First of all, let's go to the
Lord in prayer. Father in Heaven, we ask that
You might bless the reading of Your Word and the study of Your
Word. Lord, these hard things and difficult
things, things that are so badly disputed today, we pray, Lord,
You might make them clear to us, that we might understand,
be persuaded of the teaching of the Word of the Lord, Such
a text we have today. Lord, the whole world almost
stands on another plane concerning the sentiment of these words. And so we ask your guidance.
We pray that you might seal the truth to our heart and that you
might confirm to us, Lord, these things to be true. We ask it
all in the name of Christ, our Lord and our Savior, we pray. Amen. Well, in Romans 9, we find
this passage. We find it in other places as
well. And we find it in verse 13. But let's begin our reading in
verse 9 and also read down through verse 13. That's Romans 9 and
verse 9 through verse 13. And the subject or the question,
does God really hate Esau? Verse 9. This is the word of
promise, at this time will I come and Sarah shall have a son. And not only, but when Rebecca
also had conceived by one, by our father Isaac, 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 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve
the younger. As it is written, Jacob have
I loved, but Esau have I hated." Now, that's our text. Jacob have
I loved, but, on the other hand, Esau have I hated. Now, this is a subject and this
is a text. that sooner or later we will
bump into when we study the sovereignty of God, or when we make a study
down through Romans 9. Our study on election, or divine
sovereignty, or even reprobation might take us into this text
here, that Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. Now, it is very clearly spelled
out in the Scripture that such as are chosen in the Lord Jesus
Christ before the world, in Him, are loved by God. He loves them,
and He loves them with an everlasting love. Jeremiah 31 and verse 3. And He will love them unto the
end. It says in John 13 and verse
1, Our Lord, knowing that His time had come, loved his own
which were in the world, loved them unto the end." Romans 8,
35-39 takes great pains to show that there is nothing that can
separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus. And he mentions many things there,
yet they're not able to separate us from the love of God. I remember a radio preacher by
the name of Dehon One day I was listening, thirty years ago probably,
and he was preaching on the love of God. And he said that God's
love is eternal, that God has loved us everlastingly. Then
he said, but if you die and go to hell, God's love must therefore
turn into hate on your part. Now, he does not love them because
of any personal trait or character. that might be found in them.
He does not love those that he loves because he looks ahead
and sees some desirable characteristics that are to be admired or that
might be useful for his glory and in his kingdom. The reason
for God's love is not to be found in the object of God's love,
that is, those He loves, because nothing in them, nothing about
them, nothing that they do or ever will do influences God to
set His love upon those that He loves. Else something that
they do might cause Him to withdraw His love from them somewhere
along the way. If his love is bestowed by merit,
then it might be withdrawn because of demerit. If it is given for
worthiness, then it might be withdrawn for unworthiness. So we see how we are able to
reason in that light. God, by Moses, said to Israel
of old, in Deuteronomy 7 and 7, two great things. First of
all, he said, The Lord did not set His love upon you. The Lord did not choose you. And then He neither loved them
nor chose the people because of what they were or because
of what God saw or the potential that might be in them. So what
reason then did Moses give for God fixing His love upon them? Deuteronomy 7 and 7, that He
set His love upon you. Why? The answer is simply because
he would. He loves because he would. He loves because he loves. And that is his good pleasure.
Thomas Goodwin, the Puritan said, the property of grace is to love
because it will. Therefore, God's love is sovereign. He loves whom He will, neither
increasing nor decreasing that love over the course of time. And everyone that God loves,
His love is effectual. That is, it bestows the gifts
and the good upon the objects of God's love that He has designed
and intended for them. But then we ask, what about our
text? here today. Here we have a text
declaring a man by name that God is said to hate. Esau have
I hated. Now, I remind you, not willy-nilly,
but a person by name and by identity, identified as the brother of
Jacob, is said to be hated by God. Now, not only a person by
name, but a person who is also a Jew, a real, full-bred and
born Jew, not a Gentile or a proselyte, not just a far-removed descendant
from Abraham our father, but the firstborn grandson of godly
old patriarch Abraham, the son of the son of Abraham is said
to be hated by God. Now, the firstborn of the promised
son Isaac, he was also. So the question is, why are these
facts significant? Some would be willing to say,
oh, there's no profit in considering or studying or thinking about
things like that in the Scripture. We can't understand it and so
forth. Let's just go on. But another
question Why does Paul mention the case of Jacob and Esau and
even quote from the Old Testament Scripture? So the question is
pertinent, what bearing does this have on the present subject
of Paul in Romans 9 discussing the sovereignty of God? Well,
the answer, I believe, is the one that John Gill gave, the
scope and design of the Apostle is to prove that all Israel are
not of Israel, and that all the natural seed of Abraham were
not the children of God in a spiritual sin. You see this back in verse
6, verse 7, and verse 8 in the 9th chapter of Romans. Therefore,
in spite of the Jews being of Abraham's seed and nativity,
and being the chosen people, having many unique privileges
bestowed upon them by God. Yet God's promise had not failed,
had not come to naught. The Word of God had not been
made of none effect by the fact that certain descendants of Abraham
were perishing in their sin. This was illustrated by the case
of Ishmael and Isaac. But it is better illustrated
by the example of Jacob and Esau. That is, that not all Israel
are of Israel, and that it is not the mere children of the
flesh that are the children of God, but it is those that are
the children of promise as Isaac was. Now there are Israelites,
and then there is the Israel of God. And there were the seed
of Abraham. And there were the children of
promise. And these were not always one
and the same. Now in the matter of Jacob and
Esau in Romans chapter 9, he recalls some historical facts
for us here to consider. Number one, They were conceived
at the same time. They lay as twins in the womb. One of them was not born a year
before the other. They were twins at conception,
and they were twins in the womb in verse 10 of Romans 9. Number two, before birth it was
revealed to Rebekah their mother. that the elder would serve the
younger. That's in Romans 9 and verse
12. And then in verse 13, Paul cites
another Old Testament Scripture in support of the distinction
that he has just made between Jacob and Esau, especially the
words of verse 12. It was said unto her," that is,
their mother, Rebecca. You remember in Genesis 25, the
children, even then, were striving together within her, as it were,
for mastery. And she went before the Lord,
and the Lord answered her. But we read, it was said unto
her, the elder shall serve the younger. The elder of the twins
in her womb. as it is written," Paul said. And of course, he is referring
to the Old Testament writing, to the Old Testament canon of
Scripture. And he cites some scriptural
support to support his teaching, whom he calls in Romans 3 and
2, the oracles of God, the Word of the Lord. Now, can we take
this as our cue in order to make the point how frequently Do we
find Paul quoting Scripture out of the Old Testament to support
his teachings? Right here in Romans 9, we find
several of those, especially when his teaching is opposed
by many. Therefore, v. 7-9, he refers
to the record in Genesis. In v. 13, he says it is written. In v. 17, Scripture said to Pharaoh,
In verse 25, the Scripture said, in Osi, or in Hosea. Verse 27, 29, and 33, he quotes
directly from the prophet Isaiah. For all of them confirmed the
fact that not all Israel will be saved, not all Israel are
of Israel, and also that the Gentiles will be called into
the grace and salvation of God and of Christ. Now, time to face
the question, Jacob have I loved, Esau have I hated? Paul said, it's written. It is
written, Jacob have I loved, Esau have I hated? Now, where is that written? Well, it is written in Malachi
chapter 1 and verses 1 through 3. What is written in this instance? Jacob have I loved, but Esau
have I hated." Now we have two characters in view, Jacob and
Esau, twin sons of Isaac and Rebekah. And then notice the
two statements, have I loved, have I hated. Then the name is given, Jacob
have I loved, Esau have I hated." Now, let's emphasize the force
of the word in the middle, the little word, but. Jacob have
I loved, but Esau have I hated. Jacob I loved, but Esau, on the
other hand, have I hated. It is a total, absolute contrast. Jacob I loved, Esau I hated. But Esau, and please note, it
was not Jacob I loved, and Esau I loved less. That is not what
Paul said. It is not what Malachi has said. The contrast is not between love,
the contrast rather is between love and hate. It is not between
love and love less. It is not two degrees of love
that are in the mind of the apostle. Not a greater love and a lesser
love. I say that because that's how
some people solve Romans 9.13. Jacob have I loved, Esau have
I loved less. And you'd be surprised at some
of the commentators pitched by this, that's the out that they
take. It is not a greater degree of
love to Jacob and a lesser degree of love unto Esau. Because the
verse absolutely loses its meaning when this way of understanding
the words are adopted. It is no longer pertinent to
Paul's intention to say, Jacob I love, Esau I love less, or
even hated less. Besides, let's make a couple
of points here that might set it in order for us. Number one,
of those who hold to the universal love of God, that God loves everybody,
that God loves everyone upon the face of the earth, we remember
that it is not their contention that some are loved more and
some are loved less. That is not their doctrine, at
least not until they are pinched by Romans 9 and verse 13. Rather, it is the doctrine of
Arminianism that God loves all equally and alike. Cain as much
as Abel, Pharaoh as much as Paul, Judas as much as Joseph, Those
that are never saved as much as those that are saved. Those
that are in hell as much as those that are in heaven. When they
emphasize John 3.16, God so loved the world, I have never heard
them make the distinction, some more and some less. Some with
a greater degree of love, some with a lesser degree of love.
This invention therefore, is aimed strictly at this verse
of Scripture and this doctrine, Esau have I hated." Now, if we
granted them this distinction, we then ask them, what reason
will they give? What justification can they set
forward for God loving Esau less than Jacob? Yes, it means love
less, they say. Well, then we ask the question,
what reason, what ground, why does God love Esau less than
He loved Jacob? You see, they have not solved
their problem. They have not gone to the root
of the problem. Why did God love Esau with a
lesser degree of love, if that is what the text is saying? In
comparison with Jacob, how in the world could we make it say
that? Should they answer us? Well,
because Jacob's works were righteous and Esau's works were evil. Because Jacob believed, they
might say, and Esau did not. Then we remind them in verse
11 of Romans 9 that Paul has excluded good and evil as a consideration
in the matter. Neither good nor evil. is behind
God's sovereign determination of them. And besides, God is
no more a respecter of graces than He would be of persons,
and that would be a respecter of grace. For Paul, in that statement
about good and evil in verse 11, declares that the sentence,
the elder shall serve the younger, does not rest upon the morality,
or the lack thereof of either Jacob or Esau." William G. T. Shedd is one of those, surprisingly,
who argues for loving less when we see this concerning Esau. Showing less favor is how he
has tended to render that. See his criticism in his commentary
in Romans chapter 9. And yet he makes an amazing statement
in light of his view of the matter, for he wrote, and I quote, the
love and hatred here alluded to cannot be God's feeling towards
holiness and sin, unquote. And besides, there is not the
slightest hint in the text that we are to understand Paul to
say, I love the ways, I love the life, I loved the works of
Jacob, but I hated the ways and the works and the life of Esau."
No hint of that at all. For as we saw, these are excluded
from consideration in verse 11. Good or evil was not a factor
in God loving the one and hating the other. not even a foresight
of their respective good and evil, and certainly not their
actual good or evil. For the children, you see, had
not yet been born, they had not yet done any good or evil, when
it was said to their mother, the elder shall serve the younger."
Now, let's notice a connection for which I'm indebted to the
writings of John Gill, one of my favorite. Gill said that Paul
interprets the saying, the elder shall serve the younger, as meaning
God loved the one and hated the other. And that even the passage
in Malachi 1, verses 2 and 3 was an explanation of what was told
Rebekah before the twins did good or evil, or were born. And Paul interprets that to mean,
Jacob I loved, Esau have I hated. If you'd like to, I'm turning
to Malachi, the first chapter and the first verse of that book,
the last book of the Old Testament, Malachi. Let's look at chapter
1 and let's read verses 1 through 3 from this particular place
and see how it is perverted by some, but how it lines up directly
with what Paul said. Malachi 1, 1 through 3. The burden
of the word of the Lord to Israel by Malachi. 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, and I hated
Esau, and I laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the
dragons of the wilderness." Now, the first thing we noticed is
that Gil was right in saying that Paul is using the original
text in Genesis chapter 25 as meaning, Jacob have I loved,
but Esau have I hated. Now, if we look at the words
of Malachi that we just read, we notice something. I loved
Jacob and I hated Esau. And notice how this is emphasized. Notice how it is put forth. Was
not Esau Jacob's brother? Yes, they were brothers. Born
of the same conception. carried in the same womb born
of the same Father and same Mother. Yes, Esau was Jacob's brother. As in Romans 9, they were blood,
natural brothers, twins, and so forth. Even Esau was the firstborn. Esau came out born first. And yet, even though Esau was
Jacob's brother, And even though Jacob have I loved, yet Esau
have I hated," the prophet said. Remember, Jacob was a prominent
man in the history of Israel and of the building up of the
twelve sons and twelve tribes of Israel. He was son of Isaac. He was grandson of Abraham. He was blessed by God. And his
name was changed to Israel as God dealt with him in Genesis
32, 38, 35, and 10. He was the progenitor of the
twelve sons or tribes of Israel, and is often named in that great
trio, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of
Jacob. And those three are so often
brought together in the Scripture. So, what is the spiritual advantage
to being the brother of Jacob? Esau was Jacob's brother. Will
he have Jacob's grace? Will he have the same divine
love upon him? Will he be elected and loved
by God? He chose Jacob. Has he not chosen
Esau as well? He loved Jacob, but does he not
love Esau? Nay. Esau have I hated, notwithstanding
him being Jacob's brother, for grace does not run in the blood. It is not passed by natural procreation. Brothers, one loved, one hated,
one elect, the other a reprobate from the same father and the
same mother is not unusual. It has occurred all down through
history. Now, those who oppose this view
of God really hating Esau, they seek to diffuse it in one of
two ways. It pinches them badly. And so
to get out of the trap, here's what they do. Number one, they
contend Paul is only speaking of nations in Romans chapter
9 because of Genesis 25-23. Two nations are in thy womb because
both Jacob and Esau were dead when Malachi wrote his prophecy. Thus, it is only their paternity
that is in view in the prophecy of Malachi. But who would argue
that the words, the elder shall serve the younger, means that
the older nation shall serve the younger nation? Who would
argue like that? Secondly, they contend that Paul
does not speak personally of Jacob and Esau, the two literal
persons and sons, twin sons of Jacob and Rebekah. But he does
in Romans 9, verse 10 and 11. Thirdly, they contend it has
nothing to do with salvation. That it is not something spiritual
at all. It has nothing to do with their
eternal state. Nothing whatsoever. So when they
claim that Paul neither speaks of Jacob or Esau personally,
nor of their spiritual state, Thus, as the judicious Mr. Fry concluded, the force and
pertinency of the apostles' reasoning are lost. They aim Paul's words
in another direction. They take his meaning completely
and turn it around. Let it be noted that the two
objections raised and answered in Romans 9, 14 and verse 19
prove that we have understood Paul
rightly to say that he is speaking of Jacob and Esau personally
and of their spiritual state. Because these objections are
not necessary and they're not possible by the other means of
interpretation. All those other skedaddles around
the inn. In Malachi 1 through 3, we can
see Number one, Jacob and Esau were dead and gone when Malachi
wrote. Number two, Malachi speaks of
their descendants. But why does he do so? What is
the purpose of the statement? Was not Esau Jacob's brother? Yet I loved Jacob and I hated
Esau. Well, the answer is, it is a
reply to the people's quibble and cobble against the Lord's
saying I have loved you, in the second verse of Malachi 1. And
they say impudently, wherein have you loved us? Wherein? Where are the tokens of your
love? Show us what you have done that
is an object of your love. Where are those tokens? For they
had been chastened by God and by their enemy, and yet they
had been kept and they had been recovered. from the scourge of
the Chaldean and brought safely again into the worship of the
Lord. Where hast thou loved us? They say. The reply of God or
the prophet was this, was not Esau and Jacob brothers, yet
I hated Esau and laid his habitation desolate. I destroyed it. I brought it to nothing. The
point seems to be The attitude of God towards Jacob and Esau
is what John Gill called the personal regard that God had
to Jacob and Esau, is in many ways manifested in their offspring. For example, to Israel, God extends
numberless blessings to the offspring of Jacob. To the Edomites, Esau's
descendants, He stretches His hand out against them. He destroys
their habitation and He brings them down. God's love and God's
hatred will be effectual. That is, it will be seen and
accomplished. It will be manifest. Those that
God loves will have the benefits of the love of a kind and gracious
Heavenly Father. Those that God hates will see
the evidences of it, as did Esau, first in the selling of his birthright,
being a profane person before God and before men. Hebrews 12,
16. He is called a fornicator, a
profane person who became a full apostate from God and His worship. That was the end of Esau. The
love and the hatred of God, therefore, towards them was in effect election
and reprobation. They are synonymous in their
case. It is not nations, but individuals
that are in view in Romans chapter 9, since Paul is explaining how
many of the nation of Israel were excluded from the blessing
of salvation and the promise made through Abraham. And his
scope and his design in Romans chapter 9 is to establish the
fact that not all Israel which are of Israel in verse 6, So
that's a very important point in this chapter. So let's close
by showing today, if we will, that the love of God is particular. Especially is it declared to
be particular in the New Testament. Jeremiah 31, 3, I have loved
you with an everlasting love, but it is typified by God setting
His love upon Israel, and with the exception, brothers and sisters,
of John 3 and verse 16. No other passage, as A. W. Pink says in the New Testament,
even seems or comes close to teaching universal love. We understand the word world
in John 3 and verse 16 to denote the Gentiles rather than every
single individual without exception. The Gentiles, the world. They
are called the world by the Jews. Romans 11, 12, and 15. John 13 and 1, having loved His
own which were in the world, He loved them to the end. His
own which were in the world. Revelation 3 and 19, as many
as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Proverbs 3 and verse 12. Hebrews 12 and verse 6, whom
the Lord loveth, He chasteneth. These distinctions would be absolutely
meaningless if God's love were absolutely universal upon everyone,
whom as many as I love makes a clear distinction. And besides,
as I said, Romans 8, 35-39, nothing can separate us from the love
of God which is in Christ Jesus. How will any explain God loving
those that perish. How will any explain that those
that God loves will perish in sin and unbelief? Because His love has moved Him
to bestow great blessings upon them, even salvational blessing. Esau have I hated. It's like someone said, it's
a bitter pill, but swallow it down, because there it is. All right, let's bow our heads
together, please, for a word of prayer.