they would perish "easily" if they apostatized. As I have noted above, it was "easy" for a people to die when they had a god who constantly zapped them with plagues, disasters, and such like when they didn’t toe the line.
2 Samuel 17:15 Then Hushai said to the priests Zadok and Abiathar, "Thus and so did Ahithophel counsel Absalom and the elders of Israel; and thus and so I have counseled. 16 Therefore send quickly and tell David, 'Do not lodge tonight at the fords of the wilderness, but by all means cross over; otherwise the king and all the people who are with him will be swallowed up.'"
Hushai, of course, wasn’t telling Zadok and Abiathar to hurry to warn David. He meant for them to do it "easily." They could take their good sweet time and not put themselves out, just as long as they did it "easily." Just ask the prophet Turkel if you doubt me.
As this passage continued, a derivative of mahar was used two more times.
17 Jonathan and Ahimaaz were waiting at En-rogel; a servant-girl used to go and tell them, and they would go and tell King David; for they could not risk being seen entering the city. 18 But a boy saw them, and told Absalom; so both of them went away quickly, and came to the house of a man at Bahurim, who had a well in his courtyard; and they went down into it. 19 The man's wife took a covering, stretched it over the well's mouth, and spread out grain on it; and nothing was known of it. 20 When Absalom's servants came to the woman at the house, they said, "Where are Ahimaaz and Jonathan?" The woman said to them, "They have crossed over the brook of water." And when they had searched and could not find them, they returned to Jerusalem. 21 After they had gone, the men came up out of the well, and went and told King David. They said to David, "Go and cross the water quickly; for thus and so has Ahithophel counseled against you."
We have the prophet Turkel to assure us that Jonathan and Ahimaaz didn’t hurry away after they realized that the boy had seen them. They just took their good sweet time and went "easily" to the house of Bahurim, and then after they were assured that Absalom’s servants were gone, they went to David and told him to "cross the water quickly." What they meant, of course, was that David should cross the water "easily," because there was no need to hurry. After all, why should David have hurried when his life was in danger?
2 Kings 1:11 Again the king sent to him another captain of fifty with his fifty. He went up and said to him, "O man of God, this is the king's order: Come down quickly!"
This verse is in that quaint little yarn about the captains of fifty who were sent to fetch the prophet Elijah back to king Ahaziah, who had fallen through a lattice in his upper chamber, and wanted the prophet to come heal him of his injuries (vs:1-4). Elijah called down fire from heaven [snicker, snicker] to consume the first group of fifty, but the king sent another group of fifty, who suffered the same fate. However, the captain of the second group managed to get in the message quoted above before he was incinerated. In the message, Elijah was asked to come "quickly" to the king. Of course, the king didn’t mean for Elijah to hurry; he could take his time and do it "easily," just as long as he came to the king’s aid. Just ask the prophet Turkel if this isn’t what it meant. After all, when one falls through a lattice in his upper chamber, he shouldn’t feel the need for anyone to rush to his aid.
2 Chronicles 18:8 Then the king of Israel summoned an officer and said, "Bring quickly Micaiah son of Imlah."
This verse is in the passage parallel to 1 Kings 22, where Jehoshaphat was urging King Ahab to produce prophetic evidence that their coalition against Ramoth-gilead would be successful. The context of this chapter clearly shows that Ahab was eager to persuade Jehoshaphat to ally the forces of Judah with him, but even though Ahab had paraded before Jehoshaphat his own prophets, who were predicting resounding success for the coalition, Jehoshaphat wanted to hear at least one more prophet (1 Kings 22:7; 2 Chron. 18:6). The context clearly shows Ahab’s eagerness to have Jehoshaphat on his side, so it is doubtful that Ahab was telling the officer he had summoned to take his good, "easy" time in bringing the prophet Micaiah to him. Obviously, he wanted Micaiah there as quickly as possible.
With the exception of Ecclesiastes 4:12, which I will discuss later, these are all of the texts in the OT where mahar or its derivatives were translated with quick or quickly in the KJV. In all of the passages quoted, mahar was obviously used to convey a since of haste or speed, so why should we accept the quibble of the king of quibblers, who has found himself between a rock and a hard place in his attempt to make Yahweh’s land promise conditional to the behavior of Abraham‘s descendants? If mahar would have been better translated with easily in Deuteronomy 9:3, then why didn’t at least some English translations use the "better" word in this verse?
The word mahar was used several other times, where the KJV rendered it haste, hasten, hastened, so I will quote without comment several of these passages. The words in bold print will indicate where mahar appeared in the Hebrew text, so readers can decide for themselves if the word was being used to convey haste or speed or if it just meant "easy," as Turkel claims. I will be using the NRSV, so haste or its derivatives may not be in the English text, which in this version sometimes used hurry, quick, or some other word denoting speed.
Genesis 18:7 Abraham ran to the herd, and took a calf, tender and good, and gave it to the servant, who hastened to prepare it.
Genesis 19:20 "Look, that city is near enough to flee to, and it is a little one. Let me escape there--is it not a little one?--and my life will be saved!" 21 He said to him, "Very well, I grant you this favor too, and will not overthrow the city of which you have spoken. 22 Hurry, escape there, for I can do nothing until you arrive there." Therefore the city was called Zoar.
Genesis 24:18 "Drink, my lord," she [Rebekah] said, and quickly lowered her jar upon her hand and gave him a drink. 19 When she had finished giving him a drink, she said, "I will draw for your camels also, until they have finished drinking." 20 So she quickly emptied her jar into the trough and ran again to the well to draw, and she drew for all his camels.
Genesis 24:46 She quickly let down her jar from her shoulder, and said, 'Drink, and I will also water your camels.' So I drank, and she also watered the camels.
Genesis 43:29 Then he [Joseph] looked up and saw his brother Benjamin, his mother's son, and said, "Is this your youngest brother, of whom you spoke to me? God be gracious to you, my son!" 30 With that, Joseph hurried out, because he was overcome with affection for his brother, and he was about to weep. So he went into a private room and wept there.
Genesis 45:9 Hurry and go up to my father and say to him, 'Thus says your son Joseph, God has made me lord of all Egypt; come down to me, do not delay. 10 You shall settle in the land of Goshen, and you shall be near me, you and your children and your children's children, as well as your flocks, your herds, and all that you have.... 13 You must tell my father how greatly I am honored in Egypt, and all that you have seen. Hurry and bring my father down here."
Exodus 12:33 The Egyptians urged the people [Israelites] to hasten their departure from the land, for they said, "We shall all be dead."
Joshua 4:10 The priests who bore the ark remained standing in the middle of the Jordan, until everything was finished that Yahweh commanded Joshua to tell the people, according to all that Moses had commanded Joshua. The people crossed over in haste.
Joshua 8:14 When the king of Ai saw this, he and all his people, the inhabitants of the city, hurried out early in the morning to the meeting place facing the Arabah to meet Israel in battle; but he did not know that there was an ambush against him behind the city.... 19 As soon as he [Joshua] stretched out his hand, the troops in ambush rose quickly out of their place and rushed forward. They entered the city, took it, and at once set the city on fire.
Judges 9:48 So Abimelech went up to Mount Zalmon, he and all the troops that were with him. Abimelech took an ax in his hand, cut down a bundle of brushwood, and took it up and laid it on his shoulder. Then he said to the troops with him, "What you have seen me do, do quickly, as I have done."
Judges 13:10 So the woman ran quickly and told her husband, "The man who came to me the other day has appeared to me."
1 Samuel 17:48 When the Philistine drew nearer to meet David, David ran quickly toward the battle line to meet the Philistine.
1 Samuel 23:27 Then a messenger came to Saul, saying, "Hurry and come; for the Philistines have made a raid on the land."
1 Samuel 25:18 Then Abigail hurried and took two hundred loaves, two skins of wine, five sheep ready dressed, five measures of parched grain, one hundred clusters of raisins, and two hundred cakes of figs. She loaded them on donkeys.
Esther 5:5 Then the king said, "Bring Haman quickly, so that we may do as Esther desires." So the king and Haman came to the banquet that Esther had prepared.
Esther 6:10 Then the king said to Haman, "Quickly, take the robes and the horse, as you have said, and do so to the Jew Mordecai who sits at the king's gate. Leave out nothing that you have mentioned."
Isaiah 5:18 Ah, you who drag iniquity along with cords of falsehood, who drag sin along as with cart ropes, 19 who say, "Let him make haste, let him speed his work that we may see it; let the plan of the Holy One of Israel hasten to fulfillment, that we may know it!"
Notice that the structure of the last passage made haste parallel with speed [chuwsh]. I wonder why if mahar meant easily instead of quickly or hastily.
There are many more examples that I could quote where mahar was used to convey the sense of haste, speed, or rushing, but this is enough overkill. Turkel won’t be convinced, of course, but readers whose minds haven’t yet rusted shut should be able to see that the Hebrew word mahar conveyed the idea of speed or quickness. I asked a question above that I will now return to. If mahar would have been better translated with easily in Deuteronomy 9:3, then why didn’t at least some English translations use the "better" word in this verse? A check of the translations will show that they didn’t use Turkel’s "better" word.
KJV: Understand therefore this day, that the LORD thy God is he which goeth over before thee; as a consuming fire he shall destroy them, and he shall bring them down before thy face: so shalt thou drive them out, and destroy them quickly, as the LORD hath said unto thee.
KJV21: Understand therefore this day that the LORD thy God is He who goeth over before thee as a consuming fire. He shall destroy them, and He shall bring them down before thy face: so shalt thou drive them out and destroy them quickly, as the LORD hath said unto thee.
NKJV: Therefore understand today that the LORD your God is He who goes over before you as a consuming fire. He will destroy them and bring them down before you; so you shall drive them out and destroy them quickly, as the LORD has said to you.
ASV: Know therefore this day, that Jehovah thy God is he who goeth over before thee as a devouring fire; he will destroy them, and he will bring them down before thee: so shalt thou drive them out, and make them to perish quickly, as Jehovah hath spoken unto thee.
NASV: Know therefore today that it is the LORD your God who is crossing over before you, so that you may drive them out and destroy them quickly, just as the LORD has spoken to you.
NIV: But be assured today that the LORD your God is the one who goes across ahead of you like a devouring fire. He will destroy them; he will subdue them before you. And you will drive them out and annihilate them quickly, as the LORD has promised you.
RSV: Know therefore this day that he who goes over before you as a devouring fire is the LORD your God; he will destroy them and subdue them before you, so you shall drive them out and make them perish quickly, as the LORD has promised you.
NRSV: Know then today that the LORD your God is the one who crosses over before you as a devouring fire; he will defeat them and subdue them before you, so that you may dispossess and destroy them quickly, as the LORD has promised you.
ESV: But be assured today that the LORD your God is the one who goes across ahead of you like a devouring fire. He will destroy them; he will subdue them before you. And you will drive them out and annihilate them quickly, as the LORD has promised you.
WEB: Know therefore this day, that Yahweh your God is he who goes over before you as a devouring fire; he will destroy them, and he will bring them down before you: so shall you drive them out, and make them to perish quickly, as Yahweh has spoken to you.
NET: Understand today that the Lord your God who goes before you is a devouring fire; he will devastate and humiliate them before you. Thus you will expel and demolish them quickly just as he has told you.
NAB: Understand, then, today that it is the LORD, your God, who will cross over before you as a consuming fire; he it is who will reduce them to nothing and subdue them before you, so that you can drive them out and destroy them quickly, as the LORD promised you.
GNB: But now you will see for yourselves that the LORD your God will go ahead of you like a raging fire. He will defeat them as you advance, so that you will drive them out and destroy them quickly, as he promised you.
REB: Know then this day that it is the LORD your God himself who crosses at your head as a devouring fire; it is he who will subdue them and destroy them as you advance; you will drive them out and soon overwhelm them, as he promised you.
NCV: But today remember that the LORD your God goes in before you. He will destroy them like a fire that burns things up. He will defeat them ahead of you. And you will force them out. You will destroy them quickly. It will happen just as the LORD has said.
NWT: And you will know today that Jehovah your God is crossing before you. A consuming fire he is. He will annihilate them, and he himself will subdue them before you; and you must dispossess them and destroy them speedily just as Jehovah has spoken to you.
Revised Berkeley Version: Be assured, however, that the LORD is crossing before you like a consuming fire; He will destroy and subdue them in your sight, and you will be able to dispossess and kill them off quickly, as the LORD promised you.
Darby’s: Know then this day, that Jehovah thy God is he that goeth over before thee, a consuming fire; he will destroy them, and he will cast them down before thee, and thou shalt dispossess them and cause them to perish quickly, as Jehovah hath said unto thee.
Amplified: Know therefore this day that the Lord your God is He Who goes over before you as a devouring fire. He will destroy them and bring them down before you; so you shall dispossess them and make them perish quickly, as the Lord has promised you.
Tyndale’s: But understand this day that the Lord thy God which goeth over before thee a consuming fire, he shall destroy them and he shall subdue them before thee. And thou shalt cast them out, and bring them to nought quickly as the Lord hath said unto thee.
Jerusalem Bible: Be therefore sure today that Yahweh your God himself will go in front of you, a devouring fire that will destroy them, and he himself will subdue them for you, so you will dispossess and destroy them quickly as Yahweh has promised you.
Moffatt’s: Be sure, then, this day, that it is the Eternal your God who goes in front of you as a consuming fire, to destroy them, to subdue them before you; so shall you drive them out and kill them off quickly, as the Eternal has promised you.
Lamsa’s: And that you may know therefore this day that the LORD your God is he who will go over before you; as a consuming fire he shall destroy them, and he shall defeat them before you; so that you shall rout them, and destroy them quickly, as the LORD has said to you.
The Message: Today know this: GOD, your God, is crossing the river ahead of you--he's a consuming fire. He will destroy the nations, he will put them under your power. You will dispossess them and very quickly wipe them out, just as GOD promised you would.
Basic English Bible: Be certain then today that it is the Lord your God who goes over before you like an all-burning fire; he will send destruction on them, crushing them before you; and you will send them in flight, putting an end to them quickly, as the Lord has said.
Webster’s: Understand therefore this day, that the LORD thy God is he who goeth over before thee; as a consuming fire he shall destroy them, and he shall bring them down before thy face: so shalt thou drive them out, and destroy them quickly, as the LORD hath said to thee.
Douay Rheims: Thou shalt know therefore this day that the Lord thy God himself will pass over before thee, a devouring and consuming fire, to destroy and extirpate and bring them to nothing before thy face quickly, as he hath spoken to thee.
Now here are some literal translations.
Young’s literal: (A)nd thou hast known to-day, that Jehovah thy God [is] He who is passing over before thee--a fire consuming; He doth destroy them, and He doth humble them before thee, and thou hast dispossessed them, and destroyed them hastily, as Jehovah hath spoken to thee.
Hendrickson’s Interlinear: Therefore know today that Jehovah your God [is] he who passes over before you [as] a fire consuming he will destroy them and he will humble them before you, so you shall dispossess them and make them perish quickly as has spoken Jehovah to you.
Hendrickson’s Marginal: And know today that Jehovah your God is he who passes over before you as a consuming fire; He will destroy them, and he will bring them down before you; so you shall drive them out and make them perish quickly, as Jehovah has spoken to you.
Having spent five years in France as a [snicker, snicker] missionary, I am able to read and speak French, so I checked my Segond’s French version to see how mahar was rendered in this translation. My own English translation is in parentheses after it.
Segond’s New French Version: Reconnais aujourd’hui que l’Éternel, ton Dieu, marche lui-même devant toi, comme un feu dévorant; c’est lui qui les détruira, c’est lui qui les humiliera devant toi, et tu les déposséderas, tu les feras périr promptement, comme l’Éternel te la dit.
(Recognize today that the Eternal one, your God, walks himself before you, like a devouring fire. It is he who will destroy them; it is he who will humiliate them before you, and you will dispossess them, you will make them to perish promptly, as the Eternal one said to you.)
I will drive one final nail into Turkel’s "easily" coffin. One would think that even he would recognize that Jews who are fluent in Hebrew would be better qualified to translate their scriptures than someone whose knowledge of Hebrew is pretty well limited to what he can cut and paste from lexicons and "scholars" trying to find unity and harmony in the Bible, so I will end my string of Bible translations with the JPS (Jewish Publication Society) version of Deuteronomy 9:3.
JPS: Know then this day that none other than the LORD your God is crossing at your head, a devouring fire; it is He who will wipe them out. He will subdue them before you, that you may QUICKLY dispossess and destroy them, as the LORD has promised you.
If Turkel will obtain a copy of this version and read the introduction, he will learn that Harry M. Olinsky, professor of Bible at Hebrew Union College, served as editor-in-chief during the translation work and that he was assisted by H. L. Ginsberg, professor of Bible at the Jewish Theological Seminary, and Ephraim A. Speiser, professor of Semitic and Oriental Languages at the University of Pennsylvania. Their associates were Rabbis Max Arzt, Bernard J. Bamberger, and Harry Freedman, who were respectively representatives of the conservative, reformed, and orthodox branches of Judaism. Solomon Grayzed, editor of the Jewish Publication Society, served as committee secretary. Now why would Turkel think that he knows more than these Jewish scholars, who thought that quickly was the correct way to translate mahar in Deuteronomy 9:3?
I have quoted above 31 different English translations, all of which rendered mahar in Deuteronomy 9:3 as quickly, soon, speedily, or hastily. Twenty-eight of them used quickly to translate it, and soon, speedily, and hastily were each used once in the other three translations. Segond’s French translation used promptement, the word from which promptly in English was derived. None of the translations that I consulted used easily to translate mahar in this verse. In fact, I have spent a good part of a day researching this word, and I was unable to find any place in English translations where mahar in this verse was translated easily, yet Turkel asserts that easily would have been a "better" translation of the word and then puts [Wein.Dt111, 375-6, 406] after the assertion, as if citing a writer seeking to find inerrancy in the Bible is sufficient to prove the assertion.
Turkel has a habit of finding a writer who agrees with his doctrine du jour, whom he then quotes without supporting information and expects everyone to fall in line. While I was engaged in a one-sided "debate" with him on the Theology Web, he pulled that rabbit out of his hat and asked me why I thought that I knew more than biblical "scholars," so I will turn the question back to him. Why does he think that he knows more about the meaning of mahar than the dozens of scholars who worked on all of the translations quoted above?
Don’t expect an answer to this question.
Turkel, of course, doesn’t like it when I blast him with 20 or 30 different translations, which all agree with me and disagree with him, so I am sure that he will have something to say about how this is "poor scholarship" (as if citing writers who are bent on finding unity and harmony in the Bible is first-rate scholarship). I am sure, however, that no sensible person reading this doubts that he wouldn’t hesitate one moment to quote them if he could find several translations that rendered mahar as easily, which he claims would be a "better" translation. Since he cannot counter my rebuttal with his own list of translations, all he will be able to do is pooh-pooh the translations above and call them "poor scholarship." At the very least, however, he should feel an obligation to tell us why none of the committees of Hebrew scholars who worked on translating Deuteronomy 9:3 decided that easily would be a better word than quickly to translate mahar, but don’t hold your breath until he does this. I would probably have a heart attack if he even quotes this section of my reply in whatever unlinked "rebuttal" he may post on his website. We can expect him to skip it with some comment about "fluff" or "irrelevant distractions," but he won’t attempt to respond to it. Neither will he link his readers to it.
The citation of Wein.Dt111, 375-6, 406 above contained a "(s)ee this word mahar also used in Eccl. 4:12," so what does this verse say?
And though one might prevail against another, two will withstand one. A threefold cord is not quickly broken.
Turkel’s implication, of course, is that this is an example of where mahar was used in the sense of "easily," but if this is so, why did the various translations use quickly to translate mahar in this verse? I won’t test the patience of readers by quoting them, but I have looked through the translations again and found that they consistently used quickly in this verse. Even Segond’s French version said, "Le corde à tois brins ne se rompt pas vite." Turkel can check a French-English dictionary to see that vite means "fast, swift, rapid, speedy, or quick." Anytime there is a straw in sight, a biblical inerrantist will try to grab it in hopes of saving his position, and Turkel consistently proves that to be true.
For the sake of argument, let’s just assume that Turkel is right and that easily would have been a better word than quickly to translate mahar in Deuteronomy 9:3. How would it help his position if this verse said that Yahweh would go before the Israelites like a consuming fire to subdue the Canaanite nations so that "you may dispossess and destroy them easily"? How would that help Turkel to prove that the land promise did not fail, because I have quoted several passages, which Turkel has basically ignored, that say that the Israelites could not drive out some of the Canaanite nations.
Joshua 15:63 But the people of Judah could not drive out the Jebusites, the inhabitants of Jerusalem; so the Jebusites live with the people of Judah in Jerusalem to this day.
Joshua 17:12 Yet the Manassites could not take possession of those towns; but the Canaanites continued to live in that land. 13 But when the Israelites grew strong, they put the Canaanites to forced labor, but did not utterly drive them out.
If Deuteronomy 9:3 meant what Turkel claims would have been a "better" translation, it would have been saying that the Israelites would destroy the Canaanite nations and "easily" drive them out, but if they could not drive out some of the people, how could anyone construe Deuteronomy 9:3 to be a true statement? Driving out "easily" but not being able to drive out cannot be considered the same thing except in the desperate imagination of a biblical inerrantist trying to find harmony in the Bible.
Well, if this were not bad enough, it gets worse.
Judges 1:19 Yahweh was with Judah, and he took possession of the hill country, but could not drive out the inhabitants of the plain, because they had chariots of iron.
What happened here? If Yahweh was "with Judah," what difference would it have made if the inhabitants of the plain had chariots of iron? If Yahweh was indeed "with" Judah, the inhabitants of the plain could have had even iron tanks, and it would have made no difference, or is it Turkel’s position that Yahweh is not omnipotent?
Well, of course, Turkel is never without a quibble. Here he said the following about Judges 1:19.
We noted that Judges 1:19 fits as an example of a proviso in Deut. noting that the Israelites would not be allowed to take land too quickly, lest they be endangered by beasts.
Yes, this was Turkel’s quibble, but as I have shown very clearly above, the "proviso" in Deuteronomy 7:22, which said that Yahweh would drive out the Canaanite nations "little by little" so that the "wild beasts" could be kept under control, is just another example of where the Bible says X in one place but not X in another place, because Turkel’s quibble that mahar (quickly) in Deuteronomy 9:3 would have been "better translated" with easily is obviously an assertion that is not supported by the scholarly evidence. Hence, Turkel is confronted with another X and not X (P and ~P) example.
Deuteronomy 9:3 Know then today that Yahweh your God is the one who crosses over before you as a devouring fire; he will defeat them and subdue them before you, so that you may dispossess and destroy them quickly, as Yahweh has promised you.
Deuteronomy 7:22 And Yahweh thy God will put out those nations before thee by little and little: thou mayest not consume them at once, lest the beasts of the field increase upon thee.
This inconsistency is so clear that even Turkel should be able to see it, and, frankly, I believe he does see it but just won‘t admit it. In one place, the Bible says X (Yahweh would drive out the Canaanite nations quickly), but in another place, it says not X (Yahweh would not drive the nations out quickly but only "little by little"). Turkel doesn’t like it when I point out X and not X (P and ~P) passages in the Bible, but he needs to explain to us how (if Deuteronomy 9:3 did indeed mean "easily") being unable to drive out some of the nations could possibly be construed to mean that the Israelites drove the nations out "easily."
Notice that in Deuteronomy 7:22 (above) I emphasized "at once" in bold print. I wonder if Turkel knows what the Hebrew text says here. The word for "at once" was mahar in Hebrew, so what do you know? The "inspired" writer was here using mahar in obvious contrast to "by little and little," which would convey the idea of gradualness, so mahar was being used here in the opposite sense of "by little and little." In other words, the writer was saying that Yahweh would drive the Canaanite nations out gradually rather than "all at once" [mahar], but Deuteronomy 9:3 said that the nations would be driven out mahar. How could driving the nations out mahar and not driving the nations out mahar possibly have meant the same thing? Regardless of what quibble he may resort to--and be assured that if he "answers" this, he will resort to quibbles--Turkel must explain to us how being unable to drive out some of the nations would have constituted driving them out "easily."
Watch Bobby hop; watch Bobby skip; watch Bobby hop, skip, and jump right over this.
Now I need to issue the same warning that I received when someone called to my attention Turkel’s "fluff-free" version of my rebuttals. If you are drinking coffee or a Coke or whatever as you are reading this, put it aside or else risk having your drink spewed all over your keyboard. At the same location cited above, you will find the section below, which I have already quoted in part at the beginning of this article. The quoted section, however, didn’t include the "gorilla" tactic that Turkel had to resort to in order to explain how quickly wouldn’t necessarily mean "all at once."
Till:
All Turkel has done is point out another inconsistency, because the promise was that Yahweh would drive the nations out quickly.Turkel:
We fully anticipated the use of the following statement verse by our opponent, and have saved making reference to it so that we can have a little fun:Till:
Yeah, right, Turkel fully anticipated that I would quote this verse. See my comments about that at the beginning of this article. Meanwhile, let’s hurry on to see the "fun" that Turkel had. Notice especially the section I have emphasized in bold print in his "gorilla analogy."Turkel:
Deuteronomy 9:3 Know then today that Yahweh your God is the one who crosses over before you as a devouring fire; he will defeat them and subdue them before you, so that you may dispossess and destroy them quickly, as Yahweh has promised you.
Notice that it said that Yahweh would drive out the nations quickly, as he had promised the Israelites, so this text is not just saying that the nations would be driven out quickly but that the quickness with which the nations would be driven out was part of the promise.
Turkel(2):
Now we ask our opponent this question. If Llerraf the Gorilla is swinging on a tree in the jungle and has a bunch of bananas, and he says, "I will eat these bananas quickly," what does he mean? Does he mean, he will eat them all at once and do so quickly; i.e., will he inhale them in one session in less than ten seconds flat? Or does he mean, he will eat each one quickly, i.e., as he eats them, over an extended period of time, each banana going down in a few microseconds flat, with the total sum of bananas in the bunch eaten over a period of several days? Give up? We don't know either, and we will not know until we ask for some clarification, or else see him start eating the bananas. Now we tell the reader, look at the Biblical text. Did the Israelites eat their bananas all at once quickly? No. Did they eat each individual banana quickly? Yes, barring failures to obey such as the ones we record above, and items we say (below) reveal such instances implicitly. So unless our opponent can prove that the text of 9:3 was intended to apply to eating the whole bunch of bananas en masse -- and the context offers no help for that, whereas the historical record of Joshua provides contextual evidence that the "one at a time" meaning is in view -- he's just swinging in the cage again and hooting at the customers throwing ten-ton peanuts.
Till:
See why I warned you not to be sipping any kind of drink as you read
this? As absurd as it is, let’s take Turkel’s analogy and make it
parallel to the position he is trying to defend. Let’s have the gorilla
say, "I will eat these bananas easily." (Why not have a talking
gorilla? Turkel believes in talking snakes and donkeys.) If the gorilla
said this, but later we learned that he choked while trying to eat some
of the bananas and just couldn’t get some of them down, it would be the
case that Llerraf’s boast that he would eat the bananas "easily" proved
to be false. If not, why not?
I am sure that the readers can see my point. Turkel quibbled that mahar in Deuteronomy 9:3 really meant that Yahweh would be with the Israelites so that they would "easily" drive out the Canaanite nations. Turkel asked us to "look at the Biblical text," but when we do that, we find that in some cases the Israelites choked on their bananas and could not drive out some of the nations, and at other times the "driving out" was hardly "easy." Hence, Yahweh’s promise that the nations would be driven out "easily" proved to be false, and we found that this was the case by taking Turkel‘s advice and "look[ing] at the Biblical text." We have already seen some texts that clearly say that the Israelites could not drive out some of the nations, so let’s look now at other examples where the "driving" out was obviously difficult or else unsuccessful. I won’t cite the example of the city of Ai, because Turkel will quibble that the difficulty in obtaining this victory was due to the disobedience of Achan, who had kept some of the loot from Jericho for himself. Be that as it may, the victory at Ai certainly didn’t come "easy" for the Israelites, because they lost the first battle at a cost of 36 men (Josh. 7:5).
The long day of Joshua: In the battle with the Amorites in Joshua 10:8-14, Yahweh had to stop the sun in the sky [snicker, snicker] to give Joshua’s army time to defeat their enemy. Apparently, this victory wasn’t "easy" for the Israelites.
The Amorites at Mount Heres, Aijalon, and Shaalbim: And the Amorites forced the children of Dan into the mountain: for they would not suffer them to come down to the valley: But the Amorites would dwell in mount Heres in Aijalon, and in Shaalbim: yet the hand of the house of Joseph prevailed, so that they became tributaries. And the coast of the Amorites was from the going up to Akrabbim, from the rock, and upward (Josh. 1:34-36).
The Geshurites and Maacathites: Nevertheless the children of Israel expelled not the Geshurites, nor the Maachathites: but the Geshurites and the Maachathites dwell among the Israelites until this day (Josh. 13:13).
"Quickly," "easily"--really what difference does it make? Aside from the fact that the Israelites sometimes failed to drive the Canaanite nations out of the land, some of the victories that they won were neither quick nor easy, and we know this from "look[ing] at the Biblical text." Turkel should trying looking at it too.
So even if we give Deuteronomy 9:3 the meaning that Turkel arbitrarily--without the support of scholarship--assigned to the verse, he still has an X and not X (P and ~P) problem to explain, because one passage (Deut. 9:3) said that the Israelites would "easily" drive out the Canaanite nations, but other passages (Josh. 15:13; 17:12; Judges 1:19, etc.) said that the Israelites could not drive out some of the nations. Only a biblical inerrantist could construe not being able to drive out to mean the same as "easily driving out."
Someone pull Turkel’s foot out of his mouth before he chokes on it.
Finally, let’s look at Turkel’s fallacy of begging the question. I will requote here the last part of his "gorilla analogy" above to show how he is trying to prove the inerrancy of the land promise by assuming the inerrancy of the Bible. This is a familiar inerrantist tactic.
Turkel (requoted):
If Llerraf the Gorilla is swinging on a tree in the jungle and has a bunch of bananas, and he says, "I will eat these bananas quickly," what does he mean? Does he mean, he will eat them all at once and do so quickly; i.e., will he inhale them in one session in less than ten seconds flat? Or does he mean, he will eat each one quickly, i.e., as he eats them, over an extended period of time, each banana going down in a few microseconds flat, with the total sum of bananas in the bunch eaten over a period of several days? Give up? We don't know either, and we will not know until we ask for some clarification, or else see him start eating the bananas. Now we tell the reader, look at the Biblical text. Did the Israelites eat their bananas all at once quickly? No. Did they eat each individual banana quickly? Yes, barring failures to obey such as the ones we record above, and items we say (below) reveal such instances implicitly. So unless our opponent can prove that the text of 9:3 was intended to apply to eating the whole bunch of bananas en masse -- and the context offers no help for that, whereas the historical record of Joshua provides contextual evidence that the "one at a time" meaning is in view -- he's just swinging in the cage again and hooting at the customers throwing ten-ton peanuts.
Till:
Do you see it? Turkel is arguing that if we look at the biblical
text,
we see that the Israelites did not drive out all of the Canaanite
nations quickly; therefore, Deuteronomy 9:3 couldn’t have meant that
these nations would be driven out quickly, because if it did, there is
an inconsistency in the biblical text. Hence, quickly in this
verse
must not have meant quickly. So, just like that, he proves inerrancy in
the land-promise issue by assuming that texts B, C, and D, which say
that the Israelites did not drive out some of the Canaanite nations,
cannot contradict text A, which says that the Israelites would drive
out the Canaanite nations quickly.
In so doing, he forgets what he himself said in the first paragraph of his first article in our land-promise "debate."
As formulated the article addressed only the internal consistency of the Biblical record on this subject. Questions of the historicity of the Conquest, or the propriety of driving out and/or killing the inhabitants of Canaan, were not addressed at all, and will not be addressed here. Readers should bear in mind that in any replies to this essay, any resort by our opponent to any subject other than that addressed in "Yahweh's Failed Land Promise"--that is, the internal consistency of the Biblical record on this subject--can and will be taken as, and treated as evidence of, lack of capability to address the subject at hand, and of a need to provide a distraction from the central issue, for no other purpose than to conceal incapability on the primary subject by changing the discussion to another subject never addressed in the original article.
Turkel, then, has apparently forgotten his own standard that he insisted on when the "debate" began: the internal consistency of the biblical record on Yahweh’s land promise is the issue. His "gorilla analogy" above, aside from being patently ridiculous, tried to prove that the Bible is internally consistent on the land-promise issue by assuming that the Bible is internally consistent on this subject. When he argues that mahar in Deuteronomy 9:3 could not have meant "quickly" because if it did, the Bible is elsewhere inconsistent on the land-promise issue, he is not doing what he acknowledged at the beginning of the debate was his responsibility, i. e., to prove the internal consistency of the biblical text. He is merely assuming what he is obligated to prove, because he first assumes consistency in the biblical text and then argues from that assumption.
I wonder if Turkel knows what circular reasoning and begging the question are.
As for the conclusion that he reached by assuming
that
the
Bible
is
consistent on the land-promise issue, if he still wants to insist that mahar
in Deuteronomy 9:3 would have been "better
translated"
with the
word easily, he can take some of his own advice. He can bang his head
against the 32 translations of Deuteronomy 9:3, which I quoted above,
and then call an ambulance.
