Jacob Loved, Esau Hated

[HammondCheese]

We're clearly not going to agree on the definition of 'hate' in these passages, so just stop...  Both of you.  We can all agree in caveman terms, "Love good.  Hate bad."

Since you focused on the phrase for the title of this thread and offered no constraint to the argument in your OP, why should we stop?

I'm making the argument that both God and Paul are speaking of two 'nations', not two 'individuals'...

I know. And as I said above, as you did not read my post... "Whenever the names Jacob and Esau are mentioned, it doesn't mean that the writer of Scripture meant "nations."

And Romans 9 itself has absolutely nothing to do with the fallacy of predestination of the individual believer, but rather sets the stage for the transition beginning in verse 30 when he brings the Gentiles into the conversation which I outlined earlier regarding 'the righteousness of faith' vs. 'the law of righteousness'.

That was the whole premise of this thread I started to address Calvinism in the first place.

Your premise was not established. If you want to constrain the discussion to only part of the context, you should have done so. Your title belies this.

My title and opening post were simply to lure Calvinists out to debate Romans 9, not start a thread to debate the definition of "hate".  After several failed attempts to discuss the context of Rom 9:13 in light of the entire chapter, I lost interest. 

Nobody could get past that single verse and the definition of "hate".  [emoji848]

I know. And as I said above, as you did not read my post... "Whenever the names Jacob and Esau are mentioned, it doesn't mean that the writer of Scripture meant "nations."

It does in Romans 9 as clearly indicated in verses 12-13, both of which tie directly to Genesis 25:23 and Malachi 1.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[Ransom]

So, that's one vote in favour of my reviving that old Romans 9 post. Anyone else?

After scouring various forums, doing my best to reconstruct it, and finally resigning myself to having to rewrite it (which isn't necessarily bad), it turns out that old post was on this forum all along and forgotten and I just stumbled on it by accident while searching for something else completely unrelated. Harumph.