Jacob and Esau

My post #196 suggests that this analysis just is not ture, since foreknew has an element of loving relationship and just knowing about someone, though for the same length of time, is not called foreknowledge.

Please read it again from this pov, ok?

That was the point. Please reread
 
YES - foreknew means foreloved.

To flesh this out a bit...

Romans 8:29 For whom HE did foreknow, HE also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of HIS Son.
From this verse we can see that the predestination of the elect is based on the foreknowledge of GOD. Now everyone admits that in this verse, the word “fore” means before earthly life. Therefore, they think that it also means before creation as if our earthly life was the same as our creation. I wonder if this is a valid and reasonable link to make?

GOD obviously does not before life know everybody since not everyone will become like Jesus, which Rom 8:29 defines predestination to mean and, as per Matthew 7:21– 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’ which tells us what knowing means, emphasising the idea that loving is knowing and knowing about has no love.

James 2:19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that--and shudder.
Jesus obviously knew about the demons and knew about the miracle workers but this knowing contained no love as it is plain, He never knew them.

This means that foreknow must carry the idea of approval. As one commentator stated it, “Whom HE foreknew” is virtually equivalent to “whom HE foreloved”.

Now this question comes to mind: if it is true that no one had been created at the time of this foreknowledge, on what basis does GOD "before life" love some and not the rest?

This would mean that there is no reason for HIS particular "before life" love. GOD's election / foreknowing is thus based on eenie, meenie, minie, moe, but how can you put your faith in a GOD like that? How much better to admit that we should start looking in some area we have not looked yet, and since we cannot find any of those, why not finally admit that we need a revelation from GOD to give us an infinitely loving answer to this problem?

Now, according to pre-conception existence theology, the "before life" love (foreknowledge) of GOD, that is, HIS pre-life approval of some and rejection of the rest was based on the prior uncoerced choice of the creature (in Sheol, before physical creation) and on HIS infinite love, which means that HE will never stop loving anyone who can possibly ever come to glorify HIM.

The reason why HE loved some "before this life" and why HE did not love the rest is found in their (our) response for or against HIM when He proclaimed to every creature under heaven HIS divinity and HIS gospel of salvation from sin, Col 1:23.

Some had chosen to eternally defile themselves and some had not. Some had decided to never ever fulfil HIS purpose and some were still able to fulfil HIS purpose, some willingly, (angels) and others only if HE was infallibly gracious ( by election) to them (His fallen church). Yes, and He predestined these sinful people of HIS kingdom by their faith to be conformed to the image of HIS Son, and HE predestined the other sinful people of the evil one for the Day of Judgement, Jn 3:18, and established them for the correction of the fallen elect. Matt 13:29 ‘NO!’ he said, [postpone the judgement because...] ‘if you pull the weeds now, you might uproot the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest...that is, until the sinful elect give up their willingness to live with the evil of the reprobate and choose to be holy and in full accord with the judgement.

In short, the Satanic fall happened before the creation of the physical universe and was the reason for their reprobation before the foundation of the world....not whim.
Thank you. So it's not what He knows it who He knows.
 
wake up

You believe they were unconditionally elected to be saved before the foundation of the earth

You do not believe they were saved at that time

you do believe they were saved later in time

so your view is simply God had a plan to save those men at some future time

you cannot escape it

it was not a reality that they were saved before the foundation of the earth

therefore it can only be a plan, an intension, a purpose chose your word



o
No mention of a plan. A plan assumes time. A future. God exists outside of time.
 
When did God decide to create ?

Thinking , deciding has sequence.

Does God have a rational mind ?

Does God think ?

How long before deciding to create did God actually create ?

Next
Missed the answer to my question. Did you simply forget to address it?
 
No mention of a plan. A plan assumes time. A future. God exists outside of time.
wake up

You believe they were unconditionally elected to be saved before the foundation of the earth

You do not believe they were saved at that time

you do believe they were saved later in time

so your view is simply God had a plan to save those men at some future time

you cannot escape it

it was not a reality that they were saved before the foundation of the earth

therefore it can only be a plan, an intension, a purpose (chose your word)
 
I agree. Depends on context of course.
Your theology however must act as though it never does in any atonement text


1 Timothy 2:4–6
4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

Romans 5:18
Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

Isaiah 53:6
All we like sheep have gone astray; We have turned every one to his own way; And the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

1 Timothy 4:10
For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

2 Corinthians 5:14–15
14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: 15 And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.
 
wake up

You believe they were unconditionally elected to be saved before the foundation of the earth

You do not believe they were saved at that time

you do believe they were saved later in time

so your view is simply God had a plan to save those men at some future time

you cannot escape it

it was not a reality that they were saved before the foundation of the earth

therefore it can only be a plan, an intension, a purpose (chose your word)
I am awake. Still no mention of a plan.

Question begging
 
Your theology however must act as though it never does in any atonement text


1 Timothy 2:4–6
4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

Romans 5:18
Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

Isaiah 53:6
All we like sheep have gone astray; We have turned every one to his own way; And the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

1 Timothy 4:10
For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

2 Corinthians 5:14–15
14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: 15 And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.
I just said context decides. Yet Tom says Calvinism "never does'. Tom is looking to argue
 
Your theology however must act as though it never does in any atonement text


1 Timothy 2:4–6
4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

Romans 5:18
Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

Isaiah 53:6
All we like sheep have gone astray; We have turned every one to his own way; And the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

1 Timothy 4:10
For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

2 Corinthians 5:14–15
14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: 15 And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.
Yep 👍
 
I've seen people claim that this section is not talking about the persons of Jacob and Esau, but the nations.

10 And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac 11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), 12 it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.”

("the children") is added to the text, but you can't avoid not yet being born nor having done any good or evil. He's talking about Jacob and Esau, not the nations. It can be further applied to the nations, but the context is clearly about the unborn Jacob and Esau. And again, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated” is clearly about the two individuals.

Why is this important? Because the point is "that the purpose of God according to election might stand", which says that God made the choice before they were even born.
Genesis 32:28
The man said, “From now on, your name will no longer be Jacob. You will be called Israel,

Jacob ( Isreal ) I loved, Esau ( the nations) I hated.

Roman’s 9-11 is about hardened Isreal that God loved . Isreal , the Jews are the ones Paul is rebuking in those chapters whom God has hardened

Miseo in the lexicon , hate means to esteem less, to love less- even many Calvinist theologians agree that is the meaning. The same meaing from Jesus when He said a disciple must hate his own mother, father to come follow Him. Hate there means the exact same thing. You love your mother/father less than you do Jesus- You esteem Jesus more, love Him more.

Why would God bless Esau if He actually hated him ?

An oxymoron once again in your theology, a contradiction.

miseó: to hate

Original Word:
μισέω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: miseó
Phonetic Spelling: (mis-eh'-o)
Definition: to hate
Usage: I hate, detest, love less, esteem less.

HELPS Word-studies

3404
miséō – properly, to detest (on a comparativebasis); hence, denounce; to love someone or something less than someone(something) else, i.e. to renounce one choice in favor of another.

Lk 14:26: "If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate (3404 /miséō, 'love less' than the Lord) his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple" (NASU).

[Note the comparative meaning of 3404 (miséō) which centers in moral choice, elevating one value over another.]

to be disinclined to, disfavor, disregard in contrast to preferential treatment (Gn 29:31; Dt 21:15, 16) Mt 6:24; Lk 16:13. τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ J 12:25 or ἑαυτοῦ Lk 14:26 (cp. the formulation Plut, Mor. 556d οὐδʼ ἐμίσουν ἑαυτούς; on the theme cp. Tyrtaeus [VII B.C.] 8, 5 D.3). Ro 9:13 BDAG


BDAG.
② to be disinclined to, disfavor, disregard in contrast to preferential treatment (Gn 29:31; Dt 21:15, 16) Mt 6:24; Lk 16:13. τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ J 12:25 or ἑαυτοῦ Lk 14:26 (cp. the formulation Plut, Mor. 556d οὐδʼ ἐμίσουν ἑαυτούς; on the theme cp. Tyrtaeus [VII B.C.] 8, 5 D.3). Ro 9:13 (Mal 1:2f). Perh. 2 Cl 6:6 (s. 1b). (JDenney, The Word ‘Hate’ in Lk 14:26: ET 21, 1910, 41f; WBleibtreu, Paradoxe Aussprüche Jesu: Theol. Arbeiten aus d. wissensch. Prediger-Verein d. Rheinprovinz, new ser. 20, 24, 15–35; RSockman, The Paradoxes of J. ’36).—ACarr, The Mng. of ‘Hatred’ in the NT: Exp. 6th ser., 12, 1905, 153–60.—DELG. M-M. EDNT. TW.

And here is a Greek Scholar/Teacher Robert Mounce

I loved, but Esau I hated” (Mal 1:2–3). This should not be interpreted to mean that God actually hated Esau. The strong contrast is a Semitic idiom that heightens the comparison by stating it in absolute terms. 17

Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 198–199.

Berkeley softens the contrast translating, “To Jacob I was drawn, but Esau I repudiated” (the NRSV has “chose” and “rejected”). In discussing the “hatred” of God, Michel comments that it “is not so much an emotion as a rejection in will and deed” (TDNT 4.687).

Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995).

Here are more renown Scholars

Esau I hated. I.e., “loved less,” according to an ancient Near Eastern hyperbole. It expresses the lack of gratuitous election of Esau and the Edomites (Idumaeans). See Gen 29:30–31: “he loved Rachel more than Leah …; when the Lord saw that Leah was hated …”; cf. Deut 21:15–17; compare Luke 14:26 (“hate”) with Matt 10:37 (“love more”). There is no hint here of predestination to “grace” or “glory” of an individual; it is an expression of the choice of corporate Israel over corporate Edom.

Joseph A. Fitzmyer S.J., Romans: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 33, Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 563.

13. Characteristically Paul backs up his argument with a quotation from Scripture, this one from Malachi 1:2–3: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” Two questions are important here: Is Paul referring to nations or individuals? and What is meant by hated? As to the first, we have just seen that the Genesis passage refers primarily to nations and we would expect that to continue here. That this is the case seems clear from what Malachi writes about Esau: “Esau I have hated, and I have turned his mountains into a wasteland and left his inheritance to the desert jackals” (Mal. 1:3). Both in Genesis and Malachi the reference is clearly to nations, and we should accept this as Paul’s meaning accordingly.

The meaning of hated is a different kind of problem. There is a difficulty in that Scripture speaks of a love of God for the whole world (John 3:16) and the meaning of “God is love” (1 John 4:8, 16) is surely that God loves, quite irrespective of merit or demerit in the beloved. Specifically he is said to love sinners (Rom. 5:8). It is also true that in Scripture there are cases where “hate” seems clearly to mean “love less” (e.g., Gen. 29:31, 33; Deut. 21:15; Matt. 6:24; Luke 14:26; John 12:25). Many find this an acceptable solution here: God loved Esau (and the nation Edom) less than he loved Jacob (and Israel). But it is perhaps more likely that like Calvin we should understand the expression in the sense “reject” over against “accept”. He explains the passage thus: “I chose Jacob and rejected Esau, induced to this course by my mercy alone, and not by any worthiness in his works.… I had rejected the Edomites.…” This accords with the stress throughout this passage on the thought of election for service. God chose Israel for this role; he did not so choose Edom. Leon Morris, The Epistle to the Romans,


hope this helps !!!
 
Continued

Romans 9
That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone. 33 As it is written:

“See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes people to stumble
and a rock that makes them fall,
and the one who believes in him will never be put to shame.

The above is the same teaching in Romans 3 below :

Romans 3
But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from law, although the law and the prophets bear witness to it, 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction; 23 since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins; 26 it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies him who has faith in Jesus. 27 Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On the principle of works? No, but on the principle of faith. 28 For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law. 29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30 since God is one; and he will justify the circumcised on the ground of their faith and the uncircumcised through their faith.

And if we keep reading into chapter 9 the hardened Jew/reprobate is whom Paul prays for in their temporary hardening until all the gentiles are grafted into the branch. The potter/clay is God using the hardened Jews- His elect,chosen people ( destruction ) to bring in non elect vessels of glory ( gentiles) their salvation. The potter/clay is another analogy that contradicts calvinism, not support it. Once the glasses/lens are removed one can see the passages in their greater biblical context and harmonize them.

Conclusion : it’s nations not individuals from the context

Romans 9:30–32 (ESV) — 30 What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. 32 Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone,

Romans 10:18–21 (ESV) — 18 But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have, for “Their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world.” 19 But I ask, did Israel not understand? First Moses says, “I will make you jealous of those who are not a nation; with a foolish nation I will make you angry.” 20 Then Isaiah is so bold as to say, “I have been found by those who did not seek me; I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me.” 21 But of Israel he says, “All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people.”

Romans 11:19–23 (ESV) — 19 Then you will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20 That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. 22 Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. 23 And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again.

hope this helps !
 
Malachi 1- the nations

A prophecy: The word of the Lord to Israel through Malachi.[a]

2 “I have loved you,” says the Lord.

“But you ask, ‘How have you loved us?’

“Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?” declares the Lord. “Yet I have loved Jacob, 3 but Esau I have hated, and I have turned his hill country into a wasteland and left his inheritance to the desert jackals.”


4 Edom may say, “Though we have been crushed, we will rebuild the ruins.”

But this is what the Lord Almighty says: “They may build, but I will demolish. They will be called the Wicked Land, a people always under the wrath of the Lord. 5 You will see it with your own eyes and say, ‘Great is the Lord—even beyond the borders of Israel!’

6 “A son honors his father, and a slave his master. If I am a father, where is the honor due me? If I am a master, where is the respect due me?” says the Lord Almighty.

“It is you priests who show contempt for my name.

“But you ask, ‘How have we shown contempt for your name?’


7 “By offering defiled food on my altar.

“But you ask, ‘How have we defiled you?’

“By saying that the Lord’s table is contemptible. 8 When you offer blind animals for sacrifice, is that not wrong? When you sacrifice lame or diseased animals, is that not wrong? Try offering them to your governor! Would he be pleased with you? Would he accept you?” says the Lord Almighty.


9 “Now plead with God to be gracious to us. With such offerings from your hands, will he accept you?”—says the Lord Almighty.


10 “Oh, that one of you would shut the temple doors, so that you would not light useless fires on my altar! I am not pleased with you,” says the Lord Almighty, “and I will accept no offering from your hands. 11 My name will be great among the nations, from where the sun rises to where it sets. In every place incense and pure offerings will be brought to me, because my name will be great among the nations,” says the Lord Almighty.

Romans 9- the nations

I speak the truth in Christ—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it through the Holy Spirit— 2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, 4 the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. 5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of the Messiah, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen.

6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 8 In other words, it is not the children by physical descent who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring. 9 For this was how the promise was stated: “At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son.”


10 Not only that, but Rebekah’s children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”


14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.


19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?


22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? 25 As he says in Hosea:

“I will call them ‘my people’ who are not my people;
and I will call her ‘my loved one’ who is not my loved one,”

26 and,

“In the very place where it was said to them,
‘You are not my people,’
there they will be called ‘children of the living God.’”

27 Isaiah cries out concerning Israel:

“Though the number of the Israelites be like the sand by the sea,
only the remnant will be saved.
28 For the Lord will carry out
his sentence on earth with speed and finality.

29 It is just as Isaiah said previously:

“Unless the Lord Almighty
had left us descendants,
we would have become like Sodom,
we would have been like Gomorrah.”

30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone. 33 As it is written:

“See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes people to stumble
and a rock that makes them fall,
and the one who believes in him will never be put to shame.”
 
Jacob ( Isreal ) I loved, Esau ( the nations) I hated.

Roman’s 9-11 is about hardened Isreal that God loved . Isreal , the Jews are the ones Paul is rebuking in those chapters whom God has hardened
Partially correct--

The phrase "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated" comes from Romans 9:13, where Paul quotes from Malachi 1:2-3. In this passage, Paul is discussing God's sovereign choice in election, particularly regarding the descendants of Jacob (Israel) and Esau (Edom). God chose Jacob to be the recipient of His covenant promises, while Esau's descendants did not receive the same favor. However, it's essential to note that the term "hate" in this context does not necessarily denote personal animosity but rather indicates a preference or choice in the context of God's sovereign plan.

In Romans 9-11, Paul addresses the theme of God's sovereignty in salvation and the relationship between Jews and Gentiles in God's redemptive plan. While it is true that Paul speaks extensively about the hardening of Israel in these chapters, it's important to understand that not all Jews are hardened, and Paul's purpose is not to rebuke Israel as a whole but to explain God's dealings with both Jews and Gentiles in the broader scope of salvation history.

Paul emphasizes that although many Jews rejected Jesus as the Messiah, God has not rejected His people Israel permanently. He affirms that there is a remnant of Israel who have believed in Jesus (Romans 11:1-5) and that God's promises to Israel will ultimately be fulfilled (Romans 11:25-29). Additionally, Paul warns Gentile believers not to boast over Israel's temporary hardening but to show them kindness and seek their salvation (Romans 11:17-24).

In summary, while Romans 9-11 addresses the hardening of Israel and the inclusion of Gentiles in God's plan of salvation, it is not accurate to say that Paul is rebuking Israel as a whole or that God has permanently rejected His chosen people. Rather, Paul's intention is to demonstrate the depth of God's wisdom and the universality of His saving grace, which extends to both Jews and Gentiles.
 
Back
Top Bottom