Replies

Not only since he was a little child, P-Marlowe, but if you'd open your Bible and start reading Romans 9:11, you'd see that He hated Esau before Esau was even born.

(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;) [Rom. 9:11].

God rejected the first born, and chose the younger son. At that time Jacob had done no good, and Esau had done no evil. It does not rest upon birth that was identical and it does not rest upon their character or their works. Paul makes the entire choice rest upon "the purpose of God according to election." He further qualifies his statement that it is not of works, but rests upon God who calls. However, the calling in this verse is not to salvation.

It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger [Rom. 9:12].

This is from Genesis 25:23, which was given before the two boys were born. "And the Lord said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger."

As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated [Rom. 9:13].

This is from the last book in the Old Testament, see Mal. 1:2–3. This statement was not made until the two boys had lived their lives and two nations had come from them, which was about two thousand years later, and much history had been made.

I believe its called context. :)

BigMack

However, the calling in this verse is not to salvation.

Again, funny how I address posts to Marlowe, and only get direct responses from others. Check your playbooks again. Which one of you is the ventrioquist, and which one the puppet?

You missed Paul making a direct connection between the two OT quotes, in verses 12 and 13, tying both together into verse 15, and wrapping up by summarizing the principle in verse 16. God wills whom He wills, and the "willed" cannot refuse Him. The overall context is found a few verses back, in verse 8:

"it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendents".

Everything that follows in the chapter, from Esau to pottery, ties back into this. Are you really going to tell me that a discussion about who constitutes the children of God is not a discussion which includes salvation?

But then again, Marlowe's question didn't deal with salvation, either.

I believe its called context. :)