I disagree. I don't see it as God being the maker of a hard-heart, but rather using the hard-heart for a needed end. There are no 'black pawns' according to God's original intent. Rather, black pawns can be used when God is trying to make something happen.
Exo 4:21 KJV
(21) And the LORD said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go.
I
believe (note that I limit this word to
believe) God will not harden anyone's heart in a south direction that wasn't there already. God didn't have to harden Pharaoh's heart initially; it was after Egypt was receiving divine smack-down and any sane ruler would have relented, not out of love or understanding but simply acknowledgment of brute force. But three times it repeats that God was to harden that heart, and for the reason to stop him from letting Israel go ahead of the schedule. Without that specific intervention Israel would have been let go sooner.
I believe, however, that the reason this particular passage was used, was because Mary was given an elected name, Jesus was elected as Savior, and being saved is an act (election).
My understanding has no problem with names being assigned to people. God only need to direct the mind of the parent to the proper name, either subconscious (which would be hard to prove) or even in the direct obvious sense as in John ("... and wrote, saying, His name is John.", Luke 1:63).
I disagree. I am one who was 'entirely sinful' or at least as you suggest not 'any less sinful.' God, in fact, did make me less so in my everyday living and entirely in my new nature. Did God 'make' me take actions? You bet He did and I'm forever grateful. He has deliberately stopped me in my youth from making 'my own' rash decisions simply by providing a verse in my devotions that day or the previous.
Were you
willing to let God direct you? I don't think it takes much argument that throwing a select bible verse in front of someone is not normally expected to have any sort of effect. If God had to manifest himself or an angel in front of you and force your action against your heart and you still resist, the sin remains in your mind, even if the action was never completed.
1 Kings 13:2 300+ years before Josiah was born :think:
God can direct the naming of a child, he can shape events to place the child in the right circumstances, and if required he can force the action to complete the prophecy. King Saul is an example where God had to step in to actually stop Saul from taking action. Is it not written, "Is Saul also among the prophets?"
1Sa 19:18-24 KJV
(18) So David fled, and escaped, and came to Samuel to Ramah, and told him all that Saul had done to him. And he and Samuel went and dwelt in Naioth.
(19) And it was told Saul, saying, Behold, David is at Naioth in Ramah.
(20) And Saul sent messengers to take David: and when they saw the company of the prophets prophesying, and Samuel standing as appointed over them, the Spirit of God was upon the messengers of Saul, and they also prophesied.
(21) And when it was told Saul, he sent other messengers, and they prophesied likewise. And Saul sent messengers again the third time, and they prophesied also.
(22) Then went he also to Ramah, and came to a great well that is in Sechu: and he asked and said, Where are Samuel and David? And one said, Behold, they be at Naioth in Ramah.
(23) And he went thither to Naioth in Ramah: and the Spirit of God was upon him also, and he went on, and prophesied, until he came to Naioth in Ramah.
(24) And he stripped off his clothes also, and prophesied before Samuel in like manner, and lay down naked all that day and all that night.
Wherefore they say, Is Saul also among the prophets?
Not sure what you mean. I don't deny free will, I just don't believe it is a gift from God. We ARE responsible for it, but I think we obtained it ala Genesis 3.
My desired effect was that 'election' would be seen as a biblical word from this point in the TOL dialogue. It was both an invite to recognize some commonality as well as an opportunity to talk of differences but the reason I brought it up, is because sometimes those against the Calvinist idea of election, go too far and forget that it isn't a choice. Election IS a biblical word and so an Open Theist better talk about it AND embrace it too. Just like a Calvinist? No, but I think dialogue is more important than dismissal of a biblical term. Many also miss that "Almighty" (Omni- potent) is also a biblical word, including a couple of Open Theist pastors who should really know better. I want to tell them "Talk about those Biblical words! Don't deny they exist in the Bible!" :e4e:
I refuse to dismiss any term that is from the Bible text. I don't think Calvinism has a right concept of election, which goes back to the "outside of time" theory of reality. As touching that point, what I was trying to show here is that (at least so far that I have seen) any and every recorded miracle works within the power of God and by the power of God, rather than requiring "foreknowledge" of the "I saw the future in a crystal ball" variety. Meaning, "outside of time" is not required to believe the Bible as written.