Who hardened Pharaoh's heart?

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
When Pharoah did it, it was Pharoah's responsibility. When God did it, it was God's responsibility. The two did not occur simultaneously according to the passages quoted in the first post.

...

Then why is it [God's hidden will] mentioned in the Bible?

As I said before, I think it was just the author's way of saying the same principle in two different ways. I don't think Pharaoh felt like he wanted to let them go, but God then compelled him to do otherwise.

Why does God mention His hidden will in the Bible? Well, it does help to reveal something of him to us. But it doesn't serve as something that should dictate the way in which we act. By that I mean that we can't act based on what we thing God's hidden will is.

[EDIT: Messed up the quote/post.]

Originally posted by joelek
As I said before, I think it was just the author's way of saying the same principle in two different ways. I don't think Pharaoh felt like he wanted to let them go, but God then compelled him to do otherwise.

Why does God mention His hidden will in the Bible? Well, it does help to reveal something of him to us. But it doesn't serve as something that ...[text shortened]... we can't act based on what we thing God's hidden will is.

[EDIT: Messed up the quote/post.]

Oh, ok. You think the Bible says one thing but really means another. Ok.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Oh, ok. You think the Bible says one thing but really means another. Ok.

No, I think that Pharaoh hardened his heart. I also think that God hardened his heart. This is EXACTLY what the Bible says.

Originally posted by no1marauder
I have studied more cases of murder than you want to know.

Truer words, you've yet to utter.

Contract killers? There's a large section of the prison popluation. Supposedly, greed is no longer an emotion. Thanks for the update.

And sociopaths: a group of people who kill as readily as wiping their noses, and with equal dispatch, all without any emotional impetus. Brilliant! Your research and results will surely garner you an Emmy ( or is it Oscar?).

On clear days, what color is the sky in your world?

Originally posted by no1marauder
You obviously don't know what you're talking about.
Legal justifications are usually based on the necessity of saving your own or other people's lives.

Nailed it again!
I am so blissfully unaware of the heart of the issue, you are compelled to state (almost verbatim) my exact stance.
Although not a big proponent of the pharmaceutical approach, I believe in your case, it's probably better to stay with the meds.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Truer words, you've yet to utter.

Contract killers? There's a large section of the prison popluation. Supposedly, greed is no longer an emotion. Thanks for the update.

And sociopaths: a group of people who kill as readily as wiping their noses, and with equal dispatch, all without any emotional impetus. Brilliant! Your research and results wil ...[text shortened]... ly garner you an Emmy ( or is it Oscar?).

On clear days, what color is the sky in your world?

So you were utterly wrong to state:

Emotion is one of the distinguising characteristics of murder.


Your attempts at humor are even more pathetic than your "arguments". The latter are far funnier.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Nailed it again!
I am so blissfully unaware of the heart of the issue, you are compelled to state (almost verbatim) my exact stance.
Although not a big proponent of the pharmaceutical approach, I believe in your case, it's probably better to stay with the meds.

You seem unable to maintain a stance from post to post, Darf.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
No good reason? Why, they were extras in one of the biggest drama productions ever--underwritten by none other than the Great Director. That should be reason enough!

Charlton Heston was in it too, a small detail convieniently overlooked by old-earthers.

Originally posted by no1marauder
So you were utterly wrong to state:

Emotion is one of the distinguising characteristics of murder.


Your attempts at humor are even more pathetic than your "arguments". The latter are far funnier.

The original post is unretracted. During the trial phase, the accused is faced with all testimony regarding the intent of the act.
During deliberation, the jury is charged with determining the intent of the act. What was the accused thinking? What were their emotions?
Don't limit emotions to the emoticons available below the post button. Emotions are meant to be respondents, but most often have been given the lead.
Whether its the humor that gets to you or the arguments, the important thing is that you are being entertained.

Originally posted by no1marauder
You seem unable to maintain a stance from post to post, Darf.

I assume by "Darf," you are returning to your thread about Darfius and I being in cahoots.
How does that make you feel?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
The original post is unretracted. During the trial phase, the accused is faced with all testimony regarding the intent of the act.
During deliberation, the jury is charged with determining the intent of the act. What was the accused thinking? What were their emotions?
Don't limit emotions to the emoticons available below the post button. Emotions ar ...[text shortened]... humor that gets to you or the arguments, the important thing is that you are being entertained.

Please, Darf, stop trying to talk about legal matters; it's embarrassing to even hit such softballs. Intent doesn't necessarily have anything to do with emotions as I have already shown. Plus your new argument that somehow intent = emotions destroys your original "point"; that God has no emotions. To paraphrase you:

What was God thinking when he killed the Egyptian first borns?
What were his emotions?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I assume by "Darf," you are returning to your thread about Darfius and I being in cahoots.
How does that make you feel?

No, actually I think it's quite likely you are Darfius using a second account.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Intent doesn't necessarily have anything to do with emotions as I have already shown. Plus your new argument that somehow intent = emotions destroys your original "point"; that God has no emotions. To paraphrase you:

What was God thinking when he killed the Egyptian first borns?
What were his emotions?

Intent doesn't necessarily have anything to do with emotions as I have already shown.

Uh, no you haven't.

Plus your new argument that somehow intent = emotions destroys your original "point"; that God has no emotions.

As what occurred in Egypt was killing, not murder, again, emotions were neither necessary nor employed. Man's intents are sometimes determined by emotions. God, being without human emotion, does all He intends without aid from the same.

Originally posted by no1marauder
No, actually I think it's quite likely you are Darfius using a second account.

Darf's not here, man.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Intent doesn't necessarily have anything to do with emotions as I have already shown.

Uh, no you haven't.

Plus your new argument that somehow intent = emotions destroys your original "point"; that God has no emotions.

As what occurred in Egypt was killing, not murder, again, emotions were neither necessary nor employed. Man's intents are som ...[text shortened]... d by emotions. God, being without human emotion, does all He intends without aid from the same.

You've already conceded that a sociopath kills with no more concern than "wiping his nose" and such a concession clearly means that intent has nothing to do with emotions. Further, you are in full retreat by saying "Man's intents are SOMETIMES determined by emotions" when you previously said: "Emotion is one of the distinguising characteristics of murder" A "distinguishing characteristic" of something cannot be lacking in any instance, so emotions are not a distinguishing characteristic of murder. QED.

Good to know in your theology God's mindset is the same as a sociopath.