Monday, September 20, 2010

Romans 9 ~ #11

WARNING: Please don't agree or disagree with this blog until you have personally checked it against the Bible for yourself. The Bible (not this blog) should be your final authority.  Regarding this blog, or any other blogs that I have written, if you find that I am in wrong, in whole or in part, I want to assure you that I welcome further discussion and correction.


For Starters

As mentioned in my previous blogs, when studying the Bible, it is critically important to always study the context of a particular Bible verse or passage. One of the most important areas of Bible study (after praying for understanding)  is to consider the context! This cannot be emphasized enough. We need to look at each verse in the context of the verses that surround it.  We need to consider the context of the book - the meaning - the audience, or who the book was written to, the historical back ground and time it was written in,  and the purpose, why was this book written. Also, we have to consider the context of the whole Bible.  In other words, is the meaning you are interpreting from one passage consistent with the message of the rest of the Bible.  What does the whole Bible say about this subject? All doctrine must be understood and explained by Scripture itself, not by human explanations (or even blogs like this). Scripture must interpret scripture. The Bible should always be the final authority when trying to understand important matters concerning truth and salvation and sometimes requires additional study so that we can gain a proper understanding of what God is trying to say to us. This is especially true when considering difficult Bible passages such as, the "hardening of Pharaohs heart" and "God hating Esau",  which are both found in Romans Chapter 9.

I mention these verses because some people (i.e. Calvinists) use Pharaoh and Esau as proof texts to substantiate the view that God predestines some to heaven and some to hell. They also use it to justify the position that God loves some and hates others, and that Jesus died for some instead of all. I believe this view is in direct opposition to Biblical truths, and that it grossly distorts the Bible's meaning and overall message. At the same time, this view redefines the true character of God that is described in the Bible.
So, for today's blog, I would like to consider these "proof texts" for Calvinism and answer the the difficult questions that follow: How can a loving and merciful God harden Pharaoh's heart without giving him the opportunity to choose good or evil? And, how could a loving and merciful God hate Esau before he was even born? To answer these tough questions, we have to put these verses into context and for these passages use related scripture verses to interpret their proper meaning. Otherwise, it would be very easy to walk away from these difficult passages with an incorrect interpretation. Also, bear in mind, there are other matters to consider before reading these texts, such as God's absolute sovereignty. Remember, God is not bound in the physical world (time) as we humans are, and He has the advantages of His sovereign attributes. Because God is sovereign, He has the benefit of foreknowledge, which means he has the knowledge of an event before it occurs. Knowing Gods attributes, as well as, letting scripture interpret other scripture  is essential for understanding the context of what God is trying to tell us in His  Word.
Hardening Pharaoh's Heart
Romans 9:17-18) For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth. Therefore God has mercy on whom He wants to have mercy, and He hardens whom He wants to harden.

Did God predestine Pharaoh to sin and rebel against Him?  Not at all! God, because He is sovereign, foreknew of  Pharaoh's choices before they ever took place and God foreknew that Pharaoh would never honor the true and living God.  So God used Pharaoh to fulfill His purposes as He released Israel from bondage in Egypt. Furthermore, we must not forget that Pharaoh hardened his own heart five times before God finally intervened.

(Exodus 9:16) It is not said that Pharaoh was born for, but was raised to the throne for a particular purpose. That purpose was so God could show His power. It also doesn't say that God raised Pharaoh up to destroy him. His power could have been shown by Pharaoh yielding to God, but unfortunately for Pharaoh, this would not be the case. Pharaoh's conduct made it necessary for God to punish him. Pharaoh's election is not of an individual to destruction, but of a man to be a king for a particular purpose. The destruction came upon Pharaoh because, in that position, he resisted God.
(Exodus 9:15) God shows mercy and compassion according to His own sense of right, not according to any human code. What must not be forgotten in the case of Pharaoh and what appears distinctly, from the whole narrative in Exodus, is that Pharaoh's hardening was at first his own act. Five times it is said that Pharaoh hardened, or made heavy his own heart (Exodus 7:13; 7:22; 8:15; 8:32; 9:7), after giving Pharaoh several chances, God eventually intervenes and hardens Pharaoh's heart (Exodus 9;12) and even after that it is said that Pharaoh hardened himself (Exodus 9:34); thus, Pharaoh closed his own heart to God's appeals which eventually grew harder by his stubborn resistance to God's judgments, until at last God, as a punishment for his obstinate rejection and rebellion, God gave him over to his mad folly. Pharaoh himself once said, “I have sinned; the Lord is righteous” (Exodus 9:27). If Pharaoh did not harden his own heart, the result would have been different.
Jacob & Esau
(Malachi 1:2-3) “I have loved you, says the LORD. But you ask, How have you loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother?’ the LORD says. Yet I have loved Jacob, but Esau I have hated, and I have turned his mountains into a wasteland and left his inheritance to the desert jackals.

(Romans 9:11) "Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand:  not by works but by him who calls—she was told, "The older will serve the younger".(Romans 9:13) Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated". 
As mentioned above, the Prophet Malachi and the Apostle Paul are using the name “Esau" and these verses clearly state that God hated Esau. Again, just as we did with Pharaoh, we will have to interpret scripture with other scripture, while also bearing in mind the context of these verses and the absolute sovereignty and character of God.
Some back-ground first: Isaac and Rebekah had twin sons, Esau and Jacob. Esau was born first, and later was renamed Edom (his descendants were called Edomites). Jacob, who was immediately born afterward, was later renamed Israel (his descendants were called Israelites). Before either man was born it is mentioned in Genesis 25:19-34 that "Two nations are in thy womb, … one people shall be stronger than the other, and the elder (people) shall serve the younger”.Since God has a purpose in everything He does (Romans 8:28) - we know God does not use His power in an arbitrary manner; thus, there has to be a reason why God would hate Esau and love Jacob, especially given the fact that neither was born and never had the chance to do good or evil. Because of  God's foreknowledge, He knew the choices that both men would make  in their lives before they were ever born (just like He did with Pharaoh) and  based on this fact, God looked ahead with perfect foreknowledge and saw that though Jacob began as a sly, devious person, would grow into a man who feared God. Of him God said, "I loved Jacob."   God also looked ahead through foreknowledge and saw Esau who spurned his birthright – the rights of the firstborn – by selling it to Jacob for a pot of stew Genesis - 25:26-34. Esau’s god, at that moment, was his stomach.  God foreknew Esau would dishonor Him, just as he did not honor his birthright; thus, looking ahead, even before the twins were born, God said "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated".

Also, bear in mind the births of Jacob and Esau fulfilled God's master design for establishing the nations of Israel and Edom. As previously mentioned in Genesis 25:19-34 it clearly states "..two nations are in thy womb… one people shall be stronger than the other, and the elder (people) shall serve the younger...”. The Edomites, descended from Esau and served the Israelites. The election here is the establishment of a nation. Isaac willed to bestow the blessing of the first born son onto Esau; however, Esau decided to sell his birthright instead; thus, God in His sovereignty chose Jacob to become the founder of the chosen people, and received the blessing to be the father of a great nation. 
So, considering the context and the nature of God, we know God's loving Jacob and hating Esau had nothing to do with their election unto salvation, but had everything to do with God choosing one man and his descendants and rejecting another man and his descendants. Putting Romans 9:13 into context makes it abundantly clear that loving Jacob and hating Esau was entirely related to which of them God chose to lead the nation of Israel. God in His sovereignty foreknew the  lives of both Jacob and Esau, while also knowing the Edomites would rebel against Him and become bitter enemies with the chosen nation of Israel.
(Malachi 1:2-3) God has the right to reject what nation He will, including the Jews, and to choose other nations if He wills it. This is shown by facts from history. God exercises His right of choice and foreknowledge when He chose Jacob as the chosen nation, instead of Esau. The facts are recited to show this. The language of Malachi, shows that that two nations are referred to. Verse 3 says, “I hated Esau and laid waste his mountains and his heritage.” This was not true of Esau as a person, but was true of his descendants. One nation was loved and the other nation was hated; however, there is not the slightest hint of electing some persons to eternal salvation and others to eternal damnation.
(Romans 9:10-13) The children (Jacob and Esau), yet unborn, were both Isaac's twin sons and both equally without works, neither having done good nor evil. Of His own will God chose Jacob, yet unborn, to become the head of His chosen people, rather than Esau. Here again, this election was not to eternal salvation, but to become the head of a people. As Moses, Samuel, and John the Baptist were raised up for a great work of God, so was Jacob.

Conclusion
Contrary to what Calvinism says, God does not arbitrarily save nor damn anyone, or elect/predestine certain people to eternal damnation.  God has set forth criteria in His Word for all to see, study, know, and obey.  Those who obey God's Son as their Lord are the objects of His love, compassion and mercy.  Those who disobey and who reject His Son, will still remain the objects of His love, but they will receive God's justice instead. God is sovereign.  He accomplishes His purposes not only through those whom He foresees will be obedient to His will but also through those whom He foresees will reject Him as was the case with Pharaoh and Esau.

8 comments:

  1. Gods Grace - Getting what we don't deserve. God's Mercy - Not getting what we do deserve. God's Justice - Getting what we do deserve. God's Salvation - Getting everything at the expense of One



    For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures. 1 Corinthians 15:3-4


    For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.




    For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to
    save the world through him John 3:17


    For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23



    But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Romans 5:8


    For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. 1 Peter 3:18


    Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him John 3:36


    If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 1 John 1:9

    Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me". John 14:6


    For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God, not by works, so that no one can boast. Ephesians 2:8-9

    Seek the Lord while He may be found; call on Him while he is near. Isaiah 55:6


    Show me your ways, O Lord, teach me your paths; guide me in your truth and teach me, for you are God my Savior, and my hope is in you all day long. Remember, O Lord, your great mercy and love, for they are from of old. Remember not the sins of my youth and my rebellious ways; according to your love remember me, for you are good, O Lord."
    Psalm 25:4-7


    Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God. John 1:12

    But I trust in your unfailing love; my heart rejoices in your salvation. Pslams 13:5

    Surely God is my salvation; I will trust and not be afraid. The Lord, the Lord, is my strength and my song; He has become my salvation. Isaiah 12:2

    I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes Him who sent Me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life. John 5:24 (NIV)

    It's urgent that you listen carefully to this: Anyone here who believes what I am saying right now and aligns himself with the Father, who has in fact put me in charge, has at this very moment the real, lasting life and is no longer condemned to be an outsider. This person has taken a giant step from the world of the dead to the world of the living.John 5:24 (MSG)


    And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life. 1 John 5:11-13


    John 3:16-17

    This is how much God loved the world: He gave his Son, his one and only Son. And this is why: so that no one need be destroyed; by believing in him, anyone can have a whole and lasting life. God didn't go to all the trouble of sending his Son merely to point an accusing finger, telling the world how bad it was. He came to help, to put the world right again. Anyone who trusts in him is acquitted; anyone who refuses to trust him has long since been under the death sentence without knowing it. And why? Because of that person's failure to believe in the one-of-a-kind Son of God when introduced to him. (MSG)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Pharaoh (part 1)
    Apologetics Press :: Scripturally Speaking
    Who Hardened Pharaoh's Heart?
    by Kyle Butt, M.A. and Dave Miller, Ph.D.
    [
    In their perpetual quest to find discrepancies in the Bible, to undermine biblical ethics, and to find fault with the actions of God, skeptics have charged that God mistreated Pharaoh by overriding his free will and forcing him to resist the demand of Moses to allow the Israelites to exit Egypt. The skeptics focus on the verses about Pharaoh’s heart, demanding that the God of the Bible is an unjust, cruel being. Steve Wells, the well-known skeptic writer, said: “God begins the process of ‘hardening Pharaoh’s heart’ (see also Exodus 7:3,13, 9:12, 10:1, 20,27, 11:10, 14:4,8), thus making it impossible for any of the plagues that God sends to have any beneficial effect. But according to 1 Samuel 6:6, God didn’t harden the Pharaoh’s heart; the Pharaoh did it himself” (Wells, 2001). Kendall Hobbs, in an essay titled “Why I Am No Longer a Christian,” added Pharaoh’s story to a list of alleged atrocities committed by the God of the Bible. “There are plenty of other atrocities committed by God or at his command,” Hobbs comments, then lists “the Exodus story when the Egyptian Pharaoh was repeatedly ready and willing to let Moses and his people go, until God hardened his heart, and then God punished him for his hardened heart by sending plagues or killing children throughout all of Egypt” (Hobbs, 2003).

    The Protestant Calvinist response to the skeptic is simply to say that God can do what He chooses to do, and that humans have no right to question God. To him, the answer is “not to retract the sovereignty of God’s election, or to try to give a rational explanation to doubting men” (Palmer, 1972, p. 33). Since Calvinism has largely dominated the Protestant landscape for the last five centuries, most skeptics have dismissed Christianity as absurd, and have turned away in utter disgust in order to embrace atheism. The smug Calvinist declares, “So be it! You have the problem!”

    But why would many otherwise right-thinking people reject the Calvinistic brand of Christianity? Must their rejection necessarily be due to a desire to be free from the moral and social restraints that come with the acceptance of the Christian religion? Must the unbeliever’s unbelief inevitably be the result of an unwillingness to accept truth? While it is true that most human beings in history have rejected the correct pathway in life due to stubborn pride, selfishness, and a desire to gratify fleshly desires (cf. Matthew 7:13-14; 1 John 2:15-17), there are exceptions. Some people reject Christianity because they have been presented with pseudo-Christianity—a Catholic or Protestant version of it—what Paul called “a different gospel” (Galatians 1:6), that is, a diluted, distorted form, rather than pure, New Testament Christianity.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Pharaoh (part 2)

    The reason rational, honest people would reject Calvinism’s claim that God arbitrarily (i.e., for His own sovereign reasons) rejects some people, or overrides their free will, is because they recognize that a perfect God, i.e., One Who is infinite in all of His attributes (including justice, fairness, and impartiality), would not do so. God cannot be just, while unjustly rejecting some people. God cannot be God, and yet conduct Himself in an ungodly manner. Even the biggest sinner, who has violated his conscience repeatedly, and has dulled his spiritual sensibilities, has enough sense to comprehend the principle of being fair—even if he chooses not to treat people fairly.

    Turning to the book of Exodus, most Bible readers must admit that they were at least slightly startled the first time they read about God hardening Pharaoh’s heart, and then His punishing Pharaoh for that same hard-heartedness. In dealing with these allegations, three distinct declarations are made with regard to the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart. First, the text states that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart (7:3; 9:12; 10:1,20,27; 11:10; 14:4,8), and the hearts of the Egyptians (14:17). Second, it is said that Pharaoh hardened his own heart (8:15,32; 9:34), that he refused to humble himself (10:3), and that he was stubborn (13:15). Third, the text uses the passive form to indicate that Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, without giving any indication as to the source (7:13,14,22; 8:19; 9:7,35). The questions that arise from this state of affairs are: (1) did God harden Pharaoh on some occasions, while Pharaoh hardened himself on others? (2) Did God do all the hardening of Pharaoh, with the references to Pharaoh hardening himself being the result of God forcing him to do so against his own will? (3) Are all three declarations given in the text actually parallel expressions that mean the same thing? (4) Are the three declarations distinct from one another in their meaning, but all true in their own respects? Is the God of the Bible an unjust, cruel Being?

    Two excellent explanations are available that account for the Exodus declarations, each perfectly plausible and sufficient to demonstrate that both the skeptic and Calvinist interpretations are incorrect. Both explanations pertain to the fact that every language has its own way of using certain types of words and phrases that might appear odd to a person not familiar with the language. For instance, suppose a person commented that his boss became angry and “bit his head off.” Would anyone think that the speaker actually had his head bitten off? Of course not! English-speaking people understand this example of figurative speech. Or suppose a person went looking for a job, and someone said that she was “hitting the streets.” She was not literally hitting the streets with her fists. Most English speakers would understand the idiom. In the same way, the biblical languages had idioms, colloquialisms, Semitisms, and word usages peculiar to them, which those familiar with the language would understand.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Pharaoh (part 3)

    In his copious work on biblical figures of speech, E.W. Bullinger listed several ways that the Hebrew and Greek languages used verbs to mean something other than their strict, literal usage. He listed several verses that show that the languages “used active verbs to express the agent’s design or attempt to do anything, even though the thing was not actually done” (1898, p. 821). To illustrate, in discussing the Israelites, Deuteronomy 28:68 states: “Ye shall be sold (i.e., put up for sale) unto your enemies…and no man shall buy you.” The translators of the New King James Version recognized the idiom and rendered the verse, “you shall be offered for sale.” The text clearly indicated that they would not be sold, because there would be no buyer, yet the Hebrew active verb for “sold” was used. In the New Testament, a clear example of this type of usage is found in 1 John 1:10, which states, “If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him [God—KB/DM] a liar.” No one can make God a liar, but the attempt to deny sin is the equivalent of attempting to make God a liar, which is rendered with an active verb as if it actually happened. Verbs, therefore, can have idiomatic usages that may convey something other than a strict, literal meaning.

    With that in mind, Bullinger’s fourth list of idiomatic verbs deals with active verbs that “were used by the Hebrews to express, not the doing of the thing, but the permission of the thing which the agent is said to do” (p. 823, emp. in orig.). To illustrate, in commenting on Exodus 4:21, Bullinger stated: “ ‘I will harden his heart (i.e., I will permit or suffer his heart to be hardened), that he shall not let the people go.’ So in all the passages which speak of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart. As is clear from the common use of the same Idiom in the following passages” (1968, p. 823). He then listed Jeremiah 4:10, “ ‘Lord God, surely thou hast greatly deceived this people’: i.e., thou hast suffered this People to be greatly deceived, by the false prophets….’ ” Ezekiel 14:9 is also given as an example of this type of usage: “ ‘If the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet’: i.e., I have permitted him to deceive himself.” James MacKnight, in a lengthy section on biblical idioms, agrees with Bullinger’s assessment that in Hebrew active verbs can express permission and not direct action. This explanation unquestionably clarifies the question of God hardening Pharaoh’s heart. When the text says that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, it means that God would permit or allow Pharaoh’s heart to be hardened.

    A second equally legitimate explanation for the Exodus text is that the allusions to God hardening Pharaoh’s heart are a form of figurative speech, very closely associated with metaphor, known as “metonymy,” where one name or word is employed for another. For example, when we speak of “reading Shakespeare,” we mean that we read his writings or plays. God hardening Pharaoh’s heart would be “metonymy of the subject,” that is, the subject is announced, while some property or circumstance belonging to it is meant. Specifically, under this form of the figure, “[a]n action is sometimes said to have been accomplished, when all that is meant by it is that an occasion was given” (Dungan, 1888, p. 287; cf. Bullinger, 1898, p. 570).

    ReplyDelete
  5. Pharaoh (part 4)

    570).

    The Bible is replete with examples that illustrate this figure of speech. John reported that “Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John” (John 4:1). In reality, Jesus did not personally baptize anyone (John 4:2). But His teaching and influence caused it to be done. Jesus, the subject, is mentioned, but it is the circumstance of His influence that is intended. His teaching was responsible for people being baptized. Repeatedly in the book of 1 Kings, various kings of Israel are said to have “walked in the way of Jeroboam…who had made Israel sin” (e.g., 1 Kings 16:19,26; 22:52). But Jeroboam did not force either his contemporaries or his successors to sin. Rather, he set an example that they chose to follow. Judas was said to have purchased a field with the money he obtained by betraying Christ (Acts 1:18). But, in reality, he returned the money to the chief priests and then hung himself. The blood money was then used to purchase the field (Matthew 27:5-7). By metonymy of the subject, Judas was said to have done that which his action occasioned. Paul warned Roman Christians: “Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died” (Romans 14:15). What he meant was that they should not set an example that lures weaker brothers into doing what they consider to be wrong. Paul told Corinthian Christians that they were in a position to “save” their unbelieving spouses (1 Corinthians 7:16). He told Timothy that he was in a position to “save” those who listened to his teaching (1 Timothy 4:16). In both cases, Paul meant that proper teaching and a proper example could influence the recipients to obey God’s will for their lives.

    Another instance of metonymy of the subject, closely aligned with the example of Pharaoh in Exodus, is the occasion of the conversion of Lydia, the businesswoman from Thyatira. The text states that the “Lord opened her heart” (Acts 16:14). However, the specific means by which God achieved this action was the preaching of Paul. God’s Word, spoken through Paul, created within her a receptive and responsive mind. In like fashion, Jesus is said to have preached to Gentiles as well as to the antediluvian population of Noah’s day (Ephesians 2:17; 1 Peter 3:19). Of course, Jesus did neither—directly. Rather, He operated through agents—through Paul in the first case and through Noah in the latter. Similarly, Nathan accused king David: “You have killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword” (2 Samuel 12:9). In reality, David sent a letter to his general ordering him to arrange battle positions where Uriah would be more vulnerable to enemy fire. On the basis of metonymy of the subject, David, the subject, is said to have done something that, in actuality, he simply arranged for others to do.

    In the case of Pharaoh, “God hardened Pharaoh’s heart” in the sense that God provided the circumstances and the occasion for Pharaoh to be forced to make a decision. God sent Moses to place His demands before Pharaoh. Moses merely announced God’s instructions. God even accompanied His Word with miracles—to confirm the divine origin of the message (cf. Mark 16:20). Pharaoh made up his own mind to resist God’s demands. Of his own accord, he stubbornly refused to comply. Of course, God provided the occasion for Pharaoh to demonstrate his unyielding attitude. If God had not sent Moses, Pharaoh would not have been faced with the dilemma of whether to release the Israelites. So God was certainly the instigator and initiator. But He was not the author of Pharaoh’s defiance.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Pharaoh (part 5)

    570).

    The Bible is replete with examples that illustrate this figure of speech. John reported that “Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John” (John 4:1). In reality, Jesus did not personally baptize anyone (John 4:2). But His teaching and influence caused it to be done. Jesus, the subject, is mentioned, but it is the circumstance of His influence that is intended. His teaching was responsible for people being baptized. Repeatedly in the book of 1 Kings, various kings of Israel are said to have “walked in the way of Jeroboam…who had made Israel sin” (e.g., 1 Kings 16:19,26; 22:52). But Jeroboam did not force either his contemporaries or his successors to sin. Rather, he set an example that they chose to follow. Judas was said to have purchased a field with the money he obtained by betraying Christ (Acts 1:18). But, in reality, he returned the money to the chief priests and then hung himself. The blood money was then used to purchase the field (Matthew 27:5-7). By metonymy of the subject, Judas was said to have done that which his action occasioned. Paul warned Roman Christians: “Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died” (Romans 14:15). What he meant was that they should not set an example that lures weaker brothers into doing what they consider to be wrong. Paul told Corinthian Christians that they were in a position to “save” their unbelieving spouses (1 Corinthians 7:16). He told Timothy that he was in a position to “save” those who listened to his teaching (1 Timothy 4:16). In both cases, Paul meant that proper teaching and a proper example could influence the recipients to obey God’s will for their lives.

    Another instance of metonymy of the subject, closely aligned with the example of Pharaoh in Exodus, is the occasion of the conversion of Lydia, the businesswoman from Thyatira. The text states that the “Lord opened her heart” (Acts 16:14). However, the specific means by which God achieved this action was the preaching of Paul. God’s Word, spoken through Paul, created within her a receptive and responsive mind. In like fashion, Jesus is said to have preached to Gentiles as well as to the antediluvian population of Noah’s day (Ephesians 2:17; 1 Peter 3:19). Of course, Jesus did neither—directly. Rather, He operated through agents—through Paul in the first case and through Noah in the latter. Similarly, Nathan accused king David: “You have killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword” (2 Samuel 12:9). In reality, David sent a letter to his general ordering him to arrange battle positions where Uriah would be more vulnerable to enemy fire. On the basis of metonymy of the subject, David, the subject, is said to have done something that, in actuality, he simply arranged for others to do.

    In the case of Pharaoh, “God hardened Pharaoh’s heart” in the sense that God provided the circumstances and the occasion for Pharaoh to be forced to make a decision. God sent Moses to place His demands before Pharaoh. Moses merely announced God’s instructions. God even accompanied His Word with miracles—to confirm the divine origin of the message (cf. Mark 16:20). Pharaoh made up his own mind to resist God’s demands. Of his own accord, he stubbornly refused to comply. Of course, God provided the occasion for Pharaoh to demonstrate his unyielding attitude. If God had not sent Moses, Pharaoh would not have been faced with the dilemma of whether to release the Israelites. So God was certainly the instigator and initiator. But He was not the author of Pharaoh’s defiance.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Pharaoh (part 6)

    Notice that in a very real sense, all four of the following statements are true: (1) God hardened Pharaoh’s heart; (2) Moses hardened Pharaoh’s heart; (3) the words that Moses spoke hardened Pharaoh’s heart; (4) Pharaoh hardened his own heart. All four of these observations are accurate, depicting the same truth from different perspectives. In this sense, God is responsible for everything in the Universe, i.e., He has provided the occasion, the circumstances, and the environment in which all things (including people) operate. But He is not guilty of wrong in so doing. From a quick look at a simple Hebrew idiom, it is clear that God did not unjustly or directly harden Pharaoh’s heart. God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34), He does not act unjustly (Psalms 33:5), and He has always allowed humans to exercise their free moral agency (Deuteronomy 30:19). God, however, does use the wrong, stubborn decisions committed by rebellious sinners to further His causes (Isaiah 10:5-11). In the case of Pharaoh’s hardened heart, God can be charged with no injustice, and the Bible can be charged with no contradiction. Humans were created with free moral agency and are culpable for their own actions.

    REFERENCES

    Bullinger, E.W. (1898), Figures of Speech Used in the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1968 reprint).

    Dungan, D.R. (1888), Hermeneutics (Delight, AR: Gospel Light).

    Hobbs, Kendall (2003), “Why I Am No Longer a Christian: Ruminations on a Spiritual Journey out of and into the Material World,” [On-line], URL: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/kendall_hobbs/no_longer.shtml.

    MacKnight, James (1954 reprint), Apostolic Epistles (Nashville, TN: Gospel Advocate).

    Palmer, Edwin (1972), The Five Points of Calvinism (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).

    Wells, Steve (2001), Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, [On-line], URL: http://www.Skepticsannotatedbible.com>.


    Copyright © 2003 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved

    ReplyDelete
  8. In the fullest sense, the larger context of every passage of Scripture is the entire Bible. Since God is true, His Word is truth. There can be no contradiction between truth, and the interpretation of a single passage of Scripture must be in harmony with the whole.

    The clear teaching of the Bible is that God "would have all men to be saved, and come to the know-ledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:4). God does not wish "any should perish, but that all should come to repentance" (2 Peter 3:9). Peter, who at one time thought only a particular race of people was chosen of God, had to be taught a thorough lesson on this very point. Through the vision he experienced, he learned "of a truth I perceive God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation he who fears him and works righ-teousness is acceptable to him" (Acts 10:34-35).

    From these and numerous other passages it is clear that: (a) the Bible teaches that God loves every human being and has acted to make possible the salvation of each one; and (b) the death of Christ was for every man, and makes it possible for every man to receive atonement for his sins.

    "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believes on him should not perish, but have eternal life" (John 3:16). Christ, demonstrating God’s love, tasted "of death for every man" (Hebrews 2:9). He "gave himself a ransom for all" (1 Timothy 2:6).

    (Copied) F. Furman Kearley, Ph.D

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.