IF GOD SO LOVED "EVERYONE", THEN WHY DID HE HATE ESAU?

[Eddie Ramos]

It seems like John 3:16 is by far the most widely memorized verse among people who know anything about the Bible because it speaks about God loving the world. While this verse may seem like "good news" to everyone who reads it, it does not stand alone from the rest of the scriptures. No verse does.

So, as most people are glad to memorize that verse, what happens when they come across a verse like this?:

Romans 9:13 (KJV) 13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

Malachi 1:2-3 (KJV)
2 I have loved you, saith the LORD.
Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us?
Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the LORD:
yet I loved Jacob,
3 And I hated Esau,
and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.

Psalms 5:5 (KJV)
5 The foolish shall not stand in thy sight:
thou hatest all workers of iniquity.

Psalms 11:5 (KJV)
5 The LORD trieth the righteous:
but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.

Psalms 5:6 (KJV)
6 Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing:
the LORD will abhor the bloody and deceitful man.

How does John 3:16 look in light of these passages? Did God change? No, God does not change (Malachi 3:6). This teaches us that we can't just focus on John 3:16 and conclude that God's love for the world, in the giving of his Son, is actually not referring to every individual in the world (because there are passages that tell us about God hating others), but rather John 3:16 is referring to certain people within the world. These certain people are also known as God's beloved which means to be loved.

1 John 4:10-11 (KJV) 10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. 11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.

The beloved are thise who were chosen for salvation, those who were called to be saints.

Romans 1:7 (KJV) 7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

My question for this thread is: Can you see that the Bible, on one hand, speaks of God's love in conjunction with those whose sins were laid on Christ? And on the other hand, can you see that those who were hated, are those whose sins were not laid upon Christ? This is what it means to be hated. It means that you have to pay for your own sins by your own death.

[Eddie Ramos]

[Replying to Eddie Ramos in post #8]

So you think God should love evil people? Which means nobody would need to repent or obey him or accept Christ.

God did love evil people, he loved his elect. Every single human being was under the condemnation of sin and therefore evil before the eyes of God (including the elect). And yet, God demonstrated his love toward us, in that while we were yet his enemies and sinners, he died for us.

Romans 5:8 (KJV 1900)
8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

BUt God did not obligate himself to love (meaning, pay for the sins of) every single human being. He, of the good pleasure of his will, decided that instead of justly letting mankind perish for their sin, that he would redeem some and lay their sins upon Christ. The rest of the people of the world are still justly condemned for their sins. This is why he has given us the account of Jacob and Esau, because Jacob represents those who God loved (i.e. paid their sins), the elect chosen for salvation and Esau represents those he hates, which would be the rest of the world (to be hated means that you have to pay for your own sin by your own death).

[Eddie Ramos]

My question for this thread is: Can you see that the Bible, on one hand, speaks of God's love in conjunction with those whose sins were laid on Christ? And on the other hand, can you see that those who were hated, are those whose sins were not laid upon Christ? This is what it means to be hated. It means that you have to pay for your own sins by your own death.

Romans 9:13 - I believe the context of this passage is about God’s election of how people would be saved. God didn’t (but could have) chosen that “all Jewish people will be saved” or “those who perfectly follow the Law will be saved” but instead chose “all those who put their trust in the Messiah will be saved.” So, the love/hate here is about choosing/loving Jacob as the Messianic line and Esau not being that line. It had to be one or the other.

Thanks for your reply, but your statements, although thoughtful and caring, don't line up with the scriptures. I don't mean that statement in a condescending way, but that is how most people who hold to free will choose to interpret such passages, so as to include everyone in God's saving love. But Romans 9 teaches us that it is the sole prerogative of God to have mercy on whom he will have mercy and to harden whom he will harden. And this mercy has everything to do with salvation. And just as God begins his example with twins born from the same womb, he ends it by describing clay which is taken from the same lump. And just like Jacob and Esau, this lump of clay is divided by the potter (God) into vessels (people) of honor unto glory and vessels (people) of destruction.

Romans 9:18–23 (KJV 1900)
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. 19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels (people) of wrath fitted to destruction: 23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels (people) of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

At no place in this context does it every allude to the idea that you suggested of, "all those who put their trust in the Messiah will be saved". As a matter of fact, God uses twins in the womb for the very reason to show that nothing was done by either one, whether good or evil, in order for God to make a determination to love one and hate the other.

Romans 9:11–13 (KJV 1900)
11 (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;) 12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. 13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

So, we can't say that God knew Jacob would be good and therefore loved him and that God knew that Esau would be evil and therefore hated him, because the scriptures told us that their works, whether good or evil, were not part of God's equation when he made choice between them. That's very important to notice.

Jacob and Esau represented 2 nations and 2 manner of people. Historically, we can see how that played out, but spiritually, and far more importantly, the first nation and people in view are God's holy nation made up of all true believers from every tongue, tribe and nation, as portrayed by Jacob.

1 Peter 2:9 (KJV 1900)
9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

The other nation is the nation of the wicked, as portrayed by Esau.

Philippians 2:15 (KJV 1900)
15 That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;

Malachi 1:2-3, Psalm 5:5-6, Psalm 11:5 are about hating wicked deeds and bringing consequences upon those that unrepentantly go about doing them.

It is important not to dismiss what the texts actually teach. Many would prefer it to say that God loves the sinner but hates the sin, yet that is not stated nor taught in any of those passages.

Psalm 5:5–6 (KJV 1900)
5  The foolish shall not stand in thy sight:
Thou hatest all workers of iniquity.
6  Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing:
The LORD will abhor the bloody and deceitful man.

So, while God certainly hates sin, it's the individual that is being spoken of in these passages. Remember, Esau was hated for not doing anything good or evil. That's because the word "hated" is in direct relation to God's salvation program. Those whom he loved (typified by Jacob) are those whose sins were laid upon Christ. And those whom he hates (as typified by Esau) are those whose sins were not laid on Christ and they have to bear their own sins by their own death.

John 3:16 and 1 John 4:10-11 are about how God still loves these (i.e., all) individuals, wishing that they would turn from their wickedness. God, knowing they can’t do this on their own, sent the Messiah on our behalf. This salvation comes to whoever trusts in the Messiah (John 3:18, 1 John 4:15).

Paul addresses Romans to people who have trusted in the Messiah.

Unfortunately, this free will way of thinking leaves out the mentally handicapped who cannot make any such decisions, or babies, or the unborn. And God does not have separate salvation programs for different cases. This means that what applies to one, applies to all who were chosen for salvation. Therefore, John 3:16 (the way you understand it) is in direct opposition to God hating Esau (the person) and the wicked person. These scriptures only harmonize when we realize that God's saving love, was only for those he chose to save, the elect. And he chose them under the same premise as Jacob, by not taking nay of their works (good or evil) into consideration. But simply by the good pleasure of his own will. Now John 3:16 can be understood to be speaking of only the beloved, the elect. Which is what 1 John 4:11 explains.

1 John 4:11 (KJV 1900)
11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.

The whole world is not beloved of God, only the elect are.

So, God hates our wickedness but loves the wicked enough to give us a sure way out of that life into a better life. If we remain wicked, trying (and failing) to be good on our own, then we are facing that righteous, loving hatred. God’s love is fulfilled by those who accept what Christ does for us, as we are transformed into truly loving people.

Did you know that there is actually no verse that tells us that Christ has to be "accepted"? But there is averse that tells us that we (the elect) have been made accepted through the work of Christ.

Ephesians 1:6 (KJV 1900)
6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

[Sybo76]

I love all the replies, though very unpopular in most evangelical circles. I was so surprised no one has tried to explain this away with the old, " 'hate' doesn't really mean hate" response.
Anyone needing a good exposition of John 3:16, check out A.W. Pink's.
(Well, there was the one fellow who said hate/love of Esau and Jacob was more like chose/love)... I understand though. It's a tough pill to swallow

[Sybo76]

[Replying to Eddie Ramos in post #12]

Well said

[Tcg]

[Replying to Eddie Ramos in post #1]

The answer is quite simple. Christianity was pasted onto Judaism and the gospels were pasted onto Paul's teaching. Of course, it's not all going to match.


Tcg

[Eddie Ramos]

[Replying to Eddie Ramos in post #1]

The answer is quite simple. Christianity was pasted onto Judaism and the gospels were pasted onto Paul's teaching. Of course, it's not all going to match.


Tcg

But it all matches perfectly when we are able to do 2 things.

1. Recognize that the Bible is the inspired inerrant Word of God.
2. Seek for one cohesive truth throughout the whole Bible.

[The Tanager]

Thanks for your reply, but your statements, although thoughtful and caring, don't line up with the scriptures. I don't mean that statement in a condescending way, but that is how most people who hold to free will choose to interpret such passages, so as to include everyone in God's saving love.

Thank you for sharing your interpretation and challenging my beliefs with it, while also hearing out my thoughts on relevant passages. I think 1 Timothy 2:4 is one of the hardest passages to square with a Calvinistic viewpoint on this matter: “God desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of truth.” How do you interpret this verse and why?

But Romans 9 teaches us that it is the sole prerogative of God to have mercy on whom he will have mercy and to harden whom he will harden. And this mercy has everything to do with salvation. And just as God begins his example with twins born from the same womb, he ends it by describing clay which is taken from the same lump. And just like Jacob and Esau, this lump of clay is divided by the potter (God) into vessels (people) of honor unto glory and vessels (people) of destruction.

I don’t think the point about Jacob and Esau concerns their individual salvations. I don’t see where the Bible says Esau was damned. Hebrews 11:20 talks about Esau experiencing the future blessings invoked by Isaac’s faith. Nothing in the Genesis text suggests Esau lost his faith. Even Hebrews 12:15-17 is talking about the act of Esau that resulted in him permanently losing his birthright (i.e., being the child through whom God’s promise would come through), not his individual salvation.

I think Romans 9, then, is clearly about the Messianic line and that Paul brings this in to contrast it to Jews who thought being a child of God was about physical descent; about being Jewish. Chapter 9 starts off about how much Paul wishes his fellow Israelites would get it. He writes that the Messiah comes through Israel (v. 5), but inclusion with the Messiah isn’t by physical descent, since it’s not about being a child of Abraham (v. 7). It’s actually through Isaac that Abraham’s offspring are named (v. 7). This, obviously, isn’t about physical descent either. What’s the difference between Isaac and Ishmael? It’s that the Messiah was chosen to come through Isaac, not Ishmael. Being a child of the promise is about being Abraham’s offspring (v. 8) and, here, it is said to come through identifying with Isaac rather than Ishmael.

That Messianic line is then traced through Jacob rather than Esau, not because of something they did (v. 11) but so that God’s purpose of election might continue. That purpose of election, contextually, is about the Messianic line not about Jacob and Esau’s individual salvation. Paul provides “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated” as textual support for that idea, not for choosing Jacob’s salvation and damning Esau.

Does this mean God is unjust (v. 14)? Paul says no. But unjust about what? Contextually, this is about how being a physical descendent of Abraham is not enough. It’s about the promise, which is the promised Messiah. Why is God not unjust? Because, like he told Moses, he can have mercy on whomever he wishes. Contextually, the mercy isn’t by physical descent but about being children of the promise, the promise being the Messiah. Which he then quickly traces being secured through the Exodus. Salvation isn’t about the way humans want it to be or how they want to earn it, but on God’s pure mercy (which comes to us through the Messiah).

So, why does God still find fault (v. 19)? God used Pharaoh, but Paul says He “endured with patience vessels of wrath”...that is, God allowed Pharaoh’s disobedience to be prolonged for the good of others, so that his vessels of mercy could reach glory. And God has the right to do that. If God just chooses who is a vessel of mercy, why would he need to “make known the riches of his glory” through his dealings with Pharaoh? He could just reveal it to those He individually predestined.

Romans 9 ends talking about attaining the righteousness of God through faith/trust (v. 30), not pursuing a law (v. 31), not being born a Jew (from earlier in the passage), and not “because God chose them”. We must confess with our mouth and believe in our heart (10:9-10) to be saved. God says (10:21) that “all day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people” but they haven’t turned to Him. If God chooses to save some and damn the others, this isn’t holding out his hands to them.

So, we can't say that God knew Jacob would be good and therefore loved him and that God knew that Esau would be evil and therefore hated him, because the scriptures told us that their works, whether good or evil, were not part of God's equation when he made choice between them. That's very important to notice.

I agree. The loving Jacob and hating Esau, here, is about through whom the promise would go forth, the promised Messiah. This choice was God’s, not based on any good of Jacob (who was far from it for much of his life until he gave in to God).

1 Peter 2:9 - Yes, Paul is saying those in Christ [those who believe (v. 7)] are a chosen race. God could have chosen a different way to make up his royal priesthood, but it was through mercy in Christ because we weren’t going to get there on our own.

Phil 2:15 - Yes, those in Christ are to obey, working out their own salvation (v. 12) through God’s strength not our own efforts (v. 13) that we may be blameless (v. 15) and stand out from those who don’t know God (v. 15).

It is important not to dismiss what the texts actually teach. Many would prefer it to say that God loves the sinner but hates the sin, yet that is not stated nor taught in any of those passages.

I’m not saying these passages teach that God loves the sinner but hates the sin. Those left in their sin, by not being found in Christ, are hated because true love hates sin. Psalm 5 was written by David and it’s clear he knows he sinned, but thanks God for loving him enough to pursue him and bring him back.

Unfortunately, this free will way of thinking leaves out the mentally handicapped who cannot make any such decisions, or babies, or the unborn. And God does not have separate salvation programs for different cases. This means that what applies to one, applies to all who were chosen for salvation.

No, it doesn’t leave these people out. Trust in God is possible for the mentally handicapped, for babies, for unborn babies. It won’t look the same as a more fully thought out trust, but it’s not a different way of salvation.

The whole world is not beloved of God, only the elect are.

1 John 4:11 doesn’t say that. It only makes a comment about Christians, that we should love each other in response to God’s deep love for us.

Did you know that there is actually no verse that tells us that Christ has to be "accepted"?

I brought up Romans 10:9, which does say we are to believe Jesus is Lord and was raised from the dead. I don’t see why that isn’t a verse that talks about “accepting” Christ.

But there is averse that tells us that we (the elect) have been made accepted through the work of Christ.

Ephesians 1:6 (KJV 1900)
6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

I agree with this verse, just not your interpretation of it. It is God’s glorious grace which accepts/blesses us in the beloved, Jesus, not any work of our own. We became that when we “believed in him” (v. 13).

[onewithhim]

[Replying to Eddie Ramos in post #1]

I would say that when it is said that God hates somebody, it means that he LOVES LESS that person than another person. At Luke 14:26 Jesus says, "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, even his own life, he cannot be my disciple." He meant to love to a lesser degree. To combine this with what Jehovah'sWitness said above, it makes sense that Jehovah would not love Esau the way he loved Jacob and everyone else that honored Him.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to Eddie Ramos in post #1]

It probably just meant that he loved him lesser than. I doubt the writer thought God hated Esau because God blessed him with a kingdom. The word translated hate must have meant more to Jews.

[DJT_47]

The answer is in the below

Romans 9:6-18

6Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: 7Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. 8That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. 9For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son. 10And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac; 11(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;) 12It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. 13As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

14What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. 15For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. 16So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. 17For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. 18Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.