Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated?

I have long believed that no one ever comes to understand Romans 9 through a Calvinistic paradigm unless they are first taught to look for Calvinism in the text. Verses 12-13 are a great example.

In Luke 14:26, Jesus says "If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple." However we interpret Jesus' command to "hate" our relatives, I can be certain He doesn't mean that we are supposed to desire their eternal damnation.

Yet people read Romans 9:13 and say that it's obvious that God wanted Esau to be condemned to hell forever. Why? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

In verse 12, Paul quotes Genesis 25:23 which says "the older shall serve the younger." You don't spell salvation s-e-r-v-i-c-e. Why then do people read this and think that the older one goes to hell whereas the younger one goes to heaven? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

What if that verse is meant to be taken literally? What if, during the eschaton, Esau and his descendants will be raised from the dead and forced to be the slaves of the Jacob and his descendants? Doesn't that scenario fit more naturally with the text?

Keep in mind that Paul's discussion of election does not end with chapter 9...it continues for three chapters. In chapter 11:30-32, Paul gives us the real reason that God chooses some for favor in this lifetime while "hating" others: "For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all."

When does this "mercy on all" happen? Since Paul says that the Jews in chapter 9 were given over to disobedience so that his Gentile audience might obtain mercy, when will those disobedient Jews find themselves to be objects of God's mercy? Paul tells us:

“The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”


That's the eschaton!
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
I have long believed that no one ever comes to understand Romans 9 through a Calvinistic paradigm unless they are first taught to look for Calvinism in the text. Verses 12-13 are a great example.

In Luke 14:26, Jesus says "If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple." However we interpret Jesus' command to "hate" our relatives, I can be certain He doesn't mean that we are supposed to desire their eternal damnation.

So you actually think that Luke 14:25 is definitional regarding the meaning of "hate"?

So "hate" NEVER means "hate" the way it means it in English?
Seriously?!

I'm sorry if you're not aware of this, but most terms have different connotations depending on the CONTEXT. So it's not respectful to God to choose only ONE meaning for a term, and to try to force that SAME one meaning in EVERY usage throughout Scripture. That is simply NOT how we use terms.

The Greek term "miseo" simply means "hate", the same as the English term "hate" means.

The reason we don't interpret it in the same way in Luke 14:25 is because of CONTEXT. One of the commandments is "Honour thy father and mother" (which implies love), and so "hate" in Luke 14:25 is not meant in an absolute sense, but in an RELATIVE sense. We are to love God SO MUCH that our love for our parents seems like hate IN COMPARISON.


I will finish by asking you this.... If you think "hate" ("miseo") doesn't actually mean "hate", then please give us the Greek word that DOES mean "hate"/"hate". Or are you claiming there isn't one?

Yet people read Romans 9:13 and say that it's obvious that God wanted Esau to be condemned to hell forever. Why? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

Please stop being so rude and disrespectful, okay?
If you are going to ask US "why" we believe something, then wait for US to tell you.
Don't simply project your own dishonest and self-serving answer.
You clearly aren't interested in truth, if you have to "make up" your own false answers.

In verse 12, Paul quotes Genesis 25:23 which says "the older shall serve the younger." You don't spell salvation s-e-r-v-i-c-e. Why then do people read this and think that the older one goes to hell whereas the younger one goes to heaven? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

Please stop bearing false witness against Calvinists.
You will have to answer to God for your sinful behaviour.

What if that verse is meant to be taken literally? What if, during the eschaton, Esau and his descendants will be raised from the dead and forced to be the slaves of the Jacob and his descendants? Doesn't that scenario fit more naturally with the text?

Nope.
(Since you asked. But I get the feeling that you don't WANT to hear our answers, you simply want to mock and ridicule our beliefs, because you think being a child of God means lying about others, and mocking and ridiculing others. Sad.)
 
I will finish by asking you this.... If you think "hate" ("miseo") doesn't actually mean "hate", then please give us the Greek word that DOES mean "hate"/"hate". Or are you claiming there isn't one?
I have no issue with Luke 14:26 translating that word as "hate", with the understanding that our English vocabulary is somewhat limited in expressing the full range of meaning of Greek words (I don't even need to go into all the ways in which the word "love" is inadequate to express the full range of nuance that love is spoken of in Greek). It's a limitation of language translation. My point was to demonstrate that such nuance exists with regard to the word "hate" in the Bible, since Calvinists have routinely cited Romans 9:13 as a "clobber" verse.

I think that the context for Paul's point is the fuller OT passage that he is quoting from, which is Malachi 1:2-5:

“I have loved you,” says the Lord.
“Yet you say, ‘In what way have You loved us?’
Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?”
Says the Lord.
“Yet Jacob I have loved;
But Esau I have hated,
And laid waste his mountains and his heritage
For the jackals of the wilderness.”
Even though Edom has said,
“We have been impoverished,
But we will return and build the desolate places,”
Thus says the Lord of hosts:
“They may build, but I will throw down;
They shall be called the Territory of Wickedness,
And the people against whom the Lord will have indignation forever.
Your eyes shall see,
And you shall say,
‘The Lord is magnified beyond the border of Israel.’


It is clear from these verses that the prophet is describing a judgment against Edom that has an eschatological fulfillment. What then is the purpose behind Paul's discourse in Romans 9-11? Could it be that he is describing how certain OT prophecies that have a fulfillment in the age to come are the means by which God will offer everyone a chance to find mercy?
 

TomFL

Well-known member
I have long believed that no one ever comes to understand Romans 9 through a Calvinistic paradigm unless they are first taught to look for Calvinism in the text. Verses 12-13 are a great example.

In Luke 14:26, Jesus says "If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple." However we interpret Jesus' command to "hate" our relatives, I can be certain He doesn't mean that we are supposed to desire their eternal damnation.

Yet people read Romans 9:13 and say that it's obvious that God wanted Esau to be condemned to hell forever. Why? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

In verse 12, Paul quotes Genesis 25:23 which says "the older shall serve the younger." You don't spell salvation s-e-r-v-i-c-e. Why then do people read this and think that the older one goes to hell whereas the younger one goes to heaven? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

What if that verse is meant to be taken literally? What if, during the eschaton, Esau and his descendants will be raised from the dead and forced to be the slaves of the Jacob and his descendants? Doesn't that scenario fit more naturally with the text?

Keep in mind that Paul's discussion of election does not end with chapter 9...it continues for three chapters. In chapter 11:30-32, Paul gives us the real reason that God chooses some for favor in this lifetime while "hating" others: "For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all."

When does this "mercy on all" happen? Since Paul says that the Jews in chapter 9 were given over to disobedience so that his Gentile audience might obtain mercy, when will those disobedient Jews find themselves to be objects of God's mercy? Paul tells us:

“The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”


That's the eschaton!
Look at

Mal. 1:1–4 —ESV
“The oracle of the word of the LORD to Israel by Malachi.¶ “I have loved you,” says the LORD. But you say, “How have you loved us?” “Is not Esau Jacob’s brother?” declares the LORD. “Yet I have loved Jacob
but Esau I have hated. I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of the desert.”
If Edom says, “We are shattered but we will rebuild the ruins,” the LORD of hosts says, “They may build, but I will tear down, and they will be called ‘the wicked country,’ and ‘the people with whom the LORD is angry forever.’””

It is corporate Israel (Jacob) over Esau (Edom)
 

armylngst

Active member
I have long believed that no one ever comes to understand Romans 9 through a Calvinistic paradigm unless they are first taught to look for Calvinism in the text. Verses 12-13 are a great example.
Except that isn't true. I have not always had a Calvinistic paradigm, having grown up in an American Baptist Church (Arminian). My understanding of these verses did not change when I became calvinistic.
In Luke 14:26, Jesus says "If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple." However we interpret Jesus' command to "hate" our relatives, I can be certain He doesn't mean that we are supposed to desire their eternal damnation.
No. Why would anyone desire their own eternal damnation? (Did you read the whole verse?). I can't do this justice like the other person, but we are to so love God, that even the love we have for ourselves appears as hate. It is qualitative.
Yet people read Romans 9:13 and say that it's obvious that God wanted Esau to be condemned to hell forever. Why? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.
Why do you immediately equate hate to condemnation to hell. Hate is the opposite of love, and Jesus loved the rich young ruler, even though it is clear that Jesus shut the rich young ruler out of heaven. (Actually, the rich young ruler did that, Jesus was just making him aware.)
In verse 12, Paul quotes Genesis 25:23 which says "the older shall serve the younger." You don't spell salvation s-e-r-v-i-c-e. Why then do people read this and think that the older one goes to hell whereas the younger one goes to heaven? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.
The verse is in the Old Testament. If you look to the New Testament, you will see said of Esau, that Esau sought out a place of repentance, but could not find it, even though He sought it out with tears. This is all dealing with the idea that God hates Esau. It isn't a hatred that is easily understood, because, when Jacob comes to see Esau, Esau tells Jacob that he has been blessed by God. To anyone standing around, it would appear that God loves Esau. However, Esau did evil in the eyes of God, and God just stopped chastising or punishing Him. After all, God only chastises those He loves.
What if that verse is meant to be taken literally? What if, during the eschaton, Esau and his descendants will be raised from the dead and forced to be the slaves of the Jacob and his descendants? Doesn't that scenario fit more naturally with the text?
No. You have to take the dealings of God with Israel and Edom completely into account.
Keep in mind that Paul's discussion of election does not end with chapter 9...it continues for three chapters. In chapter 11:30-32, Paul gives us the real reason that God chooses some for favor in this lifetime while "hating" others: "For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all."
Paul is talking to the Gentiles (greeks, depending on your version) in light of Israel. So we (Gentiles) were once disobedient to God, yet, through Israel's disobedience/rejection of the gospel, we (Gentiles) have received mercy because of what Israel did. In the future, Israel will be shown mercy, as God showed mercy to us. Consider that the gospel was first to the Jews, and then it went global. So, by Israel's disobedience, the gospel came to the Gentiles and as such, to all.
When does this "mercy on all" happen? Since Paul says that the Jews in chapter 9 were given over to disobedience so that his Gentile audience might obtain mercy, when will those disobedient Jews find themselves to be objects of God's mercy? Paul tells us:

“The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”


That's the eschaton!
The culmination of the mercy that God will have on all is found in Zechariah. Jesus stands with one foot on the shore, and one in the sea, and all of Israel (remaining) will look upon Him as One who was pierced (thank you for making it obvious you are speaking of Jesus, Zechariah). It is the final, culminating salvation/reconciliation between God, and His chosen people, Israel. Paul says that Israel has been partially blinded. This is where the partial blindness is removed, and Israel will ultimately be saved.
 

TomFL

Well-known member
Except that isn't true. I have not always had a Calvinistic paradigm, having grown up in an American Baptist Church (Arminian). My understanding of these verses did not change when I became calvinistic.

So when it was stated

Rom. 9:11–13 —ESV
“though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls—
she was told, “The older will serve the younger.”
As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.””

you believed it was related to eternal salvation ?

Rom. 9:6–13 —ESV
Ҧ But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel,
and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.”

This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring.
For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.”
And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac,
though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls—
she was told, “The older will serve the younger.”
As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.””

Rather than God's choice to work through a nation of peoples descended from Abraham but not all of Abrahams descendants ?
 

civic

Well-known member
I have long believed that no one ever comes to understand Romans 9 through a Calvinistic paradigm unless they are first taught to look for Calvinism in the text. Verses 12-13 are a great example.

In Luke 14:26, Jesus says "If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple." However we interpret Jesus' command to "hate" our relatives, I can be certain He doesn't mean that we are supposed to desire their eternal damnation.

Yet people read Romans 9:13 and say that it's obvious that God wanted Esau to be condemned to hell forever. Why? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

In verse 12, Paul quotes Genesis 25:23 which says "the older shall serve the younger." You don't spell salvation s-e-r-v-i-c-e. Why then do people read this and think that the older one goes to hell whereas the younger one goes to heaven? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

What if that verse is meant to be taken literally? What if, during the eschaton, Esau and his descendants will be raised from the dead and forced to be the slaves of the Jacob and his descendants? Doesn't that scenario fit more naturally with the text?

Keep in mind that Paul's discussion of election does not end with chapter 9...it continues for three chapters. In chapter 11:30-32, Paul gives us the real reason that God chooses some for favor in this lifetime while "hating" others: "For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all."

When does this "mercy on all" happen? Since Paul says that the Jews in chapter 9 were given over to disobedience so that his Gentile audience might obtain mercy, when will those disobedient Jews find themselves to be objects of God's mercy? Paul tells us:

“The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”


That's the eschaton!
do you know what a hate crime is in the USA ?

do I need to spell it out for you ?

hate means hate just as love means love and like means like.

hope this helps !!!
 

Beloved Daughter

Well-known member
I have long believed that no one ever comes to understand Romans 9 through a Calvinistic paradigm unless they are first taught to look for Calvinism in the text. Verses 12-13 are a great example.

In Luke 14:26, Jesus says "If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple." However we interpret Jesus' command to "hate" our relatives, I can be certain He doesn't mean that we are supposed to desire their eternal damnation.

Yet people read Romans 9:13 and say that it's obvious that God wanted Esau to be condemned to hell forever. Why? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

In verse 12, Paul quotes Genesis 25:23 which says "the older shall serve the younger." You don't spell salvation s-e-r-v-i-c-e. Why then do people read this and think that the older one goes to hell whereas the younger one goes to heaven? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

What if that verse is meant to be taken literally? What if, during the eschaton, Esau and his descendants will be raised from the dead and forced to be the slaves of the Jacob and his descendants? Doesn't that scenario fit more naturally with the text?

Keep in mind that Paul's discussion of election does not end with chapter 9...it continues for three chapters. In chapter 11:30-32, Paul gives us the real reason that God chooses some for favor in this lifetime while "hating" others: "For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all."

When does this "mercy on all" happen? Since Paul says that the Jews in chapter 9 were given over to disobedience so that his Gentile audience might obtain mercy, when will those disobedient Jews find themselves to be objects of God's mercy? Paul tells us:

“The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”


That's the eschaton!

You would do better to read this book written by Katherine Paterson

Jacob Have I Loved Paperback – May 5, 2020​


It's written for pre-teens and teens.

You won't find Luke 14:26 in it, for good reason.

These types of posts reveal that you are probably seeing what you want to see as you accuse us of.

See, we don't cherry pick scripture.

Here is the rest:

Romans 9:14-24

14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! 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 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— 24 even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?


In short, you have no right to answer the question. Salvation depends solely on God.
 

TomFL

Well-known member
You would do better to read this book written by Katherine Paterson

Jacob Have I Loved Paperback – May 5, 2020​


It's written for pre-teens and teens.

You won't find Luke 14:26 in it, for good reason.

These types of posts reveal that you are probably seeing what you want to see as you accuse us of.

See, we don't cherry pick scripture.

Here is the rest:

Romans 9:14-24

14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! 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 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— 24 even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?


In short, you have no right to answer the question. Salvation depends solely on God.
The problem is Paul's objector is a Jew who being hardened in his rebellious state was used to effect the crucifixion.
He objects that if his disobedience serves to further God's plan why is he still being judged and used as a vessel of dishonour

It does not refer to unconditional election to salvation or reprobation

Paul squarely put the blame on the Jew himself and shows the situation is not without remedy

Rom. 11:20–23 —KJV
Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.”

which would be the case if it was the result of an unconditional decree
 

zerinus

Well-known member
I have long believed that no one ever comes to understand Romans 9 through a Calvinistic paradigm unless they are first taught to look for Calvinism in the text. Verses 12-13 are a great example.

In Luke 14:26, Jesus says "If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple." However we interpret Jesus' command to "hate" our relatives, I can be certain He doesn't mean that we are supposed to desire their eternal damnation.

Yet people read Romans 9:13 and say that it's obvious that God wanted Esau to be condemned to hell forever. Why? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

In verse 12, Paul quotes Genesis 25:23 which says "the older shall serve the younger." You don't spell salvation s-e-r-v-i-c-e. Why then do people read this and think that the older one goes to hell whereas the younger one goes to heaven? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

What if that verse is meant to be taken literally? What if, during the eschaton, Esau and his descendants will be raised from the dead and forced to be the slaves of the Jacob and his descendants? Doesn't that scenario fit more naturally with the text?

Keep in mind that Paul's discussion of election does not end with chapter 9...it continues for three chapters. In chapter 11:30-32, Paul gives us the real reason that God chooses some for favor in this lifetime while "hating" others: "For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all."

When does this "mercy on all" happen? Since Paul says that the Jews in chapter 9 were given over to disobedience so that his Gentile audience might obtain mercy, when will those disobedient Jews find themselves to be objects of God's mercy? Paul tells us:

“The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”


That's the eschaton!
Your post is hard to reply to, because it lacks a clear purpose and direction. If the purpose of your post is that Calvinists get the meaning of Romans 9:12-13 wrong, well, Calvinists get the meaning of the whole Bible wrong, so no big surprise there. If your aim is to discuss specifically what the correct meaning and interpretation of Romans 9:12-13 should be, then your post is not focused enough to require a relevant response, but digresses into the rights and wrongs of Calvinism in general. So it is hard to give it an appropriate response. It is not general enough to give it a general response, and not specific enough to give it a specific response. Perhaps that is why it has not attracted many replies. I think you need to rephrase it so it is focused enough on a particular issue that it can be replied to.
 

brightfame52

Well-known member
I have long believed that no one ever comes to understand Romans 9 through a Calvinistic paradigm unless they are first taught to look for Calvinism in the text. Verses 12-13 are a great example.

In Luke 14:26, Jesus says "If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple." However we interpret Jesus' command to "hate" our relatives, I can be certain He doesn't mean that we are supposed to desire their eternal damnation.

Yet people read Romans 9:13 and say that it's obvious that God wanted Esau to be condemned to hell forever. Why? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

In verse 12, Paul quotes Genesis 25:23 which says "the older shall serve the younger." You don't spell salvation s-e-r-v-i-c-e. Why then do people read this and think that the older one goes to hell whereas the younger one goes to heaven? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

What if that verse is meant to be taken literally? What if, during the eschaton, Esau and his descendants will be raised from the dead and forced to be the slaves of the Jacob and his descendants? Doesn't that scenario fit more naturally with the text?

Keep in mind that Paul's discussion of election does not end with chapter 9...it continues for three chapters. In chapter 11:30-32, Paul gives us the real reason that God chooses some for favor in this lifetime while "hating" others: "For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all."

When does this "mercy on all" happen? Since Paul says that the Jews in chapter 9 were given over to disobedience so that his Gentile audience might obtain mercy, when will those disobedient Jews find themselves to be objects of God's mercy? Paul tells us:

“The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”


That's the eschaton!
The book of Romans is all about Salvation, Chapters 1-11 doctrinal and12-16 practical
 

brightfame52

Well-known member
And yet nothing there mentions unconditional election to salvation
Sure it does, Rom 9:11

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)
 

civic

Well-known member
I have long believed that no one ever comes to understand Romans 9 through a Calvinistic paradigm unless they are first taught to look for Calvinism in the text. Verses 12-13 are a great example.

In Luke 14:26, Jesus says "If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple." However we interpret Jesus' command to "hate" our relatives, I can be certain He doesn't mean that we are supposed to desire their eternal damnation.

Yet people read Romans 9:13 and say that it's obvious that God wanted Esau to be condemned to hell forever. Why? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

In verse 12, Paul quotes Genesis 25:23 which says "the older shall serve the younger." You don't spell salvation s-e-r-v-i-c-e. Why then do people read this and think that the older one goes to hell whereas the younger one goes to heaven? Because they are taught beforehand to read the passage through a Calvinistic lens.

What if that verse is meant to be taken literally? What if, during the eschaton, Esau and his descendants will be raised from the dead and forced to be the slaves of the Jacob and his descendants? Doesn't that scenario fit more naturally with the text?

Keep in mind that Paul's discussion of election does not end with chapter 9...it continues for three chapters. In chapter 11:30-32, Paul gives us the real reason that God chooses some for favor in this lifetime while "hating" others: "For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all."

When does this "mercy on all" happen? Since Paul says that the Jews in chapter 9 were given over to disobedience so that his Gentile audience might obtain mercy, when will those disobedient Jews find themselves to be objects of God's mercy? Paul tells us:

“The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”


That's the eschaton!

Strong's Concordance
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 comparative basis); hence, denounce; to love someone or something less than someone (something) else, i.e. to renounce one choice in favor of another.

to detest means intense dislike for someone.

What does it mean to detest something?

transitive verb. 1 : to feel intense and often violent antipathy toward : loathe detests politics They seem to truly detest each other. 2 obsolete : curse, denounce.

hope this helps !!!
 

TomFL

Well-known member
Sure it does, Rom 9:11

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)
That says nothing at all about salvation or reprobation

that was an election to service

God chose a nation through which he would bring firth messiah and through whom all nations would be blessed'

In any case all Israel (Jacob) was not saved

and we have no information all Edom (Esau) was lost

Gen. 25:23 —KJV
“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.”

';
 
Top