Freewill religion ! - Part 2

[About the Son of God]

'Away from' is two words. The RSV has 'of' as a possible meaning of the word which is translated 'from'. The RSV says, 'away from the fatness of the earth shall your dwelling be'. It doesn't say anything about animal fat. The fatness of the earth is the richness of it.

Mark, I went to the Greek, I looked -- it doesn't say exactly what the RSV does.
The translators interpreted "apo" in Greek, which means "from" and turned it into "away from", inconsistently.
Saying the word means one thing in Jacob's blessing and the opposite in Esau's.

But the wording is the same in both and ought not be translated differently.
If Esau is to live "away from" then Jacob is to live "away from" the fatness of the earth, for the same word is used in both sentences.
The Hebrew doesn't support it either.

I agree that Esau was to live in Seir... which you can look up where it is, and what it is like.
That may explain why it is translated as it is in the RSV -- but the words of the original languages don't explain it.
I see no reason to continue discussing why the richness of the land, also includes the fertility of animals with you. Let's drop it.

 

[Sparkey]

Well, I don't see where God ever says He created Esau to be the way that he was or that He hardened Esau. But by the same token God had a plan and certain people had to be a certain type of person for that plan. Did God created Esau that way, I not sure. But I am confident that God knew about both of them before they were born, what they would be like.

Greetings Deborah13

You're right about that. I don't read anything to that effect either. But when I cast my mind about searching for a clue, my thought goes to what Peter said. Something was told to the men of old about things that they (and angels too) sought and desired.

Here's the clip quote:

Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, 11 inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories. 12 It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look.

Even though it may have been keep secret from Isaac, from Rebekah, or parts kept secret from the two twins, we are able to glean the meanings behind the mysteries as we keep knocking, keep seeking, and keep asking and as the Spirit of God guides. You get to see things today that angels have longed to see for thousands of years. Amazing Grace! is an understatement.

 

[MarkT]

'Away from' is two words. The RSV has 'of' as a possible meaning of the word which is translated 'from'. The RSV says, 'away from the fatness of the earth shall your dwelling be'. It doesn't say anything about animal fat. The fatness of the earth is the richness of it.

Mark, I went to the Greek, I looked -- it doesn't say exactly what the RSV does.
The translators interpreted "apo" in Greek, which means "from" and turned it into "away from", inconsistently.

Apparently the Greek word "apo" means "to move away" as in 'apostasy'.

Gen. 27:28 'May God give you the dew of heaven, and of the fatness of the earth, and plenty of grain and wine'.

 

[Sparkey]

Originally published in a reference that includes Westcott and Hort

 

[Deborah13]

we are able to glean the meanings behind the mysteries as we keep knocking, keep seeking, and keep asking and as the Spirit of God guides.

Hey Sparrowhawke

Yes, we keep asking for more. At times, I wistfully think, is that all I can do, wait patiently for more understanding. But then I remember how fortunate I am, in Him.
Besides it's so much fun studying I really wouldn't want to know it all anyway.

It is amazing that we can read it the story, from start to the future finish. We may not understand it all. But there is so much of the old that was revealed in the new.
And when we get a special (special to us personally) blessing of that occasional revelation it's like the sun shinning through the clouds on a stormy day.

Yes Amazing Grace!

 

[MarkT]

Originally published in a reference that includes Westcott and Hort

wayya'an (and he answered) yitschaq (Isaac) 'aviw (his father) wayyo'mer (and he said) 'elav (to him) hinneh (behold) mishmanne (from the fat of) ha'arets (the land) yihyeh (it will be) moshavekha (your dwelling) umittal (and from the dew of) hashshamayim (the heavens) me'ai (above)

Albert Barnes notes: "Away from the fatness. The preposition (מן min) is the same as in the blessing of Jacob. But there, after a verb of giving, it had a partitive sense; here, after a noun of place, it denotes distance or separation; for example, Proverbs 20:3."

So to compare it to Genesis 27:28,

weyitten-iekha (and He will give to you) haeloim (God) mittal (from the dew of) hashshamayim (the heavens) umishmanne (and from the fat of) ha'arets (the land) werov (and abundance of) daghan (grain) wethirosh (and wine)

Notice that almost the same words are used, but the presence of the verb "will give" drastically changes how we view "from." In Genesis 27:28 God gives from, but in Genesis 27:39 Esau is told he will be from.

 

[Sparkey]

Prepositions are the tiniest of words, aren't they? Yet they trip me up so often. The concept in the Greek is that of a circle. We have direction and location expressed by these little words. I like the diagram, am very visual; I hope that you do also. It isn't meant to do more than it does, illustrate. The Greek is very precise. That is not the original language for this Scripture though. To really get at it, we dismiss the thought of "APO" except as a note, that translators who took from the Hebrew and translated into the Greek did it that way. Again, not the original.

One illustration, to a person fluent in Hebrew --the word we know as Esau, has a strong meaning of "Doer". See Meaning and etymology of the Hebrew name Esau for more.



Very seldom do I hang a whole doctrine or teaching upon a preposition. There is one case though. That little word "IF" but that's not what we're talking about here at all.

In Genesis 27:28 God gives from, but in Genesis 27:39 Esau is told he will be from.

Let's see if our Reference Tagger works to show versions, shall we? (if it doesn't just refresh the screen)
To Jacob: Gen 27:28 (NKJV) and to Esau: Gen 27:39 (NKJV)
To Jacob: Gen 27:28 (YLT) and to Esau: Gen 27:39 (YLT)
To Jacob: Gen 27:28 (KJV) and to Esau: Gen 27:39 (KJV)
To Jacob: Gen 27:28 (ESV) and to Esau: Gen 27:39 (ESV)
To Jacob: Gen 27:28 (TNIV) and to Esau: Gen 27:39 (TNIV)
To Jacob: Gen 27:28 (NLV) and to Esau: Gen 27:39 (NLV)

Sorry, the RefTagger plug-in for our site does not recognize RSV. We could continue, I do know several sites that give both Hebrew and Greek interlinear if you think that would help?

I like trying to understand the large picture, don't know how to make perfect sense of a language that I have no skill in, sorry.

Here's a link to Genesis 27. It's a PDF file but should load directly. I like reading the green text there.
Genesis 27 Hebrew Interlinear by Software4All

There are other software packages and some that can be downloaded free to the desktop. Like E-Sword. I like that too. Free and it has various versions that can be downloaded for the serious student.

 

[About the Son of God]

Apparently the Greek word "apo" means "to move away" as in 'apostasy'.

Yes!. apo-stacy, "from - stability,static,standing,stasis,state"; Generally understood as something that is from a stable place.
So the idea, "from standing" denotes both the idea of a direction (from), and what the source was (stable).
But the generally translated meaning is a connotation.

If the thing that is stable is the "church", then the apostate is crudely understood as "from the churched state".

Using your example note in the RSV, what do you think:
Is an apostate, "from [a] stable state", or is he "of [a] stable state" ?

Quote Originally Posted by MarkT View Post 'Away from' is two words. The RSV has 'of' as a possible meaning of the word which is translated 'from'.

So, why do you think the RSV notes say "apo" means "of" ?

The 'main' inference of the word "of" is a "belonging to".

Compare:
Can "of the earth" mean "from the earth" ?
Can "of the earth" mean "away from" the earth ?

Which idea is more likely to be true?

 

[MarkT]

Apparently the Greek word "apo" means "to move away" as in 'apostasy'.

Yes!. apo-stacy, "from - stability,static,standing,stasis,state"; Generally understood as something that is from a stable place.
So the idea, "from standing" denotes both the idea of a direction (from), and what the source was (stable).
But the generally translated meaning is a connotation.

If the thing that is stable is the "church", then the apostate is crudely understood as "from the churched state".

Using your example note in the RSV, what do you think:
Is an apostate, "from [a] stable state", or is he "of [a] stable state" ?

Quote Originally Posted by MarkT View Post 'Away from' is two words. The RSV has 'of' as a possible meaning of the word which is translated 'from'.

So, why do you think the RSV notes say "apo" means "of" ?

The 'main' inference of the word "of" is a "belonging to".

Compare:
Can "of the earth" mean "from the earth" ?
Can "of the earth" mean "away from" the earth ?

Which idea is more likely to be true?

Away from or away of, either way it means a separation from the thing. As I said Esau was told his dwelling would be away from the fatness of the earth and the dew of heaven.

wayya'an (and he answered) yitschaq (Isaac) 'aviw (his father) wayyo'mer (and he said) 'elav (to him) hinneh (behold) mishmanne (from the fat of) ha'arets (the land) yihyeh (it will be) moshavekha (your dwelling) umittal (and from the dew of) hashshamayim (the heavens) me'ai (above)

Albert Barnes notes: "Away from the fatness. The preposition (מן min) is the same as in the blessing of Jacob. But there, after a verb of giving, it had a partitive sense; here, after a noun of place, it denotes distance or separation; for example, Proverbs 20:3."

So to compare it to Genesis 27:28,

weyitten-iekha (and He will give to you) haeloim (God) mittal (from the dew of) hashshamayim (the heavens) umishmanne (and from the fat of) ha'arets (the land) werov (and abundance of) daghan (grain) wethirosh (and wine)

Notice that almost the same words are used, but the presence of the verb "will give" drastically changes how we view "from." In Genesis 27:28 God gives from, but in Genesis 27:39 Esau is told he will be from.

 

[MarkT]

Prepositions are the tiniest of words, aren't they? Yet they trip me up so often. The concept in the Greek is that of a circle. We have direction and location expressed by these little words. I like the diagram, am very visual; I hope that you do also. It isn't meant to do more than it does, illustrate. The Greek is very precise. That is not the original language for this Scripture though. To really get at it, we dismiss the thought of "APO" except as a note, that translators who took from the Hebrew and translated into the Greek did it that way. Again, not the original.

One illustration, to a person fluent in Hebrew --the word we know as Esau, has a strong meaning of "Doer". See Meaning and etymology of the Hebrew name Esau for more.



Very seldom do I hang a whole doctrine or teaching upon a preposition. There is one case though. That little word "IF" but that's not what we're talking about here at all.

In Genesis 27:28 God gives from, but in Genesis 27:39 Esau is told he will be from.

Let's see if our Reference Tagger works to show versions, shall we? (if it doesn't just refresh the screen)
To Jacob: Gen 27:28 (NKJV) and to Esau: Gen 27:39 (NKJV)
To Jacob: Gen 27:28 (YLT) and to Esau: Gen 27:39 (YLT)
To Jacob: Gen 27:28 (KJV) and to Esau: Gen 27:39 (KJV)
To Jacob: Gen 27:28 (ESV) and to Esau: Gen 27:39 (ESV)
To Jacob: Gen 27:28 (TNIV) and to Esau: Gen 27:39 (TNIV)
To Jacob: Gen 27:28 (NLV) and to Esau: Gen 27:39 (NLV)

Sorry, the RefTagger plug-in for our site does not recognize RSV. We could continue, I do know several sites that give both Hebrew and Greek interlinear if you think that would help?

I like trying to understand the large picture, don't know how to make perfect sense of a language that I have no skill in, sorry.

Here's a link to Genesis 27. It's a PDF file but should load directly. I like reading the green text there.
Genesis 27 Hebrew Interlinear by Software4All

There are other software packages and some that can be downloaded free to the desktop. Like E-Sword. I like that too. Free and it has various versions that can be downloaded for the serious student.

Make it easy on yourself and read the RSV.

 

[About the Son of God]

Away from or away of, either way it means a separation from the thing.

huh? what is "away of" ?

We were discussing the Greek; eg: the "mr. apo-state" apologetic, so I lost you when you rapidly jumped to the Hebrew with no Greek at all.

Explain why you are doing it ?

 

[Sparkey]

Make it easy on yourself and read the RSV.

Just trying to help, not trying to assert a particular slant or belief here. Thanks though.

 

[MarkT]

Away from or away of, either way it means a separation from the thing.

huh? what is "away of" ?

Now, we were discussing the Greek; the "mr. apo-state" apologetics, so don't just jump to the Hebrew.
Explain why you are doing it.

I don't know. You tell me why you can't understand. If I said, "Away, of the fatness of the earth, shall your dwelling be" would you think I was giving you the fatness of the land? There is that word 'away' which you seem to be ignoring. If I said, "Away from the fatness of the land shall your dwelling be" would that help? Then read the RSV.

 

[reba]

closed for some research

2.4: No Trolling. Do not make an inflammatory remark just to get a response. Address issues not personalities. Respect where people are in their spiritual walk, and respect all others in general. Respect where others are in their spiritual walk, do not disrupt the flow of discussion or act in a way that affects others negatively including when debating doctrinal issues, in the defense of the Christian faith, and in offering unwelcome spiritual advice.

It is a violation to misquote or misrepresent another member.

 

[reba]

reopened

 

[About the Son of God]

[edited by Staff]

I am not going to say my interpretation is perfect, or that there is no possibility of mistakes on my part.
And, if I do find a better way to say some of the things in my heart -- I will try to do a better job in the future.
I am just doing the best I can with what I know now.

 

[About the Son of God]

We only have that right to salvation because God has reached down, in His mercy and grace, and offered it to us.
Because He sent His Son to purchase it for us. It is not something we deserve or could ever earn. "29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent." So yes, the Jesus, says we are to believe on Him. But I don't think we do that on our own.

OK, we have the same general idea ; with some ambiguity...
I was just getting nervous with all the buying and selling and possessing going on.

For me, believing is a relationship; a walk with the Lord. That's enough proof by itself to know I can't do it alone.
That beautiful word 'grace', is used for both gift and thank you. It's both the initiation by God, and the response which I DO.
God has made grace for grace; gift for thanks; faith for awe.

God's works. Well, I don't see where God ever says He created Esau to be the way that he was or that He hardened Esau. But by the same token God had a plan and certain people had to be a certain type of person for that plan. Did God created Esau that way, I not sure. But I am confident that God knew about both of them before they were born, what they would be like.

Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you. Jeremiah 1:5 ( He was a prophet, a *sign* for the world to see ).

OK. Let me outline my thoughts, and conclusions, and you tell me if this makes sense:

The prophecy was made when the children were already conceived in the womb.
It's not like the prophecy was made before time began; because it was made after the children had begun struggling, exercising their free wills.
They were not old enough to be culpable to the laws of the land; so their wills could not yet do good nor evil -- but they were doing things, exercising the brains and demonstrating character traits. eg: They could clearly show that they were not peaceful/tranquil before God made the prophecy.

Genesis 25:22 And the children struggled together within her; and she said, If it be so, why am I thus? And she went to enquire of the LORD.
Genesis 25:23 And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.

In perspective, this prophecy itself was made one thousand+ years before Jesus' time; and before Paul, and Romans.

The prophecy, itself, says nothing about God's hardening Esau, nor especially anything about God hating Esau (the man.). The actual words of the prophecy merely indicate an order of serving.

Therefore: Even if I accept @Asyncritus ' position (partially, I do), still the wording of the prophecy itself is no more potent than this one:
Genes 49:8 Judah, ... thy father's children shall bow down before thee.

For -- Judah, being the King, was served by all of Israel through David and Solomon. ( And ultimately through Christ, Jesus )

But: it doesn't follow that, for example, since Levi had to serve King David, that Levi was damned. Nor even that they lost their priesthood in that day (Nor the day Jesus first set foot on earth.).

The words of the prophecy simply change an arbitrary order of which child was greater in the family, and which child was to do which task.

So, I'd like to do a brief look for Esau, (AKA. Seir, and Edom) forward through the bible from Genesis forward;

I find nothing in the time of Detueronomy which says anything about them except to warn Israel to be on good behavior around them, and God says WHY.

Deuteronomy 2:4 And command thou the people, saying, Ye are to pass through the coast of your brethren the children of Esau, which dwell in Seir; and they shall be afraid of you: take ye good heed unto yourselves therefore:
Deuteronomy 2:5 Meddle not with them; for I will not give you of their land, no, not so much as a foot breadth; because I have given mount Seir unto Esau for a possession.

That's a pretty stark contrast to God telling Israel to wipe out all other peoples in the lands of Caanan, and not to be afraid of any of them, etc.

Because If Esau, as a man, had been fully corrupt -- I don't see why he would ever have gotten the blessing of Seir from his father, let alone God ; and he certainly would have been judged like other nations of Caanan.

Yet God allows Israel and Edom to establish normal trading agreements, and far more importantly -- no prohibition is made against marrying Edomites into Israel, but instead they share the blessing of Israel.

Joshua 24:4 And I gave unto Isaac Jacob and Esau: and I gave unto Esau mount Seir, to possess it; but Jacob and his children went down into Egypt.
Deuteronomy 23:7 Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite; for he is thy brother: thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian; because thou wast a stranger in his land.
Deuteronomy 23:8 The children that are begotten of them shall enter into the congregation of the LORD in their third generation.
( That is, their sanctification will not be complete for three generations, but they do become part of the family, Israel // analogous to salvation words: Justified but not sanctified. )

From the standpoint of free will, what I see is that God works incrementally over time in agreement with the choices people make. The prophecy developed over time, although God knew what was to come -- in some sense of the word.

The words concerning Esau's [nation's] doom, in fact, do not happen until the prophets Obadiah, Isaiah, and Jeremiah.
That's around 770 years after Esau's time: ~1650BC - 853BC (conservatively small.)

Jeremiah 49:10, Obadiah 1:8-9, etc.

But those words that predestination people often fixate on eg:"I hated Esau", don't happen until Malachi: at around 420BC, which was even a loooong time after Obadiah. (~1200 years after Esau, and note: history was over with. Past tense. It's not a future prophecy, but the status quo becomes permanent. )

Malachi 1:2 I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother?
The LORD says: yet I loved Jacob And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.

This Hate prophecy, then, doesn't even really have any direct connection to the actual man Esau but is indirect, for none of these events of wasting the land, and his heritage, happened in his lifetime, nor were even prophesied in his day.

So, again, the evidence is that the original prophecy was explicitly about two nations, not two men.

----

So, when I get to Romans:
Roman 9:11 (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
Roman 9:12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
Roman 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

----

I see that Roman 9:12 may or may not have included Esau, but Roman 9:13 is definitely about his children.
For: A prophecy about the past is not a prophecy of pre-desitnation; rather is's a prophecy of consequences on the nations.

The supposed prophecy of Hate is something that was said after the person Esau's life was done; not when it had begun.

 

[Sparkey]

Malachi 1:2 I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother?
The LORD says: yet I loved Jacob And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.

I'm not suggesting that anybody is doing something contrary, not at all, but I would also look more at who was being spoken to rather than to clip a snippet or or two from what the Prophet Malachi declared especially while considering doctrine. More than one doctrine has been misunderstood or improperly conceived by looking for things to prove before examining what is said. What did the Prophet Malachi (whose name could mean, 'Messenger of God') say? Who was he speaking to and what was he speaking against?

That's a subject for a different thread, and perhaps for a different forum as well. Still...

It sounds to me like the Prophet captured the exact essence of the heart of those who would reply against God.

Words are difficult and I debated within myself before posting this. Let me emphasize the fact that I do appreciate that this particular does indeed belong in this conversation here in Ye Old.

 

[About the Son of God]

Hi Sparrow,

Hmm... OK. Yeah, it's a narrow point, although I didn't cherry pick, I just followed the verse Paul was citing in Romans 9:13 that is abused so much ... but I see your point.

Almost the whole prophecy is written at Jacob AKA Israel (not the man, but his kids.), about their failings, esp: the curses Jacob will receive for various crimes of the priesthood "if" they don't repent, and some curses even if they do.

But, since Paul's brought us here -- and he also cited Genesis and Malachi together; I'd also like to point out that there is a connection; as Asyncritous kindly pointed out.... The priesthood was generally the father's duty, or when he died the eldest boy; Eg: before it was restricted to Levi *alone*.

So, I'll try to show an example of priestly abuse that ties the two together; the ancient and the new.
The word "Honor" is the root idea of Honorarium, which means money.

Matth 15:4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. [ eg: It's a deadly sin. damnable. ]
Matth 15:5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift [korban], by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;
Matth 15:6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

So, a priest claiming that the money he inherited from dad to take care of mom with, is a gift for the priesthood/temple/ and therefore mom dies of starvation, is a damnable priest.

So: That's one way, jacob AKA Israel talked back to God; saying how the religion's rules ought to work on a "technicality"
There are also many other violations whereby Israel tried to talk back to God listed in Malachi...

But, I'd rather not focus on all them... The first five sentences of the prophecy of malachi use Esau as an example. ( Recall, Esau wasn't his mother's favorite, but he was the one who was left to care for her when Jacob was messing around for an extra 7 years to obtain a second wife uh the one who brought idols with her. But he loved her.... )

Esau (the nation/tribe), by this time, was not worshiping God in the same way that Esau, their father had.
Therefore: Esau's seed (AKA: slip/clay), by this time, had been mixed with that of the women HE married, who brought their own religious ideas (and idols) into the fray, as did their children, and so forth....
In the end, they were utterly displeasing to God. Worthless.

Esau's nick-name is interesting, in that he was called "Edom" (red), like "red Clay"; a very similar sound to "Adam", earth.

But since man is made by God , eg: out of the dust of the earth, or clay, or the slip between spouses, as is metaphorically said so often in scripture:I think it important, to really focus a bit on what an ancient potter was, and how they did their art. If we don't know the thing the analogy is using to explain the point with, we really can't understand the point of the analogy. The more you know, the more you can discern.

Pottery is made by a potter first digging clay out of the ground, and then sifting it, picking out any roots, and rocks, that happen to be in it.

Then it has to be homogenized, and water added, and sometimes glass or other ingredients mixed in to improve it depending on problems the clay has;
(And most clay has at least some problems!!!)

This lump is then called a clay body. (technical term, too) http://ceramicartsdaily.org/bookstore/additions-to-clay-bodies/

At this point, the clay may be formed, *carefully* dried, and finally tested in the fire of a kiln.
I've done this, myself, and a portion of even my best work -- has shattered and crumbled, so I'm familiar with why it's called an "art".

But, one has to realize that clay comes in different qualities; some clay is just better than others.
And sometimes one can improve clay by mixing it with another clay, or substance, and sometimes not.
Impurities, organic inclusions, sand, calcium, iron, can all reduce the strength, beauty, and utility of a clay, and some of them can flat ruin it.

SO, a potter has to know what a clay is like, and what it can be used for:
One does not, for example, make porcelain china plates from red clay, and I mean, not even from porcelain clay *mixed* with red clay. A thin plate made of pourous red clay will absorb water and likely be very fragile ; not to mention it will almost certainly crack in the kiln when being "fired".
But one CAN make porous bricks from red clay (and straw), or thick walled pots to hold various things.

So a potter must CHOOSE the RIGHT THING to make out of a piece of clay; and I mean something compatible with the quality of the clay.

Now: If a piece of red clay brick, asked the brick worker "why didn't you make a china doll out of me?" I'd laugh in derision, and sell it for a comedy show.

In Romans 9:19-20 ; Isaiah 45:9 ; The idea's the same -- but it's not funny. It's just ignorance pretending to be knowledge.

God want to build a temple with living stone; and he's the potter which digs, chisels even hard rock, and fires stone bricks. ( Persians glazed stone with glassy clay glaze, for some of their most beautiful walls. )
If we are to become, living rock. then scripture says: look to Sarah, the "pit from which you were dug", and to Abraham "the rock from which you were hewn." ( Isaiah 51:1 )

God knows what he's doing with the clays that are available to make and decorate "living stone".
I simply trust, that God, seeing the quality of the clay -- and knowing the best that could be done with it; did that which was best.

For I know from experience, that it doesn't do any good to build a large pile of weak clay into beautiful objects, and put them in a kiln; just to have the weak ones shatter and bring the weight of the shelves down to crush the rest. Given enough defective jars, some will always shatter, the stacked shelves fall, and like an avalanche from a mountain -- crush the rest.

Unless God builds the house, the builder does so in vain. ( Psalm 127:1 )

And to be clear: To build a house, is to use your clay to beget holy children (Eg: the first wife, not the idol wife, Esau..)
Malachi 2:15(NIV)

Esau's nation definitely did talk back to God, wanting to make their children do their religion their way.
Malachi 1:4(NIV), Malachi 1:4(ESV)

 

[Asyncritus]

Hi ATSOG

Hebrews 12 is so explicit on the point, that I find it difficult to understand why we're getting hung up on this individual/nation thing.

As I'm sure you know, it says:

'Lest there be any fornicator or profane person as Esau, who for one mess of meat sold his own birthright'

That is about as individual as you can get, I would suppose.

And yes, of course the nation of Edom is spoken of in many other places in the OT, but especially in Obadiah, where they do some very grim and nasty things to Israel in the last days, as a punishment for which, they will become subservient to them.