 |
| The election of Jacob over Esau: When did it happen? In eternity or when they were in their mother's womb? |
https://www.facebook.com/sing.f.lau/posts/10201255108475236
December
30, 2013
#Esau_and_Jacob_and_their_election
#The_Godly_line
An
interesting thought cross my mind as a result of a good question asked by a
Brother.
What
do you think?
A
brother inquired:
"But
then I ponder aloud.....Esau is born under the roof of Issac, the seed of the
godly line (is the doctrine of the godly line still applicable here now?) and
my question, "is Esau saved unto eternity?..... "
======
Brother,
when I say I love good questions, it is not because I have all the answers. It
is because it makes me study the Scriptures again.
Your
question about the godly line is very interesting - "is the doctrine of
the godly line still applicable here now?"
I
understand the "godly line" as a strict reference to that very narrow
genealogical line that connects Jesus the Son of God back to Adam the son of
God, Luke 3:38. [I believe the "godly line", strictly speaking,
terminated at the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.] In that "godly
line," each link (each individual, like Jacob in that "godly line) may
have many sons and daughters but only one specific male offspring of God's OWN
SOVEREIGN and GRACIOUS CHOICE carried on the line until it terminated at Jesus
the Christ. The rest of the offspring (whether they were among God's elect or
not, are not the focus of the biblical account, except for the descendants
of the chosen nation of Israel.
In
human tradition, it is the eldest male seed that carries on the line. In Divine
Providence, it is the one by God's sovereign choice - the human choice is
bypassed to emphasize the free and sovereign grace of God.
Perhaps
we should see the case of Esau and Jacob from that light... in the CONTEXT of
election to be the NEXT LINK in the "godly line", and NOT in the
context of election unto eternal salvation. As far as Esau's right to be the
link that continued the "godly line" he was rejected of God. That
much is clear. However, we so often see the matter from the perspective of eternal
salvation. Seeing the case from the
latter perspective CHANGE the whole issue completely.
Is
Esau saved unto eternity? I don't know. From what I read from the biblical account,
Esau is no worse than Jacob; in fact, he was put in much favourable light. Jacob
was a schemer and deceiver nearly all his life!!! Esau has his grievous faults.
Esau's
EXCLUSION from being a link in that "godly line" is OFTEN CARELESSLY
equated as Esau's EXCLUSION from the election unto eternal salvation. Those who
advocate the latter need to prove it from the Scriptures.
Well,
I thank you for asking the question and making me think on this matter this
morning. THANKS.
=====
Adam
Wells
Bro
Sing, if we view Rom 9 and the exclusion of Esau as a non-eternal matter, then
consistency would demand that we also view the election mentioned there as a
non-eternal matter. There are those who do teach it that way and see it only as
the election of nations (from which the redeemer would come) and not of
individuals. Is this what you are trying to say?
Charles
Page
"Esau's
EXCLUSION from being a link in that "godly line" is OFTEN CARELESSLY
equated as Esau's EXCLUSION from the election unto eternal salvation."
The
only thing that God states about Esau before they were born is that the older will
serve the younger. There is no reprobation of Esau in that only a prophetic
statement. It has nothing to do with God saying he hates Esau and loves Jacob.
This
is clearly eternal salvation and temporal salvation demonstrated in this
Genesis account. The statement of God loving Jacob and hating Esau is the
response of God to their respective "lifestyle conversions"
In
fact, as you have stated Sing, this love for Jacob is perhaps a tongue-in-cheek
statement from God saying "I could just as well love Esau and hate
Jacob!"
It has nothing to do with election as is so popularly promoted. Praise the Lord, they both are elect! Isn't that good news?
Charles
Page
Hosea
says Jacob wept to get his way with angels and God had a controversy with him
over that!
Sing
F Lau
Bro
Adam, I believe in Rom 9-11, Apostle Paul is dealing with a deep mystery WHY
many of God's children (therefore regenerated elect) among the Jews were
unbelieving concerning the gospel, THAT IS, why only a remnant among them was
chosen to enter into the gospel rest. It was in that context, that Paul
marshalled in the appropriate example of Esau and Jacob. Paul was not dealing
with the non-elect among the Jews.
Dellis
Layne Worsham Sr.
From
Jacob came the Godly line of Judah?
Because
Esau was hated, did this mean, he and the continuing line after him were hated?
Because Esau was hated, does this mean, he couldn't be saved?
Sing
F Lau
Bro
Peter, if "saved by grace through faith" you mean eternal salvation
freely bestowed upon us, based solely upon the faithfulness/fidelity of Christ
work of redemption, when we were dead in trespasses and sins, then I concur
with you.
What
were the promises implied, and of what did he disqualify himself? Thanks.
[Peter deleted his comment!!!]
Adam
Wells
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, 3And I hated Esau, and
laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.
4Whereas Edom saith, We are impoverished, but we will return and build the
desolate places; thus saith the LORD of hosts, They shall build, but I will
throw down; and they shall call them, The border of wickedness, and, The people
against whom the LORD hath indignation for ever. 5And your eyes shall see, and
ye shall say, The LORD will be magnified from the border of Israel. - Mal 1:2-5
Sing
F Lau
Brother
Dellis, Jacob and Judah (both being not firstborn of their fathers!) - were
both individual links IN the ONE godly line that ran from Adam to Jesus.
Esau
was "hated" only in the sense that his birthright as the first born
was bypassed by God's sovereign purpose.
"I hated Esau" is often mistakenly understood as him being consigned to eternal damnation.
Sing
F Lau
Bro
Adam, that's a good passage. The intent and focus of the passage is to point
out, how DESPITE being not the firstborn, Jacob the younger brother was so loved
by God... a fact that greatly aggravates the ungratefulness of Jacob.
Isaac
blessed Jacob in this manner:
28
Therefore God give thee of the dew of heaven, and the fatness of the earth, and
plenty of corn and wine:
29 Let people serve thee, and nations bow down to thee: be lord over thy brethren, and let thy mother’s sons bow down to thee: cursed be every one that curseth thee, and blessed be he that blesseth thee.
Isaac
blessed Esau in this manner:
39
And Isaac his father answered and said unto him, Behold, thy dwelling shall be
the fatness of the earth, and of the dew of heaven from above;
40
And by thy sword shalt thou live, and shalt serve thy brother; and it shall
come to pass when thou shalt have the dominion, that thou shalt break his yoke
from off thy neck.
Bryant
Cutler
Brother
Sing, I see from your post above that you are not sure if Esau is elect or
not... But I say unto you does the Lord hate his elect? It is clear from Paul
in Romans and from Malachi that Esau was not saved. I do not believe that being
born into a family is any assurance of salvation ever. (Sorry, using speech to
text on my tablet... Didn't notice the misspellings)
Sing
F Lau
Brother
Bryant, "Does
the Lord hate His elect?"
That's
a very interesting question, worthy of careful consideration.
It
depends on what you mean by that.
Is
God's sovereignly PREVENTING some of His children from seeing the gospel truth
in Jesus Christ an instant of hating the elect? I inquire to understand what
you are saying.
Rom
11:
29
For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
30
For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy
through their unbelief:
31
Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may
obtain mercy.
32
For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
Is
depriving the firstborn of his birthright an instant of God "hating"
Esau?
Or
did the hating of Esau lie in God's election of Jacob to eternal salvation, and
rejection of Esau unto eternal damnation?
Did that election take place in eternity, or in time?
Will you tell us?
I'm asking to learn.
Adam
Wells
One
can easily get confused in all the twists and turns of a conversation. I agree
that Rom 11 deals with the unbelief of the elect Jews which you quoted above,
not chapter 10. Let me ask a plain question so as to understand more clearly
what you have written. Does Rom 9 teach that the man Jacob was elected for
eternal salvation? (Predestination) or Does it teach that God's election of
Jacob merely signified that the Chosen One would be born from his body?
Sing
F Lau
Thanks,
I've edited the mistake.
You asked, "Does Rom 9 teach that the man Jacob was elected for eternal salvation? (Predestination) or Does it teach that God's election of Jacob merely signified that the Chosen One would be born from his body?
I
believe it is the LATTER - Jacob was elected to be the NEXT LINK in the
"godly line" that would eventually lead to the promised Messiah. So,
the election is not unto eternal salvation, but that is the most common and
popular idea).
Each
election has its own specific end, depending on the context. One of them is
election unto eternal salvation.
Romans
9
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;)
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.
Note
a few things:
-
children not yet born, BUT ALREADY conceived in the womb when the said election
took place... the preeminence of the younger over the elder!
-
the purpose of God according to THAT election might stand, superseding the
purpose of man whether the 1st born has preeminence.
-
the implication of that election is specifically this: the elder shall serve
the younger, and NOT the elder shall be bypassed in eternal salvation but the
younger chosen unto eternal salvation.
-
There is no unrighteousness with God in electing the younger to have
preeminence over the firstborn!!!
Sing
F Lau
Bro
Eng Sun, concerning
Judas Iscariot... you asked "Is the son of perdition, Judas Iscariot
seated amongst the godly cloud of witnesses that cheer every step we take on
earth? " Your question is obviously rhetorical, requiring a negative
answer.
Judas
Iscariot is, humanly speaking, one of the most tragic cases... an APOSTLE who
betrayed his Lord. Why? Because of disillusionment based on some ignorant and
erroneous ideas... that is, Jesus came to usher in an earthly kingdom of which
Judas would become the Finance Minister!!! Judas may be a traitor ... I fear
that there are worse traitors than Judas AMONG God's children... who betray
Jesus in a more sophisticated way... for example, those who are so learned and
enlightened (like many theologians and doctors of divinity) but teaching errors
that injure the Person and Name of our blessed Lord Jesus Christ.
"The
son of perdition" is a very strong term... Joh 17:12 "While I was
with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I
have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the
scripture might be fulfilled."
So,
look at this verse where the term is found. Just some observations...
-
Judas was one among "them", the pronoun indicating the 12 Apostles.
-
Christ has kept THEM in God's name, them including Judas Iscariot, until the
appointed time.
-
Judas was ONE AMONG the twelve Apostles whom God has given to Christ, and he
kept them by the Father's power and authority.
-
None of the 12 apostles were lost EXCEPT Judas, the son of perdition.
-
And Judas fell from his HIGH and UNIQUE office of apostleship... thus the
strong term "THE son of perdition."
-
Judas' fall from the high and unique office of apostleship was not because
Jesus could not keep him, but was necessary so that the Scripture might be
fulfilled.
Jesus,
the all-knowing Son of God Himself picked Judas to be one of His 12 disciples.
God gave Judas to be one of Jesus' 12 Apostles.
Did
Jesus make the horrid mistake of choosing a non-elect to be his special
disciple... an Apostle?
Or
did He know all along, and picked Judas, that what had been prophesied would be
fulfilled?
Properly understanding pure grace, and the distinction between eternal salvation and temporal salvation enables a man to see things from another perspective. I'm just studying.
Hulan
Bass
Was
Judas Iscariot a child of God? Jesus stated in Matt. 26:24 that it would have
been good if he had not been born.
Sing
F Lau
Thanks,
Elder Hulan Bass.
Lots
of questions can be asked!
Mt
26:24 The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by
whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not
been born.
Please
tell, with your great mind for analysis...
-
in what sense it would have been good for Judas if he had not been born?
-
it would have been good with respect to who, himself, or others?
Is
Jesus saying that it would have been good if Judas never existed, not even
conceived, or conceived but never born to commit such heinous and treasonous
act?
But
isn't the birth of Judas, and his acts NECESSARY for the fulfilment of the
prophecy? (John 17:12)
