DID GOD “HARDEN” THE HEART OF PHARAOH?

Like I do say to people, you cannot know God by studying any book whatsoever: whether bible or whatever. God is not in books: God is in Jesus. This explains why you may go to bible schools and never really know Jesus. I did not say studying bible or theology is bad, but unfortunately God is a spirit and spiritual things are spiritually discerned.

All things have been entrusted and delivered to Me by My Father; and no one fully knows and accurately understands the Son except the Father, and no one fully KNOWS AND ACCURATELY UNDERSTANDS THE FATHER EXCEPT THE SON and anyone to whom the Son deliberately wills to make Him known.  (Matthew 11:27)

This means one cannot know the Father (God) except he has met with the knowledge of the son (Jesus).

John 14:7-9  If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.  (8)  Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.  (9)  Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou [then], Shew us the Father?

Putting together the words:
Statement 1: Nobody knows God but Jesus.
So, you don't know God!
Statement 2: if you can know Jesus, you need not itch to know the God anymore because "he that hath seen me hath seen the Father".

The two statements put together means therefore that, no knowledge of God as claimed by us until we met Jesus is true. "no man knows the Father". Note: NO MAN! NO MAN!

So if the disciples had been claiming they know God before they met Jesus; maybe some of them have been scribes and Pharisees with big bibles preaching and teaching the people in the cathedrals about God from the Holy Scriptures; they should be shocked to hear this from Jesus that "no man knows the Father except the Son". Then it means what they actually have known is inaccurate, untrue.

Philip really wished he just met God one on one like many of us have desired too today. "introduce us to God! One of these nights call us together and tell the Father to come down and let 's just see His face". But Jesus quenched that holy thirst, because in Christ Jesus the thirst for God is quenched (John 4:14, 6:35). "he that hath seen me hath seen the Father". That is, there is no knowledge of the Father outside Jesus. Be complacent when you meet Jesus: He is full representation of the Father. Be satisfied with His revelation of the Father.

No man has ever seen God at any time; the only unique Son, or the only begotten God, Who is in the bosom [in the intimate presence] of the Father, He has declared Him [He has revealed Him and brought Him out where He can be seen; He has interpreted Him and He has made Him known]. (John 1:18 AMP)
No one has ever seen God. The only Son, who is truly God and is closest to the Father, has shown us what God is like. (John 1:18)
His Son is the reflection of God's glory and THE EXACT LIKENESS OF GOD'S BEING (Hebrews 1:3 GW)
God's Son has all the brightness of God's own glory and is LIKE HIM IN EVERY WAY. (Hebrews 1:3 CEV)
He is THE SOLE EXPRESSION OF THE GLORY OF GOD [the Light-being, the out-raying or radiance of the divine], and He is the perfect imprint and very image of [God's] nature (Hebrews 1:3 AMP)

Ever since I discovered this, I seek no other revelation of God outside Him, not from a prophet, not from a Moses, not from a David, and (sorry to say) not even from a Paul but by looking at Jesus. Only Jesus reveals the Father. His character and that of God are the same. He is not gentler than the Father. He is not slower to anger than the Father. He that hath seen him hath seen the Father.

If in the past, because you have not met with a person, you have had many descriptions, read many books, watched many fictitious movies, hear many reports about the person; now when you have the exact copy, do you still go back to the many books of description of the person? Jesus is the exact likeness of the Father; a sufficing knowledge of God.

Now this clears the ground about which to believe when two scriptural portions seem contradictory (though no contradictions in scriptures but interpretations differ and authors'  revelations excel another). All that existed before Jesus, Jesus claimed "no man hath seen the Father", therefore except you will not believe Jesus' word is true, none of those men ever saw God. Whatever they had must be visions, dreams, voices etc of God which is nothing compared to the "exact likeness of the Father".

Moses truly wrote:
And I (GOD), behold, I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians, and they shall follow them: and I will get me honour upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host, upon his chariots, and upon his horsemen. Exo 14:17 

As though, God had wicked plans, as though God's heart can devise mischief, as though God killed Pharaoh innocently. But we know that the thoughts of God are thoughts of peace and NEVER evil (Jer 29:11). He will NEVER be a part to that.

These six [things] doth the LORD HATE: yea, seven [are] an ABOMINATION unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, An HEART THAT DEVISETH WICKED IMAGINATIONS, feet that be swift in running to mischief… (Proverbs 6:16-18 KJV)

The Lord hates these things, so how will He ever try them?

If Jesus is the "exact likeness of the Father" and Jesus and the Father are one, if Jesus does as He see His Father doing and Jesus never hardens and will never harden, then it means the Father will never do so.
Joh 5:19 The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

Still doubting this? Why did Moses wrote so?
Ok, have you heard these words from Jesus before?
You have heard in the law [of moses] that so and so… but I [Jesus] say… (see Matthew 5)

Or words like,
Moses wrote that because so and so… but in the beginning it was not so…?

Hmm… I'm not teaching to cast doubts on any portion of the bible because ALL SCRIPTURES is given by the inspiration of God not the devil (2Tim 3:16-17), so believe the scriptures; but you must UNDERSTAND that none of the holy men of God ever saw God and so could only write by prophecy. Now we understand that the Giver of prophecy to be perfect, the gift perfect, but the medium imperfect, the language imperfect, the translation and other human factors which are always imperfect may have distorted the message from its original intent. But thank God we have the Lord himself now;\: Jesus who is not to speak as "thus saith the Lord" but himself the Lord; not as a messenger altering message but the message himself: the Word of God pure, clear and direct.

Lastly let me show you this, that the authors of a book may sometimes make errors in presenting a single account/incidence
2Sam 24:1 And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.

The above verse says, it was God who moved David to sin; and the same God was angry that David sinned. Hmm… Does that conform to what we see in Jesus?

Now the same account but different author
And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.  (1 Chronicles 21:1 KJV)
The author of chronicles helped us to see that truly, it was Satan who did this and not God. Established!

You must be blushing by now. Wow!

Similarly, see the story Moses wrote that it was God that hardened the heart of pharaoh by another account, in this same bible

Wherefore then do ye harden your hearts, AS THE EGYPTIANS AND PHARAOH HARDENED THEIR HEARTS? when he had wrought wonderfully among them, did they not let the people go, and they departed? (1 Samuel 6:6 KJV)

Got that?
Even the philistines knew that all God did was that He "wrought wonderfully among them" in healing them many of the times of the plagues brought by "he that destroyeth" but they obstinately hardened their hearts.

God doesn't harden men's heart. Men do by themselves because of one thing: it's called the "deceitfulness of sin".
"But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be HARDENED through the DECEITFULNESS OF SIN. (Hebrews 3:13 KJV)

The Validity of Romans 9:11-15

(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
[Rom 9:11-15]

If the above scripture is anything to go by,...

1. God does not need you to do good or evil (neither having done good or evil), to pass His verdict of righteousness (or otherwise) on you. Think on this. #Unbeatable

2. The purpose of God according to election is always independent of works
"...not of works, but of him that calleth"

3. God does not in later times need works to justify a man. Once He has started to justify without works, so will He continue. If He started to be kind without works, He'll so continue. Because we see in the life of the Jacob He loved, that He remain loved unto the end even though Jacob's life was a questionable one. However, this tenacious love of God changed this man at last. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?...

4. "What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness...", God is not after what you or other people will say, He's after how to work out His own counsel.

That is, controversially or uncontroversially, whom God has loved, He has loved! (the gifts and calling of God are without repentance)

5. " ...unrighteousness with God?" Do you call that unrighteousness? No! it's not unrighteousness.

It's sovereignty.

Or say, VETO POWER

Peradventure you become God tomorrow, you can try to change that.
"I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy..."

So, are you ready to be on the favoured side of God? or you want to serve as Esau, labouring in the heat of the day and yet missing the blessing?
God's favour is His righteousness with which he seals ALL THAT BELIEVE.

Rom 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

BBE But to him who without working has faith in him who gives righteousness to the evil-doer, his faith is put to his account as righteousness. (Rom 4:5)

Believe in Jesus and enjoy His FREE righteousness.

The Law is not evil

Several times Paul in his teaching of we not being under the law, have often have to correct any emerging notion of the law being evil.

Please follow this Bible event story carefully

[[1Co 5:1]] It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.

What did you read there? Amongst these church members, there are people who are involved in the practice of sleeping with their own very step mother. Ha! How do you see that act? Worst grade of fornication, you might say. Hmm..

[[1Co 5:2]] And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.

They, instead of frowning seriously at the act, were "puffed up" - proud. They were not humbled, neither were they ashamed. Maybe they never really see anything that bad in it. Christians! Church that has pastors, elders, and every setting.
Hmm...

The entire church lived and enjoyed the company of this brother. He worships with them, and there was no shame or perhaps, guilty conscience.

Hmm...
In fact, they were boastful because verse 6 says,
"Your glorying is not good"

Could this be ignorance? Could it be that they do not know this is in fact horrible? May be.

Note that, nowhere in the new testament is this "clearly spelt out" as a sin. Not even Jesus' "Gospels". Oh! They don't even have these epistles or Gospels books anyway. Where in the Bible will you find sleeping with one's step mother as a sin? Not even the simple "ten commandments"

Lev 18:8 The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's nakedness.

Lev 20:11 And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Deu 22:30 A man shall not take his father's wife, nor discover his father's skirt.

Deu 27:20 Cursed be he that lieth with his father's wife; because he uncovereth his father's skirt. And all the people shall say, Amen.

So Paul got to know this as sinful because the scriptures (not just widespread societal condemnation) say it is, and this statement came from the law. Yet it's still true we are not under the law.

So, is the law useless? Is it a waste really?

See this again.

[[1Co 9:9-10]]
For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.

He quotes from the law of Moses and instructs the church with it. He admonishes us to keep that instruction in the law. This is only one of several examples where the law is referred to and an admonition is extracted. For your information, every instruction we have in the epistles have the law of Moses as source.

The law may have made sin to "abound" to death; it may have caused so great blindness and religion: yet it can be to our benefit today if we use/apply it "lawfully".

But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully (1 Tim 1:8)

The earlier verse says, "For our sakes, no doubt, this [law] is written"

Rom 7:12 Wherefore the law is holy... and just, and GOOD

Rom 7:16 ...I consent unto the law that IT IS GOOD

So we ought to thank God for the holy law. It is by it we know this is right or this is wrong, even though it cannot make anyone do the right it presents. By it we can admonish the brethren. By it, we can know what's MORALLY acceptable and what's not. By rightly dividing, we can show ourselves approved unto God. By it we can show any erring brother or sister proofs. This is part of the 'all scripture' that is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction and instruction in righteousness (1 Tim 3:16-17). We should not resort to senses or experience or personal opinions or cultural perceptions to discern right or wrong, scriptures (Genesis to Malachi) guided the Bible time Church. Paul used it. Peter used it. Jesus used it. The law is not evil. The law is not error, it's people's interpretation that may be erring. Today we behold Christs life out of the law. The law is good, However, it must be used "lawfully".

Emmanuel?

[[Mat 1:23]] Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

Why must Jesus be called Emmanuel? If you've been conversant with the bible, you'll know whenever names are given to people, it is always to say something about what the parents feel, or what God says, about a contemporary situation. Remember how a sorrowful mother gave birth to a child and said the child should be called Ichabod. What's her message? - The glory has departed from Israel. See 1 Sam 4:21

What of Jabez? He was born by a mother in sorrow and was thus so named. 1Chron 4:9

Hosea was asked to marry a prostitute
Hos 1:4 and has by her Jezreel;
Hos 1:6 Loruhamah;
Hos 1:8 and Lo-ammi
All were messages to the nation.

After the fall of Adam and how God has announced the Good news of a coming "seed of the woman" who will give life, that was when Adam gave the woman the name - Eve

[[Gen 3:20]] And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all LIVING.

What's the point? Names don't come in the Bible without a message, especially in such a case like this when God is the namer. So why the name - Emmanuel?

Now this is why that name emerged. The name simply means "God With Us". That is, God is now joined to man in this child that is born.

Hmmm..

Was there a separation before? Of course. The same Isaiah announced this.

[[Isa 59:1-2]] 1 Behold, the LORD'S hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear:
2 But your iniquities have SEPARATED between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.

The separation was by sin. And Jesus born to save from sins (Matt 1:21), therefore will remove the sin barrier and sanctify (Heb 10:5-9). This He did and said it is finished! God and man today is reconciled by the sacrifice of Jesus.

[[Rom 5:10]] For if, when we were enemies, we were RECONCILED to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

Emmanuel! Emmanuel!! Each time you shout that name, you're saying, "I'm now at PEACE with God. I'm now reconciled with God! No barriers anymore!". Do you want to shout it one more time?

Now pay attention to this! Having established this, It will be out of place for anyone to quote Isaiah 59:1 and say "your sins is hindering God from hearing you, it's your sin! it's your sin! God is against you". It cant be true! because what? because Emmanuel! God said Emmanuel! God with us! No barriers!

Now Someone might want to say, "yes but that is only after you have repented. It does not apply to someone who still sins". I would probably have agreed with you but I will be ignoring scriptures if I so do.

[[Rom 5:10]] For if, WHEN WERE ENEMIES (not when we changed our ways to be friends with God)... when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son...

[[2Co 5:19]] To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, NOT IMPUTING THEIR TRESPASSES UNTO THEM; (so people being reconciled can have trespasses...) and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

So what we are sent to preach is the word of RECONCILIATION (God with us, not imputing trespasses...), not the word of SEPARATION (God has turned His back, your sins have separated etc).

This is the Good News. Christ has FULLY paid for all your sins: you either believe this or continue to walk in error. He is in fact an "overpayment" for your sins (1jn 2:2). People have always think that you must give something to be a partaker of the blessings of God. Stop this deception! Forgiveness is Free in Christ Jesus! (Romans 3:24).
Take this FREE OFFER of righteousness and give thanks. Alleluia!

Tithing and The New Testament

If you still expect a blessing from your tithing, you have not started to walk fully in Grace...

If you are still a "tither" faithful or unfaithful, you're not yet walking fully in the rights Christ bought you.

If you still have tithe envelopes or boxes, all the same..I invite you to learn this truth in Grace.

There is no commandment called tithing in the New Testament!
Paul never taught his Church or ask his Church to show him their "tithe cards"

Jesus never taught his disciples to tithe!

Listen! The closest word of Jesus to tithing is found in Matthew 23:23 and he wasn't teaching to tithe, nor saying "do not tithe", but rather condemning certain tithers

Mat 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin...

Hmm... How careful these guys are, as to tithe of even mint and anise and Cummin... but Jesus never praised that, but Jesus "woed" them because they didn't keep the law at all points.

Hmm...
*[[Jas 2:10]] KJV* For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

*[[Mat 23:23]] KJV* Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

So, no "faithful tither" is faithful indeed: ask him, "have you areas of the law you neglected? Are you sure you're all rounder in keeping this law of God? Are you sure you'll be able to continue to tithe of mint and anise and Cummins, very minute details and yet, other areas of the law do not suffer neglect?". According to Jesus, until you do this, you'll always fall in bad light in the eye of God: thus, don't expect any blessing if your neighbors are dying of hunger and you're rich and tithing faithfully, despising their cries.
Pro 21:13 says Whoso stoppeth his ears at the cry of the poor, he also shall cry himself, but shall not be heard, meaning, his tithes shall not be blessed.
And you also must not "rob God" in tithes. Don't rob Peter to pay Paul! So was Jesus' teaching.

Tithing is an old testament injunction. Nowhere in the epistles was it demanded. Did Paul wrote about Church finances at all? Yes he did. Did he reveal how his Church was making it financially at all? Yes. Without tithes? Yes.

*[[2Co 9:1]] KJV* For as touching the ministering to the saints, it is superfluous for me to write to you:

*[[Phi 4:15-16]] KJV* Now ye Philippians know also, that in the beginning of the gospel, when I departed from Macedonia, no church communicated with me as concerning giving and receiving, but ye only. For even in Thessalonica ye sent once and again unto my necessity.

What is that? Giving by the church. So there was giving by the Church. But was that tithes? No.

*[[Act 2:44-45]] KJV*  And all that believed were together, and had all things common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.

Was that tithes? No.
But did it meet their needs? Yes.

*[[2Co 11:8-9]] KJV* I robbed other churches, [taking wages of them]<this word in square brackets was inserted by translators, readers take note>, to do you service.  And when I was present with you, and wanted, I was chargeable to no man: for that which was lacking to me the brethren which came from Macedonia supplied: and in all things I have kept myself from being burdensome unto you, and so will I keep myself.

So there was meat in Gods house not by tithing, but by a voluntary offering.

More scriptures?

*[[1Co 16:1-3]] KJV* Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. And when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem.

What is this "collection for the saints"? Looks like our offerings today. It is gathered first day of the week and collected to be forwarded to Jerusalem. But this is in no way same as tithes, because in verse 3, he calls it "liberality".
"them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem".

Just in case, you're slow in believing..
*[[Gal 2:9-10]] KJV* And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.

They didn't tell Paul, "only remember your tithing! Tithing!! Always pay", but GIVING! GIVING!

Now what's the new testament practice?

*[[2Co 8:12-15]] KJV* For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not. For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened: But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality:  As it is written, He that had gathered much had nothing over; and he that had gathered little had no lack.

First, willing mind. No giving without a willing mind.

*[[2Co 9:12]] BBE* For this work of giving not only takes care of the needs of the saints, but is the cause of much praise to God;

So we give in church to take care of needs, yet not by tithing. Why?

*[[2Co 9:7]] KJV* Every man ACCORDING AS HE PURPOSETH IN HIS HEART, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.

This is how we give in the new testament. Talk of tithing, it's not tithing!

Tithing is AS THE LAW PURPOSE FOR YOU, not as you purpose in your heart.

"so let him give...". In tithing, it is "so let him PAY", not so let him give.

"..not grudgingly, or of necessity...", in the law of tithing, it is of necessity. You don't pay it, locusts will devour your works. But the new testament giving is out of love. You're not blessed by the giving you do (we're blessed by what Christ has done Gal 3:13-14), neither are we cursed for not giving. Locusts don't invade your works for not tithing (because He Nevers asked you to tithe in the first place), there are always open heavens because of what Christ has done for us. Giving is our nature, we need not be coerced to do so. Accept the unconditional blessing of Christ and serve in love.
Amen.

What happened in Daniel 3:24-end

Daniel 3:24-25
(24)  Then Nebuchadnezzar the king was astonied, and rose up in haste, [and] spake, and said unto his counsellors, Did not we cast three men bound into the midst of the fire? They answered and said unto the king, True, O king.
(25)  He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.


He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

Now I've heard a preacher say this is the first appearance of Jesus on the earth. In fact, we have a common eulogy that describes God as the "fourth in the furnace". That is because of the way he was described: "and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God". But it's not Jesus. Jesus has never showed up on the earth as a man until John 1:14.

What Nebuchadnezzar was actually seeing was a vision! A vision! And the meaning of the vision is simply that God is with these men! Simple!

God opened his eyes to see a vision, and it wasn't Jesus in the furnace, but an ANGEL. The word "son of god" is "bar elahin" which is sometimes translated "angel" (see Good News Bible). And in case, you don't agree with that, see verse 28.

[Then] Nebuchadnezzar spake, and said, Blessed [be] the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who hath sent his ANGEL… (Daniel 3:28)

So Nebuchadnezzar confessed what he saw was an angel of God.

In fact, it appeared like only the king saw it, because he said, "Lo, I SEE", not "we see", or "can't you see?" Lo, I see four men… and he was the only one who described the how that fourth man look like. Now, you don't describe a picture to a person if the picture is right before the eyes of both of you and the other person isn't blind. It's only when people around me are not seeing what I'm seeing will I ever need to start to describe.

Did not we cast three men bound into the midst of the fire? They answered and said unto the king, True, O king. He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

It can also be seen this vision just like every other vision was very brief: it had disappeared when he called out for the three men.

Then Nebuchadnezzar came near to the mouth of the burning fiery furnace, [and] spake, and said, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego,… no mention of the fourth man anymore, just the three men were called. Evidently, the vision has disappeared.

Well if you ask me, can a person who is not saved have a vision? I'll refer you to Cornelius (Acts 10:3), to Paul on his way to Tarsus (Acts 9:3-6)

…Then Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, came forth of the midst of the fire… no fourth man anymore.

And in verse 29, God was to be honoured in every nation, on the earth.

Blessed be the name of the Lord for the written word.

Learning from The Confidence of Shadrach Meshach and Abednego

Daniel 3:16-18
(16)  Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, answered and said to the king, O Nebuchadnezzar, we [are] not careful to answer thee in this matter.
(17)  If it be [so], our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver [us] out of thine hand, O king.
(18)  But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.

Thank you for going through the story of the trio with me.

Trust that you are well familiar with the story from which we can draw lessons (Rom 15:4, 1Cor 10:11).

But this is where most people and even translations misinterpret this story.

They say, the trio said, "if you throw us into the fire, our God is able to deliver us". Correct up to this point. But they add "but if our God doesn't deliver us, we will…" Wrong!

Let's read the story again.

The king said,
Now if ye be ready that at what time ye hear… all kinds of musick, ye fall down and worship the image which I have made; [well]: but if ye worship not, ye shall be cast the same hour into the midst of a burning fiery furnace; and who [is] that God that shall deliver you out of my hands?

The response:
"If it be [so]",… if it be so that what?

that "ye shall be cast the same hour into the midst of a burning fiery furnace" because the king added that "who [is] that God that shall deliver you out of my hands?"

Is this clear at this juncture?

If it be so, [if that's the case], that we shall be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace [thinking no God is able to deliver out of your hands], our God is able to deliver…

But if not…

if not what? If it be not so… if it be not so;

the exact opposite of the previous statement:

if that's not the case, that you shall not cast us into the furnace,… be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up [because only a person who has not been burnt by fire can choose whether to bow or not to bow]

So, those men never said, "even if our God does not deliver us", rather, they were saying, "if you do what you promise to do because we did not bow, our God is able to deliver us, but if you do not throw us into the furnace, we will still not bow"
because if God never delivered them, they will already be in ashes, roasted. So they couldn't have been saying, we will not bow. They would have said, "and if our God does not deliver us, well, so be it that we die a good death, not denying our faith".

There was no doubt in their speech. They are Hebrews. It's not their first time of seeing miraculous interventions. Remember they've practically seen the miraculous knowing and interpretation of the king's dream before amongst several wonders Jehovah has demonstrated in their lives. They were used to things like that, and never counted it a risk to utter such a word before the great Nebuchadnezzar and amidst threat of seven-time-heated furnace. And so, the author of Hebrews will say they were men "who through FAITH (not fear, not doubt)… quenched the violence of fire (Hebrews 11:33-34)

The lesson we draw here is that our confidence in such times our faith is tested can be strengthened when we "get used to the miraculous".

Jesus has NEVER gave it a thought that "what if this miraculous things fail?" The day Jesus walked on water, it never came to His mind that "hey! this is water! Who do you think you are? This is too much and you may be going beyond your boundaries". He simply stepped on the water and walked. Elijah was so bold to challenge the prophets of Baal to a "the god that answers by fire be God" contest and even asked that more waters be poured on the sacrifice. Experiential confidence can be helpful for you in times of storm. Give your ears daily to hearing testimonies of how God is setting men free everyday; healing the sick through men; unstopping deaf ears; cleansing lepers through men that are not clergy. Take steps too. Pray over situations and try to observe how your prayer of faith change the situation. You can do it because Jesus says so. So go ahead! And when you're tried, it is that God may be magnified.
Blessed!