본문 바로가기
  • Home

On Human Free Will in Light of Pharaoh’s Hardness of Heart

  • Korean Journal of Old Testament Studies
  • Abbr : KJOTS
  • 2026, 32(01), pp.80~117
  • DOI : 10.24333/jkots.2026.32.01.80
  • Publisher : Korean Society of Old Testament Studies
  • Research Area : Humanities > Christian Theology
  • Received : October 20, 2025
  • Accepted : December 22, 2025

Kim Jeong Heon 1

1한세대학교 대학원

Accredited

ABSTRACT

Pharaoh’s hardness can raise theological problems not only for the relationship between human free will and divine sovereignty but also for the question of responsibility. Consequently, studies on this topic have long proceeded in a contentious manner. This paper, working from that problem-awareness, offers new insights by structurally analyzing the lexemes related to Pharaoh’s “hardness” and their syntactic constructions. The inclusio structure of qāšâ (קשׁה) shows that while God made Pharaoh’s heart strong (חזק/ḥāzaq) and heavy (כבד/kābēd), he did not make it hard (קשׁה/qāšâ); rather, Pharaoh himself hardened (קשׁה/qāšâ) his own heart. Pharaoh’s officials are also presented as a case indicating that, whether a person hardens one’s own heart or God hardens it, one’s “heart” and “actions” remain matters one can choose and determine. Moreover, the conditional clauses God presents to Pharaoh, taken together with the case of the officials, show that even when God exerts influence upon the human heart, human free will and the capacity to choose are not infringed. On this basis, the paper concludes that Pharaoh’s hardness results from the simultaneous operation of divine sovereignty and human free will, yet the ultimate responsibility for his hardness and the resulting plagues lies with Pharaoh himself. In this process, by identifying the inclusio structure of qāšâ (קשׁה) within the plague narrative, this study has shown that qāšâ (קשׁה) plays a highly significant role in the attribution of responsibility for hardening. It has also newly demonstrated that Pharaoh’s officials stand in contrast to Pharaoh at two levels —“heart” and “action”— thereby showing that they function to further underscore Pharaoh’s responsibility. These findings appear to lend additional persuasive force to positions that more strongly emphasize Pharaoh’s accountability in the debate over his hardness.

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2024 are currently being built.