Jacob and Esau why did God bless Jacob's lie

[Robbinson]

The God of the Old Testament and the New Testament are the same. I agree that to believe and suggest otherwise is a grave error.

Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever (Hebrews). While Jesus ushered in a gospel of grace, He preached more about hell and the coming of the great tribulation than about anything else. God is still the same Holy God He always was and scripture shows us he will not tolerate sin. Through His grace and mercy and Christ’s sacrifice, we have a way of cleansing our sin (thanks be to God), but lest anyone think God is just about love and mercy - He is about justice and righteousness. We are made righteous not of our own doing, but by Christ’s sacrifice and without that we are lost and will be judged harshly. That is the gospel.

Blessings,

Brian

 

[KingAlfred]

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.

Nah…I can’t buy that one. Sorry. You’re using literal interpretations you like to negate those you don’t like. I know many Protestant fundamentalists for whom it doesn’t work that way. Their sense of literalism means that every single thing in the Bible is to be taken, on its own merit, literally. That means that when Jesus said, ‘Call no man ‘father’, except God’, that statement stands alone, and is literally true, in their opinion. Therefore, according to them, the Church is violating the Bible by instructing its followers to refer to its priests, bishops, etc., as ‘father’. Now…of course we know that such thinking is wrong. But, we need to be careful when we say everything in the Bible is ‘literally’ true.

I guess my thinking on the Bible is a bit heretical. I confess…as a follower of Liberation Theology (non-Marxist), I’m a bit of a heretic. Sorry. I still love and would die for the Catholic Church.

 

[NotWorthy]

Nah…I can’t buy that one. Sorry. You’re using literal interpretations you like to negate those you don’t like. I know many Protestant fundamentalists for whom it doesn’t work that way. Their sense of literalism means that every single thing in the Bible is to be taken, on its own merit, literally. That means that when Jesus said, ‘Call no man ‘father’, except God’, that statement stands alone, and is literally true, in their opinion. Therefore, according to them, the Church is violating the Bible by instructing its followers to refer to its priests, bishops, etc., as ‘father’. Now…of course we know that such thinking is wrong. But, we need to be careful when we say everything in the Bible is ‘literally’ true.

I guess my thinking on the Bible is a bit heretical. I confess…as a follower of Liberation Theology (non-Marxist), I’m a bit of a heretic. Sorry. I still love and would die for the Catholic Church.

And you’ve just described the fallacy of “Sola Verse-ura”.

Catholics can NOT take Jesus literally here, because then the Holy Spirit would be guiding St. Paul to sin by calling Abraham the Jews’ father.

 

[KingAlfred]

The God of the Old Testament and the New Testament are the same. I agree that to believe and suggest otherwise is a grave error.

Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever (Hebrews). While Jesus ushered in a gospel of grace, He preached more about hell and the coming of the great tribulation than about anything else. God is still the same Holy God He always was and scripture shows us he will not tolerate sin. Through His grace and mercy and Christ’s sacrifice, we have a way of cleansing our sin (thanks be to God), but lest anyone think God is just about love and mercy - He is about justice and righteousness. We are made righteous not of our own doing, but by Christ’s sacrifice and without that we are lost and will be judged harshly. That is the gospel.

Blessings,

Brian

Follow your logic carefully, Friend. If the OT god did in fact order the Israelites to mass murder men, women and *children *of the tribes that opposed the Israelites in securing their promised land, which the OT says he did, then that god is a murderer of children. How does that ‘square’ with Catholic pro-life issues and positions? You say you’re against abortion, yet, in theory at least, supportive of ‘divinely’ inspired, genocidal infanticide. I don’t think you believe that. I do suspect, however, you haven’t thought this dilemma through completely. You’ve just almost instinctively sided with Biblical literalism.

I face no such dilemma. I say God did not order the Israelites to do that. They misconstrued His calling, committed those atrocities, and then sadly attributed them to Him, in retrospect. Most permanent conquerors in the human story have done similar things. The Europeans who settled the Western Hemisphere sure did. Its entire contemporary society is the product of centuries of land-theft, ethnic-cleansing and slavery.

 

[KingAlfred]

And you’ve just described the fallacy of “Sola Verse-ura”.

Catholics can NOT take Jesus literally here, because then the Holy Spirit would be guiding St. Paul to sin by calling Abraham the Jews’ father.

Thank you. We therefore need to be careful when we promote *literalism. *How is it that our sense of literalism differs from that of the Protestants?

 

[davidv]

Follow your logic carefully, Friend. If the OT god did in fact order the Israelites to mass murder men, women and *children *of the tribes that opposed the Israelites in securing their promised land, which the OT says he did, then that god is a murderer of children. How does that fact about ‘god’ affect Catholic pro-life issues and positions? You say you’re against abortion, yet, in theory at least, supportive of ‘divinely’ inspired, genocidal infanticide. I don’t think you believe that. I do suspect, however, you haven’t thought this dilemma through completely. You’ve just almost instinctively sided with Biblical literalism.

I face no such dilemma. I say God did not order the Israelites to do that. They misconstrued His calling, committed those atrocities, and then sadly attributed them to Him, in retrospect. Most permanent conquerors in the human story have done similar things. The Europeans who settled the Western Hemisphere sure did. Its entire contemporary society is the product of centuries of land-theft, ethnic-cleansing and slavery.

When you make the incorrect assumption that “killing” equals “murder”, the conclusions based on it become invalid. God is immutable and He didn’t murder anyone, nor did He command anyone to murder.

 

[Robbinson]

Follow your logic carefully, Friend. If the OT god did in fact order the Israelites to mass murder men, women and *children *of the tribes that opposed the Israelites in securing their promised land, which the OT says he did, then that god is a murderer of children. How does that ‘square’ with Catholic pro-life issues and positions? You say you’re against abortion, yet, in theory at least, supportive of ‘divinely’ inspired, genocidal infanticide. I don’t think you believe that. I do suspect, however, you haven’t thought this dilemma through completely. You’ve just almost instinctively sided with Biblical literalism.

I face no such dilemma. I say God did not order the Israelites to do that. They misconstrued His calling, committed those atrocities, and then sadly attributed them to Him, in retrospect. Most permanent conquerors in the human story have done similar things. The Europeans who settled the Western Hemisphere sure did. Its entire contemporary society is the product of centuries of land-theft, ethnic-cleansing and slavery.

Yes - we disagree. I believe the Bible to be accurate and truthful when it describes those events. I agree - these are difficult passages. The Bible also tells us that God’s ways are not our ways. How about Noah and the Ark - do you believe that God caused the flood which eliminated all mankind, other than Noah and his family? If so, don’t you see the same dilemma? If not, what parts of the Bible do you then believe in and not?

Blessings,

Brian

 

[KingAlfred]

“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.”

**I don’t think so. The Church doesn’t strongly encourage either individual or literal interpretation of the Bible. That’s been a huge theme of Catholic history from its beginning. The Bible is potentially dangerous in the wrong hands and minds. That’s why Catholic doctrine takes priority over the individual Catholic, not the Bible. Yes, you’re argument is logical, but logic isn’t always the standard or ‘practical’ truth of matters at hand. **

“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."

**Genocide is the mass murder of certain categories of people. The OT god ordered the Israelites to wipe out completely, entire populations of men, women, children and their livestock, burning their corpses, hanging them up, stacking them up, and all manner of other atrocities. Sorry. It’s there, in black and white. **

“They were there to show God’s displeasure with sin and to discourage sin.”

What did the children do that warranted being murdered? How about the livestock?

“If you think the God of the OT was bad, you should check out the one that shows up in the NT.”

He didn’t order the murder of children.

“The NT God says you can be punished in eternal hellfire for sin.”

**Right. But still, there’s no mass murder of children in the NT. Jesus wouldn’t have supported genocide against anyone. He said, ‘Love your enemy.’ **

“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.”

**So, God will murder children because of the sins of their parents? You can’t believe that. I know you don’t. **

“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.”

*Even the children? * Using that logic, couldn’t one deduce that unborn children killed by abortion are being ‘punished’ for the sins of their parents? Isn’t that one ghastly conclusion that literal translation could produce in this case? CATHOLIC Dude…our God doesn’t ever kill children.

“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.”

**The children, too? The only way I’ll be convinced that you actually believe this, which I pray you don’t, will be if you post, on this thread, in plain sight, that yes…God rightfully ordered the Israelites to murder the children of their enemies. (Don’t do it.) **

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

Of course not, but the literal translation of the OT by the Protestants who settled this land helped them decide that such egregious misconduct was morally acceptable.

 

[KingAlfred]

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.

None at all. The Catholic Church defends life.

 

[NotWorthy]

Follow your logic carefully, Friend. If the OT god did in fact order the Israelites to mass murder men, women and *children *of the tribes that opposed the Israelites in securing their promised land, which the OT says he did, then that god is a murderer of children. How does that fact about ‘god’ affect Catholic pro-life issues and positions? You say you’re against abortion, yet, in theory at least, supportive of ‘divinely’ inspired, genocidal infanticide. I don’t think you believe that. I do suspect, however, you haven’t thought this dilemma through completely. You’ve just almost instinctively sided with Biblical literalism.

So, is the Old Testament Inspired?

I face no such dilemma. I say God did not order the Israelites to do that. They misconstrued His calling, committed those atrocities, and then sadly attributed them to Him, in retrospect. Most permanent conquerors in the human story have done similar things. The Europeans who settled the Western Hemisphere sure did. Its entire contemporary society is the product of centuries of land-theft, ethnic-cleansing and slavery.

So, is the Old Testament author inspired or not?

 

[KingAlfred]

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.

Do you realize the founders of this country often referred to it as ‘The New Israel’?

 

[KingAlfred]

So, is the Old Testament Inspired?

So, is the Old Testament author inspired or not?

Yes – inspired to teach. Its teachings often use ‘negative lessons’, e.g., they teach us what not to do. Committing genocide is one of them.

 

[davidv]

“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.”

**I don’t think so. The Church doesn’t strongly encourage either individual or literal interpretation of the Bible. That’s been a huge theme of Catholic history from its beginning. The Bible is potentially dangerous in the wrong hands and minds. That’s why Catholic doctrine takes priority over the individual Catholic, not the Bible. Yes, you’re argument is logical, but logic isn’t always the standard or ‘practical’ truth of matters at hand. **

This is pure fiction. This is direct quote from Dei Verbum:

…The sacred synod also earnestly and especially urges all the Christian faithful, especially Religious, to learn by frequent reading of the divine Scriptures the “excellent knowledge of Jesus Christ” (Phil. 3:8). “For ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ.”(5) Therefore, they should gladly put themselves in touch with the sacred text itself, whether it be through the liturgy, rich in the divine word, or through devotional reading, or through instructions suitable for the purpose and other aids which, in our time, with approval and active support of the shepherds of the Church, are commendably spread everywhere. And let them remember that prayer should accompany the reading of Sacred Scripture, so that God and man may talk together; for “we speak to Him when we pray; we hear Him when we read the divine saying.” (6)

 

[mdr]

It might be instructive to note what Jewish tradition says about Jacob and Esau - not that it’s binding in any way if it conflicts with the CCC, of course. Our former neighbor, a Chassidic Jew, said that the passage referring to the twins as “contending” within the womb means that Jacob had actually been destined to be born first, but the babies wrestled in the womb and Esau managed to supplant Jacob. In this view, then, Jacob is winning back the birthright that his Creator had intended for him.

(Interestingly, this same neighbor said that Leah, for whom I’ve always felt sorry - ‘I’m having another son for him, maybe now he’ll love me more than her’ - had been destined to marry Esau. Knowing what he would become, she had prayed long and fervently for that destiny to change, and the Lord answered her prayers. In this view, playing second fiddle to her prettier sister was a blessing compared with the life she would have had as Esau’s wife.)

The deception is still problematic, but I suppose the answer is that even holy people can sin sometimes, and that God alone knows their hearts and can judge. Look at David and Bathsheba, after all. Look at St. Peter, who denied Our Lord three times, yet was forgiven and given the keys to the Kingdom.

:twocents:

Peace-
-mdr

 

[NotWorthy]

Thank you. We therefore need to be careful when we promote *literalism. *How is it that our sense of literalism differs from that of the Protestants?

Well, when two verses contradict each other, then you know that the “literal” approach doesn’t work.

So yes, the literal approach is still the primary means of reading Scripture. I’m worried that you feel the literal approach isn’t even necessary.

That has led you to believe that the God of the OT is different from the God-Man Jesus.

 

[NotWorthy]

None at all. The Catholic Church defends life.

So how do you separate argument a from b?

a) The god of the OT is different from Jesus.

b) “The Word was with God and the Word was God”.

These two statements disagree with each other, yet you made the first statement (allow my paraphrasing, please) and you agreed with the second.

 

[NotWorthy]

Yes – inspired to teach. Its teachings often use ‘negative lessons’, e.g., they teach us what not to do. Committing genocide is one of them.

But how can the inspired text teach us “what not to do” by stating, “And then God told them to do this…”?

That makes no sense to me.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

It is interesting to note that Leah was buried with Jacob, and the rest of the family, as his wife

Then he charged them, and said to them, “I am to be gathered to my people; bury me with my fathers in the cave that is in the field of Ephron the Hittite, 30 in the cave that is in the field at Mach-pelah, to the east of Mamre, in the land of Canaan, which Abraham bought with the field from Ephron the Hittite to possess as a burying place. 31 There they buried Abraham and Sarah his wife; there they buried Isaac and Rebekah his wife; and there I buried Leah-- 32 the field and the cave that is in it were purchased from the Hittites.”

Genesis 49:29-31
Rachel was buried elsewhere

So Rachel died, and she was buried on the way to Ephrath (that is, Bethlehem), 20 and Jacob set up a pillar upon her grave; it is the pillar of Rachel’s tomb, which is there to this day.

Genesis 35:19-20

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Do you realize the founders of this country often referred to it as ‘The New Israel’?

What is your point?

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Yes – inspired to teach. Its teachings often use ‘negative lessons’, e.g., they teach us what not to do. Committing genocide is one of them.

You cannot take the stories in the Old Testament that you are talking about to be a lesson that God is teaching in what not to do. For, when Saul decided to disobey God and allowed any of those that God commanded Saul kill, Saul lost favor with God, and God replaced him with David. God had his reasons for the slaughter…even though we do not know them. God did not command the leaders of the USA to kill all of the Native Americans, or to become slavemasters of the Africans or anyone else.
Another point you are missing is that the Isrealites were God’s chosen people. He chose them from among all other nations in the world. That is OT. He was not for any other people except the Isrealites.
Jesus came in the NT and changed that. He came for the world, not just the Isrealites.