Freewill religion ! - Part 2

[Sparkey]

And whose idea was it to kill Jacob? Gen. 27:41

But he never tried to actually carried it out when he finally got the chance.
and ... We even have clear evidence of Esau's repentance when he weeps and hugs Jacob on the way home.

There is some real depth to the passages that show the conflict between brothers to us there. There is also a subtle Hebrew wordplay going on. But it's missed even in the best translations because the "play" is based on words that sound alike or similar in the Hebrew and those who no longer "hear" the oral version will likely miss it.

Here's part of an essay that I wrote in last quarter's Eng Comp class that attempts exposition:

Face​

There are mysteries upon mysteries in the spoken word,
Many things said and yet not heard (Sparrowhawke 2013).​

We turn now to a single word: Face. Here we depart from the common notions of racial relations. We set them aside to ponder a more universal problem. This is seen and written of many thousands of years ago at the dawn of our attempts to understand.

Quoting Everett Fox, translator and well known Hebrew scholar, we find a descriptive understanding of the original Hebrew word translated “Face”.

This is an accurate and highly idiomatic translation of the Hebrew, and the reader will notice nothing unusual about the passage at is reads in English. The sound of the Hebrew text, on the other hand, gives one pause. It is built on variations of the word panim, whose basic meaning is “face,” although the Hebrew uses it idiomatically to encompass various ideas. (Note: in Hebrew, the sound p is pronounced ph under certain circumstances.) If the text is translated with attention to sound, it’s quite striking oral character emerges:​

For he said to himself:
I will wipe (the anger from) his face (phanav)
With the gift that goes ahead of my face; (le-phanai)
Afterward, when I see his face, (phanav)
Perhaps he will lift up my face! (phanai)
The gift crossed over ahead of his face … (al panav)​

The night before his fateful meeting with Esau, as he is left to ponder the next days’ events, Jacob wrestles with a mysterious stranger –a divine being. After Jacob’s victory, the text reports (32:31)

Yaakov called the name of the place: Peniel/Face of God.
For: I have seen God,
Face to face,
And my life has been saved.​

The repetition suggest a thematic link with what has gone before. One could interpret that once the hero has met and actually bested this divine being, his coming human confrontation is assured of success. Thus upon meeting Esau at last, Jacob says to him (33:10):

For I have, after all, seen your face, as one sees the face of God.

(Fox, Everett. “The Five Books of Moses” 6-7)​

Jacob had been in fear of his older twin brother Esau. He sent gifts to wipe the anger from the face of his brother. Recall that Jacob had exchanged birthrights with Esau and that his mother, Rachel, had counseled him to deceive his father so that he might obtain the blessing. Jacob had spent twenty years away and was in fear when he heard that his brother was coming ‘with four hundred men’. When Esau asked why he had sent such a large company of gifts, Jacob replied, “[These are] to find favor in the sight of my lord.”

The younger brother, just the night before, had wrestled with the Angel of God. Refused to let Him go until he be given a blessing. Fresh from this victory, and after having seen the Face of God, Jacob, now called Israel (meaning ‘Prevailed with God’ or ‘God-Fighter’) was ready to meet the face of the one he feared. Upon meeting Esau, Jacob was able to see his face too. The text reveals a mystery. We are only able to see one another after having obtained victory and that through the understanding that the Lord indeed loves and blesses us. Only then may we deal well one with the other. Only after appearing before our Father may we know our brother.

I've not quite figured it out (no surprise there) but there seems to be an allusion to future writings to be found out by us, in later times. My mind goes to a Promise of seeing God, face to face. The conclusion is that God is the solution to problems that arise between brothers. That almost goes without saying (sounds trite, doesn't it?) and pardon for the anti-climatic nature of it, but I'm quite certain that the reality will far exceed any written description I could possibly give.

 

[MarkT]

No, I really don't. For, the Calvinists seem to think that hatred means a desire to damn someone, and yet the word itself doesn't appear to have that meaning in much of scripture. Why is this?

I don't know. You will have to ask a Calvinist because I am not a Calvinist.

In Leah's case, Jacob didn't care for her eyes, but Rachel was beautiful and lovely. So there was a physical attraction. Jacob loved Rachel because she was beautiful. I wouldn't read hated in this case in the same sense as God hated Esau. In this instance there was an absence of love. You could say hate is the opposite of love as darkness is the opposite of light or you could say darkness is the absence of light. In her case there was an absence of love.

 

[MarkT]

Show me something where God demonstrated his hatred to Esau, as in malice; a scripture quote please?
And explain exactly what it is that Esau lost, and how we know it.

I guess you could say God demonstrated his love for Jacob. Jacob listened to his mother and he acted wisely. Isaac blessed him instead of blessing Esau as he had intended.

It can't find anything that says Esau was damned, sent to perdition, or anything explicit like that.
Rather, I see a line that says Esau sold his right to some land for a bowl of lentils.

Of course the Old Testament doesn't say he was damned. It says he sold his birthright. It's Paul who uses Jacob and Esau as an example - two vessels (Jacob and Esau) made of the same lump (Isaac), one vessel for beauty and one for menial use.

 

[MarkT]

Fine. His calling to various tasks is in fact, arbitrary.
I agree. I just don't think you know whether or not God had compassion and mercy on Esau as well as hardening Esau at times. It's not like God only does one or the other.

Is not God's temple to be made of "Living stone"?

That's not what I'm saying. He calls us to life. He leads us to lie down in green pasture. He restores our soul. Not for anything we did but because we are his. He knows us by name. John 10:3

 

[MarkT]

But he never tried to actually carried it out when he finally got the chance.
and ... We even have clear evidence of Esau's repentance when he weeps and hugs Jacob on the way home.

In the light of Christ, murder was in his heart. He planned to kill Jacob so Jacob had to flee to Laban in Haran.

And far more important,
God wrestled with Jacob the night before that encounter and WOUNDED Jacob so that he could not run away from a fight.

The location he wounded Jacob, is the hip -- the place where any bible study of the word shows a man girds on a sword.
Jacob then names the place "penel" -- the "Face of God", and then says those words "I have lived"; The exact same words said by Hagar, the mother of Ishmael, the ass of a man. Abraham never said anything like that.... and he never tried to force God's hand, but instead spoke with God as a friend.

Jacob then faces his brother in the morning, unable to fight effectively and now unable to run. Yes indeed, God protected Esau from Jacob trying to lay a finger on him.

Weird point of view. You seem to be acting as Esau's advocate. God protected Esau from Jacob? Jacob tried to appease his brother. He wasn't looking for a fight.

Jacob's thigh was put out of joint. There's nothing that says anything about the place where a man girds on a sword.

 

[MarkT]

And realizing God has worked through Esau, Jacob pays his brother restitution even when forgiven, and then says "as if I have seen the face of God."
Esau told him that he had no need of these gifts; but this is the first time that Jacob had to face the guilt of what he did to Esau.

There is no mention of restitution or guilt or forgiveness for that matter. Whether Esau didn't care anymore because he had enough or whether he forgot Jacob was blessed, Esau and Jacob were reconciled. And Jacob was so happy his brother received him that he said just seeing his face was like seeing the face of God, which you can take as an expression of love.

But Jacob was blessed. God said a nation and a company of nations shall come from you, and kings shall spring from you. Gen. 35:11,12

Indeed David slew 18,000 Edomites, Esau's descendants, in the Valley of Salt, and all the Edomites became his servants. And David reigned over all Israel. 2 Sam. 8:13-15 So the elder came to serve the younger.

 

[Sparkey]

You seem to be acting as Esau's advocate.

About The Son of God doesn't seem that way to me at all. More so, it seems (to me) that he strives to open the Word of God to those who have an ear to hear. I would hesitate to enter the debate here (mostly because I can't figure out what it's about --seems to me there is more agreement going on than what meets the eye) but even if I were to, would still urge all to read the heart of what is being said with as much skill and prayerful thought as they were able. This, not from a moderator, but instead from an interested reader who tries to figure out intents behind words. That's not an easy thing to do. It requires one to be practiced in putting their feet into the shoes of others.

Regarding Esau's intent toward his brother, while it is true that he had 400 men with him as he pursued his brother, 'The Grabber,' the bible speaks primarily about this circumstance from Jacob's point of view. Jacob ran in fear of his brother but when the time for face-to-face confrontation came, and when they actually met --a question about the gifts that he had sent prior was asked—not a demand for restoration of the inheritance that has been squandered for a bowl of pottage. Certainly Esau understood his plight because he could not have forgotten how he pleaded with his father Isaac for a blessing but was told essentially nothing was left with which to bless.

We also see that the struggle between them began before they were born too! The twins were struggling in the womb of their mother. Rebekah asked God about it and he replied, “Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you shall be divided; the one shall be stronger than the other, the older shall serve the younger.” (Gen 25:21-26)

There is more than the struggle between brothers here that is to be regarded. Yes, Esau had previously threatened to kill his brother for his part of the deception and yes Jacob had fled, but that was earlier. What we see in Gen 33 is many years later and this is about reconciliation not vengeance. It's about fear and prejudice too, perhaps. From these two came the Israelites and the Edomites. Edom was a nation that plagued Israel in later years and was finally judged by God (Obadiah 1:1-21).

I like twin stories that are shown to us in the bible. With the light of the New Testament we can look back and see his choice as an example of ungodliness—a person who will put physical desires over spiritual blessings (see Hebrews 12:15-17). By his negative example, Esau teaches us to hold fast to what is truly important and remain children of the Promise even though that would necessarily mean denying the appetites of the flesh.

There's more to this than I can see also. I'm depending on Paul's understanding and what he taught as well as a bunch of commentators that came even after him. What did Jacob have at the time? He had a terrible dread of a final conflict which was overcome the night prior and then with new-found confidence and his spirit bolstered he spoke.

Oh, and feel free to correct me if I got any of the small points wrong, I'm talking mostly from memory and should know better, especially when I post in an area affectionately known as "The Wilderness" of Ye Old Apologetics and Theology. It is my belief that with the Lord's blessing here, even in this wild and wooley, this oftentimes dry and thirsty area, a River of Living Water may spring forth, but that only as we continue to strive toward unity.

 

[MarkT]

But: Tell me, what reason did Jacob have to strike God? His name is changed to Is - Ra - el. The man who takes advantage of God, the very morning after he does so.
It's terribly Ironic.

Where does it say he struck God?

For, Jacob already had the promise of blessing through an inheritance he obtained by EXTORTION; Jacob then went beyond dubious legal means to steal a second blessing from his father, a separate blessing none the less, which gave his brother reason to have anger over him.

Esau sold his birthright and God blessed Jacob. Who are you to judge?

Genesis 27:36 And he said, Is not he rightly named Jacob? for he hath supplanted me these two times: he took away my birthright [by extortion]; and, behold, now he hath taken away my blessing [by theft]. And he said, Hast thou not reserved a blessing for me?

Did Jacob have some reason to doubt that God would give him the land, if he had bought it fair and square from Esau? Why did he attack God? Is it not so that Jacob could boast of his own works (Even the name Is-Ra-El is a boast about a man is it not????)

Esau sold his birthright. 'Thus Esau despised his birthright'. Gen. 25:34

He despised his birthright. Held it of no value. Sold it for a bowl of pottage and some bread.

Jacob knew what he did was wrong, when he risked a curse, disobeying his Father. His Mother even admits the sin side of it -- but she's shrewed, having heard the prophecy.

Genes 27:12 ... and I shall bring a curse upon me, and not a blessing.
Genes 27:13 And his mother said unto him, Upon me be thy curse, my son: only obey my voice, and go fetch me them.

You assume he did something wrong but in fact he listened to his mother like a good son.

Again, whom took care of his mother in her old age? Jacob or Esau?

I don't know. Who?

Why then, did Jacob need to lie to take a blessing, and then why would he wrestle with God to secure a blessing that was already his? Work work work(S)... Can you tell me: Where is Jacob's FAITH, before, as I don't see it until *after* he is punished with a struck hip and left in the hands of Esau, who is merciful.

Well, one was Isaac's blessing and the other was God's blessing.

The fact remains God loved Jacob, but Esau he hated. You can curse Rebekah if you want but Jacob was chosen and blessed even before he was born.

 

[About the Son of God]

I've not quite figured it out (no surprise there) but there seems to be an allusion to future writings to be found out by us, in later times. My mind goes to a Promise of seeing God, face to face. The conclusion is that God is the solution to problems that arise between brothers. That almost goes without saying (sounds trite, doesn't it?) and pardon for the anti-climatic nature of it, but I'm quite certain that the reality will far exceed any written description I could possibly give.

Friendship.

Exodus 33:11 And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua [Jesus/Yeshua], the son of Nun, a young man [named by Moses], departed not out of the tabernacle [in God's tabernacle, he stayed] .

1Corinthians 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

This is what friends do:
2John 1:12 Having many things to write unto you, I would not write with paper and ink: but I trust to come unto you, and speak face to face, that our joy may be full.

John 15:15 Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you.

Bravo on the essay, sparrow.

I think "God fighter" is the translation I am most familiar with when looking at this in terms of historical language.
Is-RA-el; man-who gets the better of/fights/does evil to-el (God).

I wonder, when they were in Egypt and esp. in flight -- what the Israelites thought of the sound of the Pharaoh's name.
The Pharaoh in Egypt, of the time of Moses is generally thought to be a Ramses; Moses, recall was his adopted son through Pharaoh's daughter. (one of). and his name is a question being Egyptian. I'll ignore the scholars who believe Moses is actually an Egyptian... but the name of Moses is in the Egyptian vein, perhaps given to help hide him from death in the river.

It is customary, when a son is disowned, that the part of his name relating to the God of the Pharoh's dynasty is struck out.

So it is, that from Ramses time is found (I am told by scholars) an artifact that records one of his sons Ramoses, whom had the Ra struck off - leaving Moses.

It's perhaps a coincidence that Ra, the sun-god, is associated with a near monotheism (which caused a revolt in Egypt?) -- that this God's name has also the same sound as "fight" in Hebrew.
But: In our college football stadiums, we still yell things like Ra-Ra-Ra.

Ra Ra Ree!, kick em in the knee.
Ra Ra Ras!, kick em in the other knee....

History doesn't repeat itself, but it seriously does rhyme.

 

[About the Son of God]

No, I really don't. For, the Calvinists seem to think that hatred means a desire to damn someone, and yet the word itself doesn't appear to have that meaning in much of scripture. Why is this? I don't know. You will have to ask a Calvinist because I am not a Calvinist.

OK. You have quite a few posts... and I don't know how quickly I can get to them; but I will.
I realize you aren't a Calvinist; I apologize that the sentence wasn't so clear.
I meant, why if "hate" means hate in the English sense of the word as in worthy of death/wrath, as you seem to imply (or didn't clarify), why does it not have that meaning when word searched in most of scripture ?

Your comment led me to believe that you meant "hate" was malice.
My apology if I misread you.

 

[About the Son of God]

I guess you could say God demonstrated his love for Jacob. Jacob listened to his mother and he acted wisely. Isaac blessed him instead of blessing Esau as he had intended.

He blessed both of them.
Hebrews 11:20 By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come.

I quoted you the scripture with the actual blessing, but you didn't seem to notice any of the implications ?
Fat of the land means the BEST of the land. etc. Esau was *truly* blessed ??

I also see what Jacob did to be sin in compliance with his mother asking him to sin.
I see no real way to avoid it being shown to be a sin.

His mother said "let his curse be upon me." which first and foremost shows that they knew they were abusing the father's good will; and scripture also shows the tragic consequences of their action -- for scripture shows good solid evidence she bore the equivalent of a mild curse.

We know Rebekah loved Jacob more than Esau, for scripture testifies to her favoritism (Genesis 25:28), and a proper inference is that Rebekah wanted Jacob to take care of her in her old age; She clearly would NOT have wanted Esau, not to mention his wives were vexing as scripture also testifies. (Genesis 26:35).

Therefore: selfish interest shows up in some of what Rebekah does, and when someone's desires are ruined, the ruin itself is the bearing of punishment/correction ( AKA: a trial in life ). She ended up with Esau, who was the rightful son to take care of her -- while Jacob was forced to leave her.

BUT: God's prophecy would have been fulfilled even if Rebekah had said or done nothing. She brought that result on herself; for, even in context of Paul -- if we are to think the promise is independent of the child doing good or ill, it is not necessarily independent of the parents.

I also think you also have glossed over, that in Isaac's blessing to Esau, are found the words, "You shall throw off the Yoke of your brother." So that, in some sense, the blessing Isaac gave to Jacob is specifically to reduce (punitive) Jacob's blessing.

It's complicated....

And, given how quick you are to defend Jacob's questionable behavior based on his mother; Consider that the supposed threat of murder which Esau spoke is fulfillment of the father's blessing, too; It could be that Esau was trying to work out how his Father's prophecy was to come to be; for scripture tells us that Esau actually spoke the words to comfort himself.

Then, Esau could be said to have been acting "wisely", in obtaining his father's blessing just as you say Jacob did; For did not Jacob think Esau's life worth less than a bowl of porridge? It is only the intimidation of murder which is needed, not the actual carrying out -- for Esau to get his blessing.

Both Jacob and Esau went beyond what their parents told them to do, in order to get the blessings.
Jacob lied, extorted, and charged "USURY", Esau considered murder and intimidation.

SIn for Sin, blessing for blessing; Jacob and Esau both had it.
Coveting and murderous thoughts are *both* in the top 10.

An open point in predestination, and one that is not clear to me, is that if God hardens a person, that such an act causes them to be condemned by God. Those who deny free will, and which this thread is about, hold that God damns them as vessels of wrath.

I believe in free will, and I tend to think that God punishes not for what he causes a person to do -- but only for what they do themselves. He punishes not for when he hardens a person, but only when they harden themselves. ( Both events can happen in a person's life ).

We are supposed to become living rock.

It's a fact that a potter dries clay, which partially hardens it before putting it in a kiln; whether the item to be made is for glory or wrath. IF it is done carefully, the item usually (but not always) survives the kiln -- if not done carefully, the item cracks and is broken and lost.

Sin, in my view, is a defect in the clay. And the same lump of clay, especially naturally mined clay -- can vary in quality over a distance of mere centimeters.

In the ten commandments there is a promise attached to one commandment; "Honor your mother AND father, so that you may have a long life." anything else is sin.

This command was a codification on stone of something that already is supposed to be in every man's living heart. A child is to love both parents.
It is not a command to love one parent over the other, or obey one parent over the other.

Jacob knew his father didn't intend that blessing for him -- Jacob also lied to his father when his father asked him point blank if he was Jacob. His mother didn't actually tell him to do that -- I say this because you seem to wish to continue being a stickler over very minor details that can be legitimately inferred from the sentences, therefore you too need to consider them for your own arguments.

It's Paul who uses Jacob and Esau as an example - two vessels (Jacob and Esau) made of the same lump (Isaac), one vessel for beauty and one for menial use.

Your scripture knowledge is good, but I'm puzzled:

Why is it that you say Isaac is the lump of clay, since Pharaoh is brought up in scripture just before the lump of clay is mentioned?

Why not the man who is called Earth, eg: Adamah, red clay, who is the theme of much of Romans; Eg: Romans 5:12, etc. and from whom all of mankind is formed? For Pharaoh, Esau, and Jacob all three descend from Adam.

Also: It says absolutely nowhere in scripture that Esau, the man, was hardened.

Immediately after talking about Esau and Jacob with respect to the promise; Paul says "mercy and compassion" (eg: I see, Jacob and Esau); But after Pharaoh is mentioned, Paul makes three statements "mercy, mercy, harden". ( I see, Esau, Jacob, and Pharaoh. or perhaps, taking the promised children of Abraham as one, and Pharaoh as another -- it's just Israel vs. Pharaoh. )

Nowhere ( please look, I am not perfect ) does scripture say that Esau's heart was hardened ?
It is said only of Pharaoh, as far as I know.

Hence by scripture alone, I don't see that Esau is condemned. eg: I don't see that he is a vessel of "wrath", as a certainty -- nor do I see that Paul is teaching a fact, rather than discussing a legal hypothesis. ( As a man of science forums, I think you know hypothetical means "if" -- in legal questions it sometimes shows up, like Romans 9:22; There is a *big* difference between a stated fact, such as 1Corinthians 7:14, which is based only on the Faith of one immediate parent, EITHER parent -- and a hypothetical like Romans 9:22 !!! ).

I think assigning to Esau the position of "common" vessel is an understandable hypothesis; but one which in this thread will be used by free-will-detractors to mean "damned". I don't think I can accept that without clear scriptural teaching on the point.

Also, note carefully:
There are two separate things Esau was to inherit according to the promises made to Abraham, a piece of land inside the promised land, and a prophetic blessing from his father.
One was sold for porridge, but the other was coveted and stolen on account of Rebekah.
I want to make sure that these are kept in minds as separate issues.

 

[Asyncritus]

I guess you could say God demonstrated his love for Jacob. Jacob listened to his mother and he acted wisely. Isaac blessed him instead of blessing Esau as he had intended.

He blessed both of them ; but with different blessings.
Hebrews 11:20 By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come.

This is curious to say the least.

Mal.1.2 I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob,
3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.


Esau IS blessed, by Isaac, whose role in this whole disreputable incident is, in my view, highly reprehensible.

First, he KNEW that Jacob had bought the blessing from Esau, and yet persists in giving it to Esau. I say that he KNEW because it is in the highest degree improbable that Jacob, having bought the birthright, would not immediately inform his father, bringing with him the witnesses to the deal.

Second, he KNEW that God had said that the elder would serve the younger, and is here attempting to do something which would negate that prophecy.

Third, he knew the evil works of Esau, whose selection of wives up to this point in time , shows that they were very possibly prostitutes from the idolatrous brothels which dotted the land.

The proof of that is in the meanings of their names (one actually means 'tent of a high place'), and also the fact that having sold the birthright, Esau 'did eat and drink, and rose up and went his way', words which are only found in one other place in scripture : Ex 32.6, where the people 'did eat and drink and rose up TO PLAY' - the play being identified as fornication.

Which incidentally accounts for the comment in

Heb 12:16 Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.
17 For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.

That rejection wasn't by Isaac. It was by God, who would not see His great privilege, that of being the priest of the family, being formalised in the hands of this evil man.

We need to understand that God rejected Esau, Isaac notwithstanding.

Therefore, the blessing given by Isaac was of dubious value. The 'by faith' he did bless him may well mean that is was by faith in the fact that God had rejected Esau permanently, (remember, he trembled exceedingly when it was made clear to him) that he did his best to say something good for his favourite son.

Esau did become rich and wealthy, but God said:

3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.
4 Whereas Edom saith, We are impoverished, but we will return and build the desolate places; thus saith the LORD of hosts, They shall build, but I will throw down; and they shall call them, The border of wickedness, and, The people against whom the LORD hath indignation for ever.

So much for the 'fat of the land' etc.

As for the idea that Jacob sinned in claiming what he had bought, which Esau has SWORN to him and sold it, I think that is another highly dubious claim. How can you steal what is your own?

And further, in the very next chapter (28) we have God giving Jacob what is possibly the second or third greatest vision of Himself in the OT.

Does God give great visions of Himself to crooks, cheats, and rascals? I think not. God approved the transaction, because it was the means of His rejection of Esau as Heb 12 said so clearly.

And finally, the great statement of the resurrection: I am the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob' becomes meaningless if we read it as:

'I am the God of Abraham, Isaac and this crook, cheat. rogue, vagabond....'

Most unsatisfactory.

 

[MarkT]

No, I really don't. For, the Calvinists seem to think that hatred means a desire to damn someone, and yet the word itself doesn't appear to have that meaning in much of scripture. Why is this? I don't know. You will have to ask a Calvinist because I am not a Calvinist.

OK. You have quite a few posts... and I don't know how quickly I can get to them; but I will.
I realize you aren't a Calvinist; I apologize that the sentence wasn't so clear.
I meant, why if "hate" means hate in the English sense of the word as in worthy of death/wrath, as you seem to imply (or didn't clarify), why does it not have that meaning when word searched in most of scripture ?

Your comment led me to believe that you meant "hate" was malice.
My apology if I misread you.

But you're not defining the word when you say it means malice. The meaning of the word is 'a strong dislike'. You can be filled with anger and malice or be totally indifferent to what you hate. You might hate rap music, don't like it, are indifferent to it, won't buy it, won't listen to it. There is no anger. (unless you are forced to listen to it) hehe

The question you raised is what level of hate did God have for Esau? Why is that a question? Enough that Esau was made a vessel of wrath. Was he just indifferent to Esau, didn't like him, wouldn't listen to him? God knows the end from the beginning. He knew Esau would sell his birthright.

Neither brother not yet born had done anything either good or bad to deserve God's love or hate. But as much as God loved Jacob, he hated Esau. There's an equivalency in the statement, 'Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.'

God made Esau a vessel of wrath to serve a menial purpose. Esau was filled with anger and murderous thoughts. He hated his brother and he planned to kill him. That's what a vessel of wrath is - a person who is filled with wrath and murderous thoughts. Similarly Pharaoh was a vessel of wrath made for his purpose. The point is God makes men for his purpose. He endures the vessels of wrath for a time until they have served their purpose and then he destroys them.

 

[MarkT]

And Esau lifted up his voice and wept.

39 Then Isaac his father answered him:

“Behold, away from the fatness of the earth shall your dwelling be,
and away from[c] the dew of heaven on high.
40 By your sword you shall live,
and you shall serve your brother;
but when you break loose
you shall break his yoke from your neck.”

From the RSV. See any difference? It's saying the opposite of what you are saying. Esau would dwell away from the fatness of the earth. This suggests a desert dwelling. Arabs? Could they be 'Esau'?

I would go with the RSV over your translation.

 

[MarkT]

I quoted you the scripture with the actual blessing, but you didn't seem to understand the implications ??
Fat of the land means the BEST of the land. etc. Esau was *truly* blessed.

And what Jacob did was still a sin. I see no way to avoid it.
His mother said "let his curse be upon me." -- and it WAS. For the equivalent of a curse for Jacob is found in Esau's blessing.

Rebekah loved Jacob more than Esau, scripture testifies to her favoritism (Genesis 25:28), and a proper inference is that she wanted Jacob to take care of her in her old age; for Esau's wives vexed Rebekah as scripture also testifies. (Genesis 26:35).

Therefore: motives of self interest appear in what Rebekah does and the ruin her self interests, is the bearing of punishment ( a trial in life ). She ended up with Esau, while Jacob was forced to leave her and the land, and so she bears the suffering of the very thing she despised; that of not seeing her beloved child in her older years, and being stuck with Esau and his troubling wives.

I think you also have glossed over, that in Isaac's blessing to Esau, are found the words, "You shall throw off the Yoke of your brother." So that, in some sense, the blessing Isaac gave to Jacob is to be (partially) undone in a subtle way.

It's complicated....

Not really. You assert that Esau was 'truly blessed'. Yet Esau hated Jacob because of the blessing with which his father had blessed Jacob. Where do you get truly blessed? Was Esau blessed by God? No. Then how can he be truly blessed?

Isaac said Esau would live by the sword. That would make him a man of war, not peace. He said Esau would serve his brother Jacob. That would make him a servant or a slave. Indeed Jacob's descendant David would be king and he would defeat the Edomites and they would serve him.

Did Isaac curse Rebekah? Did he curse Jacob? Rebekah said, 'upon me be your curse' if Isaac cursed Jacob. But Isaac did not curse Jacob. He blessed him.

Rebekah loved Jacob. Recall what the LORD said to her, "Two nations are in your womb and two peoples, born of you, shall be divided; the one shall be stronger than the other, the elder shall serve the younger." Genesis 25:23

Jacob was the younger. There is nothing about taking care of Rebekah in her old age. There is nothing to suggest Rebekah's motives were selfish. In fact believing what the LORD said to her, Rebekah is doing the work of the LORD.

 

[Deborah13]

God made Esau a vessel of wrath to serve a menial purpose. Esau was filled with anger and murderous thoughts. He hated his brother and he planned to kill him. That's what a vessel of wrath is - a person who is filled with wrath and murderous thoughts. Similarly Pharaoh was a vessel of wrath made for his purpose. The point is God makes men for his purpose. He endures the vessels of wrath for a time until they have served their purpose and then he destroys them.

40 By your sword you shall live,
and you shall serve your brother;
but when you break loose
you shall break his yoke from your neck.”

If we are to believe that Esau was made for wrath as you say a very interesting thing happens and is predicted in v 40. "but when you break loose, you shall break his yoke from your neck."

When Esau forgave Jacob, as he obviously did, that yoke was broken.
I am much more inclined to see Esau as the pagan nations as a whole. But obviously out of the nations come many who do not remain pagans.

I asked this....when is Jacob renamed Israel? After his kicking against God. Does he see himself as winning this battle? I not sure. Does he come out unscathed?
No, he now has something that is a stumbling block, that causes him to be weak, crippled. He walks with a limp forever. I don't see where this limp is ever healed.
The nation of Israel as a whole was given a stumbling block, His name is Jesus.

 

[MarkT]

I guess you could say God demonstrated his love for Jacob. Jacob listened to his mother and he acted wisely. Isaac blessed him instead of blessing Esau as he had intended.

He blessed both of them ; but with different blessings.
Hebrews 11:20 By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come.

This is curious to say the least.

Mal.1.2 I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob,
3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.


Esau IS blessed, by Isaac, whose role in this whole disreputable incident is, in my view, highly reprehensible.

First, he KNEW that Jacob had bought the blessing from Esau, and yet persists in giving it to Esau. I say that he KNEW because it is in the highest degree improbable that Jacob, having bought the birthright, would not immediately inform his father, bringing with him the witnesses to the deal.

Second, he KNEW that God had said that the elder would serve the younger, and is here attempting to do something which would negate that prophecy.

Third, he knew the evil works of Esau, whose selection of wives up to this point in time , shows that they were very possibly prostitutes from the idolatrous brothels which dotted the land.

The proof of that is in the meanings of their names (one actually means 'tent of a high place'), and also the fact that having sold the birthright, Esau 'did eat and drink, and rose up and went his way', words which are only found in one other place in scripture : Ex 32.6, where the people 'did eat and drink and rose up TO PLAY' - the play being identified as fornication.

Which incidentally accounts for the comment in

Heb 12:16 Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.
17 For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.

That rejection wasn't by Isaac. It was by God, who would not see His great privilege, that of being the priest of the family, being formalised in the hands of this evil man.

We need to understand that God rejected Esau, Isaac notwithstanding.

Therefore, the blessing given by Isaac was of dubious value. The 'by faith' he did bless him may well mean that is was by faith in the fact that God had rejected Esau permanently, (remember, he trembled exceedingly when it was made clear to him) that he did his best to say something good for his favourite son.

Esau did become rich and wealthy, but God said:

3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.
4 Whereas Edom saith, We are impoverished, but we will return and build the desolate places; thus saith the LORD of hosts, They shall build, but I will throw down; and they shall call them, The border of wickedness, and, The people against whom the LORD hath indignation for ever.

So much for the 'fat of the land' etc.

As for the idea that Jacob sinned in claiming what he had bought, which Esau has SWORN to him and sold it, I think that is another highly dubious claim. How can you steal what is your own?

And further, in the very next chapter (28) we have God giving Jacob what is possibly the second or third greatest vision of Himself in the OT.

Does God give great visions of Himself to crooks, cheats, and rascals? I think not. God approved the transaction, because it was the means of His rejection of Esau as Heb 12 said so clearly.

And finally, the great statement of the resurrection: I am the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob' becomes meaningless if we read it as:

'I am the God of Abraham, Isaac and this crook, cheat. rogue, vagabond....'

Most unsatisfactory.

Very good. But I wouldn't go so far as to say Isaac knew what the LORD said to Rebekah or call Isaac's actions reprehensible.

Interesting, Jacob was called Jacob, that is, 'He takes by the heel or He supplants' because he had taken hold of Esau's heel. Gen. 25:23 Did Isaac know that too? Who named Jacob?

 

[About the Son of God]

First, he KNEW that Jacob had bought the blessing from Esau, and yet persists in giving it to Esau. I say that he KNEW because it is in the highest degree improbable that Jacob, having bought the birthright, would not immediately inform his father, bringing with him the witnesses to the deal.

Asyncritus, please reread my posts; I have been told by some people, that the first time they read me -- they don't understand, but after re-reading it made sense. I think re-reading it might help.

There are two separate things Esau was to inherit according to the promises made to Abraham, a piece of land inside the promised land, and a prophetic blessing from his father. One was sold for porridge, but the other was coveted and stolen on account of Rebekah. I want to make sure that these are kept in minds as separate issues.

Esau complains of two separate issues to his father; one of which was a legal sale -- the other which was not.

Genesis 27:36 And he said, Is not he rightly named Jacob? for he hath supplanted me these two times: he took away my birthright; and, behold, now he hath taken away my blessing. And he said, Hast thou not reserved a blessing for me?

Esau never asked for the birthright back. He only asked for the blessing that was not rightfully his brothers.

The ORIGINAL prophecy did not say, there are two men in your womb; it said there are two nations in your womb.
It's not clear that God meant that Esau, the man, was damned. Edom the nation is a separate issue.
His HEIRS are made waste. But so are some of Abraham's; EG: And even in scripture, Jacob who is re-named "Israel", the children of his "NAME" are laid waste.

The part of the nation, eg: the NORTHERN half of the promised land, named "Israel" as opposed to "Judah", the south; "Israel" was exterminated, deported, and never returned. What a waste of Jacob's re-naming.

Judah is YHWH + the letter signifying the 4th son; dalet. YHDWH. It's where we get "Jews" from.

 

[Deborah13]

Jacob was the younger. There is nothing about taking care of Rebekah in her old age. There is nothing to suggest Rebekah's motives were selfish. In fact believing what the LORD said to her, Rebekah is doing the work of the LORD.

I agree. Rebekah heard God and believed. By faith, believing those things that be not as though they were, took action. The Lord used Rebekah to bring about His plan.
By the same token Jacob believed (had faith) her about what God had said and obeyed her in the action to bring about God's plan.

 

[MarkT]

God made Esau a vessel of wrath to serve a menial purpose. Esau was filled with anger and murderous thoughts. He hated his brother and he planned to kill him. That's what a vessel of wrath is - a person who is filled with wrath and murderous thoughts. Similarly Pharaoh was a vessel of wrath made for his purpose. The point is God makes men for his purpose. He endures the vessels of wrath for a time until they have served their purpose and then he destroys them.

40 By your sword you shall live,
and you shall serve your brother;
but when you break loose
you shall break his yoke from your neck.”

If we are to believe that Esau was made for wrath as you say a very interesting thing happens and is predicted in v 40. "but when you break loose, you shall break his yoke from your neck."

When Esau forgave Jacob, as he obviously did, that yoke was broken.

I see Esau and Jacob, renamed Israel, as nations. The blessings go beyond the brothers to their descendants. The yoke in this case is the yoke of servitude or slavery. There's a whole lot of things that come to my mind here. David's rule. God setting Esau loose. The devil. The war in the middle east.

I asked this....when is Jacob renamed Israel? After his kicking against God. Does he see himself as winning this battle? I not sure. Does he come out unscathed?
No, he now has something that is a stumbling block, that causes him to be weak, crippled. He walks with a limp forever. I don't see where this limp is ever healed.
The nation of Israel as a whole was given a stumbling block, His name is Jesus.

That's quite a connection.