Jacob and Esau

Hmmm... seems to me there is something about the point being to have God's purpose in election standing, and that it is totally fair for this to happen since God is both Sovereing and just.

But that would make the answer supportive of calvanism so some arminianw ill no doubt just dey scripture...

 

npetreley,

God had told the family "the elder shall serve the younger". The family, however, seems to have been in rejection of this. Except for Rebekah perhaps.

First, Esau sold his birthright, thus "despising" it. Yet, even after this, Isaac appears to have been more than ready to give Esau, the elder, the double portion. It was Jacob's by Divine promise and by right.

 

Why did God do this?The answer is given part way into verse 11"so that God's purpose according to His choice would stand,not because of works but because of Him who calls."That's the reason for announcing Jacob's election before his birth.

 

If you had been there to witness the event, you would say, 'definitly'. Esau had nothing but contempt in his heart for his casper milktoast brother, and no respect for what a birthright meant in the Jewish society. With that frame of mind, he willingly gave up what was rightfully his in the natural sense. In so doing he was carrying out the prophesy that the elder would serve the younger.

In reality since each of their births occured as one birth from their mother's perspective, they were equals. But Jacob's hand was first to feel the outside air and received a string tied to his wrist to indicate that event, even though Esau was the first whole child out of the womb.

 

npetreley,

1. Okay.
2. I don't agree with this interpretaion.
3. I agree.
4. Simply put but I think there's much more to it than that. Esau alreay knew, as the rest of the family, that Jacob was the heir.

Yes, he had a choice.

P.S. What do you think of Hosea 9:15 concerning Israel?

All their wickedness is in Gilgal: for there I hated them: for the wickedness of their doings I will drive them out of mine house, I will love them no more : all their princes are revolters.

 

God's purpose is to be known and enjoyed and praised(to be seen and savored and sung)as infinitely glorious in His free and sovereign grace.This is the purpose that governs all the works of God.He elects,predestines,calls,redeems,justifies,sanctifies,and glorifies to this end-for this purpose:to be seen and savored and sung as infinitely glorious in His free and sovereign grace."ifinitely glorious"means perfectly beautiful and immeasurably great."free"means the final reason for all events in the universe is in Himself and not another.The decisive influence of all that happens in the world is God's.He works all things,not just some things,after the counsel of His own will.He alone in all the universe has the freedom of ultimate self-determination."sovereign"means that nothing can thwart what He wants most to do.God's purpose is to be known and enjoyed and praised as infinitely glorious in His free and sovereign grace.And this purpose is "according to election"-it is an electing purpose-because if God did not elect unconditionally He would not be free,He would not be sovereign,and He would not be glorious.Not "free",because then men would determine their own election,not God.He would be bound(not free)to conform to their own self-determination.Not"sovereign",because instead of doing successfully what He wants most,He would be thwarted again and again by self-determining man.Not"glorious",because God's absolute freedom and sovereignty are the essence of the glory of His grace.

 

npetreley,

2. I think you'll understand my disagreement as we talk more about number 4.

Genesis 25:23 is God's answer to Rebekah's inquiry. I don't think she kept that a secret. In fact, there isn't any reason to believe she was the only one who knew of this revelation. The whole family/tribe knew Jacob was the heir by Divine promise.

No. Because the Divine birthright did not belong to Esau. No matter what Esau did or did not do would change that fact.

I guess I'll bring up Hosea 9:15 some other time.

By the way, Yelsew said something about "a thread being tied to Jacob's hand". This event was with regard to Tamar and Pharez, not Jacob.

 

No.

I'm not understanding your line of thinking. I may be missing your point because we look at this whole situation from different views.

I don't think Esau happened to walk up to Jacob one day, sell his birthright for food, and then said "whoops, shouldn't have done that". To me, the Word of God to Rebekah stands. The problem is, the family/tribe did not properly reflect that Word. Did Esau really have a birthright to sell? Only before men but not before God.

I agree. It will come to pass. But I'm not thinking within the particular terms of this event. For example, when did Esau start serving Jacob? Right away? After the blessings bestowed from their father? After Jacob returned to Canann? Etc., etc.

Because I don't look at the covenant promises the way you do.

Sorry, my fault for not defining this. By "Divine birthright", I meant, a birthright that is privileged by Divine promise. I was not refering to the lineage of Christ.

Also, if you're focusing on the earthly birthright, I think you're missing the boat. This isn't about earthly birthright.

 

npetreley,

I guess I've decided for myself not to put too much emphasis on "earthly birthright". IMO, you don't need to know the details of custom to understand revelation. Otherwise, you're implying the only way to fully know revelation is to know custom.

I'd be interested in your answer to a previous question: "when did Esau start serving Jacob? Right away? After the blessings bestowed from their father? After Jacob returned to Canann? Etc., etc.".

 

npetreley,

I think I understand your comments now.

To be honest, I also don't know when Esau started serving Jacob. Or even if it's happened yet. So it begs the question, what did God mean when he said "the elder shall serve the younger"? Since this is concerning nations, in what regard does Edom serve Israel? Is God speaking conerning history (I don't think so) or covenant or something else? To me, this is not about two individual people.

Carry these thoughts over to Romans 9.

 

npetreley,

I thought your question was provocative. I never really gave it any thought. I have been thinking a couple of days about it and only came up with this.

Could have Esau been serving Jacob because it was only through Jacob that the promised Savior was born? Esau would never experience the elation of knowing that Jesus would be born via his lineage. I wonder if Jacob understood that Jesus would be born from his lineage? As we all know no tribes were named after Esau and his sons, but tribes were named after Jacob's children as recorded in Genesis 29:31- 30:24.

Benjamin, Reuben, Simeon, Judah, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Levi, and Joseph. [Revelation 7:5-8] These are the names of those who had a tribe named after them. Quite an honor for Jacob! As we all know Jesus was born of the Tribe of Judah. [Revelation 5:5]

God had highly favored Jacob instead of Esau as noted in Romans 9:13 because of the reality of the spiritual ramifications of the lineage of the younger son, Jacob. I am eternally grateful that God sovereignly chose Jacob to produce through Mary our blessed Savior Jesus Christ. Without Jesus we all would be forever lost and destined to destruction. Thank God, His amazing grace [Ephesians 2:8]can be counted on in this life and in our spiritual body prepared for us in Heaven. [II Corinthians 5:1-4]

 

So that leads to the next question: Did Esau sell his birthright of his own free will?

Even if he did, it just shows that man's will just messes things up. After this, Jacob had to deceive his father, and Esau sought to kill him, but Esau sold his birthright to begin with, obviously despising it. Right? So, what good is the will of man, one moment despising the inheritance, the next, seeking it with much tears.

I will stick to the Sovereignty of God.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas