Jumpstarter 5 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 5

Finny draws a parallel between Pharaoh’s hardening for the Passover story and first-century Israel’s hardening for the “greater Passover event”; what does this suggest about God’s ability to weave even rebellion into redemptive history, and what makes that idea uncomfortable to accept without calling God unjust?

Another way to ask: If God used Pharaoh’s hardening (and later Israel’s hardening) to bring a bigger “Passover,” what does that say about God using even rebellion in His plan, and why does that feel unfair?

Direct Answer Finny suggests God can incorporate human sin and hardening into a larger rescue plan—Pharaoh’s rebellion served the first Passover, and Israel’s hardening served the “greater Passover” that brought salvation to the world—without God being unrighteous.

Support from Transcript:

He says Pharaoh’s hardening had a purpose: “The hardening of Pharaoh was to show the world this Passover redemption story.”
He then parallels it to Israel: “There was a hardening…to Israel so that another Passover event, the greater Passover event, would happen…[for] the redemption of the whole world.”
He calls these “beautiful parallels,” showing a repeated pattern in God’s dealings.
He insists Paul starts by denying injustice: “Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not…Absolutely not.”
He argues God’s plan is not thwarted by sin: “Israel’s sin…does not thwart God’s purpose. It actually is in keeping with God’s purpose.”
The discomfort he names is the fear that this makes God look like a Father who “shamefully [cuts] off children before they are born” or “show[s] off his wrath,” which he associates with the Calvinist reading.

Discussion Follow-ups What’s the difference between God “using” evil for good and God “authoring” evil—and how does Finny try to protect God’s justice?

Jumpstarter 5 of 10