Jacob and Esau why did God bless Jacob's lie

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jesus_N_Cherie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jesus_N_Cherie

Guest
I am reading the Bible to my sons who are 6, 7, & 8 years old. We have gotten to the part where Jacob bargains for Esau’s birthright, and then steals the blessing that Esau should have recieved from Isaac…
We have read that Isaac loved Esau, and Rebekah loved Jacob. And we have gotten to the point that Rebekah convinced Jacob to lie to and decieve his father in order to recieve the blessing.

This paints Rebeka and Jacob in a very bad light. How do I explain to my sons that Jacob and Rebekah were not bad people in what they did to Isaac and Esau? I think that it was all in God’s purpose, I mean, otherwise Esau should have become Isreal. I don’t believe that. So, what do I say to my boys? Any suggestions? And please, those who respond, remember the ages of my kids.

Thanks in advance
 
I can’t speak about Isaac, but Esau - remember that Esau is willing to sell his birthright (and the blessing from God that goes with it) for a measly bowl of soup! He obviously didn’t value the birthright or blessing at all to sell them so cheaply, and he certainly was very wrong to do what he did too.
 
Sin is still sin. What Rebekah and Jacob did was sinful - although mostly the sin was Rebekah’s for she told him to do everything despite his objections. Reason and revelation tell us that God abhors sin, but also time and time again God has been able to use sin and make something glorious out of it. This is yet another example. God punishes sin and we find that Jacob had to flee for his life from his brother and he certainly had more than his expected labor during his lifetime. Also, Jacob turned to the Lord after the sin and followed God faithfully.

One moral is to learn from our mistakes - Jacob made good use of his received blessings and he and his brother forgave each other later in life. Jacob made restitution to Esau as well, giving him hundreds upon hundreds of livestock, etc.
 
Note that both Jacob and Rebekah were punished. They were very close. After the lie mother and son were separated and never got to see each other again.

Also note that in faking Joseph’s death Jacob’s sons played a similar deception on him.

But as noted in Romans, God ordered all this to an ultimate good.
 
you should get the moderaters ready for battle suggestion no biblical names lies well jesus is the truth the way and the light so i suggest not
 
martreexcepteda said:
you should get the moderaters ready for battle suggestion no biblical names lies well jesus is the truth the way and the light so i suggest not
Click to expand...
WHAT? I have no idea what this message says or means. please explain…with grammar if possible.

No offense meant.
 
Jesus_N_Cherie said:
I am reading the Bible to my sons who are 6, 7, & 8 years old. We have gotten to the part where Jacob bargains for Esau’s birthright, and then steals the blessing that Esau should have recieved from Isaac…
We have read that Isaac loved Esau, and Rebekah loved Jacob. And we have gotten to the point that Rebekah convinced Jacob to lie to and decieve his father in order to recieve the blessing.

This paints Rebeka and Jacob in a very bad light. How do I explain to my sons that Jacob and Rebekah were not bad people in what they did to Isaac and Esau? I think that it was all in God’s purpose, I mean, otherwise Esau should have become Isreal. I don’t believe that. So, what do I say to my boys? Any suggestions? And please, those who respond, remember the ages of my kids.

Thanks in advance
Click to expand...
I don’t see where the lie was ever said to be good. The way I see it God was punishing Esau for his previous previous sin of selling off his birthright. God allows sins to accomplish His great and mysterious plans, but that does not mean He accepts or promotes those sins. Also, as others have pointed out, Jacob pretty much suffered hardships the rest of his life from then on.

What Rachel and Jacob did was sinful, but this sin was not grievous in light of Esau’s sin (Heb 12:16f is a good place to look).
 
Old Testament stories not meant to be taken literally. No…God doesn’t favor lying. Neither would he turn away Cain for offering Him vegetables instead of meat.
 
KingAlfred said:
Old Testament stories not meant to be taken literally. No…God doesn’t favor lying. Neither would he turn away Cain for offering Him vegetables instead of meat.
Click to expand...
They are to be taken literally unless contextual evidence suggests otherwise. This is the rule, not the exception.

Cain was turned away because of his attitude, not the mere fact it was vegetables (Gn 4:6f; 1 Jn 3:12)
 
Note that Jacob was further punished when Laban pulled the same trick on him and he ended up with Leah as his wife rather than Rachel.
 
Joe_Kelley said:
Note that Jacob was further punished when Laban pulled the same trick on him and he ended up with Leah as his wife rather than Rachel.
Click to expand...
Yes! God proves that he is the God of “what comes around, goes around”.

Notice, Leah is the older one. Jacob wants the younger one, Rachel. So he is fooled into marrying the older one - Leah. Pretty ironic for the younger brother who just stole the older brother’s birthright!

Don’t forget, Leah is Hebrew for “Cow”, while Rachel is Hebrew for “Ewe” (I believe).

Also, Jacob and Rebekah fooled Isaac with goat skins - a kid is the term used. And what do the brother’s use to fake Joseph’s death to Jacob? Goat’s Blood!

Yes, God does know how to get someone back for their trickery.
 
Catholic_Dude said:
What Rachel and Jacob did was sinful, but this sin was not grievous in light of Esau’s sin (Heb 12:16f is a good place to look).
Click to expand...
I think the lesson here is that God’s Plan for Salvation is going to succeed even if it goes through sinful people.

It’s not Jacob’s integrity and holiness that further’s God’s Plan. It’s simply God’s succeeds because God wills it.
 
Catholic_Dude said:
I don’t see where the lie was ever said to be good. The way I see it God was punishing Esau for his previous previous sin of selling off his birthright. God allows sins to accomplish His great and mysterious plans, but that does not mean He accepts or promotes those sins. Also, as others have pointed out, Jacob pretty much suffered hardships the rest of his life from then on.

What Rachel and Jacob did was sinful, but this sin was not grievous in light of Esau’s sin (Heb 12:16f is a good place to look).
Click to expand...
Thank you for the versus. I will check them out.
God bless you and yours.
 
KingAlfred said:
Old Testament stories not meant to be taken literally. No…God doesn’t favor lying. Neither would he turn away Cain for offering Him vegetables instead of meat.
Click to expand...
You are soooo wrong. If we pick and choose which stories are to be believed, it is only a matter of time before people with this attitude begin saying that the story of the Resurrection of Jesus is just a story to teach us a lesson.
YOU ARE WRONG as has been stated on the other threads.

Sorry to be ugly…as I surely have been, but I posted this thread with a desire to recieve Biblical answers to my questions. For me to tell my 6,7, & 8 year old sons that the Bible stories aren’t true would only confuse them…as you seem to be confused. How will they learn to trust the Word of God?

And just to answer your last statement, the reason Cain’s offering was rejected and Abel’s was accepted was the state of the heart of each one. Abel’s sacrifice was with love, and he gave God the best he had. Cain’s was done with anger and resentment…and God knew this.
 
Catholic_Dude said:
They are to be taken literally unless contextual evidence suggests otherwise. This is the rule, not the exception.

Cain was turned away because of his attitude, not the mere fact it was vegetables (Gn 4:6f; 1 Jn 3:12)
Click to expand...
Thank you for standing up for the Word of God. It is not so difficult to understand, if everything doesn’t have to be proven by science in todays generation in order to be accepted.
 
NotWorthy said:
I think the lesson here is that God’s Plan for Salvation is going to succeed even if it goes through sinful people.

It’s not Jacob’s integrity and holiness that further’s God’s Plan. It’s simply God’s succeeds because God wills it.
Click to expand...
thank you…another example of God can use even evil to bring about something good?

I appreciate it.
 
BTW, does Rebekah’s actions in this story remind anyone of Jesus’ parable of the unworthy servant? The one that after being caught cheating, the servant reduces others’ debts in order to get a job with his ex-benefactors.

Not the actions of Rebekah, but the lengths that she goes to in order to gain Jacob his birthright.
 
Catholic_Dude said:
They are to be taken literally unless contextual evidence suggests otherwise. This is the rule, not the exception.

Cain was turned away because of his attitude, not the mere fact it was vegetables (Gn 4:6f; 1 Jn 3:12)
Click to expand...
Yes and no. The Church doesn’t strongly promote literal interpretation. Catholic Bible studies instead emphasize the human context in which Bible contents were written. The historical OT is a large metaphor, allegory and symbol, not technical history or science. The God of the OT, in a literal sense, committed countless atrocities against the Canaanites, for example. As Christians, we can’t believe in a god like that. 🙂
 
KingAlfred said:
Yes and no. The Church doesn’t strongly promote literal interpretation.
Click to expand...
Traditionally (and still today) the Church promotes, as a rule, a literal interpretation over a largely allegorical one.
Catholic Bible studies instead emphasize the human context in which Bible contents were written.
Click to expand...
Of course we want to know the audience to which a writing is addressed to, but that says nothing about it being allegory/metaphor/etc.
The historical OT is a large metaphor, allegory and symbol, not technical history or science.
Click to expand...
It doesnt have to be technical history or science to still be taken literal. Just because the month, day and year are not listed doesnt mean the event never happened, nor does the fact a audience can only understand the events in a limited sense mean it is myth/allegory/etc.
The God of the OT, in a literal sense, committed countless atrocities against the Canaanites, for example. As Christians, we can’t believe in a god like that.
Click to expand...
Then you obviously have a low view of the Bible, for the God of the OT is the same God Catholics believe in. God allows wars/violence and sends plagues and such for just reasons, never unjust reasons, even if we have a hard time understanding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top