Is this about mazaje? I asked you politely to stop calling me names is that so hard to do?
Don't you think name calling is not mature?

Chrisbenogor:

Is this about mazaje? I asked you politely to stop calling me names is that so hard to do?
Don't you think name calling is not mature?

Its not about mazaje but its about hypocrisy.

If you call me out for labelling you a clown then i suppose you shld have even stricter words for Mazaje's use of language to me.

You can't pretend to be outraged by name calling and look the other way when someone you consider an ally does the same. and that is ignoring the fact that you have also been guilty of name calling against my person. Charity they say begins at home . . . clean out your own locker of bones before crowing about mine.

Now can we get back on the subject at hand? I await constructive and intellectually sound arguments from you and others. Mazaje has been a massive disappointment.

I didn't want to join the fray when insults were flying, I am asking you now can we continue without the insults?

Chrisbenogor:

I didn't want to join the fray when insults were flying, I am asking you now can we continue without the insults?

i am more than willing to hear your own point of view without insults of course.

Thank you very much, if mazaje insults me I will tell him to stop just like I am telling you now, maybe I am biased but if I have insulted you in time past I apologise.
Ok issue at hand, you are quite right burden of proof is on me, but it does shift in a conversation.
I kept silent yesterday mostly because I was trying to reconcile the problems in the documentary hypothesis, I agree that the theory has a lot of loop holes in it but it has formed the foundation of other criticisms today. So far the theory does not address who wrote it but there is more than enough proof it was not written by moses.
You have faith, if you have evidence than Moses did then convince me.

@DaviDylan: « #77 on: Today at 05:30:21 PM »  

which would also mean Mohammad is a fake since we don't see his name anywhere in the quran no?

Alhaji, have a dose of sense.

Surah Muhammad is well Known Chapter in the Qur'aan. Surah Ahzab contains the name Muhammad. Surah Saff carries Ahmad whch is the other name Muhammad is also known. What are you talking about when you are talking about the "dose of sense?" I see. You never opened the Qur'aan before. No wonder.

David read the Qur'aan. If you have opened it up, you would have seen Allah, Malaika, Reveaed Books; Torah, Sabur, Injil, Qur'aan, Isa bin Mariam, Masiah, Muhammad, etc written about in positive light. Then you would have seen Trinity, death on the cross, ressurrection, etc written about as things never happened.

Read the Qur'aan (2 doses; pills for your soul and heart) and call me in the morning (When you are finished).

Chrisbenogor:

Thank you very much, if mazaje insults me I will tell him to stop just like I am telling you now, maybe I am biased but if I have insulted you in time past I apologise.
Ok issue at hand, you are quite right burden of proof is on me, but it does shift in a conversation.
I kept silent yesterday mostly because I was trying to reconcile the problems in the documentary hypothesis, I[b] agree that the theory has a lot of loop holes in it [/b] but it has formed the foundation of other criticisms today. So far the theory does not address who wrote it but there is more than enough proof it was not written by moses.
You have faith, if you have evidence than Moses did then convince me.

1. This is where i have problems with your honesty. You agree that the theory that claims to disprove Moses authorship of the 5 books as having too many holes in it YET claim that it has "enough proof" that Moses is not the writer?
How do you reconcile this glaring inconsistency?

Would you have been magnanimous if i had said the following - i agree that the bible has a lot of loop holes in it but there is more than enough proof that it is a historically valid document.

2. That the theory has "formed the foundation of other criticisms today" does not make it any valid if it still has so many loopholes to discredit it. It simply means those using it as a foundation for their own criticism are so desperate they will grab at anything that casts a shadow on the veracity of the bible.

3. I am not the one to convince you since Moses' authorship of his books is not a question to me. It is up to you (as u earlier agreed as regards burden of proof) to convince me why i must accept a theory that is full of loopholes.

4. You cant use a loophole to discredit another alleged loophole.

The bible does have enough holes in it still you hold on to it, you know the flood story never happened and there are loads of holes like the stars falling from the sky. But that's not the issue here now.
I don't want us to get into the whole JEPD technicalities as it would spoil the fun for who ever is reading this.
Contemporary critical scholars disagree with Wellhausen and with one another on details and on whether D or P was added last. But they agree that the general approach of the Documentary Hypothesis best explains the doublets, contradictions, differences in terminology and theology, and the geographical and historical interests that we find in various parts of the Torah.
As for burden of proof, its not solely mine, is faith all you have? Don't be ashamed to say so.

Chrisbenogor:

The bible does have enough holes in it still you hold on to it, you know the flood story never happened and there are loads of holes like the stars falling from the sky. But that's not the issue here now.

Exactly my own point. You know the JDEP hypothesis is full of loopholes YET you still hold on to it and infact admit that it forms the foundation for other modern critics?

Chrisbenogor:

I don't want us to get into the whole JEPD technicalities as it would spoil the fun for who ever is reading this.
Contemporary critical scholars disagree with Wellhausen and with one another on details and on whether D or P was added last. But they agree that the general approach of the Documentary Hypothesis best explains the doublets, contradictions, differences in terminology and theology, and the geographical and historical interests that we find in various parts of the Torah.
As for burden of proof, its not solely mine, is faith all you have? Don't be ashamed to say so.

I remember posting a response to mazaje on this yesterday . . . a lot of these "contemporary critics" are guilty of forcing biblical history to fit their own preconcieved bias. So they create contradictions where there is none and then produce a hypothesis to "answer"  the contradictions.

If loopholes are the reason we shld abandon the bible, why then do you still hold on to the JDEP hypothesis that even you admit is also full of holes?

What is good for the goose . . .?

- Faith is all i have . . . fortunately it is also backed up by common sense, history, archeology and your own inability to produce convincing evidence to delegitimise the bible.

You are getting me wrong, I admit that it has loopholes does not mean it is entirely wrong, the bible has loopholes does not mean one should abandon it just admit that it does. What I am holding on to is that it shows sufficiently that it was not authored by one person.

Please give me the history behind your assertions, at least I have tried to get a point across, you really have nothing in your defence, if you do at least bring it out. Like I said earlier it best explains the doublets, contradictions et al in the Torah.

Chrisbenogor:

You are getting me wrong, I admit that it has loopholes does not mean it is entirely wrong, the bible has loopholes does not mean one should abandon it just admit that it does.

This is yet more evidence of your dishonesty.

- Your hypothesis has loopholes BUT you claim it is still valid and even admit it is the foundation for other critics including you.
- however you don't seem to give the bible the same treatment even though here you pretend to do so. Though you subtly indicate that the bible shld not be abandoned despite it containing alleged loopholes, you have consistently questioned its veracity.
I don't see you vigorously question the veracity of the JDEP hypothesis at all.

Chrisbenogor:

Please give me the history behind your assertions, at least I have tried to get a point across, you really have nothing in your defence, if you do at least bring it out. Like I said earlier it best explains the doublets, contradictions et al in the Torah.

Again i repeat . . . you seem to go round and round in circles repeating the same thing yet bleating about me not having anything in my defence which is actually untrue!

1. The alleged doublets and contradictions that Dr. Long points out are baseless . . . an example is the fact that he claims Ex 15:14 says Palestina when the original hebrew text says pelesheth.

2. Dr. Long and your ilk have a habit of developing spurious contradictions then spinning hypothesis built to force-fit your own idea of how wrong the bible is.

3. I have consistently brought out evidence to rebutt much of mazaje's plagiarised claims. You don't bring any claims at all besides repeating your mantra of holes, loopholes and more holes.

4. what "point" have you tried to get across? Sorry but i don't see any.

Chrisbenogor:

What I am holding on to is that it shows sufficiently that it was not authored by one person.

I chose to treat this last . . .

On what basis do you hold this opinion?

Where is the evidence that moses wrote it?
Lol You seem to always be honest and every other person is not, I didnt call you out on your claim about abandoning the bible you would have screamed the roof off.
Stop making me repeat myself I admitted that it had holes didnt I, but it still has some very valid points, that's why its called hypothesis, doesnt mean it is totally invalid. You have to keep your head down and focus, one mistake in a persons work does not make it totally wrong.
For instance the flood story in Genesis 6-9 is a text that can be analyzed along the lines of the Documentary Hypothesis. According to the hypothesis, the flood story is the result of weaving together two previous versions of the story, one from the J source and one from the Priestly source (P). In parts of the story, J and P are difficult or impossible to separate. Other parts (especially when each source is used to retell the same part of the story) are easier to identify as belonging to one strand or the other.
This makes sense to me, the hypothesis might be off here and there, for now it can at least show that more than one author composed the torah.
Still waiting for evidence that moses wrote them.

Chrisbenogor:


Still waiting for evidence that moses wrote them.

You go wait tire he has already said he will not provide any. . .  reason is because non exist. . . .
 
davidylan you still haven't been able to tell me how jonah survived inside a fish for 3 days using your knowledge of biology is faith all you have to your defense here?

1. The alleged doublets and contradictions that Dr. Long points out are baseless . . . an example is the fact that he claims Ex 15:14 says Palestina when the original hebrew text says pelesheth.

now that it feels convenient you are running to the original hebrew text to rescue you. .even when some original translations of the bible have been rigged by christains according to jewish scholars . . .for example Isaiah 7:14. . .when the jewish scholars point that out christain apologist claim that the jews do not understand their language very well or give some outlandish excuses. . . you never cease to have something to run or hold on to from the english translation rendered it inaccurately to the hebrew translation rendered it inaccurately. . .keep on running in the circle of delusion. . .

Chrisbenogor:

Where is the evidence that moses wrote it?

When u're tired of going around in circles you will stop abi.

- You and your goons started off struggling to plagiarise material from others to show "evidence" that Moses did not write the 5 books. After it was shot down and you even admitted loopholes you now turn around asking for "evidence" that Moses wrote it?

- Evidence that Moses wrote those books - the books of numbers, Leviticus and Deuteronomy have extremely detailed analysis of the laws that God granted to the children of Israel that could only have been known by the person unto whom those laws were first delivered.

- To Mazaje and co who LIE that Moses never declared his authorship of those books . . .

Exodus 24: 4 And Moses wrote all the words of the LORD, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel.

Exodus 34:27 And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.

- Other books that testify of Moses' authorship:

Joshua 8:32 And he wrote there upon the stones a copy of the law of Moses, which he wrote in the presence of the children of Israel.

Mark 12:18 Then come unto him the Sadducees, which say there is no resurrection; and they asked him, saying,
19 Master, Moses wrote unto us, If a man's brother die, and leave his wife behind him, and leave no children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.

Mark 10:3 And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?
4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.
5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.

John 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

There are close to over 20 of these different direct allusions to the writings of Moses that i have chosen not to include here for purpose of space.

- Historical claims of Moses' writings:

And who wrote all the books? Moses wrote his book and a portion of Bil'am [Numbers, xxii.], and Job.
- Talmud Tract Baba Bathra (written around 200 BC)

- Philo of Alexandria (20 AD) also attributes the pentateuch to Moses.

You are free to debunk all these cloud of witnesses and provide us your own unimpeachable evidence. And pls we've had it with hypothesis that have no basis.

Chrisbenogor:

For instance the flood story in Genesis 6-9 is a text that can be analyzed along the lines of the Documentary Hypothesis. According to the hypothesis, the flood story is the result of weaving together two previous versions of the story, one from the J source and one from the Priestly source (P). In parts of the story, J and P are difficult or impossible to separate. Other parts (especially when each source is used to retell the same part of the story) are easier to identify as belonging to one strand or the other.

This is again nothing but theory . . . someone's ideas . . . someone who obviously has a need to find something to disprove the bible. It is not a theory steeped in observation (as science shld be) but one that is deeply subjective.

Pls kindly give us detailed explanations as to which parts of the story on the flood come from J or P.

Bro david I will be with you shortly some other thread needs my attention will be back shortly

davidylan:

- To Mazaje and co who LIE that Moses never declared his authorship of those books . . .

Exodus 24: 4 And Moses wrote all the words of the LORD, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel.

Exodus 34:27 And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.

-

davidylan. . . are you for real? is this a joke or what? is this your evidence chie no be small thing. . . from the first sentence you will see that's if you bother to open your blind eyes that a person was narrating the story when he decleared that "and moses wrote the words of god". . this is not moses speaking. . . if it were moses declearing authorship to the books it would be phrased like like this. . " I (moses) wrote the words of god". . or "and the lord said unto me(moses) write thou these words for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel " but that's not the case. . . .if you open your eyes you will see that this is a narrative given by some one else on moses behalf, a person was clearly telling a story about moses hence the pharse" and moses wrote the words of god" this is not moses speaking and its very clear. the words of god there NEVER meant a book or the entire pentateuch as you would like to have us believe. . . of course moses must have had some writings but the point here is that his writings were added to a lot of mythology and other events that happened long after he died by some unknow writers, all the writings with his included were made into the pentateuch and all the writings were acribed to him. . . . Nice try but you have failed, try again. . . . the claim of authorship you have given here is a JOKE and complely ridiculous. . .

davidylan:

When u're tired of going around in circles you will stop abi.

- You and your goons started off struggling to plagiarise material from others to show "evidence" that Moses did not write the 5 books. After it was shot down and you even admitted loopholes you now turn around asking for "evidence" that Moses wrote it?

- Evidence that Moses wrote those books - the books of numbers, Leviticus and Deuteronomy have extremely detailed analysis of the laws that God granted to the children of Israel that could only have been known by the person unto whom those laws were first delivered.

- - Other books that testify of Moses' authorship:

Joshua 8:32 And he wrote there upon the stones a copy of the law of Moses, which he wrote in the presence of the children of Israel.

Mark 12:18 Then come unto him the Sadducees, which say there is no resurrection; and they asked him, saying,
19 Master, Moses wrote unto us, If a man's brother die, and leave his wife behind him, and leave no children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.

Mark 10:3 And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?
4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.
5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.

John 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

There are close to over 20 of these different direct allusions to the writings of Moses that i have chosen not to include here for purpose of space.

- Historical claims of Moses' writings:

And who wrote all the books? Moses wrote his book and a portion of Bil'am [Numbers, xxii.], and Job.
- Talmud Tract Baba Bathra (written around 200 BC)

- Philo of Alexandria (20 AD) also attributes the pentateuch to Moses.

You are free to debunk all these cloud of witnesses and provide us your own unimpeachable evidence. And please we've had it with hypothesis that have no basis.

This is again nothing but theory . . . someone's ideas . . . someone who obviously has a need to find something to disprove the bible. It is not a theory steeped in observation (as science shld be) but one that is deeply subjective.

please kindly give us detailed explanations as to which parts of the story on the flood come from J or P.

if i say you are a joke just accept. . .  all you did is copy from the bible what you have no understanding of. . . . are these your claim of authorship? is this a joke or what? kai. . . . how does all this nonsense you copied from the bible prove that he claimed authorship or wrote the pentateuch. i don't like repeating my self but let me say it again of course moses must have had some writings which were later added to some mythologies and events much after he died and presented as the pentateuch written by moses. .

Chrisbenogor:

Bro david I will be with you shortly some other thread needs my attention will be back shortly

thanks. I'll be expecting your comments.

But na wa oh brother david, how can you be using the bible to validate the bible na, since when? This is worse that the documentary hypothesis, wait you believe those, I will only answer your philo claim but how did he come up with it tell us, so we can examine it vigorously as we did the JPED hypothesis that is not so hard now is it?

It is not a theory steeped in observation (as science shld be) but one that is deeply subjective.

Its funny how you are holding on to following scientific process when you know fully well that if we apply it to the bible, well lets leave what will happen.What you have as evidence is just what people feel, give us real evidence david please.
As for the doublet you asked for

[table][tr][td]J[/td][td]P[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]The LORD plans the flood
The LORD saw that the wickedness of humankind was great in the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of their hearts was only evil continually. And the LORD was sorry that he had made humankind on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart. So the LORD said, "I will blot out from the earth the human beings I have created -- people together with animals and creeping things and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them." But Noah found favor in the sight of the LORD. [Gen 6:5-8 NRSV][/td]
[td]God plans the flood
Now the earth was corrupt in God's sight, and the earth was filled with violence. And God saw that the earth was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted its ways upon the earth. And God said to Noah, "I have determined to make an end of all flesh, for the earth is filled with violence because of them; now I am going to destroy them along with the earth. Make yourself an ark ,  [Gen 6:11-16 NRSV][/td]
[/tr]
[tr][td]Noah's special status
Then the LORD said to Noah, "Go into the ark, you and all your household, for I have seen that you alone are righteous before me in this generation. [7:1] [/td][td]Noah's special status
"For my part, I am going to bring a flood of waters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die. But I will establish my covenant with you; and you shall come into the ark, you, your sons, your wife, and your sons' wives with you." [6:17-18] [/td][/tr]

[tr][td]Animals by pairs and seven pairs
"Take with you seven pairs of all clean animals, the male and its mate; and a pair of the animals that are not clean, the male and its mate; and seven pairs of the birds of the air also, male and female, to keep their kind alive on the face of all the earth. For in seven days I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights; and every living thing that I have made I will blot out from the face of the ground." And Noah did all that the LORD had commanded him. [7:2-5] [/td][td]Animals by pairs
"And of every living thing, of all flesh, you shall bring two of every kind into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. Of the birds according to their kinds, of every creeping thing of the ground according to its kind, two of every kind shall come in to you, to keep them alive. Also take with you every kind of food that is eaten, and store it up; and it shall serve as food for you and for them." Noah did this; he did all that God commanded him. [6:19-22] [/td][/tr]

[tr][td]Beginning of flood
And after seven days the waters of the flood came on the earth. [6:10][/td][td]Beginning of flood
In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened. [Gen 6:11][/td][/tr]

[tr][td]Duration of flood
The rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights. [6:12][/td][td]Duration of flood
And the waters swelled on the earth for one hundred fifty days. [7:24][/td][/tr]

[tr][td]End of flood
At the end of forty days Noah opened the window of the ark that he had made and sent out the raven; and it went to and fro until the waters were dried up from the earth. Then he sent out the dove ,  He waited another seven days, and again he sent out the dove,  Then he waited another seven days, and sent out the dove; and it did not return to him any more. [8:6-12][/td][td]End of flood
In the six hundred first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, the waters were dried up from the erath; and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and saw that the face of the ground was drying. In the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dry. Then God said to Noah, "Go out of the ark, you and your wife, and your sons and your sons' wives with you, [8:13-16][/td][/tr]

[tr][td]The LORD's promise never to curse the earth
Then Noah built an altar to the LORD, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the altar. And when the LORD smelled the pleasing odor, the LORD said in his heart, "I will never again curse the ground because of humankind, for the inclination of the human heart is evil from youth; nor will I ever again destroy every living creature as I have done. As long as the earth endures, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease." [8:20-22][/td][td]God's promise: the covenant of the rainbow
Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him, "As for me, I am establishing my covenant with you and your descendants after you, and with every living creature that is with you,  I establish my covenant with you, that never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of a flood, and never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth." God said, "This is the sign of the covenant that I make between me and you, for all future generations; I have set my bow in the clouds, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and the earth,  [9:8-17][/td][/tr]



[/table]

Chrisbenogor:

But na wa oh brother david, how can you be using the bible to validate the bible na, since when? This is worse that the documentary hypothesis, wait you believe those, I will only answer your philo claim but how did he come up with it tell us, so we can examine it vigorously as we did the JPED hypothesis that is not so hard now is it?

You can only make this claim if you believe that the ENTIRE BIBLE is not credible.

You just threw your own point of view out of the window. How can u use the JEDP argument that you also admitted is full of holes to validate the JEDP argument?

What i did was NOT to use the bible to validate the bible but to indicate the vast number of bible writers and outside historians (i notice you blatantly ignore those) who also validate it.

The most important aspect of science is corroborative evidence . . . a key ingredient that is missing in your continous rehash of a hypothesis that even you believe is not valid.

As regards your issue of "doublets" in the bible . . . it is typical of the dishonesty of proponents of the documentary hypothesis.

while it blathers on about "doublets" in the bible . . . it completely ignores clear cases of doublets appearing in other Near Eastern literature that appeared about the same time as Genesis was written. e.g.

a) Urartu: In many royal inscriptions there is an initial
paragraph attributing the defeat of certain lands to the god
Haldi--then the same victories are repeated in detail as achieved by
the king. (from Kitchen, AO & OT p. 117) in:Handbuch der chaldischen
Inschriften pp. 61-63;86-100;119-32--these are weak parallels--just
attributes to god.

b) Egypt: Gebel Barkal Stela: (Kitchen op.cit.p.117) (ZAS
pp.24-39--back of notes)

Lines 3-9-- General terms on royal supremacy.
Lines 9-27-- Specific triumphs in Syria-Palestine.
Lines 27ff-- Tribute.

c) Egypt: Karnak Poetical Stela: (Kitchen op.cit.p.117.
Erman pp.254-58--back of notes)

Amon-Ra addresses Tuthmose III
Lines 1-12-- General, "I have given you power over all".
Lines 13-22-- Fills in details, specific lands.
Lines 23-25-- General statement (restatement) of power.

The key being that rather than doublets being a problem of multiple authors or sources (the doublet "problem" of Noah's flood is actually about SOURCE and not AUTHOR - but of course i dont expect you to know that at all, just copy and paste), it is an issue of literary style.

davidylan:

As regards your issue of "doublets" in the bible . . . it is typical of the dishonesty of proponents of the documentary hypothesis.

while it blathers on about "doublets" in the bible . . . it completely ignores clear cases of doublets appearing in other Near Eastern literature that appeared about the same time as Genesis was written. e.g.

a) Urartu: In many royal inscriptions there is an initial
paragraph attributing the defeat of certain lands to the god
Haldi--then the same victories are repeated in detail as achieved by
the king. (from Kitchen, AO & OT p. 117) in:Handbuch der chaldischen
Inschriften pp. 61-63;86-100;119-32--these are weak parallels--just
attributes to god.

b) Egypt: Gebel Barkal Stela: (Kitchen op.cit.p.117) (ZAS
pp.24-39--back of notes)

Lines 3-9-- General terms on royal supremacy.
Lines 9-27-- Specific triumphs in Syria-Palestine.
Lines 27ff-- Tribute.

c) Egypt: Karnak Poetical Stela: (Kitchen op.cit.p.117.
Erman pp.254-58--back of notes)

Amon-Ra addresses Tuthmose III
Lines 1-12-- General, "I have given you power over all".
Lines 13-22-- Fills in details, specific lands.
Lines 23-25-- General statement (restatement) of power.

The key being that rather than doublets being a problem of multiple authors or sources (the doublet "problem" of Noah's flood is actually about SOURCE and not AUTHOR - but of course i don't expect you to know that at all, just copy and paste), it is an issue of literary style.

davidylan is this one of your moslems are enslaving people in mauritania moment ?

deleted

deleted

deleted

Just like has been explained, I think by osisi in another thread, it has something to do with the language. When you move near to someone, or love someone, you'll understand that person even more. Some actions that others may not like or criticise can be easily understood and tolerable to you, because you know him or love him.
Its mostly the same deal with God. If you know Him and love Him, you'll understand Him more and can even interprete His action to others. Thats why we usually tell unbelievers to come to love God first if they want to know and understand Him. What they tell us in return is "whats all this drivel?"
The Bible usually attributes all things to be done by God, in the sense of permitted by God. Nothing catches God by suprise. Of course when you look through the scriptures, the same scriptures explain to us that God is just, and pharaoh himself made the decision to harden himself and not let Israel go.(Exodus 8v32)
At the end, it boils down to the language. Like in my area, someone could say 'I'm coming', while the person is actually going. Because we understand, we don't make a fuss about it.

Just like has been explained, I think by osisi in another thread, it has something to do with the language. When you move near to someone, or love someone, you'll understand that person even more. Some actions that others may not like or criticise can be easily understood and tolerable to you, because you know him or love him.
Its mostly the same deal with God. If you know Him and love Him, you'll understand Him more and can even interprete His action to others. Thats why we usually tell unbelievers to come to love God first if they want to know and understand Him. What they tell us in return is "whats all this drivel?"
The Bible usually attributes all things to be done by God, in the sense of permitted by God. Nothing catches God by suprise. Of course when you look through the scriptures, the same scriptures explain to us that God is just, and pharaoh himself made the decision to harden himself and not let Israel go.(Exodus 8v32)
At the end, it boils down to the language. Like in my area, someone could say 'I'm coming', while the person is actually going. Because we understand, we don't make a fuss about it.

Does anyone have a clear demostration or example and explanation backed with scripture verses on "How did God harden Pharaoh's heart"?