IF GOD SO LOVED "EVERYONE", THEN WHY DID HE HATE ESAU?

[Eddie Ramos]

It seems like John 3:16 is by far the most widely memorized verse among people who know anything about the Bible because it speaks about God loving the world. While this verse may seem like "good news" to everyone who reads it, it does not stand alone from the rest of the scriptures. No verse does.

So, as most people are glad to memorize that verse, what happens when they come across a verse like this?:

Romans 9:13 (KJV) 13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

Malachi 1:2-3 (KJV)
2 I have loved you, saith the LORD.
Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us?
Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the LORD:
yet I loved Jacob,
3 And I hated Esau,
and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.

Psalms 5:5 (KJV)
5 The foolish shall not stand in thy sight:
thou hatest all workers of iniquity.

Psalms 11:5 (KJV)
5 The LORD trieth the righteous:
but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.

Psalms 5:6 (KJV)
6 Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing:
the LORD will abhor the bloody and deceitful man.

How does John 3:16 look in light of these passages? Did God change? No, God does not change (Malachi 3:6). This teaches us that we can't just focus on John 3:16 and conclude that God's love for the world, in the giving of his Son, is actually not referring to every individual in the world (because there are passages that tell us about God hating others), but rather John 3:16 is referring to certain people within the world. These certain people are also known as God's beloved which means to be loved.

1 John 4:10-11 (KJV) 10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. 11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.

The beloved are thise who were chosen for salvation, those who were called to be saints.

Romans 1:7 (KJV) 7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

My question for this thread is: Can you see that the Bible, on one hand, speaks of God's love in conjunction with those whose sins were laid on Christ? And on the other hand, can you see that those who were hated, are those whose sins were not laid upon Christ? This is what it means to be hated. It means that you have to pay for your own sins by your own death.

[2ndpillar2]

[Replying to 2ndpillar2 in post #112]

Why is it a sin to give up your birthright (whatever that is) for soup?

Essau's tongue was in his cheek with respect to his promise to Jacob, such as he was making a false witness, and he did not intend to let the blessing of Isaac go to Jacob and was dumbfounded when Jacob's mother tricked the bind Isaac into blessing Jacob instead of Essau.

Stil was not a sin to technically give up a birthright (whatever that is) for a pot of soup. Wise? No. A sin? Not in any passage we read of.

And if we look at the lives of those two men, Esau seemed to be blessed. Jacob had a very rough life, not one to be envied if blessings, comfort and ease are of value.

The land of Edom, the land of Essau, is in southern Jordan, and the home of Islamist, such as those in Gaza, who think raping and killing of innocents is a good thing, sanctioned by Allah, according to the Koran, and their leaders vow to continue such measures as long as they are able. Muslim's claim to be sons of Ishmail, but their Islamic narrative states that there is a 26 generational gap in the record. The book of Obadiah indicates that those living in the land of Edom, are of Essau, and I don't consider the Islamist blessed in any decree. The Islamist claim Ishmael as their father, because they know the "book of the people/Jews" states that Essau/Edom has a bad ending. Their bad ending is upon them, whereas Israel/Jacob, is looking towards a good ending (Ezekiel 37), after a chastening come to God moment (Jeremiah 30:10-11).

[Mae von H]

[Replying to 2ndpillar2 in post #112]

Why is it a sin to give up your birthright (whatever that is) for soup?

Essau's tongue was in his cheek with respect to his promise to Jacob, such as he was making a false witness, and he did not intend to let the blessing of Isaac go to Jacob and was dumbfounded when Jacob's mother tricked the bind Isaac into blessing Jacob instead of Essau.

Stil was not a sin to technically give up a birthright (whatever that is) for a pot of soup. Wise? No. A sin? Not in any passage we read of.

And if we look at the lives of those two men, Esau seemed to be blessed. Jacob had a very rough life, not one to be envied if blessings, comfort and ease are of value.

The land of Edom, the land of Essau, is in southern Jordan, and the home of Islamist, such as those in Gaza, who think raping and killing of innocents is a good thing, sanctioned by Allah, according to the Koran, and their leaders vow to continue such measures as long as they are able. Muslim's claim to be sons of Ishmail, but their Islamic narrative states that there is a 26 generational gap in the record. The book of Obadiah indicates that those living in the land of Edom, are of Essau, and I don't consider the Islamist blessed in any decree. The Islamist claim Ishmael as their father, because they know the "book of the people/Jews" states that Essau/Edom has a bad ending. Their bad ending is upon them, whereas Israel/Jacob, is looking towards a good ending (Ezekiel 37), after a chastening come to God moment (Jeremiah 30:10-11).

None of that has anything to do with the discussion or the OP. Many sentences but still adds nothing to the discussion.

[2ndpillar2]

[Replying to 2ndpillar2 in post #112]

Why is it a sin to give up your birthright (whatever that is) for soup?

Essau's tongue was in his cheek with respect to his promise to Jacob, such as he was making a false witness, and he did not intend to let the blessing of Isaac go to Jacob and was dumbfounded when Jacob's mother tricked the bind Isaac into blessing Jacob instead of Essau.

Stil was not a sin to technically give up a birthright (whatever that is) for a pot of soup. Wise? No. A sin? Not in any passage we read of.

And if we look at the lives of those two men, Esau seemed to be blessed. Jacob had a very rough life, not one to be envied if blessings, comfort and ease are of value.

The land of Edom, the land of Essau, is in southern Jordan, and the home of Islamist, such as those in Gaza, who think raping and killing of innocents is a good thing, sanctioned by Allah, according to the Koran, and their leaders vow to continue such measures as long as they are able. Muslim's claim to be sons of Ishmail, but their Islamic narrative states that there is a 26 generational gap in the record. The book of Obadiah indicates that those living in the land of Edom, are of Essau, and I don't consider the Islamist blessed in any decree. The Islamist claim Ishmael as their father, because they know the "book of the people/Jews" states that Essau/Edom has a bad ending. Their bad ending is upon them, whereas Israel/Jacob, is looking towards a good ending (Ezekiel 37), after a chastening come to God moment (Jeremiah 30:10-11).

None of that has anything to do with the discussion or the OP. Many sentences but still adds nothing to the discussion.

It defines Edom of today, and their circumstances, whereas it responds to your warped views on Jacob and Essau. To each his own, but God wishes everyone to move from lawlessness/wickedness, to righteousness. (Ezekiel 33:19) Everyone should hear the truth. Now what they do with it is another matter.

Ezekiel 33:19 But when the wicked turns from his wickedness and practices justice and righteousness, he will live by them

[2ndpillar2]

[Replying to 2ndpillar2 in post #116]

The OP is a pretty interesting challenge to that theology that insists God hates babies or some adults for no reason. Since this is their firm position, there really can’t be any reasonable answer.

It is, however, a reason why some atheists think God is either not there or very cruel for hating Esau from birth. It is not the record of the Bible, not of the history of Esau or God, but when one has selected a preferred theology instead of the truth, not even the Holy Spirit can break through that shield.

The truth is God loved Esau same as every man and gave him land and offspring and protected them for a time….until they started doing grave wrong to people.

Atheists have the right to believe what they may. If they want to choose Marx as their Saviour, and worship Satan, and become Progressive Marxist, well, that is their choice if they live in the U.S. Essau, as a son of Isaac, was given latitude to have land and 12 children. The blessing of Isaac on Jacob was greater than what given to Essau. 12 children is not always a blessing, and the land given, a place mostly for jackals, is not always the best of blessings. https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r ... &FORM=VIRE
The land of Edom included Petra, the birthplace of the of the god known as Allah, and the birth place of the Muslim narrative, which came from the religion of the Nabateans, which revolved around the gods of the Nabatean world traders.

Ezekiel 35:15
15 Because you rejoiced when the inheritance of Israel became desolate, that is how I will treat you. You will be desolate, Mount Seir, you and all of Edom. Then they will know that I am the LORD.’ ”

Amos 1:11
11 This is what the LORD says: “For three sins of Edom, even for four, I will not relent. Because he pursued his brother with a sword and slaughtered the women of the land, because his anger raged continually and his fury flamed unchecked,

[Mae von H]

[Replying to 2ndpillar2 in post #112]

Why is it a sin to give up your birthright (whatever that is) for soup?

Essau's tongue was in his cheek with respect to his promise to Jacob, such as he was making a false witness, and he did not intend to let the blessing of Isaac go to Jacob and was dumbfounded when Jacob's mother tricked the bind Isaac into blessing Jacob instead of Essau.

Stil was not a sin to technically give up a birthright (whatever that is) for a pot of soup. Wise? No. A sin? Not in any passage we read of.

And if we look at the lives of those two men, Esau seemed to be blessed. Jacob had a very rough life, not one to be envied if blessings, comfort and ease are of value.

The land of Edom, the land of Essau, is in southern Jordan, and the home of Islamist, such as those in Gaza, who think raping and killing of innocents is a good thing, sanctioned by Allah, according to the Koran, and their leaders vow to continue such measures as long as they are able. Muslim's claim to be sons of Ishmail, but their Islamic narrative states that there is a 26 generational gap in the record. The book of Obadiah indicates that those living in the land of Edom, are of Essau, and I don't consider the Islamist blessed in any decree. The Islamist claim Ishmael as their father, because they know the "book of the people/Jews" states that Essau/Edom has a bad ending. Their bad ending is upon them, whereas Israel/Jacob, is looking towards a good ending (Ezekiel 37), after a chastening come to God moment (Jeremiah 30:10-11).

None of that has anything to do with the discussion or the OP. Many sentences but still adds nothing to the discussion.

It defines Edom of today, and their circumstances, whereas it responds to your warped views on Jacob and Essau. To each his own, but God wishes everyone to move from lawlessness/wickedness, to righteousness. (Ezekiel 33:19) Everyone should hear the truth. Now what they do with it is another matter.

Ezekiel 33:19 But when the wicked turns from his wickedness and practices justice and righteousness, he will live by them

That is such a strange answer. You admit the scripture you quote is only about the generations living millennia after the men Jacob and Esau, a view I have delineated, and then you disagree with you.

[Mae von H]

[Replying to 2ndpillar2 in post #116]

The OP is a pretty interesting challenge to that theology that insists God hates babies or some adults for no reason. Since this is their firm position, there really can’t be any reasonable answer.

It is, however, a reason why some atheists think God is either not there or very cruel for hating Esau from birth. It is not the record of the Bible, not of the history of Esau or God, but when one has selected a preferred theology instead of the truth, not even the Holy Spirit can break through that shield.

The truth is God loved Esau same as every man and gave him land and offspring and protected them for a time….until they started doing grave wrong to people.

Atheists have the right to believe what they may. If they want to choose Marx as their Saviour, and worship Satan, and become Progressive Marxist, well, that is their choice if they live in the U.S. Essau, as a son of Isaac, was given latitude to have land and 12 children. The blessing of Isaac on Jacob was greater than what given to Essau. 12 children is not always a blessing, and the land given, a place mostly for jackals, is not always the best of blessings. https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r ... &FORM=VIRE
The land of Edom included Petra, the birthplace of the of the god known as Allah, and the birth place of the Muslim narrative, which came from the religion of the Nabateans, which revolved around the gods of the Nabatean world traders.

Ezekiel 35:15
15 Because you rejoiced when the inheritance of Israel became desolate, that is how I will treat you. You will be desolate, Mount Seir, you and all of Edom. Then they will know that I am the LORD.’ ”

Amos 1:11
11 This is what the LORD says: “For three sins of Edom, even for four, I will not relent. Because he pursued his brother with a sword and slaughtered the women of the land, because his anger raged continually and his fury flamed unchecked,

Perhaps a difference is that I care for atheists. I’m sorry when believers insist that God is hard and cruel and it’s just tough. My heart is not hardened towards them.It matters to me what they think and feel.

[2ndpillar2]

[Replying to 2ndpillar2 in post #112]

Why is it a sin to give up your birthright (whatever that is) for soup?

Essau's tongue was in his cheek with respect to his promise to Jacob, such as he was making a false witness, and he did not intend to let the blessing of Isaac go to Jacob and was dumbfounded when Jacob's mother tricked the bind Isaac into blessing Jacob instead of Essau.

Stil was not a sin to technically give up a birthright (whatever that is) for a pot of soup. Wise? No. A sin? Not in any passage we read of.

And if we look at the lives of those two men, Esau seemed to be blessed. Jacob had a very rough life, not one to be envied if blessings, comfort and ease are of value.

The land of Edom, the land of Essau, is in southern Jordan, and the home of Islamist, such as those in Gaza, who think raping and killing of innocents is a good thing, sanctioned by Allah, according to the Koran, and their leaders vow to continue such measures as long as they are able. Muslim's claim to be sons of Ishmail, but their Islamic narrative states that there is a 26 generational gap in the record. The book of Obadiah indicates that those living in the land of Edom, are of Essau, and I don't consider the Islamist blessed in any decree. The Islamist claim Ishmael as their father, because they know the "book of the people/Jews" states that Essau/Edom has a bad ending. Their bad ending is upon them, whereas Israel/Jacob, is looking towards a good ending (Ezekiel 37), after a chastening come to God moment (Jeremiah 30:10-11).

None of that has anything to do with the discussion or the OP. Many sentences but still adds nothing to the discussion.

It defines Edom of today, and their circumstances, whereas it responds to your warped views on Jacob and Essau. To each his own, but God wishes everyone to move from lawlessness/wickedness, to righteousness. (Ezekiel 33:19) Everyone should hear the truth. Now what they do with it is another matter.

Ezekiel 33:19 But when the wicked turns from his wickedness and practices justice and righteousness, he will live by them

That is such a strange answer. You admit the scripture you quote is only about the generations living millennia after the men Jacob and Esau, a view I have delineated, and then you disagree with you.

Ezekiel 33:19 is about all men at all times, including today. God sent Noah, Jonah, as well as all the prophets to turn men away from lawlessness/wickedness. As for atheist, they are their own subjective law makers, and apparently deny that there is a lawgiver. If they can keep God's Commandments, and not believe there is a lawgiver, or higher power, more power to them, but I am not going to hold my breath. Atheist, along with most "Christians", are lost souls, and are lonely people. They wind up following false prophets and live with false hopes, while claiming salvation and a heaven on earth, while living in hell, as among the walking dead. Their claims are a lie, and lies are the wide path to destruction, both with regard to mind and soul. Without their cats, fawning love for food, well, they don't have much.

[Eddie Ramos]

[Replying to Eddie Ramos in post #1]

.......So, dear audience, grab your theological popcorn and fasten your celestial seatbelts. The divine comedy unfolds, leaving us pondering the cosmic dance of love and hate in the celestial theater of salvation.

I would commend you as a playwright, but since you are doing it with the Bible, then it's more of a mockery of God's Word. Nothing about the scriptures is comedy, and the fact that both love and hatred are spoken about in regards to individuals, seems like a pretty topic of discussion which I was able to have with a few people here.

And since you didn't really bring anything scriptural to the table that hasn't already been discussed, then I'm not sure what else to say.

Ephesians 5:3–4 (KJV 1900)
But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints; 4 Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.

[Eddie Ramos]

[Replying to Eddie Ramos in post #1]

Jehovah loved Esau LESS. That is what "hate" means in many instances. Jehovah didn't hate Esau in the way that we usually think of "hate."

It's been some time since I've gone through the posts on this thread, so if I have neglected to answer your comment I apologize.

SInce tGod is the one who chose to use the word "hated" when referring to Esau as opposed to the word "loved" when referring to Jacob, we must always ask ourselves why God did that. And as you can see in this thread, many have arrived at a conclusion (much like yours) by reading different places in the Bible where the same word "hated" is used. And when they arrive at the passage that says that Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah, and that God saw that Leah was hated, then they are satisfied with what they have found and stop looking for further confirmation of their understanding. In other words, they found what they were hoping to find all along and are satisfied with that one passage. But that is not how true Bible study is done. We must be wiling to look at every example of the scriptures in order to be sure that our initial conclusion is still correct and in harmony with the rest of the scriptures.

Genesis 29:31 (KJV 1900)
And when the LORD saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb: but Rachel was barren.

How Jacob historically felt about Leah is not the foucus of the passage here, it's the fact that God stated that Leah was hated. And since the beginning of my thread I have stated that to be hated meat that Christ had not made payment for sins on your behalf. Inversely, to be loved (like Jacob was) meant that Christ did indeed pay for your sins. In other words, Jacob and Esau represent 2 nations (Gen 25:23) and not just 2 historical nations, but also 2 spiritual nations. The nation of God made up of theose who are truly saved (the holy nation) and the nation of the wicked (typified by Babylon).

And in the Bible, God established a principle of thirds, where he divides the population of the whole world into thirds:

Zechariah 13:8–9 (KJV 1900)
And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the LORD,
Two parts therein shall be cut off and die;
But the third shall be left therein.
9  And I will bring the third part through the fire,
And will refine them as silver is refined,
And will try them as gold is tried:
They shall call on my name, and I will hear them:
I will say, It is my people:
And they shall say, The LORD is my God.

So, spiritually, one third of the earth are referred to as the people of God and the remaining two-thirds are killed. This means that the two-thirds are paynig for their own sins with their own death as the law of God requires (Rom 6:23). Now, I'd like to show you the relevance this has to the factthat Leah was said by God to be hated. IF being hated represents that Christ did not pay for your sins and the fact that those who are found guilty for their own sins are labeled as two-thirds, then take a look at another way in which God confirms for us that we are on the right path in our understanding.

If you count how many total children Rachel and Leah had while Jacob was working for their father Laban, they total 12 and became the 12 tribes of Israel. BUt if you look closer and count how many were attibuted to Rachel and how many were attributed to Leah, youowill see that Rachel (the one who was loved) had 4 sons while Leah (the one who was hated) had 8. To say it another way, Rachel had one-third and Leah two-thrids. The one that was loved and represented salvation is linked with one third, while the one who was hated and represented condemnation is linked with two-thirds. This is not coincidence, nothing in the Bible is. And if you take the time to see just how many times God uses the one-third two-thirds principle to paint the exact same picture, you will see that it all continues to harmonize with the conclusion that states that Jacob represents all those who were loved by God and had their sins paid for, while Esau represents all those who did not have their sins paid for by Christ and have to justly pay for their own sins by their own death. This is what it means to be hated.

[Eddie Ramos]

[Replying to 2ndpillar2 in post #112]

Why is it a sin to give up your birthright (whatever that is) for soup?

The birthright, or the right of the firstborn, represents Christ.

Exodus 4:22 (KJV 1900)
And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn:

Historically, Israel was the nation that was in captivity, but they resrpesent the Lord Jesus Christ. As God recounts this event of the Exodus in the book of Hosea, he mentions Israel being called out of Egypt once again, but notice that in verse 1, God is referring to Israel as a single individual while in verse 2 he refers to Israel pluraly as the people.

Hosea 11:1 (KJV 1900)
When Israel was a child, then I loved him,
And called my son out of Egypt.

And it's the New Testament which confirms for us that we have a correct understanding of this.

Matthew 2:15 (KJV 1900)
And (Jesus) was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.

So, rejecting the birthright is like rejecting Christ. So we can see just how sinful that is.

Hebrews 12:16–17 (KJV 1900)
Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright. 17 For ye know how that afterward (meaning, when his father Isaac was about to die), when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.

The firstborn son was entitled to the right of the firstborn (which Esau despised by selling it) as well as the blessing of the firstborn (which Jacob tricked his father to obtain). BUt before Esau ever did anything good or evil in his life, God had already decreed that he would Love Jacob and hate Esau. So, the unfolding of all these events we read about in the Bible as pertaining to Esau, are a result of God's sovereign choice to love one and hate the other (meaning not love him).

Romans 9:11–16 (KJV 1900)
(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;) 12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. 13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. 15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. 16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.