Why did God hate Esau?

You understand that you don't understand Paul's context, right? You just invented your own context, didn't you? Where does it say any of this not only in where Paul speaks of Jacob and Isaac, but in this entire passage where the context is that God will have mercy upon whom HE HIMSELF decides to have mercy, and He will harden those whom HE HIMSELF decides to harden. I'm not seeing any of what you said above in this section at all. If you can't get the context of the passage, you aren't going to understand the passage properly. Here is what Paul said in regards to Jacob and Esau, once again, and if I could, I would turn the volume up higher so you hear it this time.

"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"

Can you tell me where, in the statement above, can you find:

You see, there is a context to this whole passage, into which Paul dropped the verses above. What you are saying that the passage is saying, finds no place within the context of the passage here. You can't remove a few verses from this section, mash them with verses from a whole different part of the book, and say they are saying the same thing. Paul used the prophecy to make a point, and you are denying God His point. The point in terms of election is that that God made His choice between Jacob and Esau, a. before the twins were born and b. before they had done anything good or bad, and He did this that His purpose in election might stand. Remember God is unchanging. So for God, in election, there is one standard, in everything that God chooses, and that is that it is not by works (so nothing we do), but by Him who calls. So, God choosing Jacob over Esau, Israel over Edom, Judah over Israel, Israel over Pharaoh, believers over unbelievers... it does not matter. His purpose in election stands across the board. Not by works, but by Him who calls. This fits in the overarching context of this passage which is God hardens whom He wills to harden, and He has mercy upon whom He wills to have mercy. It is not by works, but by Him who calls. Did Pharaoh in and of himself do something that caused God to decide to crush Him, or had God planned long ago to send Joseph to Egypt, to be followed by Jacob and family, and then chose to rescue Israel from Egypt and glorify himself through the utter humiliation of Pharaoh and Egypt, and the pouring out of wrath upon Pharaoh and Egypt? God Himself said it was so He would be glorified in the surrounding nations. He also said that He didn't choose Israel for some incredible special reason, like Israel being a great nation, or that they themselves, in and of themselves, were so incredible. He said they were small and insignificant, yet He still chose them, out of all the great nations of the world surrounding them. It is in the New Testament that we find out that it was for the sake of the forefathers. (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc.) Even so, having the whole record of the Old Testament, we see it as well, since we have the whole story from Abraham on up. The Jews at the time had no idea.

The argument is that it states that any election is unconditional. God is unchanging, and Paul says that God's purpose in election stands. You fight against God. No one says you have to be a Calvinist, but you should at least understand this. There are people who believe these things, yet have no desire to be identified with calvinists.
Really then why were Israelites who were elect cutoff

Romans 9:30–32 (KJV 1900) — 30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. 31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

Romans 11:17–23 (KJV 1900) — 17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; 18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. 19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. 20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: 21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. 22 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. 23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
 
The whole story is there is no mention of unconditional election to salvation
Ah, you are just ignoring the context, and replacing it with your own false reality. You know, the Bible never mentions the trinity, yet you accept that. However, it can be seen implicitly just like unconditional election. If you claim that unconditional election is not there, then by definition, you must deny the trinity, for all the hypocrisy.
 
Ah, you are just ignoring the context, and replacing it with your own false reality. You know, the Bible never mentions the trinity, yet you accept that. However, it can be seen implicitly just like unconditional election. If you claim that unconditional election is not there, then by definition, you must deny the trinity, for all the hypocrisy.
Nothing there supports your claim

You have failed to show unconditional election to salvation in Romans 9

and in fact it actually refutes it

Romans 9:29–32 (KJV 1900) — 29 And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha. 30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. 31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

Romans 11:19–24 (KJV 1900) — 19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. 20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: 21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. 22 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. 23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again. 24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?

It was unbelief not unconditional election which cut them off

and it would be belief which would graft them back in again not unconditional election
 
Really then why were Israelites who were elect cutoff

Romans 9:30–32 (KJV 1900) — 30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. 31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

Romans 11:17–23 (KJV 1900) — 17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; 18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. 19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. 20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: 21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. 22 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. 23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
They weren't cut off. They were the remnant that God presented to Jeremiah as those who had not bowed the knee to Ba'al and remained faithful to God, because... GOD had set them aside. It didn't happen by chance. God kept them faithful to Him because they were His elect in Israel. Have you not learned anything from Paul, who said that not all who are of Israel, are of Israel? (The true Israel.) That the circumcision of the flesh is not the same as circumcision of the heart? There is nothing here that supports what you are saying. There are times when you force a context on verses, and ignore the affect the verses have on the underlying context of scripture, and times when you divorce verses from the Bible as a whole. You present these verses completely isolated from the rest of scripture. You do this often. The reason why the trinity can be implicitly found in scripture is because all of scripture is taken into account. The reason why you can't find the truth of God's unconditional election is because you won't take all of scripture into account. Let's see if you remember something I have mentioned quite a few times in the past. Did God have to save Noah and family, and if not, did He have to save anyone? If you take the whole scripture together, you can give the answer and explain.
 
They weren't cut off. They were the remnant that God presented to Jeremiah as those who had not bowed the knee to Ba'al and remained faithful to God, because... GOD had set them aside. It didn't happen by chance. God kept them faithful to Him because they were His elect in Israel. Have you not learned anything from Paul, who said that not all who are of Israel, are of Israel? (The true Israel.) That the circumcision of the flesh is not the same as circumcision of the heart? There is nothing here that supports what you are saying. There are times when you force a context on verses, and ignore the affect the verses have on the underlying context of scripture, and times when you divorce verses from the Bible as a whole. You present these verses completely isolated from the rest of scripture. You do this often. The reason why the trinity can be implicitly found in scripture is because all of scripture is taken into account. The reason why you can't find the truth of God's unconditional election is because you won't take all of scripture into account. Let's see if you remember something I have mentioned quite a few times in the past. Did God have to save Noah and family, and if not, did He have to save anyone? If you take the whole scripture together, you can give the answer and explain.
did you read

And if some of the branches be broken off,

For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
 
did you read

And if some of the branches be broken off,

For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
Apparently you didn't understand. And you repeated what I said in your remark by saying If SOME of the branches, so...well, rationally speaking, not ALL were cut off. Which were not cut off? The elect, the remnant, those who did not turn from God. It isn't that difficult to understand. If you read and understood what I wrote, you would know this and you would have actually tried to come up with an actual response. Even Paul said not all who are Israel are of Israel. Circumcision is of the heart, not of the flesh. There was the fleshy Israel of the Abrahamic/Mosaic covenants, and the spiritual Israel, the elect of God chosen to salvation. Those who would not turn their back on God, because God held on to them/chose them.

I notice you couldn't answer the last questions that I posted, though that is not a surprise.
 
Back
Top