[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

File: 143 KB, 1200x600, 3DDADFEF-0BBC-4876-95E8-3DC9719E2D7C.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14565994 No.14565994 [Reply] [Original]

Does anyone understand this? By all accounts it seems that Esau was a model man and Jacob was a conniving sneak, why would God hate a good man and love a bad one?

>> No.14566000

>>14565994
bc all of christianity is built on a "turning bad people into goodboys" kink

>> No.14566030

>>14565994
The central issue of the text is fidelity to God. Esau trades his inheritance for stew. He places a lower thing over a higher thing. He traded the kingdom of heaven for the gratification of the flesh.

>> No.14566045

>>14566030
That makes sense, but would God really hate you for that? And if he would, would he really love someone who’s clearly a bad person?

>> No.14566050
File: 11 KB, 400x400, ENTP.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14566050

>>14565994
Jacob was just a plotting Entp, not his fault that his half brother was a degenerate. Actually, he saved the bloodline.

>> No.14566071

Old testament God is just an asshole and the embodiment of 'might makes right'.

>> No.14566077

jacob was a big wrist chad and esau was a wristcel virgin loser.

>> No.14566098

>>14565994
Its an allegory about god loving the farmer and hating the hunter gatherer. Also Esau is comically stupid and Jacob is following a universal trickster motif.

>> No.14566107

>>14566071
Is there a justification for this at all? Did God have a change of heart or mature or something?

>> No.14566113

>>14565994
>If you want to discuss history, religion, or the humanities, go to /his/.

>> No.14566118

>>14566098
Why would he love a farmer over a hunter gatherer?

>> No.14566125

>>14566107
Man has a bad habit of blaming god for his misfortunes and projecting his own issues onto god. I think a good counterargument is Cain and Abel. Cain kills Abel but god doesnt kill Cain, instead he marks and protects him from retribution in order to stop cycles of violence (ie the kingdom of god). Or consider what is going on in camp while Moses receives the commandments. God had every right to glass the Hebrews and start again, but he keeps his covenant. When Joshua says God gave him power to salt the cities he may have just been justifying his behavior.

>>14566118
The early semitic peoples were pastoralists, and their patriarch obviously had to be chosen over a jaeger stew. They arent savage desert nomads. Consider:

"Isaac, who had a taste for wild game, loved Esau, but Rebekah loved Jacob." (Genesis 25:28). Even since conception, their conflict was foreshadowed: "And the children struggled together within her; and she said, If it be so, why am I thus? And she went to enquire of the LORD. 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." (Genesis 25:22–23)

>> No.14566137

>>14566125
So are you saying that God as wrathful and angry is a misrepresentation?

>> No.14566149

>>14566137
My minister pointed out that when God actions are lesser than those of the best of men, we have every right to question the text (which btw leaves the new testament fairly pristine, and is what elevates the words of jesus over the prophets), even if the outcome (like in Job) suggests that we just dont understand why God makes the decisions he does. But then we arent a sola scriptura congregation and use critical, literary, and textual sources, so that may not be sufficient for some.

>> No.14566153

>>14566149
Your minister sounds based

>> No.14566169

The point is justifying the political subjection of Edom to the Israelites. Two similar peoples of likewise similar extraction, inhabiting the same area in competition with one another. 'Brothers.'
The Israelites simply wrote a clause into their scripture wherein their god gives them primacy over their neighbour. They are appointed the overlords by their god.
All pagan tribes do this, even the Mexica did it. It's the root of medieval European nations claiming to be descended from Trojans and Greeks and all this shit. They write this stuff into their mythology all the time.
The dubious morality of the scenario is of little consequence. The point is that Edom, the land and it's people, are the 'rightful' inferiors of Israel.
Far as most are concerned, when you look for esoteric meanings in all pagan myths then you may as well be writing your own.

>> No.14566171

>>14566153
I agree, but even without that, and going by sola scriptura, the concept of the old testament god as demiurge is pretty heretical in any orthodox concept, or to consider that God was imperfect in the old testament is questionable as well. As is written in job, Gird up your loins and face me like a man. Were you there when I vaulted up the heavens and filled the oceans? By what right can you judge me? And Job, even after his J'accuse moment, has to concede that he doesnt have the knowledge or experience to comment on God's behavior. So when we read a semi-legendary text about the patriarchs, its a huge folly to start criticizing God based on which son gets the blessing, especially since on a closer readings its pretty clear that the decision was ultimately in Isaac's hands.

>> No.14566186

>>14566045
Anon, fidelity to God is the first and supreme of all commandments. It is the first law of existence. You read Esau sympathetically and Jacob unsympathetically. But how much of this do you find in the next? Or is it found in hour heart? God loves all. And God is very patient. But consider if you had a wife, and you gave her very good things and were loving to her--she could want neither any thing nor any affection, and always were you fitting and proportionate with your love; even if she had a crystaline, glittering laugh, even if she was a natural conversationalist, even if she knew just how to make you smile--what would any good quality of hers be worth to you if she was unfaithful? Rather, wouldn't all her good qualities instead be like daggers? And wouldn't then an ugly, rude, tempestuous woman be made sweet in her fidelity?

>> No.14566212

>>14566186
But wouldn’t Gods love be more perfect than ours? If someone was unfaithful you would hate them, but still love them, would God not be above hate?

Would God have forgiven Esau, if he hated him?

>> No.14566348

>>14566186
Questionable take desu

>> No.14566930

>>14566113

This is 100% a better and more literary thread than the constant, onanistic shilling of useless philisophers

>> No.14566939

>>14566930
*philosophers

>> No.14567125

>>14566113
/his/ and /lit/ need to be merged. History has always been considered a form of literature, and this board needs more activity.

>> No.14567192

>>14567125
it was fine before, but /his/ is infested by people who dont read and get their history from wikipedia intros.

>> No.14567264

>>14565994
God helps those who helps themselves.

>> No.14567767
File: 33 KB, 738x416, 1577618616710.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14567767

>>14566930
>>14566939
ebin

>> No.14567956

>>14567125
/his/ is filled with morons, why do want that?

>> No.14568064

>>14567125
>whats yer favorite dictator. Mine is Hitler because he is based and redpilled. Stalin wuz cool tho too