Exodus undercuts the notion of freewill

“But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and though I multiply my miraculous signs and wonders in Egypt, he will not listen to you.” – Exodus 7:3

In Exodus God repeatedly states that He will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and that this is the reason that Pharaoh does not listen to Moses. Honestly, God states that He hardens Pharaoh’s heart more than a dozen (if not two dozen!) times! This really calls into question our freewill in God’s scheme. How can the notion of freewill be reconciled with a God that can control our actions, and what’s more, our emotions?

God also takes credit for the skill and abilities of men:

“See I have chosen Bezalel son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah, and I have filled him with the Spirit of God, with skill, ability and knowledge in all kinds of crafts…” – Exodus 31:2-3

But not only do we need to reconcile the notion of God with our own selves, for God takes credit over things that happen outside of ourselves as well. There are many miracles that occur in Exodus, especially the ten plagues, which God all takes credit for. If a natural disaster occurs, are we to interpret it as a sign from God?

There’s an old saying, attributed to Ben Franklin, that God helps those who help themselves. But Exodus seems to suggest just the opposite! When the Egyptians were chasing the Israelites as they fled towards the Red Sea,  Moses had this to tell his people:

“The Lord will fight for you; you need only to be still.” - Exodus 14:14

So how are we to treat the world around us? More importantly, the world within us? Are we not to trust our eyes, are we not to trust our hearts? Exodus is very troubling because it paints a picture of the world in which God has a hand in everything, and we can have control over nothing, and indeed, we can know nothing.

If at least we could know that our hearts and our souls belong to us, then we could find comfort in the idea that although our senses may be deceiving, we can at least be righteously judged by our responses to the world around us. But if God can harden the heart of Pharaoh, then he can harden the hearts of us as well. How can we be expected to take responsibility for our actions if anything we do can be attributed to God?

Exodus really undercuts the notion of freewill, and without freewill, a lot of things become meaningless, indeed existence itself may be suggested to be meaningless. Does the Bible reconcile this later on? Have I misunderstood something?

Exodus: a great characterization of God

Exodus has been pretty interesting. I just got past the ten commandments, and one of the most remarkable parts of Exodus that really distinguishes it from Genesis is God’s personal involvement in the events in Egypt. In Genesis God created the world, but then after that he mostly stepped aside. He would speak to a few men, hand down some judgments and blessings, but aside from the flood, he didn’t cause much physical disturbance.

Exodus, on the other hand, has been all about the miracles of God. God curses Egypt with ten plagues, He gives Moses a shape-shifting snake staff, He allows Moses to part the Red Sea, He makes bread rain down from the sky, and He makes a rock leak water. I probably even missed some miracles, and there’s probably more to come.

Either way, this chapter shows a personal involvement from God not seen from before, furthermore, God’s finally deciding to tell His people what he really wants from them. We no longer need to look to who he finds favor with to try and figure Him out, He’s now granting us commandments and rules to follow.

Exodus has been incredibly important in characterizing God. Exodus gives much more credence to the view of God as being an actual deity, rather than just a personification of an idea. It’s tough to ascribe all those miracles to chance, so if you take the story of Exodus to be literal and to have actually happened, then it seems you’re going to have to posit an active and imminent God.

Which brings me to another important point. God’s name. When you speak of a god (no capitalization), it seems to suggest a mythological supernatural deity. A Jupiter or Odin or what have you. But when you speak of God (with a capital G), it seems to suggest a deity that personifies the idea of higher force. God could be synonymous with the logos, or at least a personification of it. But the Bible clearly illustrates it’s God to be a very personal and immanent. This contrasts explicitly with the idea of a logos, or overriding order and logic, which might be understood to be the body of existent truth. Now, I’m open to the idea of a higher power being personified in a god, since it may be pragmatically beneficial to think in terms such as that. But if the Bible posits a god which actually interacts in human affairs, then that’s far more akin to the type of gods that are traditionally understood as being mythological. The Bible I read refers to God only as God, or the Lord, which suggests that this god is the only god, which in turn suggests that He is representative of truth, absolutes, the logos, etc. A real philosopher’s god. However, I understand from doing some readings elsewhere online that the God of Abraham also has His own name. Yahweh, supposedly, or He may be referred to as YHWH, or Jehovah. This would suggest a more mythological god, one that stands next to Jupiter and Odin rather than above them.

I’m not going to make an judgments yet, but I would be interested in knowing why I have yet to see Yahweh in my version of the Bible. If The god of Abraham has an actual name other than the very general and non-descript “God,” or “The Lord,” then I think that’s of some pretty high importance.