It is customary with all those who elude arguments by tropes, to stoutly despise the text itself, and to make it their only labour to pick out some word and torture it with tropes, and to crucify it by the sense that they impose on it, without having the least regard to the surrounding context, or to the words which follow and precede, or to the author’s scope or cause. Thus it is with Diatribe here: nothing heeding what Moses is about, or what the aim of his discourse is, she snatches this little phrase out of the text: ‘I will harden’ (which offends her). And she fashions it according to her own pleasure, not at all considering in the meanwhile, how it is to be brought back and inserted again into the text, and fitted in so as to square with the body of the text. This is why Scripture is not considered very clear by those most learned doctors who have had the greatest possible acceptance among men for so many ages. What wonder is it? The sun himself could not shine if such tricks were played with him. 514
But I have already shown that Pharaoh is not properly said to be hardened because he is endured by God with leniency, and not quickly punished, since he was chastened with so many plagues. If ‘hardening’ is to endure through divine leniency, and not to directly punish, then what need was there for God to so often promise that He would harden Pharaoh’s heart (as a future act), when the miracles were now being performed?
All the while, before these miracles and this hardening —having endured through divine leniency, and not been punished — Pharaoh was a man who had inflicted so many evils on the children of Israel in his full-blown pride, which were the offspring of his prosperity and wealth. So then, this trope does not at all fit the purpose here; since it might be applied promiscuously to all those who sin under the endurance of divine indulgence. At this rate, we might say that all men are hardened: since there is no man who does not commit sin; and no man could commit sin if he were not endured with divine indulgence. This hardening of Pharaoh is therefore something different from, and beyond that general endurance of divine leniency. 515
SECT. 17. Moses’ great object in such repeated testimonies of God’s design and work of hardening, is to strengthen Israel.
Rather, Moses’ object is not so much to announce Pharaoh’s wickedness, as to affirm God’s truth and mercy — that truly, the children of Israel might not mistrust the promises of God, by which he had engaged to liberate them. This deliverance being a vast thing, God forewarns them of its difficulty, so that their faith may not falter. They would thus know that all these things had been predicted, and were being accomplished through the arrangement of that very Person who gave them the promises. It is just as if he had said,
‘I am delivering you, it is most true. But you will hardly believe it, for Pharaoh will make such a resistance, and will so put off the event. But do not trust in my promises a whit less. All this putting-off of his will, is effected by my workings, that I may perform more and greater miracles to confirm you in your faith, and to show my power, that you may hereafter place greater confidence in me with respect to all other things.
This is just what Christ also does, when he promises the kingdom to his disciples at the last supper: he foretells many difficulties — his own death, and their manifold tribulations — so that when the event had taken place, they might believe in him much more from then on. 516
Indeed, Moses sets this meaning very clearly before us, when he says, “But Pharaoh shall not let you go, so that many signs may be wrought in Egypt.” And again: “To this end have I stirred you up, that I might show in you my power, and that my name might be declared in all the earth.” 517 You see here, that Pharaoh is hardened for this very purpose: that he may resist God, and may put off the redemption of Israel, in order to make an occasion for showing many signs, and for declaring the power of God. And it is to this end: that he may be spoken of, and believed in, throughout the earth. What else is this, but that all these things are spoken and done to confirm faith, and to comfort the weak, that they may freely trust in God from then on, as the true, faithful, powerful and merciful One? It is as if to say to his little ones, in the softest words, ‘Do not be terrified by Pharaoh’s hardness of heart: I am the worker of that very hardness also, and I hold it in my own hands. I who am your deliverer will use it with no other effect, than it will cause me to work many signs, and to declare my greatness, to the end that you may believe in me.’ 518
Hence we have that saying which Moses repeats after nearly every plague, “And the heart of Pharaoh was hardened, that he did not let the people go, as the Lord had spoken.” What is this saying, “As the Lord had spoken,” if not that God might be seen to be true, who had declared beforehand that Pharaoh would be hardened? If there had been any vertibility here, 519 any freeness of will in Pharaoh, such that he had power to incline towards either side, God could not have foretold his induration with such certainty. But since the Promiser here is one who can neither be mistaken, nor tell a lie, it was necessarily and most assuredly to come to pass, that Pharaoh should be hardened. And this could not be, unless the induration were altogether outside the limits of man’s power, and stood only in the power of God. This is just as I described it above: to wit, either God was certain that He would not omit the general exercise of his omnipotence in the person of Pharaoh, or because of Pharaoh, seeing that it is what he cannot even omit.520
Furthermore, he was equally sure that the will of Pharaoh, naturally wicked and averse to Him, could not consent to the word and work of God which was contrary to it.
So that, though the impulse to will was preserved inwardly in Pharaoh by God’s omnipotence, and a contradictory word and work of God was outwardly thrown to meet it, 521 nothing else could be the result, but a stumbling and a hardening of the heart in Pharaoh. For if God had omitted the acting of his omnipotence in Pharaoh at the moment when he threw the contradictory message of Moses into his path, and if Pharaoh’s will be supposed to have acted by itself alone, by its own power, then possibly there might have been ground for questioning to which of the two sides it would have inclined itself. But now, he is driven and hurried along to an act of willing. No violence is done to his will, it is true, because he is not forced against his will; but a natural operation of God hurries him along to a natural acting of his will, such as it is, and that is a bad one. It then follows that he cannot help but run afoul 522 of the word, and by so doing he is hardened. Thus, we see that this text fights manfully against Freewill, inasmuch as God who promises cannot lie; and if He does not lie, then Pharaoh’s heart cannot help but be hardened.
SECT. 18. Paul’s reference to this passage in Romans 9. Diatribe is hard put to it, and obliged to yield.
But let us look at Paul also, who in Romans 9 adopts this passage from Moses. How sadly Diatribe is tormented here. She twists herself into all manner of shapes, to avoid losing Freewill. Once she says it is the necessity of a consequence, but not the necessity of a consequent. Once it is an ordered will, or a signified will, 523 which may be resisted; whereas a will of good pleasure cannot be resisted! Once the passages adduced from Paul do not oppose Freewill because they do not speak of the salvation of man. Once the foreknowledge of God presupposes 524 necessity; another time it does not. Once grace prevents the will — causing it to will — accompanying it on its way and giving the happy issue. Once the first cause effects everything; another time it acts by second causes, itself doing nothing.
By these and such mocking words, she only aims to get time, and to meanwhile snatch the cause out of our sight, and drag it somewhere else. She gives us credit for being as stupid and heartless, or as little interested in the cause, as she herself is. Or as little children, when frightened or at play, cover their eyes with their hands, and think nobody sees them, because they see nobody. Even so, Diatribe, not being able to bear the rays (or rather the lightning) of the clearest possible words, uses all sorts of pretences to make it appear that she does not see the real truth —
