The Problem with Christians

[athrock]

Thank you. 

If someone wants to discuss a subject like evolution or cosmology intelligently with you, you would expect the other party to have some minimum baseline of knowledge, agreed? And you would be right to do so. Now, in order to to acquire that knowledge, some reading would probably be necessary.

Just so, I can point you in the general direction of an answer to why or how God did not "harden Pharaoh's heart", but you will want to do a bit of reading to grasp the argument in its fullest form. I'll provide a link to a good article and an excerpt...you should read the full presentation which is not too long.

Here we join the the article mid-stream:


I look forward to hearing your thoughts once you have had some time to consider the weight of the entire article.

Why would god have to allow or permit Pharaoh's heart to be hardened if Pharaoh already had free will? Either way your saying god intervened and changed something, which in turn would violate free will.

Um...read it again.

[Mr.wizard]

Well until you have proven God and his attributes, special pleading still applies. Because until you have proof, you are asserting that there is something that doesn't have to play by the same rules as everything else.

Ah...the ultimate "Get Out of Jail Free" card for atheists.

Prove God exists first, and then we'll talk. 

(As if we can't have an intelligent conversation about God even if He doesn't.)

But whether I can prove God exists or not is irrelevant because the attributes of God which we are considering can be evaluated either way. IOW, we don't need an ACTUAL God in order to discuss the omnipotence or omniscience of a theoretical god, do we?

As long as you acknowledge that your just making it up as go, sure we can discuss it. However, Until you actually produce an Omnipotent Omniscient god I don't see how we can have a reasonable discussion about a hypothetical being from your imagination.

[RoadRunner79]

Well until you have proven God and his attributes, special pleading still applies. Because until you have proof, you are asserting that there is something that doesn't have to play by the same rules as everything else.

Ah...the ultimate "Get Out of Jail Free" card for atheists.

Prove God exists first, and then we'll talk. 

(As if we can't have an intelligent conversation about God even if He doesn't.)

But whether I can prove God exists or not is irrelevant because the attributes of God which we are considering can be evaluated either way. IOW, we don't need an ACTUAL God in order to discuss the omnipotence or omniscience of a theoretical god, do we?

I also notice, that it is diverting away from the topic; which was if it was special pleading, to say that because of authority and position, that something may be justified for one and not another.... they're just trying to get you away from questioning the initial claim.  I notice this often, that it is difficult to have a discussion, because of all the bouncing around.

[Mr.wizard]

Why would god have to allow or permit Pharaoh's heart to be hardened if Pharaoh already had free will? Either way your saying god intervened and changed something, which in turn would violate free will.

Um...read it again.

 "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."

This is exactly what it says

[athrock]

Ah...the ultimate "Get Out of Jail Free" card for atheists.

Prove God exists first, and then we'll talk. 

(As if we can't have an intelligent conversation about God even if He doesn't.)

But whether I can prove God exists or not is irrelevant because the attributes of God which we are considering can be evaluated either way. IOW, we don't need an ACTUAL God in order to discuss the omnipotence or omniscience of a theoretical god, do we?

As long as you acknowledge that your just making it up as go, sure we can discuss it. However, Until you actually produce an Omnipotent Omniscient god I don't see how we can have a reasonable discussion about a hypothetical being from your imagination.

I'm not making it up as I go. Catholic theology has been developed over the course of nearly 2,000 years.

[athrock]

Um...read it again.

 "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."

This is exactly what it says

If I permit or allow someone to drive my car, and they freely choose to drive it off of a cliff, that is not the same as saying that I personally drove them off the cliff myself.

God allowed Pharaoh's heart to be hardened, but he was not the agent doing the actual hardening. Pharaoh was permitted or allowed to harden his own heart.

But I think the article says more than just this point.

[athrock]

Catholic apologist Mark Shea offers this insight:

"...the biblical authors are themselves struggling to understand the meaning of the revelation they themselves reveal. One of the things they struggle with is how to describe the relationship of God with the sin and evil we commit. On the one hand, they know God is sovereign. On the other hand, they know he is good. And so one of the ways the ancient Israelite mind speaks is of God "hardening" Pharaoh's heart. But we must always read such texts in light of the fullness of revelation we have received in Christ, which shows us that God never ever wills for any person to do evil and never compels anybody to do what is sinful:
Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted with evil and he himself tempts no one; but each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin; and sin when it is full-grown brings forth death. (James 1:13-15).
So Exodus is not saying, "God needed a villain for the story of Exodus, so he magicked Pharaoh, who was actually a really nice guy, into hardening his heart, like in those movies when an evil magician turns somebody into a zombie who does horrible things against his will, or when Jean-Luc Picard is taken over by the Borg and can't stop himself from destroying the Federation fleet." God never wills evil and never wills that we do it either.
 
So what is Exodus getting at? Well, it's getting at the fact that God, not we, is the center of the story and that he will go on being and doing what he is and does. There's no point in the wet clay telling the fire to change its nature. Fire will go on being and doing what it is and does, and our God is a consuming fire. If the wet clay willfully confronts the fire, the wet clay will become hard, not because the fire is putting mind control whammy on the clay, but because the fire is what it is. Pharaoh's heart is hardened by his confrontation with God, not because God gave him no chance to repent, but despite the fact that God gave him ten chances to repent and he willfully refused each time."
 
Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/blog/mark-shea...z44h5RAaA1

[Mr.wizard]

As long as you acknowledge that your just making it up as go, sure we can discuss it. However, Until you actually produce an Omnipotent Omniscient god I don't see how we can have a reasonable discussion about a hypothetical being from your imagination.

I'm not making it up as I go. Catholic theology has been developed over the course of nearly 2,000 years.

So what, Why should I listen to what you or catholic theology has to say about the attributes or the will of god? Catholic theology has just as much proof of god as you do, none.

It reminds me of the show "Finding Bigfoot" Nobody can find a bigfoot or prove it exists but somehow "Big Foot Researchers" know the sounds they make, They know they like to knock on trees, and throw rocks! How the fuck could they know any of that! My question is the same to you, how can you claim knowledge of gods attributes when you have no knowledge of an actual god, your only projecting attributes that you think your god would have.

[Mr.wizard]

 "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."

This is exactly what it says

If I permit or allow someone to drive my car, and they freely choose to drive it off of a cliff, that is not the same as saying that I personally drove them off the cliff myself.

God allowed Pharaoh's heart to be hardened, but he was not the agent doing the actual hardening. Pharaoh was permitted or allowed to harden his own heart.

But I think the article says more than just this point.

But why would he need god's permission if he had free will already?

[athrock]

I'm not making it up as I go. Catholic theology has been developed over the course of nearly 2,000 years.

So what, Why should I listen to what you or catholic theology has to say about the attributes or the will of god? Catholic theology has just as much proof of god as you do, none.

It reminds me of the show "Finding Bigfoot" Nobody can find a bigfoot or prove it exists but somehow "Big Foot Researchers" know the sounds they make, They know they like to knock on trees, and throw rocks! How the fuck could they know any of that! My question is the same to you, how can you claim knowledge of gods attributes when you have no knowledge of an actual god, your only projecting attributes that you think your god would have.

Because God Himself established the Catholic Church for the express purpose of assisting you on your journey home.