The sin of having twins

[Verifyveritas76]

Also, Jacob considers himself a deceiver according to Genesis 27:12. The action of deceiving his father causes him no pause, only the consequences if his father perceives the deception. He was fearful, but it is not a righteous fear as you have tried to portray. He knew the consequences of the deception. He would be cursed by his father instead of blessed. Rebekah convinces him to continue with the deception by saying that she would accept the curse for him.

As I went through the conversation between Jacob and his father, I counted 5 separate distinct lies to his father not counting the lies of omission where he didn't correct his father's inaccurate conclusion. The picture couldn't be clearer in this case. This is not an inadvertent lie. This is not an insignificant lie if there is such a thing. This conversation is a premeditated series of lies on the order of magnitude. Thus, Jacob is depicted early in his life, by scripture, as being a liar.

Proverbs 12:17-22
He that speaketh truth sheweth forth righteousness: but a false witness deceit.
There is that speaketh like the piercings of a sword: but the tongue of the wise is health.
The lip of truth shall be established for ever: but a lying tongue is but for a moment.
Deceit is in the heart of them that imagine evil: but to the counsellors of peace is joy.
There shall no evil happen to the just: but the wicked shall be filled with mischief.
Lying lips are abomination to the LORD: but they that deal truly are his delight.

As far as we know Isaac didn't know that he was stabbed in the back by his own wife. As far as he knew, Jacob initiated as well as perpetrated the diabolical deception. If you believe in life after death, Isaac knows now!

It's pretty interesting, when you parse out the spelling of Jacob's name in paleo Hebrew, the pictures presented is that Yah sees the piercing. We think of it as stabbing Esau in the back. In reality, Jacob was willing to stab both the Adown and the firstborn of his family in the back to be first.

Supplanter, deceiver, manipulator, cheat? Guilty

 

[Shadowjak's Dancer]

So... fun turn this discussion took.

I suppose, I know what you mean, IshChayil, about not oversimplified in terms of generational responsibility. The one who kindled a fire that burned down neighboring fields is responsible for the damage, after all.

Even so, each generation of our people were dealt with according to how they responded to the Almighty. No longer do we use the parable about the Fathers eating sour grapes..., right?

 

[Verifyveritas76]

It's also interesting when you consider Jacob's deception against the life of David. David also had an opportunity to stab the "firstborn" king in the back if you will. Several of his men were upset that David didn't kill Saul while he had the chance. He trusted God to raise him up in God's own time.

David . . . . Righteous? I'd say so though not perfect. Yet he is noted as being a man after God's own heart. Jacob . . . Not so much

 

[The Revolting Man]

It's probably important to point out at this point that Ish's Jewish heritage makes him justifiably leery of gentiles criticism. No one here is suggesting that Jacob was any worse then any other person and certainly he experienced redemption and renewal. Also no one here would ever think that this one incident in Jacob's life should in anyway condone anti-Semitism. Jacob was just a man like any of us who made mistakes and got his head on straight as he got older. He's a great hero of the faith, both faiths. He just wasn't perfect.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

True that. That sentiment I can endorse wholeheartedly

 

[Shadowjak's Dancer]

As yet another Jew here on the forums, I can freely say that Gentile criticism doesn't much bother me. I mean, that whole Judah and Tamar incident, including the stage setting events are worth examining if people wanted to analyze the leas-than-perfect patriarchs. What they did to Joseph...
Or even what Reuven did to his dad, which is an especially pertinent example. Which father do we honor, the one who wasn't, or the one who didn't?
Tell me the one Jew or Patriarch that was perfect....
I know of only one. That doesn't mean I dishonor the others with the Truth, or the Scripture itself would be doing so.
Besides, even after reading their laundry list of mistakes preserved for all the world to see, it doesn't make me feel contemptuous towards them, but rather gives me some hope knowing how many mistakes I have made.

 

[Shibboleth]

I certainly didn't intend to open up such a fascinating can of worms with my post! But if you'll permit me to to return to my post...

In (humorously) drawing the parallels between the arguments against polygamy and against twins, I thought of something else. The world's counterfeit to polygamy, in order to preserve the "good" of monogamy, is divorce and remarriage. In the twins analogy (or in a multi-child analogy in general), the corresponding "solution" would be abortion of the twin, or birth control to prevent future children. That got me thinking about China's one-child policy, and the modern environmentalist movement...

And then I started to realize, sadly, that it might not be too much longer (if they aren't already doing it) before some more liberal mainstream "churches" start using the same kind of anti-poly hermeneutics to preach one child as God's ideal, and requiring birth control and abortion because anything more would be "sinful" (it might lead to jealousy between children, Jesus was the only-begotten Son, etc...).

 

[Shadowjak's Dancer]

I certainly didn't intend to open up such a fascinating can of worms with my post! But if you'll permit me to to return to my post...

In (humorously) drawing the parallels between the arguments against polygamy and against twins, I thought of something else. The world's counterfeit to polygamy, in order to preserve the "good" of monogamy, is divorce and remarriage. In the twins analogy (or in a multi-child analogy in general), the corresponding "solution" would be abortion of the twin, or birth control to prevent future children. That got me thinking about China's one-child policy, and the modern environmentalist movement...

And then I started to realize, sadly, that it might not be too much longer (if they aren't already doing it) before some more liberal mainstream "churches" start using the same kind of anti-poly hermeneutics to preach one child as God's ideal, and requiring birth control and abortion because anything more would be "sinful" (it might lead to jealousy between children, Jesus was the only-begotten Son, etc...).

What a horrifying thought.

 

[FollowingHim]

On Jacob: This is exactly what Satan wants us to be doing, arguing over stuff that doesn't really affect us but causes emotions to get heated and causes division between brothers. There's a lot of history behind the emotions on both sides, we need to step past it. We all recognise fault in our forefathers - we all recognise that Adam sinned for instance, that's very fundamental, and he is our father. Perceiving faults in Jacob (correctly or even incorrectly) does not equal being "antisemitic" any more than perceiving faults in Adam equals being "anti-human". This topic would be calm were it not for the millions of people who had been murdered in the past through Satan's very efficient ability to manipulate human emotion in order to whip up hatred between brothers.

And then I started to realize, sadly, that it might not be too much longer (if they aren't already doing it) before some more liberal mainstream "churches" start using the same kind of anti-poly hermeneutics to preach one child as God's ideal, and requiring birth control and abortion because anything more would be "sinful" (it might lead to jealousy between children, Jesus was the only-begotten Son, etc...).

Sadly, I can easily see that happening. It's not very far-fetched at all. Most Christians have already fallen for the lie that we need to control the number of children we have in order to be "responsible".

 

[IshChayil]

I will need a lot of time and full sized key board to respond to all of that but let me point out a few things, all men are deceitful and desperately wicked. That is in scripture and it would catch Jacob up in its very wide net. It would not be disrespectful to call your grandfather an abusive alcoholic if he habitually got drunk and beat people up. And it was a sin to try and use deceit and guile (twice) to claim what God had already promised him. Now I'm mot saying Jacob isn't a lion of the faith. He is. God blessed the whole world through him and turned him into nations. But there's no need to idolize the man. His record, good and bad, speaks foe itself.

Lastly, if something is not in scripture then we can't teach it as God's Truth. This was Martin Luther's (also a lion of the faith and the most important figure to not be in the Bible. Satanic mess? Come on man. He even supported polygyny! The guy didn't go far enough but he was still amazing.) great realization. Scripture always trumps the traditions of men. Always. I am very excited though about your loyalty to Paul. That is where people so frequently go wrong.

Blessings to you brother in our Messiah Yeshua; I appreciate your opinion but I have to respond to how you call Martin Luther a "Lion of the faith".
If by "lion" you mean, pervert, foundation-layer for the holocaust in Germany, and bible modifier, then yes, I agree.

He hated the Anabaptists who allowed any believer to testify and called their practice "from the pits of hell". (so much for the priesthood of every believer). In fact, Luther suggested the death penalty for Anabaptists. I guess we weren't yet at inter-denominational tolerance.
Many Anabaptists were murdered thanks to Luther in his lifetime. (I'll provide a reference later if you require, I remember studying this in AP European History in Highschool).

Luther did not believe the entire bible was accurate.
“When one often reads that great numbers of people were slain–for example, eighty thousand–I believe that hardly one thousand were actually killed. What is meant is the whole people.” (see The Authoritative WOrd: Essays on the The Nature of Scripture, Donald K. McKim).

Zec you wrote: "Lastly, if something is not in scripture then we can't teach it as God's Truth. This was Martin Luther's ..."
unfortunately Luther wanted to change what was in scripture.

Luther wanted to delete these books: Hebrews, James, Jude, Revelation but was unable due to his benefactor's stance (Frederik II of Saxony who had saved Luther from the pope) I guess cash is king with holy men.
Begrudgingly he wrote in the forward to his translation that they should be treated less importantly than other books and he called James the "straw epistle". wow.
see Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther's_canon

This "lion" insisted that the consumation of his marriage be witnessed by men IN THE BRIDAL CHAMBER while he did the deed.
How many ladies here in Biblical Families think this was a righteous fella? A far cry from the modesty of Rebecca who immediately wrapped herself when she saw Isaac in the field.

He taught that if a husband was unable to please his wife then she had a RIGHT to take a lover! (wow what a great teacher) pro adultery
PBS.org http://www.pbs.org/empires/martinluther/cheats.html

His vulgar mind and lack of modesty and decency are also witnessed in his book: Hans Worst
where the language is so foul and full of curse words you wouldn't believe a "man of G-d" could write such things... and you'd be right.

If you want a sampling of Martin Luther's foul mouth and vengeful spirit, scan his book Table Talk
https://archive.org/stream/cu31924029255184/cu31924029255184_djvu.txt

Here is a nice quote from Mr. Faith himself, “I am ripe sh*t, so is the world a great wide assh***; eventually we will part.”
see German Hercules: The Impact of Scatology on the Image of Martin Luther, Danielle Skjelver

Guess what, Baptists aren't the only ones who should be murdered by Luther, Jews are in too!
I suggest you read "On the Jews and their Lies" where Luther's book publicly calls for the burning of synagogues and general persecution of Jews.
Here's a link about that fabulous work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies

My favorite tidbit from this "godly man" concerning Jews is that "We [Christians] are at fault for *not killing* them [the Jews]!”
Another nice one is "let them [Jews] be driven like dogs from Christian lands"...yeah that happened too.
Is it any small wonder the seeds were sewn in Germany for the holocaust?

In his work Adolf Hitler's minister of education wrote:
"Since Martin Luther closed his eyes, no such son of our people has appeared again. It has been decided that we shall be the first to witness his reappearance ... I think the time is past when one may not say the names of Hitler and Luther in the same breath. They belong together; they are of the same old stamp [Schrot und Korn]" The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, Steigmann-Gall, Richard citing Völkischer Beobachter

Sure Luther was brave to stand up against Johanne Tetzel who was selling tickets to heaven for peoples' loved ones who had past on but many wicked people have done some good things in their life and they are not worthy of such titles as "lions of faith".

I can think of no other person in history who has both kept Jews from the Messiah and sewn seeds which resulted in persecution of the chosen people more than the person who is Martin Luther. If it were a Hindu who did it; it would have been less diabolical but a professing Christian. Shame, shame, shame, yimach sh'mo.

Generally I like your posts Zec, I jut think you are way off base on Martin Luther; I understand though because sometimes we are influenced by the traditions we grow up in. The seminaries have trouble breaking from tradition; we can all get caught up in tradition for tradition's sake and not even realize it until someone points it out. For sure this happens at Jewish Yeshivas as well; it's human nature to embrace traditions and usually we arent even aware of it.

I'm afraid I must agree with Sir Thomas Moore who died for his principles in his summary of Luther:
"[Luther is] “buffoon . . . [who will] carry nothing in his mouth other than cesspools, sewers, latrines, sh*t and dung . . . .”

Let's close with a scripture quote
וַאֲבָֽרֲכָה֙ מְבָ֣רְכֶ֔יךָ וּמְקַלֶּלְךָ֖ אָאֹ֑ר וְנִבְרְכ֣וּ בְךָ֔ כֹּ֖ל מִשְׁפְּחֹ֥ת הָאֲדָמָֽה
G-d speaking to Avram our father, "Let me bless those who bless you but those who dishonor you I will curse, and all the Earth's families will be blessed on your account" Gen. 12:3

 

[IshChayil]

On Jacob: This is exactly what Satan wants us to be doing, arguing over stuff that doesn't really affect us but causes emotions to get heated and causes division between brothers. There's a lot of history behind the emotions on both sides, we need to step past it. We all recognise fault in our forefathers - we all recognise that Adam sinned for instance, that's very fundamental, and he is our father. Perceiving faults in Jacob (correctly or even incorrectly) does not equal being "antisemitic" any more than perceiving faults in Adam equals being "anti-human". This topic would be calm were it not for the millions of people who had been murdered in the past through Satan's very efficient ability to manipulate human emotion in order to whip up hatred between brothers.

Sadly, I can easily see that happening. It's not very far-fetched at all. Most Christians have already fallen for the lie that we need to control the number of children we have in order to be "responsible".

The Adam analogy is quite weak brother. To make it an accurate analogy we'd have to say, "Adam constantly stole from G-d's trees, many times throughout his life. In fact, he was a chronic thief" and it would need to be a Martian who said it in order to make your comparison of defaming Adam similar to defaming Jacob, father of a nation.
To the crux of the matter folks:

I apologize if I hurt any one’s feelings.

There is a saying “2 Jews 3 opinions” because culturally, disagreeing is not a problem and it’s even normal to often argue the opposing side just to be sure we are thinking through an issue clearly. Clearly, we have a condition of culture-clash here.

I truly am sorry if I hurt anyone. I do want to lay things out here though for fairness and growth.

1. I never called a single person here an anti-semite nor did I even think any of you are. Promise. My assumption is everyone here are diligent men and women of G-d and avid students of the bible. I did however, label what I believe to be a tradition of men among the Gentile churches of labeling Jacob a “liar, deceiver” etc. as an anti semitic *tradition*

I am certain that it’s hard for people to see their own traditions when they view scripture.

We who have practiced Judaism so often get blamed for that but really it happens the other way around a whole lot. It’s just hard to see with the plank in one’s eye the traditions their church passed to them. How long did it take to realize polygamy isn’t evil and perverse?

I think when I labelled the source of this notion that “bad Jacob” aka pre-Israel was an old anti-semitic teaching in the church; that was misunderstood that I was labelling a person an anti-semite. I don’t feel I need to resort to ad hominem attacks; just read the back and forth carefully. No need to resort to personal attacks.

Good debaters who are atheists don’t even resort to ad-hominem; as believers we should all the more not do this; even if we are “anti-stupidity and abominations”.

2. My claim: No one in the bible who wasn’t worthy already, ever got a name change from G-d and even the believers in the end will be given new names by G-d on a white pebble; so name change is always good in scripture; a sign of approval. A name change is never a sign of “you were bad and now you are good so here is your new name”, Israel.

Esau and Ishmael never got name changes. ( Saul to Paul is not a name change it’s the same name in Hebrew and Greek. )

Many centuries after Jacob’s death the bible says this:

יְהוָ֣ה צְבָא֣וֹת עִמָּ֑נוּ מִשְׂגָּֽב־לָ֝נוּ אֱלֹהֵ֖י יַעֲקֹ֣ב סֶֽלָה׃
“L-rd of hosts is with us, He is a refuge for us, the G-d of Jacob - selah (stop and think about it)”-Psalm 46:11

יִבְחַר־לָ֥נוּ אֶת־נַחֲלָתֵ֑נוּ אֶ֥ת גְּא֨וֹן יַעֲקֹ֖ב אֲשֶׁר־אָהֵ֣ב סֶֽלָה׃
“He chose for us our inheritance, the excellence of Jacob whom He loved.”-Psalm 47:5

3. Applying a gerund label to someone implies a chronic state, i.e. deceiver. It does not imply a 1-bad-day in their life. If you stole something from a store when you were 12, and you never stole again, it’s unfair to say “when he was a kid, he was a thief” because thief was not an identifying trait; it was a 1 day sin in that case.

It is my observation that the view that Jacob was a chronic deceiver, liar, etc. is definitely sourced in anti-semitism over the centuries and if someone will pay me for my research time, I’ll trace it down in Luther, Calvin, Dostoevsky and various other anti-semites of great historical import. Even in our discussion here, the most anyone could quote from Jacob’s biblical history (not tradition) were 5 times of deception from Jacob and those are all on the same day! Imagine if our children judge us by the same standard you judge Jacob? Chances are we’ll all be labeled liar, thief, deceiver, bully, pervert, racist, etc.unfairly.

4. I have tried to use reason and logic here in an attempt to be a blessing to you guys because I truly believe it is a sin, and a “big deal” to label an ancestor as a chronic whatever if scripture doesn’t clearly indicate that. My hope was to be a blessing in removing what I perceive to be bad behaviour.

Also, I’m commanded by our G-d to “rebuke your brother...because I’m the L-rd your G-d...”. There’s no choice, it must be done; nothing personal. Defaming an ancestor violates the 5th commandment in the big 10. Honor your father and mother.

Maybe I’m wrong; let’s just refer to the man Jacob using terms how the bible refers to him (not the nation when they went after Baal, etc).

If it is your sincerely held religious belief that Jacob our father was a chronic deceiver, liar, etc. before he “got his wrestling on” with an Angel; and you have a need to call him out because it serves a higher spiritual purpose to do so; then what can I say? Just please don’t use straw men arguments claiming that Jews deify, worship, etc. Jacob because we don’t. That’s an old Gentile myth. There’s no prayers to him in the siddur; there’s no bowing down to him or anything else that could be perceived as ancestor “worship”.


Anyway, I request, that if it’s not too hard, you understand for Jews; we don’t have these church traditions of labelling Jacob as a deceiver, liar, etc. so we don’t see it that way. If we could just for the sake of peace refrain from those labels here. I’d really appreciate it because it’s quite jarring and I don’t see the labels as edifying for anyone in any way.

"עשה שלום במרומיו הוא יעשה שלום עלינו…."
“May He who makes peace in His heavenlies, may He also make peace for us…” -common Jewish prayer

 

[The Revolting Man]

Blessings to you brother in our Messiah Yeshua; I appreciate your opinion but I have to respond to how you call Martin Luther a "Lion of the faith".
If by "lion" you mean, pervert, foundation-layer for the holocaust in Germany, and bible modifier, then yes, I agree.

He hated the Anabaptists who allowed any believer to testify and called their practice "from the pits of hell". (so much for the priesthood of every believer). In fact, Luther suggested the death penalty for Anabaptists. I guess we weren't yet at inter-denominational tolerance.
Many Anabaptists were murdered thanks to Luther in his lifetime. (I'll provide a reference later if you require, I remember studying this in AP European History in Highschool).

Luther did not believe the entire bible was accurate.
“When one often reads that great numbers of people were slain–for example, eighty thousand–I believe that hardly one thousand were actually killed. What is meant is the whole people.” (see The Authoritative WOrd: Essays on the The Nature of Scripture, Donald K. McKim).

Zec you wrote: "Lastly, if something is not in scripture then we can't teach it as God's Truth. This was Martin Luther's ..."
unfortunately Luther wanted to change what was in scripture.

Luther wanted to delete these books: Hebrews, James, Jude, Revelation but was unable due to his benefactor's stance (Frederik II of Saxony who had saved Luther from the pope) I guess cash is king with holy men.
Begrudgingly he wrote in the forward to his translation that they should be treated less importantly than other books and he called James the "straw epistle". wow.
see Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther's_canon

This "lion" insisted that the consumation of his marriage be witnessed by men IN THE BRIDAL CHAMBER while he did the deed.
How many ladies here in Biblical Families think this was a righteous fella? A far cry from the modesty of Rebecca who immediately wrapped herself when she saw Isaac in the field.

He taught that if a husband was unable to please his wife then she had a RIGHT to take a lover! (wow what a great teacher) pro adultery
PBS.org http://www.pbs.org/empires/martinluther/cheats.html

His vulgar mind and lack of modesty and decency are also witnessed in his book: Hans Worst
where the language is so foul and full of curse words you wouldn't believe a "man of G-d" could write such things... and you'd be right.

If you want a sampling of Martin Luther's foul mouth and vengeful spirit, scan his book Table Talk
https://archive.org/stream/cu31924029255184/cu31924029255184_djvu.txt

Here is a nice quote from Mr. Faith himself, “I am ripe sh*t, so is the world a great wide assh***; eventually we will part.”
see German Hercules: The Impact of Scatology on the Image of Martin Luther, Danielle Skjelver

Guess what, Baptists aren't the only ones who should be murdered by Luther, Jews are in too!
I suggest you read "On the Jews and their Lies" where Luther's book publicly calls for the burning of synagogues and general persecution of Jews.
Here's a link about that fabulous work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies

My favorite tidbit from this "godly man" concerning Jews is that "We [Christians] are at fault for *not killing* them [the Jews]!”
Another nice one is "let them [Jews] be driven like dogs from Christian lands"...yeah that happened too.
Is it any small wonder the seeds were sewn in Germany for the holocaust?

In his work Adolf Hitler's minister of education wrote:
"Since Martin Luther closed his eyes, no such son of our people has appeared again. It has been decided that we shall be the first to witness his reappearance ... I think the time is past when one may not say the names of Hitler and Luther in the same breath. They belong together; they are of the same old stamp [Schrot und Korn]" The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, Steigmann-Gall, Richard citing Völkischer Beobachter

Sure Luther was brave to stand up against Johanne Tetzel who was selling tickets to heaven for peoples' loved ones who had past on but many wicked people have done some good things in their life and they are not worthy of such titles as "lions of faith".

I can think of no other person in history who has both kept Jews from the Messiah and sewn seeds which resulted in persecution of the chosen people more than the person who is Martin Luther. If it were a Hindu who did it; it would have been less diabolical but a professing Christian. Shame, shame, shame, yimach sh'mo.

Generally I like your posts Zec, I jut think you are way off base on Martin Luther; I understand though because sometimes we are influenced by the traditions we grow up in. The seminaries have trouble breaking from tradition; we can all get caught up in tradition for tradition's sake and not even realize it until someone points it out. For sure this happens at Jewish Yeshivas as well; it's human nature to embrace traditions and usually we arent even aware of it.

I'm afraid I must agree with Sir Thomas Moore who died for his principles in his summary of Luther:
"[Luther is] “buffoon . . . [who will] carry nothing in his mouth other than cesspools, sewers, latrines, sh*t and dung . . . .”

Let's close with a scripture quote
וַאֲבָֽרֲכָה֙ מְבָ֣רְכֶ֔יךָ וּמְקַלֶּלְךָ֖ אָאֹ֑ר וְנִבְרְכ֣וּ בְךָ֔ כֹּ֖ל מִשְׁפְּחֹ֥ת הָאֲדָמָֽה
G-d speaking to Avram our father, "Let me bless those who bless you but those who dishonor you I will curse, and all the Earth's families will be blessed on your account" Gen. 12:3

Its interesting that Jacob's every sin can be explained away but Luther gets the microscope. If you want perfection then stick with Christ and leave Jacob and Luther both to themselves. Luther wasn't perfect. I will look into his anti-Semitism but he was a courageous defender of the gospel and only the gospel. He took a stand when no one else would. Several of your points are unfair. The first is the consummation of his marriage, there was an important theological point being made and this was not very uncommon. In a time when large extended families generally lived in roomless houses with servants and workers, it was pretty much standard practice to get it on in the presence of others. They weren't performing a porno. No one saw anymore of her then they would have normally. This was a time when kings had sex with their wives in front of the whole court as a part of the marriage ceremony. The whole court was then present for the birth of the child. This wasn't some bizarre ritual but a hard core demonstration of his rejection of Catholic dogma.

I understand why the dismissal of portions of scripture is disturbing. It is. But again, there at mitigating factors. Luther was completely stripping the whole faith of a millenia and a half of traditions and heresies. He got a little exuberant but he was reined in. Alls well that ends well.

His language was pretty extreme but again, very much in keeping with his adamant assertion that there was no authority but scripture. If God didn't ban a word then man can't ban a word. Our standards, no matter how common sense, can not be shoe horned into any general statement of God's. And keep in mind that both Christ and Paul used some pretty salty language.

I can't speak to his anti-Semitism. I will not allow the words of a Nazi trying to burnish Hitler's legacy to indict Luther though. Some Nazis claimed to be the Lost Tribes so obviously they had some issues with reality. As far as his approach to the Anabaptists, what can I say, to a certain extent he was still a man of his times.

He was still the man he stood in front of a council that fully intended to kill him and said, "Here I stand. I can do no other." He was still the man that turned around all of Christendom and got them headed back in the right direction. He risked death time and time again to bring the Gospel to the masses.

If a tree is known by its fruit then Martin Luther has some pretty impressive fruit. He wasn't perfect by any means but no one else outside of scripture has done as much as he has to lead people out of bondage and into salvation. Every believer in the world owes him some debt. Instead of throwing out the baby with the bathwater, we should be looking to continue and complete his work.

 

[The Revolting Man]

The Adam analogy is quite weak brother. To make it an accurate analogy we'd have to say, "Adam constantly stole from G-d's trees, many times throughout his life. In fact, he was a chronic thief" and it would need to be a Martian who said it in order to make your comparison of defaming Adam similar to defaming Jacob, father of a nation.
To the crux of the matter folks:

I apologize if I hurt any one’s feelings.

There is a saying “2 Jews 3 opinions” because culturally, disagreeing is not a problem and it’s even normal to often argue the opposing side just to be sure we are thinking through an issue clearly. Clearly, we have a condition of culture-clash here.

I truly am sorry if I hurt anyone. I do want to lay things out here though for fairness and growth.

1. I never called a single person here an anti-semite nor did I even think any of you are. Promise. My assumption is everyone here are diligent men and women of G-d and avid students of the bible. I did however, label what I believe to be a tradition of men among the Gentile churches of labeling Jacob a “liar, deceiver” etc. as an anti semitic *tradition*

I am certain that it’s hard for people to see their own traditions when they view scripture.

We who have practiced Judaism so often get blamed for that but really it happens the other way around a whole lot. It’s just hard to see with the plank in one’s eye the traditions their church passed to them. How long did it take to realize polygamy isn’t evil and perverse?

I think when I labelled the source of this notion that “bad Jacob” aka pre-Israel was an old anti-semitic teaching in the church; that was misunderstood that I was labelling a person an anti-semite. I don’t feel I need to resort to ad hominem attacks; just read the back and forth carefully. No need to resort to personal attacks.

Good debaters who are atheists don’t even resort to ad-hominem; as believers we should all the more not do this; even if we are “anti-stupidity and abominations”.

2. My claim: No one in the bible who wasn’t worthy already, ever got a name change from G-d and even the believers in the end will be given new names by G-d on a white pebble; so name change is always good in scripture; a sign of approval. A name change is never a sign of “you were bad and now you are good so here is your new name”, Israel.

Esau and Ishmael never got name changes. ( Saul to Paul is not a name change it’s the same name in Hebrew and Greek. )

Many centuries after Jacob’s death the bible says this:

יְהוָ֣ה צְבָא֣וֹת עִמָּ֑נוּ מִשְׂגָּֽב־לָ֝נוּ אֱלֹהֵ֖י יַעֲקֹ֣ב סֶֽלָה׃
“L-rd of hosts is with us, He is a refuge for us, the G-d of Jacob - selah (stop and think about it)”-Psalm 46:11

יִבְחַר־לָ֥נוּ אֶת־נַחֲלָתֵ֑נוּ אֶ֥ת גְּא֨וֹן יַעֲקֹ֖ב אֲשֶׁר־אָהֵ֣ב סֶֽלָה׃
“He chose for us our inheritance, the excellence of Jacob whom He loved.”-Psalm 47:5

3. Applying a gerund label to someone implies a chronic state, i.e. deceiver. It does not imply a 1-bad-day in their life. If you stole something from a store when you were 12, and you never stole again, it’s unfair to say “when he was a kid, he was a thief” because thief was not an identifying trait; it was a 1 day sin in that case.

It is my observation that the view that Jacob was a chronic deceiver, liar, etc. is definitely sourced in anti-semitism over the centuries and if someone will pay me for my research time, I’ll trace it down in Luther, Calvin, Dostoevsky and various other anti-semites of great historical import. Even in our discussion here, the most anyone could quote from Jacob’s biblical history (not tradition) were 5 times of deception from Jacob and those are all on the same day! Imagine if our children judge us by the same standard you judge Jacob? Chances are we’ll all be labeled liar, thief, deceiver, bully, pervert, racist, etc.unfairly.

4. I have tried to use reason and logic here in an attempt to be a blessing to you guys because I truly believe it is a sin, and a “big deal” to label an ancestor as a chronic whatever if scripture doesn’t clearly indicate that. My hope was to be a blessing in removing what I perceive to be bad behaviour.

Also, I’m commanded by our G-d to “rebuke your brother...because I’m the L-rd your G-d...”. There’s no choice, it must be done; nothing personal. Defaming an ancestor violates the 5th commandment in the big 10. Honor your father and mother.

Maybe I’m wrong; let’s just refer to the man Jacob using terms how the bible refers to him (not the nation when they went after Baal, etc).

If it is your sincerely held religious belief that Jacob our father was a chronic deceiver, liar, etc. before he “got his wrestling on” with an Angel; and you have a need to call him out because it serves a higher spiritual purpose to do so; then what can I say? Just please don’t use straw men arguments claiming that Jews deify, worship, etc. Jacob because we don’t. That’s an old Gentile myth. There’s no prayers to him in the siddur; there’s no bowing down to him or anything else that could be perceived as ancestor “worship”.


Anyway, I request, that if it’s not too hard, you understand for Jews; we don’t have these church traditions of labelling Jacob as a deceiver, liar, etc. so we don’t see it that way. If we could just for the sake of peace refrain from those labels here. I’d really appreciate it because it’s quite jarring and I don’t see the labels as edifying for anyone in any way.

"עשה שלום במרומיו הוא יעשה שלום עלינו…."
“May He who makes peace in His heavenlies, may He also make peace for us…” -common Jewish prayer

You are making a straw man argument! No one here is calling Jacob a chronic liar or deceiver. They are saying that he lied and deceived, as we all have. That is all. He was a normal guy who got some things wrong but was blessed by God anyway. No one is winning by relating what the Bible itself tells us. No one is wearing their cultural blinders because they believe that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God, including Jacob.

I do not want to be put in the position of defending every dumb thing every Gentile ever said. There have been some pretty stupid things come out of our mouths over the years but can you really throw away Dostoevsky? The guys was really trying to find the truth and he gently called his contemporaries out when and where he could.

For crying out loud. Jacob can't stand up to the scrutiny the Hebrew scriptures put him under but you can take every one who ever contributed to western culture over every coal you can find? Yeah there's a plank that needs to come out of someone's eye.

There are no perfect people. Not one is worthy. Not Jacob. Not Luther. Not Dostoevsky. We are all of us, Jew and Gentile, sinners and unworthy of salvation. And if you debate that then you might as well be that atheist debater you admire so much.

 

[The Revolting Man]

The Adam analogy is quite weak brother. To make it an accurate analogy we'd have to say, "Adam constantly stole from G-d's trees, many times throughout his life. In fact, he was a chronic thief" and it would need to be a Martian who said it in order to make your comparison of defaming Adam similar to defaming Jacob, father of a nation.
To the crux of the matter folks:

I apologize if I hurt any one’s feelings.

There is a saying “2 Jews 3 opinions” because culturally, disagreeing is not a problem and it’s even normal to often argue the opposing side just to be sure we are thinking through an issue clearly. Clearly, we have a condition of culture-clash here.

I truly am sorry if I hurt anyone. I do want to lay things out here though for fairness and growth.

1. I never called a single person here an anti-semite nor did I even think any of you are. Promise. My assumption is everyone here are diligent men and women of G-d and avid students of the bible. I did however, label what I believe to be a tradition of men among the Gentile churches of labeling Jacob a “liar, deceiver” etc. as an anti semitic *tradition*

I am certain that it’s hard for people to see their own traditions when they view scripture.

We who have practiced Judaism so often get blamed for that but really it happens the other way around a whole lot. It’s just hard to see with the plank in one’s eye the traditions their church passed to them. How long did it take to realize polygamy isn’t evil and perverse?

I think when I labelled the source of this notion that “bad Jacob” aka pre-Israel was an old anti-semitic teaching in the church; that was misunderstood that I was labelling a person an anti-semite. I don’t feel I need to resort to ad hominem attacks; just read the back and forth carefully. No need to resort to personal attacks.

Good debaters who are atheists don’t even resort to ad-hominem; as believers we should all the more not do this; even if we are “anti-stupidity and abominations”.

2. My claim: No one in the bible who wasn’t worthy already, ever got a name change from G-d and even the believers in the end will be given new names by G-d on a white pebble; so name change is always good in scripture; a sign of approval. A name change is never a sign of “you were bad and now you are good so here is your new name”, Israel.

Esau and Ishmael never got name changes. ( Saul to Paul is not a name change it’s the same name in Hebrew and Greek. )

Many centuries after Jacob’s death the bible says this:

יְהוָ֣ה צְבָא֣וֹת עִמָּ֑נוּ מִשְׂגָּֽב־לָ֝נוּ אֱלֹהֵ֖י יַעֲקֹ֣ב סֶֽלָה׃
“L-rd of hosts is with us, He is a refuge for us, the G-d of Jacob - selah (stop and think about it)”-Psalm 46:11

יִבְחַר־לָ֥נוּ אֶת־נַחֲלָתֵ֑נוּ אֶ֥ת גְּא֨וֹן יַעֲקֹ֖ב אֲשֶׁר־אָהֵ֣ב סֶֽלָה׃
“He chose for us our inheritance, the excellence of Jacob whom He loved.”-Psalm 47:5

3. Applying a gerund label to someone implies a chronic state, i.e. deceiver. It does not imply a 1-bad-day in their life. If you stole something from a store when you were 12, and you never stole again, it’s unfair to say “when he was a kid, he was a thief” because thief was not an identifying trait; it was a 1 day sin in that case.

It is my observation that the view that Jacob was a chronic deceiver, liar, etc. is definitely sourced in anti-semitism over the centuries and if someone will pay me for my research time, I’ll trace it down in Luther, Calvin, Dostoevsky and various other anti-semites of great historical import. Even in our discussion here, the most anyone could quote from Jacob’s biblical history (not tradition) were 5 times of deception from Jacob and those are all on the same day! Imagine if our children judge us by the same standard you judge Jacob? Chances are we’ll all be labeled liar, thief, deceiver, bully, pervert, racist, etc.unfairly.

4. I have tried to use reason and logic here in an attempt to be a blessing to you guys because I truly believe it is a sin, and a “big deal” to label an ancestor as a chronic whatever if scripture doesn’t clearly indicate that. My hope was to be a blessing in removing what I perceive to be bad behaviour.

Also, I’m commanded by our G-d to “rebuke your brother...because I’m the L-rd your G-d...”. There’s no choice, it must be done; nothing personal. Defaming an ancestor violates the 5th commandment in the big 10. Honor your father and mother.

Maybe I’m wrong; let’s just refer to the man Jacob using terms how the bible refers to him (not the nation when they went after Baal, etc).

If it is your sincerely held religious belief that Jacob our father was a chronic deceiver, liar, etc. before he “got his wrestling on” with an Angel; and you have a need to call him out because it serves a higher spiritual purpose to do so; then what can I say? Just please don’t use straw men arguments claiming that Jews deify, worship, etc. Jacob because we don’t. That’s an old Gentile myth. There’s no prayers to him in the siddur; there’s no bowing down to him or anything else that could be perceived as ancestor “worship”.


Anyway, I request, that if it’s not too hard, you understand for Jews; we don’t have these church traditions of labelling Jacob as a deceiver, liar, etc. so we don’t see it that way. If we could just for the sake of peace refrain from those labels here. I’d really appreciate it because it’s quite jarring and I don’t see the labels as edifying for anyone in any way.

"עשה שלום במרומיו הוא יעשה שלום עלינו…."
“May He who makes peace in His heavenlies, may He also make peace for us…” -common Jewish prayer

You know what, now I'm just pissed. It's a sin to criticize your father but my fathers are fair game? You are rightly concerned about anti-Semitism but has there ever been a worthwhile gentile? So far all you've done is insult some of our greatest theologians and writers. Your last post was smug and condescending. This group of people more than any other has taken off the blinders and started stripping off the traditions. Gentiles aren't the only ones who have those though.

 

[IshChayil]

You are making a straw man argument! No one here is calling Jacob a chronic liar or deceiver. They are saying that he lied and deceived, as we all have. That is all. He was a normal guy who got some things wrong but was blessed by God anyway. No one is winning by relating what the Bible itself tells us. No one is wearing their cultural blinders because they believe that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God, including Jacob.

I do not want to be put in the position of defending every dumb thing every Gentile ever said. There have been some pretty stupid things come out of our mouths over the years but can you really throw away Dostoevsky? The guys was really trying to find the truth and he gently called his contemporaries out when and where he could.

You know what, now I'm just pissed. It's a sin to criticize your father but my fathers are fair game? You are rightly concerned about anti-Semitism but has there ever been a worthwhile gentile? So far all you've done is insult some of our greatest theologians and writers. Your last post was smug and condescending. This group of people more than any other has taken off the blinders and started stripping off the traditions. Gentiles aren't the only ones who have those though.

I didn't know you felt Luther was your father, I truly apologize if you are descended from Martin Luther. Are you?
I won't say another word against him if this is true.
If you are not his descendant maybe you should not call him your father but accept the adoption into Israel Paul talks about.
Time to change fathers? If you change fathers then you aren't a Gentile any more and you can have our theologians Seriously though, I have a list of wonderful Gentile theologians I'd be happy to share if you want.
But I am sorry you are pissed. ALso I'm very sorry if my tone seemed smug. I'll be careful about that in future posts. Forgive me for that brother. Really I mean it.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

Perhaps it would be possible to admire men for the good they have done while still recognizing the faults. Giving credit where due.
Thanks for clearing that up on the antiSemite issue. @IshChayil. I wasn't sure whether to take offense or not. I usually have pretty slow reflexes that way, but I can assure you that I have a lot of respect and interest in Hebrew culture.

I would still be open to references that you may know of to indicate Jacob's righteousness whether its biblical or historical, I just can't reconcile that standard with Jacob from what I've seen biblically to date. To me its not a big deal if he's not, it just comes down to a "prove all things" issue. It's kind of like the men of the first century enlarging the borders of their garments. (The blue ribbon at the hem of their garments which was symbolic of righteousness)

As far as Luther goes, I'm very much on the same page as @IshChayil. From what Ive seen and studied from 1st century on, the reformers were a very important part of Protestant history. However, they were primarily trying to take over the "Mother Church". When that failed, Luther in particular went to the Jewish community looking for approbation of his "revised" theology. When they rejected him, he became a rabid antiSemite. The same thing happened with him when he approached the "primitive" church that has truly been in existence since Pentecost. Though known by many names throughout history, (of which Anabaptist is only one) this body of believers are identified by theology, not by their name. Unfortunately for Christianity today,Reformers like Luther, Calvin and Knox not only held to Augustines doctrine of conversion by the sword, but also the Catholic theology of a replacement priesthood, tithing, communion, and ordination to mention a few.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Blessings to you brother in our Messiah Yeshua; I appreciate your opinion but I have to respond to how you call Martin Luther a "Lion of the faith".
If by "lion" you mean, pervert, foundation-layer for the holocaust in Germany, and bible modifier, then yes, I agree.

He hated the Anabaptists who allowed any believer to testify and called their practice "from the pits of hell". (so much for the priesthood of every believer). In fact, Luther suggested the death penalty for Anabaptists. I guess we weren't yet at inter-denominational tolerance.
Many Anabaptists were murdered thanks to Luther in his lifetime. (I'll provide a reference later if you require, I remember studying this in AP European History in Highschool).

Luther did not believe the entire bible was accurate.
“When one often reads that great numbers of people were slain–for example, eighty thousand–I believe that hardly one thousand were actually killed. What is meant is the whole people.” (see The Authoritative WOrd: Essays on the The Nature of Scripture, Donald K. McKim).

Zec you wrote: "Lastly, if something is not in scripture then we can't teach it as God's Truth. This was Martin Luther's ..."
unfortunately Luther wanted to change what was in scripture.

Luther wanted to delete these books: Hebrews, James, Jude, Revelation but was unable due to his benefactor's stance (Frederik II of Saxony who had saved Luther from the pope) I guess cash is king with holy men.
Begrudgingly he wrote in the forward to his translation that they should be treated less importantly than other books and he called James the "straw epistle". wow.
see Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther's_canon

This "lion" insisted that the consumation of his marriage be witnessed by men IN THE BRIDAL CHAMBER while he did the deed.
How many ladies here in Biblical Families think this was a righteous fella? A far cry from the modesty of Rebecca who immediately wrapped herself when she saw Isaac in the field.

He taught that if a husband was unable to please his wife then she had a RIGHT to take a lover! (wow what a great teacher) pro adultery
PBS.org http://www.pbs.org/empires/martinluther/cheats.html

His vulgar mind and lack of modesty and decency are also witnessed in his book: Hans Worst
where the language is so foul and full of curse words you wouldn't believe a "man of G-d" could write such things... and you'd be right.

If you want a sampling of Martin Luther's foul mouth and vengeful spirit, scan his book Table Talk
https://archive.org/stream/cu31924029255184/cu31924029255184_djvu.txt

Here is a nice quote from Mr. Faith himself, “I am ripe sh*t, so is the world a great wide assh***; eventually we will part.”
see German Hercules: The Impact of Scatology on the Image of Martin Luther, Danielle Skjelver

Guess what, Baptists aren't the only ones who should be murdered by Luther, Jews are in too!
I suggest you read "On the Jews and their Lies" where Luther's book publicly calls for the burning of synagogues and general persecution of Jews.
Here's a link about that fabulous work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies

My favorite tidbit from this "godly man" concerning Jews is that "We [Christians] are at fault for *not killing* them [the Jews]!”
Another nice one is "let them [Jews] be driven like dogs from Christian lands"...yeah that happened too.
Is it any small wonder the seeds were sewn in Germany for the holocaust?

In his work Adolf Hitler's minister of education wrote:
"Since Martin Luther closed his eyes, no such son of our people has appeared again. It has been decided that we shall be the first to witness his reappearance ... I think the time is past when one may not say the names of Hitler and Luther in the same breath. They belong together; they are of the same old stamp [Schrot und Korn]" The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, Steigmann-Gall, Richard citing Völkischer Beobachter

Sure Luther was brave to stand up against Johanne Tetzel who was selling tickets to heaven for peoples' loved ones who had past on but many wicked people have done some good things in their life and they are not worthy of such titles as "lions of faith".

I can think of no other person in history who has both kept Jews from the Messiah and sewn seeds which resulted in persecution of the chosen people more than the person who is Martin Luther. If it were a Hindu who did it; it would have been less diabolical but a professing Christian. Shame, shame, shame, yimach sh'mo.

Generally I like your posts Zec, I jut think you are way off base on Martin Luther; I understand though because sometimes we are influenced by the traditions we grow up in. The seminaries have trouble breaking from tradition; we can all get caught up in tradition for tradition's sake and not even realize it until someone points it out. For sure this happens at Jewish Yeshivas as well; it's human nature to embrace traditions and usually we arent even aware of it.

I'm afraid I must agree with Sir Thomas Moore who died for his principles in his summary of Luther:
"[Luther is] “buffoon . . . [who will] carry nothing in his mouth other than cesspools, sewers, latrines, sh*t and dung . . . .”

Let's close with a scripture quote
וַאֲבָֽרֲכָה֙ מְבָ֣רְכֶ֔יךָ וּמְקַלֶּלְךָ֖ אָאֹ֑ר וְנִבְרְכ֣וּ בְךָ֔ כֹּ֖ל מִשְׁפְּחֹ֥ת הָאֲדָמָֽה
G-d speaking to Avram our father, "Let me bless those who bless you but those who dishonor you I will curse, and all the Earth's families will be blessed on your account" Gen. 12:3

Maybe you didn't think I would read your links. Maybe you didn't read your links. But they give a much more nuanced view of Luther. Especially his earlier pronouncements and actions. His later words and works were against those who wouldn't convert. He placed them in the same category as those anabaptists you pointed out, which was really pretty progressive for the time. He didn't hold any racial animosity towards Jews. He wanted to purify the land of all unbelievers of any stripe. His earlier works should be considered reflective of his strident teaching against anti-Semitism. And indeed they are quite admirable and courageous even by today's standards.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

By the way, I'm not saying that a present day priesthood, tithing, communion and ordination is unbiblical, I'm just saying that the 3rd to 4th century church that became the RC church utilized a corrupted form of them to justify their existence and control religion. Unfortunately, the Reformers brought with them certain aspects of the theology that they had been taught. To the degree that the Protestants integrated with the primitive church, these incorrect understandings have now permeated till most assemblies that at one time were correct in theology and practice are basically practicing RC rituals without realizing it.

 

[IshChayil]

Well put @Verifyveritas76
Sure I'll put together a list later. Gotta do some work now.
I agree we can learn from ideas people have. The idea itself has merit or not regardless of the messenger.

איזהו חכם הלומד מכל אדם שנאמר מכל הלמדי השכלתי
Mishneh Avot 4:1a "Who is wise? He who learns from every person, as it is said: From all my teachers I grew wise (Psalm 119:99)

 

[The Revolting Man]

I didn't know you felt Luther was your father, I truly apologize if you are descended from Martin Luther. Are you?
I won't say another word against him if this is true.
If you are not his descendant maybe you should not call him your father but accept the adoption into Israel Paul talks about.
Time to change fathers? If you change fathers then you aren't a Gentile any more and you can have our theologians Seriously though, I have a list of wonderful Gentile theologians I'd be happy to share if you want.
But I am sorry you are pissed. ALso I'm very sorry if my tone seemed smug. I'll be careful about that in future posts. Forgive me for that brother. Really I mean it.

He's someone's father and if it's a sin for someone to criticize another's father then its a sin for another to criticize someone's father.

And don't apologize for being smug and condescending when you're still being smug and condescending.