Jacob and Esau why did God bless Jacob's lie

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

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.

Yes I can. And, as Christians we also believe that when Christ came it was to bring mercy, forgiveness and salvation to all of mankind. It is called the New Testament. It changes the way God acts toward mankind that He had not initially chosen. What made Him change the way He acts? Jesus death on the Cross and resurrection from death. Forgiveness and Mercy flowed forth at that point from the heart of God.
And the God of the OT is still God. We should learn much from what He did in the OT. It is not symbolism, but truth in History. How much longer before you believe and preach that Jesus did not rise from the dead? Do you see where you are leading with breaking down what is to be accepted and not accepted from the Bible? Sure, you don’t see it happening now, but it will. We are called to defend and preach the word of God…not break it down to try to discredit it.

 

[Robbinson]

Note also that Jacob had a spiritual conversion when wrestling with the Lord (or with the angel of the Lord) after which point he was renamed “Israel”. You will note a marked character change from that point forward. I agree, the Jacob before that time was crafty and dishonest - but therein lies the hope for all of us. God can change us from the sinful nature, to disciples of Christ through faith.

Blessings,

Brian

 

[KingAlfred]

Traditionally (and still today) the Church promotes, as a rule, a literal interpretation over a largely allegorical one.

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.

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.

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.

If I recall, the CCC says there are three or four levels of Biblical interpretation. I’m not certain, but I think they’re literal, allegorical, symbolic and hagiographical (pertaining to the afterlife, I believe).
I get the impression the Church discreetly encourages the reader to use his own judgment in determining which levels apply to whatever parts of the Bible he’s reading. Face it – the Church does not strongly teach literal interpretation. We know that. It can’t afford to. Many passages, as you know, can easily be turned against the Church, if taken literally. For example, what about when Jesus says, “Call no man father, except God?” What about the countless Protestant assaults on Catholicism based on literal interpretations of the Bible? No…Catholic biblicism is not about literal interpretation. It’s about contextual understanding and careful, enlightened, ‘holistic’ interpretation. Lastly…no, I don’t have a low opinion of the Bible, I just don’t interpret it literally or believe it can stand on its own without the Church. A prime example remains the OT god who directly and mercilessly ordered genocide against the Canaanites. That is not the Christian God. Sorry. If Jesus had been present on or near those battlefields, He would have rushed to the site of the blood-letting and demanded His fellow Jews stop such inhumane and monstrous behavior.

 

[KingAlfred]

Note also that Jacob had a spiritual conversion when wrestling with the Lord (or with the angel of the Lord) after which point he was renamed “Israel”. You will note a marked character change from that point forward. I agree, the Jacob before that time was crafty and dishonest - but therein lies the hope for all of us. God can change us from the sinful nature, to disciples of Christ through faith.

Blessings,

Brian

Yes, Brian…through faith, not through physical wrestling matches with angels. The story is symbolic – powerful, indeed, but symbolic, nonetheless.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

If I recall, the CCC says there are three or four levels of Biblical interpretation. I’m not certain, but I think they’re literal, allegorical, symbolic and hagiographical (pertaining to the afterlife, I believe).

Sure, the point is there is the literal, and unless contextual evidence indicates otherwise literal should be assumed. When Jesus said He was the Bread of Life in John 6 the Church has always understood this to be first and foremost literal. Undermine and belittle the literal aspect of Scripture and many key teachings will be undermined as well. This attitude (while it has been on the rise over the last few decades) has been strongly condemned by Popes under the error of Modernism-Liberalism.

I get the impression the Church discreetly encourages the reader to use his own judgment in determining which levels apply to whatever parts of the Bible he’s reading.

The Bible is a deeply spiritual book, any given passage can have multiple meanings, without excluding the literal. The Church encourages all members to draw whatever they can from any given passage, provided they are not undermining a Catholic teaching in the process.

The Church lives and thrives by the words of St Augustine: The Old Testament is revealed in the New and the New Testament is hidden in the Old.
One example I really like is the Exodus from Egypt. On the literal level, the Israelites really left their former lives of bondage in Egypt. However, this also foreshadows God leading Christians out of their past lives of bondage to sin.

Face it – the Church does not strongly teach literal interpretation. We know that. It can’t afford to.

This is flatly untrue. If the Church “cannot afford to” then many of the fundamental Truths of the Catholic Faith are undermined, just the way Modernism-Liberalism intended. There is no Eucharist, no Resurrection, no Jesus, etc because those come directly from a literal reading. The traditional rule of the Catholic faith is that literal takes precedent.

Many passages, as you know, can easily be turned against the Church, if taken literally. For example, what about when Jesus says, “Call no man father, except God?”

There are exceptions to the rule, you are failing to realize that and instead are making the exceptions the rule. He was condemning a certain misuse of the title “Father” (as well as “teacher”) by the Phraisees. This can be shown by looking at other Biblical evidence, such as when people use the term “father Abraham” they were not sinning and thus “call no man father” is an exception to the rule.

What about the countless Protestant assaults on Catholicism based on literal interpretations of the Bible? No…Catholic biblicism is not about literal interpretation.

What about them? Hang around these forums enough and you will see these “assults” fall flat quite easily or are even turned right around on them. You are attacking literal withtout a solid reason for doing so.

It’s about contextual understanding and careful, enlightened, ‘holistic’ interpretation.

Amen, yet this says nothing about denigrating the literal interpretation. You have erroneously put the literal category in irreconcilable opposition to a “contextual undersanding and careful, elightened holistic interpretation.”

Lastly…no, I don’t have a low opinion of the Bible, I just don’t interpret it literally or believe it can stand on its own without the Church. A prime example remains the OT god who directly and mercilessly ordered genocide against the Canaanites. That is not the Christian God. Sorry. If Jesus had been present on or near those battlefields, He would have rushed to the site of the blood-letting and demanded His fellow Jews stop such inhumane and monstrous behavior.

The God of the OT is the SAME as that of the NT. To suggest otherwise is material heresy at the very least. God never orders “genocide” in the sense someone is killed for no just reason.

Yes, Brian…through faith, not through physical wrestling matches with angels. The story is symbolic – powerful, indeed, but symbolic, nonetheless.

It is BOTH symbolic and literal, they are not mutually exclusive.
Israel means “one who struggles with God” and during that fight Jacob had his leg dislocated (an odd thing if it was purely symbolic).

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Note also that Jacob had a spiritual conversion when wrestling with the Lord (or with the angel of the Lord) after which point he was renamed “Israel”. You will note a marked character change from that point forward. I agree, the Jacob before that time was crafty and dishonest - but therein lies the hope for all of us. God can change us from the sinful nature, to disciples of Christ through faith.

Blessings,

Brian

Excellent point. Thank you.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

If I recall, the CCC says there are three or four levels of Biblical interpretation. I’m not certain, but I think they’re literal, allegorical, symbolic and hagiographical (pertaining to the afterlife, I believe).
I get the impression the Church discreetly encourages the reader to use his own judgment in determining which levels apply to whatever parts of the Bible he’s reading. Face it – the Church does not strongly teach literal interpretation. We know that. It can’t afford to. Many passages, as you know, can easily be turned against the Church, if taken literally. For example, what about when Jesus says, “Call no man father, except God?” What about the countless Protestant assaults on Catholicism based on literal interpretations of the Bible? No…Catholic biblicism is not about literal interpretation. It’s about contextual understanding and careful, enlightened, ‘holistic’ interpretation. Lastly…no, I don’t have a low opinion of the Bible, I just don’t interpret it literally or believe it can stand on its own without the Church. A prime example remains the OT god who directly and mercilessly ordered genocide against the Canaanites. That is not the Christian God. Sorry. If Jesus had been present on or near those battlefields, He would have rushed to the site of the blood-letting and demanded His fellow Jews stop such inhumane and monstrous behavior.

Believe what you want. But you are talking anti-Catholicism. I choose to believe literal so that I do not decieve myself by deciding what words are the truth and literal, and what the words of the Bible mean. I belong to the Catholic Church, and She will tell me how to interpret the words of the Bible. I will leave the protesting to others. I have listened to enought discussions to know just how off base non Catholics can be by deciding for themselves.

And the Catholic Church does nothing discreetly. If you are getting your spiritual direction from someone who is discreetly telling you that you can decide for yourself what is literal in the Bible, and telling you discreetly that you can interpret it yourself, chances are this person is not truly Catholic, cause he ain’t directing you to the Truth. And in this point, it matters not the title he holds, not the letters behind his name.
The Church has been around for 2000 years. Heresy will not tear her down now…though you are surely trying. The Catholic Church is not about letting the Truth go because we “have to survive”. God is head of His Church, and the gates of hell…heresy like you are preaching…will not prevail against her. Many will be decieved by false prophets who claim to be the messiah, but those who cling to the Truth of His Word and His Church shall be the ones to fight the good fight and persevere. We will be victorious…because that is what Christ has promised. If you are preaching and believing against that which the Church teaches…you are no longer with the Church.

 

[KingAlfred]

“Yes I can.”

Then you don’t mind the belief of many Muslims that Allah wants them to do the same thing to non-Muslims? It’s basically the same kind of message and concept.

“And, as Christians we also believe that when Christ came it was to bring mercy, forgiveness and salvation to all of mankind. It is called the New Testament.”

I don’t believe Jesus came to specifically publish the New Testament.

“It changes the way God acts toward mankind that He had not initially chosen. What made Him change the way He acts?”

So, He was right in ordering the Israelites to kill entire populations of men, women and children? Even livestock? What did the children do to deserve that? What did the animals do? That kind of god is not ‘all-good’.

“Jesus death on the Cross and resurrection from death. Forgiveness and Mercy flowed forth at that point from the heart of God.”

So, God did not exercise forgiveness or mercy until Jesus’ death? That makes much of the OT a lie.

“And the God of the OT is still God.”

He is God, He whom the ancient Israelites misunderstood, and to whom they wrongly attributed the atrocities they committed in clearing their ‘promised land’ of all opposition, after the fact.

“We should learn much from what He did in the OT. It is not symbolism, but truth in History.”

I hope not. If so, the Palestinians and Muslim world are justified in being very angry with Israel.

“How much longer before you believe and preach that Jesus did not rise from the dead? Do you see where you are leading with breaking down what is to be accepted and not accepted from the Bible?”

I reject the argument that the Bible is a book. It’s not. It’s a library. Every book has its own story, context and audience.

“Sure, you don’t see it happening now, but it will.”

These beliefs have actually deepened my faith, not weakened it. I couldn’t believe in a god that supposedly ordered the things that were done in his name in the OT.

“We are called to defend and preach the word of God…not break it down to try to discredit it.”

I don’t believe Catholics are called to preach the Bible. I’m sure relieved I’m not required to do so. I couldn’t preach many parts of it, morally, ethically or logically. Sorry, but Jesus would never sanction genocide.

 

[KingAlfred]

Believe what you want. But you are talking anti-Catholicism. I choose to believe literal so that I do not decieve myself by deciding what words are the truth and literal, and what the words of the Bible mean. I belong to the Catholic Church, and She will tell me how to interpret the words of the Bible. I will leave the protesting to others. I have listened to enought discussions to know just how off base non Catholics can be by deciding for themselves.

And the Catholic Church does nothing discreetly. If you are getting your spiritual direction from someone who is discreetly telling you that you can decide for yourself what is literal in the Bible, and telling you discreetly that you can interpret it yourself, chances are this person is not truly Catholic, cause he ain’t directing you to the Truth. And in this point, it matters not the title he holds, not the letters behind his name.
The Church has been around for 2000 years. Heresy will not tear her down now…though you are surely trying. The Catholic Church is not about letting the Truth go because we “have to survive”. God is head of His Church, and the gates of hell…heresy like you are preaching…will not prevail against her. Many will be decieved by false prophets who claim to be the messiah, but those who cling to the Truth of His Word and His Church shall be the ones to fight the good fight and persevere. We will be victorious…because that is what Christ has promised. If you are preaching and believing against that which the Church teaches…you are no longer with the Church.

The four levels (I think it’s four) of Biblical interpretation are in the CCC. That makes them pretty ‘Catholic’.

 

[KingAlfred]

“The God of the OT is the SAME as that of the NT. To suggest otherwise is material heresy at the very least. God never orders “genocide” in the sense someone is killed for no just reason.”

The Christian God does not order genocide, *ever.*Whether I’m a heretic or not is immaterial. If you believe Jesus would condone, much less order, genocide, under any circumstances, you have a serious moral dilemma and contradiction to work through.
I don’t. The bloodbaths alluded to in the OT aren’t there to show God’s glory, or Israel’s glory, or to gloriously foreshadow anything related to Jesus. They’re there to show human weakness, sinfulness, and the unfortunate capacity to misunderstand God. They are there to once again remind us that ours is a fallen nature. We live this tragedy ourselves, without remembering it often enough. We love our country – the U.S. --and believe it’s great, even though deep down, we also know much of it was built upon genocide against Native Americans and the enslavement of Africans. We’re living the ‘Israelite-OT Paradox’.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

The four levels (I think it’s four) of Biblical interpretation are in the CCC. That makes them pretty ‘Catholic’.

But as I read it we are to apply all four levels to each passage.

115 According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. the profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church.
116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: "All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal."83
117 The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God’s plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs.

1. the allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ’s victory and also of Christian Baptism.84
2. the moral sense. the events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written “for our instruction”.85
3. the anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, “leading”). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem.86
   118 A medieval couplet summarizes the significance of the four senses:
   The Letter speaks of deeds; Allegory to faith;
   The Moral how to act; Anagogy our destiny.87

 

[NotWorthy]

The four levels (I think it’s four) of Biblical interpretation are in the CCC. That makes them pretty ‘Catholic’.

Yes, but the literal sense is always first and foremost. You brought up Jesus saying, “Call no man Father”. This can not be taken literally, for St. Paul calls himself a father and calls Abraham a father.

Hence, we know from St. Paul’s writings that Jesus could not have been taken literally. You see, it’s Scripture that’s preventing us from taking this verse literally, not the Catholic Church simply covering Her own tracks.

 

[NotWorthy]

“The God of the OT is the SAME as that of the NT. To suggest otherwise is material heresy at the very least. God never orders “genocide” in the sense someone is killed for no just reason.”

The Christian God does not order genocide, *ever.*Whether I’m a heretic or not is immaterial. If you believe Jesus would condone, much less order, genocide, under any circumstances, you have a serious moral dilemma and contradiction to work through.
I don’t. The bloodbaths alluded to in the OT aren’t there to show God’s glory, or Israel’s glory, or to gloriously foreshadow anything related to Jesus. They’re there to show human weakness, sinfulness, and the unfortunate capacity to misunderstand God. They are there to once again remind us that ours is a fallen nature. We live this tragedy ourselves, without remembering it often enough. We love our country – the U.S. --and believe it’s great, even though deep down, we also know much of it was built upon genocide against Native Americans and the enslavement of Africans. We’re living the ‘Israelite-OT Paradox’.

You’ve got a lot of Church teaching to re-write then.

“And the Word was with God, and the Word was God”. Jesus was there when our Heavenly Father ordered the slayings of the Canaanites, in full union with the Father.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Quote Alfred: “I don’t believe Jesus came to specifically publish the New Testament.”

Me: It wasn’t called the New Testament. He did however come for all that the New Testament proclaims.

Alfred: "So, He was right in ordering the Israelites to kill entire populations of men, women and children? Even livestock? What did the children do to deserve that? What did the animals do? That kind of god is not ‘all-good’. "

Me: The children were brought up and taught in the ways of paganism. God did not want that. Who are we to judge God? Just because you don’t understand doesn’t mean you can come up with your own conclusions about whether or not God was either right, or “it’s just a story”. We cannot fathom the Mind of God. Or is that just another nice thing to read but not believe?

“Jesus death on the Cross and resurrection from death. Forgiveness and Mercy flowed forth at that point from the heart of God.”

Alfred: "So, God did not exercise forgiveness or mercy until Jesus’ death? That makes much of the OT a lie. "

The gates of Heaven were closed until the Ascension of Christ Jesus, resurrected from the dead.

“And the God of the OT is still God.”

Alfred: “He is God, He whom the ancient Israelites misunderstood, and to whom they wrongly attributed the atrocities they committed in clearing their ‘promised land’ of all opposition, after the fact.”

Oh, but you understand it. Everyone else for 2000 years has been wrong, but Alfred understands. Next you will be saying that God didn’t even undestand. Shall we then bow down to you? Why do you call yourself a Christian, let alone Catholic if you don’t believe the Bible?

“We should learn much from what He did in the OT. It is not symbolism, but truth in History.”

Alfred: “I hope not. If so, the Palestinians and Muslim world are justified in being very angry with Israel.”

Not true. God created the world…oh wait, I forgot, you don’t believe that. Anyway, He determines who gets what, and who lives and dies. He wanted Isreal to own the land, therefore, Isreal would own the land. Do you think for one minute that if Joshua had gone to the people in the land that God had given to Isreal and told them…"Hey, God said for you to leave because He wants us to have this land, that they would not have put up a fight? And that had they not killed everyone as God commanded, that the pagan beliefs of those people would have contaminated Isreal? The way you are attempting to contaminate Christianity by your disbelief in the legitimacy of His Word?

“How much longer before you believe and preach that Jesus did not rise from the dead? Do you see where you are leading with breaking down what is to be accepted and not accepted from the Bible?”

Alfred: These beliefs have actually deepened my faith, not weakened it. I couldn’t believe in a god that supposedly ordered the things that were done in his name in the OT.

Only, you don’t believe in God, only the interpretation of who you want god to be. It isn’t the real God.

“We are called to defend and preach the word of God…not break it down to try to discredit it.”

Alfred: “I don’t believe Catholics are called to preach the Bible. I’m sure relieved I’m not required to do so. I couldn’t preach many parts of it, morally, ethically or logically. Sorry, but Jesus would never sanction genocide.”

Then once again, you aren’t believing in the True God. You have decided what God is…just like the pagans and panthiests. You cannot create God in your image, you are created in His.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

“The God of the OT is the SAME as that of the NT. To suggest otherwise is material heresy at the very least. God never orders “genocide” in the sense someone is killed for no just reason.”

The Christian God does not order genocide, *ever.*Whether I’m a heretic or not is immaterial. If you believe Jesus would condone, much less order, genocide, under any circumstances, you have a serious moral dilemma and contradiction to work through.
I don’t. The bloodbaths alluded to in the OT aren’t there to show God’s glory, or Israel’s glory, or to gloriously foreshadow anything related to Jesus. They’re there to show human weakness, sinfulness, and the unfortunate capacity to misunderstand God. They are there to once again remind us that ours is a fallen nature. We live this tragedy ourselves, without remembering it often enough. We love our country – the U.S. --and believe it’s great, even though deep down, we also know much of it was built upon genocide against Native Americans and the enslavement of Africans. We’re living the ‘Israelite-OT Paradox’.

Are you comparing the United States of America to the Almighty God? No wonder you are so off base. You are thinking of Him in human terms. He is not. He knows everything. We cannot fathom the mind of God…but that doesn’t mean we can change Who and What He is.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

You’ve got a lot of Church teaching to re-write then.

“And the Word was with God, and the Word was God”. Jesus was there when our Heavenly Father ordered the slayings of the Canaanites, in full union with the Father.

Add to that. Last night I was reading about Samuel and Saul. When Saul failed to kill all of those that God commanded him to kill…all men, women, children and animals…he, Saul, lost favor with God. And then God chose another king for Isreal.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Alfred: “He is God, He whom the ancient Israelites misunderstood, and to whom they wrongly attributed the atrocities they committed in clearing their ‘promised land’ of all opposition, after the fact.”

And I guess that when Jesus came to the earth as a Man, He couldn’t have said that the Isrealites had all along been misunderstanding God’s commands. Funny, He is God, and I think that if the Isrealites had been misunderstanding Him, He would have told them. And I think Christ Jesus would have let us know also.

 

[NotWorthy]

Add to that. Last night I was reading about Samuel and Saul. When Saul failed to kill all of those that God commanded him to kill…all men, women, children and animals…he, Saul, lost favor with God. And then God chose another king for Isreal.

And why was this?

The answer lies in the rest of the story. Israel would inter-marry with the Canaanites and quickly adopt the pagan ways of the Canaanites.

The story for you and I is that to refuse to sin is to avoid the temptation to sin.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

And why was this?

The answer lies in the rest of the story. Israel would inter-marry with the Canaanites and quickly adopt the pagan ways of the Canaanites.

The story for you and I is that to refuse to sin is to avoid the temptation to sin.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Whether I’m a heretic or not is immaterial.

It is very relevant because if what you are describing is heresy (and for now I assume you just don’t fully realize it) then whatever claims flow from that heretical conclusion should not be trusted either. To suggest and continue to suggest that there are TWO DIFFERENT GodS, one of the OT and one of the NT, is flat out heresy.

The Christian God does not order genocide, *ever. *If you believe Jesus would condone, much less order, genocide, under any circumstances, you have a serious moral dilemma and contradiction to work through.

“Genocide” is a loaded term, and an incorrect one. It suggests a bloodthirsty God who does not punish for any truly just reason except for the love of blood. That is quite wrong.

I don’t. The bloodbaths alluded to in the OT aren’t there to show God’s glory, or Israel’s glory, or to gloriously foreshadow anything related to Jesus. They’re there to show human weakness, sinfulness, and the unfortunate capacity to misunderstand God. They are there to once again remind us that ours is a fallen nature. We live this tragedy ourselves, without remembering it often enough.

They were there to show God’s displeasure with sin and to discourage sin. If you think the God of the OT was bad, you should check out the one that shows up in the NT. The NT God says you can be punished in eternal hellfire for sin.

St Thomas Aquinas and other great saints explain man can only be punished with hell for personal sins. However, man can be punished with temporal punishments like death in so far as someone above them brought the punishment on the whole. For example, when masses of people were killed off in the OT that was not God judging their souls for hell, but rather they receiving the temporal punishment due to their father’s or leader’s grave sins. It is as if a man sinned greatly and as punishment all he owed or was ruling over was forced to be sold or destroyed.

We love our country – the U.S. --and believe it’s great, even though deep down, we also know much of it was built upon genocide against Native Americans and the enslavement of Africans. We’re living the ‘Israelite-OT Paradox’.

God never commanded us to treat the Natives or Africans like that, so this claim is further misunderstanding and misapplication on your part.