Search This Blog

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

More on the Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart

In the comment section of the last post, my friend Emet made some points about the hardening of Pharaoh's heart recorded in the book of Exodus. I will interact with his remarks below. His words are in italics and my responses are in bold.

Pharaoh’s Heart is one of the reasons I had to learn biblical Hebrew. I’m not sure if you can read Hebrew but please verify the following use of words.

Yes, one good thing Bob Jones University does is to stress the ancient languages.

Pharaoh of his own free will does not want to let the Children of Israel leave Egypt.

True.

In Exodus 4:21 the Almighty tells Moses to return to Egypt, show Pharaoh great signs, but Pharaoh will not send the people out because the Almighty will strengthen (chet, zayin, kof) his heart. The Almighty is strengthening Pharaoh’s heart so that Pharaoh, who considers himself a deity, can use his free will to keep the Children of Israel in Egypt, and to do exactly what he wants to do - battle this Almighty. A soldier under torture will often reveal information, not because he wants to do so, but because he cannot withstand the pain.

So, if I understand what you are saying, YHWH gave Pharaoh strength to enable him to remain resolute against letting the people go, even in the face of horrible plagues?

First, I don't see how that resolves the moral problem. Because what you are saying is that Pharaoh would have given in but YHWH gave him the strength to remain obstinate. How that differs from the traditional understanding of YHWH hardening Pharoh's heart is difficult to see.

Second, the Hebrew word is the Piel Imperfect of חָזַק (chazaq). In the Piel, it can mean the following (according to the Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Lexicon):

1) to make strong
2) to restore to strength, give strength
3) to strengthen, sustain, encourage
4) to make strong, make bold, encourage
5) to make firm
6) to make rigid, make hard


According to BDB, when this verb has לֵב (leb) for its object, it means to "harden" or "make obstinate." BDB cites Ex. 4:21; Joshua 11:20; Jer. 5:3; Psalms 64:6 as cases where this is the meaning.

Third, the Septuagint (LXX) uses the Greek word σκληρυνῶ which has the following meanings according to Thayer's Greek Lexicon:

1) to make hard, harden
2) metaph. a) to render obstinate, stubborn, b) to be hardened, c) to become obstinate or stubborn


So, I don't see any justification for translating the word "to strengthen" in 4:21. I think " to harden," "to make obstinate," or "to make stubborn" are all better translations.


Exodus 7:3 But I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and though I multiply my miraculous signs and wonders in Egypt, NIV. The Hebrew word used in this verse is spelled (kof, shin, hey) and it means support or harden in a strong manner. The Almighty is telling Moses that He will support Pharaoh’s free will even though the plagues will become more difficult.

The Hebrew word in 7:3 is the Hiphil Imperfect of קָשָׁה (qashah ). Again according to BDB in the Hiphil it can mean:

1) to make difficult, make difficulty
2) to make severe, make burdensome
3) to make hard, make stiff, make stubborn
a) of obstinacy (fig)
4) to show stubbornness

The LXX once again uses σκληρυνῶ to translate the Hebrew verb. I think this clearly demonstrates that the two Hebrew words are synonyms.


Exodus 7:13 The heart of Pharaoh was strong and he did not heed them as [the Almighty] had spoken. The Stone Edition TANACH The Hebrew word used here is the same as in Exodus 4:21 (chet, zayin, kof) and it means strong or steadfast. It is the same word used in Deuteronomy 31:6 when the Almighty is speaking and encouraging the children of Israel - Be strong (chet, zayin, kof) and courageous. Do not be afraid or terrified because of them, for the LORD your God goes with you; he will never leave you nor forsake you. NIV
Exodus 7:22 also uses the word (chet, zayin, kof) ...so Pharaoh’s heart was strong and he did not heed them, as [the Almighty] had spoken. The Stone Edition TANACH Verse 22 uses exactly the same words as verse 13.


In both 7:13 and 7:22 the Hebrew verb is the Qal Imperfect of חָזַק (chazaq). in the Qal, according to B-D-B, it means:

1) to be strong, grow strong
a) to prevail, prevail upon
b) to be firm, be caught fast, be secure
c) to press, be urgent
d) to grow stout, grow rigid, grow hard (bad sense)
e) to be severe, be grievous
2) to strengthen

I see no reason NOT to understand it in the sense of "to grow stout, grow rigid, grow hard."


We have a numbering problem. Verse 8:15 in the Christian bibles is verse 8:11 in the Torah.

Exodus 8:15 But when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and did not listen to them, as the LORD had said. NASB

Exodus 8:11 Pharaoh saw that there had been a relief and he kept making his heart stubborn. He did not heed them as [the Almighty] had spoken. The Stone Edition Tanach

The word in the Hebrew text is (kaf, bet, dalet) which translates as stubborn, or making important. The Torah uses a different word here to tell us that Pharaoh was making himself important. He could not bear the thought that there was a power/god more forceful than he was. A few verses later Pharaoh’s own sorcerers cannot duplicate the plague of lice. They acknowledge to Pharaoh that it is the finger of the Hebrew G-d.


Here the Hebrew word is the Hiphil infinitive of כָּבַד (kabad) which BDB says can mean:

1) to make heavy
2) to make heavy, make dull, make unresponsive
3) to cause to be honoured

I don't see that Pharaoh is "making himself important" as you say but but that he is "making his heart dull or unresponsive."


The next verse (Christian bible 8:19, Hebrew 8:15) says, But Pharaoh’s heart was strong and he did not heed them, as [the Almighty] had spoken. Again the exact same words as 7:13, 7:22 and now 8:15.

Exodus 9:34-35 illustrate this understanding beautifully when you see it in the Hebrew, but one would miss it entirely in English.

Pharaoh saw that the rain, the hail and the thunder ceased and he continued to sin; and he made his heart stubborn (kaf, bet, dalet), he and his servants. Pharaoh’s heart became strong (chet, zayin, kof) and he did not send out the Children of Israel as [the Almighty] had spoken through Moses. The Stone Edition TANACH


As I said above, I don't see any reason to translate the Qal imperfect of חָזַק (chazaq) any other way than "to grow stout, grow rigid, grow hard."

So, Emet you are right in pointing out that there are three different Hebrew verbs all translated "harden" in most English translations. I think there is a reason for that, however; the Hebrew verbs are close synonyms.

In addition, if your goal is to somehow lessen the moral problem of YHWH making Pharaoh's heart hard or stubborn, I don't see that you can accomplish it through appeal to the Hebrew vocabulary involved.

7 comments:

  1. Dear Dr. Pulliam,

    Thank you for checking out the Hebrew words. One of the sources that I use for translations is Etymological Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew by Matityahu Clark. I see that you use a Christian source, Brown-Driver-Briggs - Hebrew Lexicon. This might be the source of our differences. I do not use the Septuagint (LXX) as a valid translation. The mistakes in LXX are too numerous to mention here. Christian translators only pick and choose from LXX when they want to use it as a source. I wonder if we would argue about the translation of the word almah in Isaiah 7:14. Since you have concluded that Christianity is false, as I have, maybe you would consider a better Hebrew to English translation of their book. I am not Jewish but it is helpful to know the Torah from their perspective, after all it is their book.

    "So, Emet you are right in pointing out that there are three different Hebrew verbs all translated "harden" in most English translations. I think there is a reason for that, however; the Hebrew verbs are close synonyms."

    The Torah is very concise in the use of words. If it uses three different verbs for something similar, there is an important point being made.

    "First, I don't see how that resolves the moral problem. Because what you are saying is that Pharaoh would have given in but YHWH gave him the strength to remain obstinate. How that differs from the traditional understanding of YHWH hardening Pharoh's heart is difficult to see."

    I am saying Pharaoh would have given in but the Almighty gave him the strength to choose. And Pharaoh chose to be obstinate. The deeper question is why he chose to be obstinate. At any point Pharaoh could have chosen to give in. People usually question the fairness of the Almighty hardening Pharaoh’s heart - meaning that it wasn’t fair or moral to take away his free will and force him to resist the Almighty’s request.

    One cannot have a productive discussion about a moral problem in the Torah until one has a firm grasp on the meaning of the words and stories. Otherwise you will get all kinds of strange opinions about the Almighty, many of which you debunk in your blog.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Emet,

    Thanks for your comments.

    1. I am not using the LXX as an authoritative guide but I do think its helpful to see how they translate various Hebrew words. Its just one line of evidence to be used with many others.

    2. As for BDB being a Christian book, etc. When it comes to lexical matters, I don't think there is any demonstrable theological bias in their lexicon. Its a lexicon not a theological treatise.

    3. As for demanding there must be a difference in meaning when different words are used is not always the case. Synonyms do exist and good literature will refrain from using the same word every time. The meaning of words is shaped by the context in which they are used.

    4. As for your resolution to the problem, it is a possible interpretation but the question is this: is it the most likely intepretation. Based on the context of Exodus as well as the rest of the Hebrew Scriptures, I would say no.

    5. The best interpretation in my opinion is to say that a) Pharaoh of his own free will did not want to let the Hebrews go; b) After seeing some of the "miracles" he would have had a change of heart and allowed them to go but at that point YHWH stepped in and hardened his heart.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The deeper question is why he chose to be obstinate. At any point Pharaoh could have chosen to give in.

    The point is, though, that Pharaoh couldn't choose to give in. If the situation starts with, "I don't want to let these people go," then an outside force acts to cause letting them go to be a good idea and a decision is made to let them go, then Pharaoh has changed his mind. It doesn't matter if he's done it to be a nice guy or because he suddenly realizes it will cost him more to keep the slaves than to release them. He's changed his mind.

    But then if Yahweh steps in and causes Pharaoh to change his mind back, Yahweh is at fault. Period, full stop. It doesn't matter if you're saying that it's because Pharaoh's heart was "hardened" or "strengthened." At that point it's grasping at rhetorical straws and an attempt to distract from the objection.

    Moreover, Yahwheh's beef with Pharaoh was with Pharaoh himself. An awful lot of innocent people were killed in the process. Why did Yahweh not just kill off Pharaoh and put a sympathetic Pharaoh in his place instead of sending plague and famine and killing off the first-born?

    It's not like the Egyptian people would have had a share in the slavery of the Israelites. The Pharaoh's were gods on Earth and could not be questioned. An Egyptian abolitionist movement would have been impossible.

    ReplyDelete
  4. But there may be some communal guilt there too, Geds. Exodus 1:22 says that Pharaoh commands "to all his people" or "to all his nation" to cast the Hebrew sons into the river. Ed Greenstein in the HarperCollins Study Bible states: "Since all Egyptians are involved in the genocide, all Egyptian households will suffer the plagues."

    I realize you can still make a case that it was still unfair, since not all of the Egyptian firstborn participated in this, plus could the Egyptians say "no" to the decree of their Pharaoh. But there may be a sense of collective culpability in the Exodus story.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dear Dr. Pulliam,

    I see my problem.

    “As for demanding there must be a difference in meaning when different words are used is not always the case. Synonyms do exist and good literature will refrain from using the same word every time. “

    Good literature. You’re reading the bible as literature now and I’m still reading it as the word of the Almighty.

    To be more accurate, after comparing the “New Testament” documents with the “Old Testament” documents I have ruled out the possibility that the NT is the word of the Almighty from the Hebrew bible. I started examining NT because that is what I learned as a child. It is fine if people want to believe in Christianity, but the stories and doctrine are not supported by the Hebrew documents. Evaluating the Hebrew documents is more difficult because I came to it with my Christian definitions of sin, heaven, hell, faith, messiah and a healthy dose of scepticism.

    The Hebrew bible has some stories, but it is not a history book. One can certainly find much more poetic and interesting literature. When’s the last time you sat down to read a rousing chapter of Leviticus? The Hebrew bible appears to be a law book, with stories that bring out the deeper meanings of the law. It is studied in a very different manner than Christians study their writings. Each word and the Hebrew root mean something. There are amazing insights that one can apply to their life. It is a method of study that makes my brain happy and my understanding of the Almighty expand.

    So, sometimes when I read your blog with the words of Andy Woods, William Craig, Glenn Miller and others, who are coming to conclusions based on the Hebrew writings that they understand only through the lens of their Christian perspective, I feel the need to reply.

    Your scholarship on the subject of Evangelical Christianity is superb.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Emet,

    Even those who accept the idea that the Hebrew Scriptures are the word of God also recognize that it has in some cases the characteristics of good literature.

    As for different words always having to mean something different, I would suggest you read the book, Exegetical Fallaciesby Don Carson. He shows that this is not always the case. It can be the case but doesn't always have to be.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thank you. And again, I am working my way through Biblical Nonsense. I am an equal opportunity checker outer. Sometimes I'm not aware of the contradictions and it is important for me to fully examine every single one of them. One of the many things that I appreciate about Judaism is that questions are expected and appreciated. I've heard it said, "If you don't have the questions, the answers don't hit home".

    All the best.

    ReplyDelete