For popular or very good threads
Adam Clarke:
But I will harden his heart - The case of Pharaoh has given rise to many fierce controversies, and to several strange and conflicting opinions. Would men but look at the whole account without the medium of their respective creeds, they would find little difficulty to apprehend the truth. If we take up the subject in a theological point of view, all sober Christians will allow the truth of this proposition of St. Augustine, when the subject in question is a person who has hardened his own heart by frequently resisting the grace and spirit of God: Non obdurate Deus impertiendo malitiam, sed non impertiendo misericordiam; Epist. 194, ad Sixtum, "God does not harden men by infusing malice into them, but by not imparting mercy to them." And this other will be as readily credited: Non operatur Deus in homine ipsam duritiam cordis; sed indurare eum dicitur quem mollire noluerit, sic etiam excaecare quem illuminare noluerit, et repellere eum quem noluerit vocare. "God does not work this hardness of heart in man; but he may be said to harden him whom he refuses to soften, to blind him whom he refuses to enlighten, and to repel him whom he refuses to call." It is but just and right that he should withhold those graces which he had repeatedly offered, and which the sinner had despised and rejected. Thus much for the general principle. The verb חזק chazak, which we translate harden, literally signifies to strengthen, confirm, make bold or courageous; and is often used in the sacred writings to excite to duty, perseverance, etc., and is placed by the Jews at the end of most books in the Bible as an exhortation to the reader to take courage, and proceed with his reading and with the obedience it requires. It constitutes an essential part of the exhortation of God to Joshua, Jos 1:7 : Only be thou Strong, רק חזק rak chazak. And of Joshua's dying exhortation to the people, Jos 23:6 : Be ye therefore Very Courageous, וחזקתם vachazaktem, to keep and to do all that is written in the book of the law. Now it would he very strange in these places to translate the word harden: Only be thou hard, Be ye therefore very hard; and yet if we use the word hardy, it would suit the sense and context perfectly well: Only be thou Hardy; Be ye therefore very Hardy. Now suppose we apply the word in this way to Pharaoh, the sense would be good, and the justice of God equally conspicuous. I will make his heart hardy, bold, daring, presumptuous; for the same principle acting against God's order is presumption, which when acting according to it is undaunted courage. It is true that the verb קשה kashah is used, Ex 7:3, which signifies to render stiff, tough, or stubborn, but it amounts to nearly the same meaning with the above.

All those who have read the Scriptures with care and attention, know well that God is frequently represented in them as doing what he only permits to be done. So because a man has grieved his Spirit and resisted his grace he withdraws that Spirit and grace from him, and thus he becomes bold and presumptuous in sin. Pharaoh made his own heart stubborn against God, Ex 9:34; and God gave him up to judicial blindness, so that he rushed on stubbornly to his own destruction. From the whole of Pharaoh's conduct we learn that he was bold, haughty, and cruel; and God chose to permit these dispositions to have their full sway in his heart without check or restraint from Divine influence: the consequence was what God intended, he did not immediately comply with the requisition to let the people go; and this was done that God might have the fuller opportunity of manifesting his power by multiplying signs and miracles, and thus impress the hearts both of the Egyptians and Israelites with a due sense of his omnipotence and justice. The whole procedure was graciously calculated to do endless good to both nations. The Israelites must be satisfied that they had the true God for their protector; and thus their faith was strengthened. The Egyptians must see that their gods could do nothing against the God of Israel; and thus their dependence on them was necessarily shaken. These great ends could not have been answered had Pharaoh at once consented to let the people go. This consideration alone unravels the mystery, and explains everything. Let it be observed that there is nothing spoken here of the eternal state of the Egyptian king; nor does anything in the whole of the subsequent account authorize us to believe that God hardened his heart against the influences of his own grace, that he might occasion him so to sin that his justice might consign him to hell. This would be such an act of flagrant injustice as we could scarcely attribute to the worst of men. He who leads another into an offense that he may have a fairer pretense to punish him for it, or brings him into such circumstances that he cannot avoid committing a capital crime, and then hangs him for it, is surely the most execrable of mortals. What then should we make of the God of justice and mercy should we attribute to him a decree, the date of which is lost in eternity, by which he has determined to cut off from the possibility of salvation millions of millions of unborn souls, and leave them under a necessity of sinning, by actually hardening their hearts against the influences of his own grace and Spirit, that he may, on the pretext of justice, consign them to endless perdition? Whatever may be pretended in behalf of such unqualified opinions, it must be evident to all who are not deeply prejudiced, that neither the justice nor the sovereignty of God can be magnified by them.
Did this come from a book or a website? Please cite that source.


I don't think the hardening of heart issue can be understood as just straightforward as many think. Many usually just read about God hardening someone's heart and just jump to conclusions because the thought of God doing that or even mentioning it raises red flags. But I'm very open to the idea that this could've been some type of special theological or literary of the writer to express a point. That's why these points in your article stood out to me:

. "God does not work this hardness of heart in man; but he may be said to harden him whom he refuses to soften, to blind him whom he refuses to enlighten, and to repel him whom he refuses to call." It is but just and right that he should withhold those graces which he had repeatedly offered, and which the sinner had despised and rejected. Thus much for the general principle.
All those who have read the Scriptures with care and attention, know well that God is frequently represented in them as doing what he only permits to be done. So because a man has grieved his Spirit and resisted his grace he withdraws that Spirit and grace from him, and thus he becomes bold and presumptuous in sin. Pharaoh made his own heart stubborn against God, Ex 9:34; and God gave him up to judicial blindness, so that he rushed on stubbornly to his own destruction. From the whole of Pharaoh's conduct we learn that he was bold, haughty, and cruel; and God chose to permit these dispositions to have their full sway in his heart without check or restraint from Divine influence:
 
Adam Clarke — ‘ . . . eum quem noluerit vocare. "God does not work this hardness of heart in man; but he may be said to harden him whom he refuses to soften, . . ” . . ’

——————

This is a long-winded excuse.

Any good Baptist can tell you, the sins of omission are often worse than the sins of commission. Why didn’t God softens Pharaoh’s heart? I mean, if that’s the way he normally works and all.
The way that explanation goes makes it seem as if God is needed to get people to do good. As if there was no way for Pharaoh to have not hardened his heart on his own, without God in the picture. And somehow this just equates to God permitting it? I wonder if this is how all of life works in the Christian worldview.

Either way, I'm not on board with it 100%, but then again I'm also not onboard 100% with the other side that God hardened Pharaoh's heart (because some places say Pharaoh did it)..
 
3ef636600bb3df2b2e2cc962de4dab11.jpg


It’s amazing how many different religions, philosophies, etc, have hit upon the Golden Rule.

should we say re-invented, re-discovered ? ??
 
  • Like
Reactions: AgnosticBoy
But I'm very open to the idea that this could've been some type of special theological or literary of the writer to express a point.
I’m slightly open to this. Or, I’ll try to be open to this.

But really, from age 5 my whole life has been saturated with TV. I’m very familiar with story. As I guess other people are of different places and ages, even if it’s just deliciously long evenings around the camp fire.

And would have been a better story if it had the aspect,

. . . the Pharaoh was a prideful man, this served him well as a young man, but . . .
 
Last edited:
For one of the rare times, my got to site gave an explanation for this topic that I found unsatisfactory. It's not even worth quoting but it basically said, since Pharaoh was a sinner, and would be punished anyway, that excuses God to harden his heart.

I read another explanation elsewhere that God hardened Pharaoh's heart not by directly controlling his will, but through the plagues. When God would pull back on the plagues, then Pharaoh would see he's no longer in trouble and go back to a hardened heart. I'd have to look at the timeline to see when is the first mention of God's hardening Pharaoh's heart. But it does seem to play into the explanation that Scooter quoted earlier.

Looking at the timeline of those passages now.................
 
I read another explanation elsewhere that God hardened Pharaoh's heart not by directly controlling his will, but through the plagues. When God would pull back on the plagues, then Pharaoh would see he's no longer in trouble and go back to a hardened heart. I'd have to look at the timeline to see when is the first mention of God's hardening Pharaoh's heart. But it does seem to play into the explanation that Scooter quoted earlier.
Turns out my theory doesn't fit the story that neatly because there is one instance where God did not relent on a plague, and Pharoah's heart was still hardened.

Exodus 9:8-12 (God did NOT relent from this plague)...
8 Then the Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “Take handfuls of soot from a brick kiln, and have Moses toss it into the air while Pharaoh watches. 9 The ashes will spread like fine dust over the whole land of Egypt, causing festering boils to break out on people and animals throughout the land.”10 So they took soot from a brick kiln and went and stood before Pharaoh. As Pharaoh watched, Moses threw the soot into the air, and boils broke out on people and animals alike. 11 Even the magicians were unable to stand before Moses, because the boils had broken out on them and all the Egyptians. 12 But the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and just as the Lord had predicted to Moses, Pharaoh refused to listen.

But is there still room to say that God used the plagues to harden Pharaoh's heart sorta like the same way I buy my girl something she likes just to make her excited and happy? Is that okay to do just as long as it's not a direct control thing (God overriding Pharaoh's will)?🤔

Exodus 10:16-20 fits my theory since God relents on a punishment and then it says God hardened Pharaoh's heart right after. Was it the relenting that made Pharoah's heart harden?
16 Pharaoh quickly summoned Moses and Aaron and said, “I have sinned against the Lord your God and against you. 17 Now forgive my sin once more and pray to the Lord your God to take this deadly plague away from me.”

18 Moses then left Pharaoh and prayed to the Lord. 19 And the Lord changed the wind to a very strong west wind, which caught up the locusts and carried them into the Red Sea. Not a locust was left anywhere in Egypt. 20 But the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he would not let the Israelites go.

So whether the story supports my theory is really a mixed result. In some cases it does, in other cases, not so much.
 
Exodus 9:8-12 (God did NOT relent from this plague)...
8 Then the Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “Take handfuls of soot from a brick kiln, and have Moses toss it into the air while Pharaoh watches. 9 The ashes will spread like fine dust over the whole land of Egypt, causing festering boils to break out on people and animals throughout the land.”
It’s certainly magical, and visual.

Okay, I’m in favor of a lot of meaning being packed into a small amount of words. For example, from the original “Godfather” movie, one of his main lieutenants tells him who’s wanting to see him. The Godfather asks, “What does _____ want?” He’s giving an answer. And then he says, “Save him for last.” And from these few words, we clearly pick up that he’s the leader of the community.

———————

But I’ve got to tell you. I read the book of Genesis as an adult, all 50 chapters. I did not find much depth of character, or realism in plot. Instead some of the same themes, such as conflict between brothers that rises to murder or almost to murder, keeps getting churned over and over again. Another example, we’re told that so-and-so is a righteous man, but we’re not told why he’s righteous.

I’ll try to be open to Exodus being a more realistic description of human conflict, even if the story “goes BIG.”
 
Asking myself how God hardened Pharoah's heart made me take a more philosophical look on causation to explore a view I brought up earlier. Could God have used indirect means? Here's what I pulled up from Google's Ai search when looking up indirect causation:

Synonyms for indirect causation include contributing factors, remote causes, secondary causes, underlying factors, ancillary causes, intermediate causes, precipitating factors, consequential factors, collateral causes, and associated factors. These terms all suggest a cause that is not the immediate or primary reason for an effect, but still plays a role in bringing it about.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:
1. Contributing factors: These are elements that, while not the sole cause, help to bring about an outcome.
2. Remote causes: This term implies a cause that is further removed in time or sequence from the effect.
3. Secondary causes: This indicates a cause that is not the primary or most important one in producing an effect.
4. Underlying factors: These are the deeper, often less obvious, reasons that contribute to an event.
5. Ancillary causes: Similar to secondary causes, these are supporting causes.
6. Intermediate causes: These are causes that act as a link between an initial event and a final outcome.
7. Precipitating factors: These are events or conditions that trigger a specific outcome.
8. Consequential factors: These are effects that arise as a result of an indirect cause.
9. Collateral causes: These are causes that are related to the main cause but not directly part of it.
10. Associated factors: These are factors that are linked to the cause of an event but don't necessarily directly cause it.

I think options 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 are all possible with 1, 3, 7 being more probable.

The reason I think these are probable is again because the story doesn't only say that God was hardening Pharoah's heart. It also says Pharaoh was hardening his heart, as well. But from a lot of the critical explanations out there would make it seem that it was all God's fault and Pharaoh's will was completely out of it. I think that's faulty picture that leaves out details.

But God actions as a sort of secondary cause makes it possible for both God and Pharaoh will's to be a cause for the "hardening of heart". I think God used the signs and possibly even other things to bring about a result which didn't have to involve taking away Pharoah's ability to choose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Multicolored Lemur
I think God used the signs and possibly even other things to bring about a result which didn't have to involve taking away Pharoah's ability to choose.
To me, this is kind of “lawyering” the situation so that God gets off the hook.

Why would God, instead, not try to soften Pharaoh’s heart? For example, maybe He has Pharaoh come across a young nephew who’s down in the dumps because the slightly older boys won’t let him play with them.
 
Last edited: