How Israel was born.

[GodIsSalvation]

Seems to me God picked a good name for his servant Israel.

 

[ivanc0]

whose testimony is more accurate - the prophet anointed by God to teach, or the man who thought he had overcome a being whose mere touch shriveled his thigh?

did you ask this question because you really wanted to know the answer, or because you thought you already knew but wanted to make a point? doesn't it stand to reason that another can ask a question not from ignorance, but to illustrate? Jacob means 'holder of the heel' -- can you see the dim outline of an allegory there?

Jacob wrestled against force that was measured to test him. if he had seen the true glory of the Father, he would not have had to ask His name.

it is as though, a man clings to the heel of a fast runner, and when the runner crosses the finish lane of a race, he tells himself "i have finished the race!"
but the reality is that he was dragged and carried the whole way.
so also Israel.

here is how Israel was truly born:

Ezekiel 16
​

Who will you trust the eye witness, or the one who speaks about the event thousands of years after?

I will be so happy if some one proves me wrong. (honestly)

Ezekiel 16 seem the wrong reference, It talks about prostitutes, and passionate prostitutes in really expert language like one who has close experience on those affairs.

 

[posthuman]

Understand your point, you saying that Jacob was wrong! .
I did the math and the answer is "assertion error"

did you really do the math? ((♥ loves math ♥))

remember in another thread when i mentioned "flatland" ?

when mr. square "saw" a sphere in flatland, did he really see the sphere?
what he saw was a circle that changed diameter.

anyone whose experience is confined to a plane cannot "see" anything more than a projection of any polyhedron.
i think that is what we have here.

 

[posthuman]

Ezekiel 16 seem the wrong reference, It talks about prostitutes, and passionate prostitutes in really expert language like one who has close experience on those affairs.

perhaps you are not familiar with exactly how many times Israel has been called a prostitute by God. maybe read all of Ezekiel

 

[PeterJens]

Literally it says Jacob have seen God face to face.

You are arguing language. Adam saw God face to face. Moses saw God face to face. Israel saw God in the pillar of fire and smoke. Elijah saw the back of God. John saw God on the throne in a vision. Jacob wrestled with God.

But none saw God in heaven on His throne without any barriers other than Jesus.

Language is always a summary which needs explanation to bring out context or meaning.
Jesus said John the Baptist was Elijah or a type of Elijah returned to Israel.

Jesus said he was in the Father, and the Father was in him. If you have seen Jesus you have seen the Father, so strictly speaking all the apostles have seen the Father face to face. But Jesus here is talking about the nature of God, his intention, his way of relating and being with mankind.

So the bible is not obvious, or simple, or without nuance and depth, or for those who would rather by cynical, reason to walk away because love does not interest them.

 

[posthuman]

Who will you trust the eye witness, or the one who speaks about the event thousands of years after?

Jacob ~ 1500 BC
Hosea ~ 700 BC

will you trust someone who says "i did the math" but hasn't actually?



i don't trust myself either.

but hey, if you're cool with being wrong by orders of magnitude about one thing, why not others?
maybe Jacob "the deceiver" too.

 

[ivanc0]

did you really do the math? ((♥ loves math ♥))

remember in another thread when i mentioned "flatland" ?

when mr. square "saw" a sphere in flatland, did he really see the sphere?
what he saw was a circle that changed diameter.

anyone whose experience is confined to a plane cannot "see" anything more than a projection of any polyhedron.
i think that is what we have here.

Agree with you, then it reinforces my idea of the not literally taking of the Old testament, as they saw thing they could not understand and explained in human language being just an approximation of what was really happening.

I did the maths, and is a division by zero. I am an engineer and IT consultant. so logic is my field. and I see this passage as a bug in the "code",
but the "code is untouchable so needs workaround to fix the issue" this is what most people are doing.

 

[ivanc0]

You are arguing language. Adam saw God face to face. Moses saw God face to face. Israel saw God in the pillar of fire and smoke. Elijah saw the back of God. John saw God on the throne in a vision. Jacob wrestled with God.

But none saw God in heaven on His throne without any barriers other than Jesus.

Language is always a summary which needs explanation to bring out context or meaning.
Jesus said John the Baptist was Elijah or a type of Elijah returned to Israel.

Jesus said he was in the Father, and the Father was in him. If you have seen Jesus you have seen the Father, so strictly speaking all the apostles have seen the Father face to face. But Jesus here is talking about the nature of God, his intention, his way of relating and being with mankind.

So the bible is not obvious, or simple, or without nuance and depth, or for those who would rather by cynical, reason to walk away because love does not interest them.

Thanks lots.

But this is not a out of context event, it show place, describes the event, it shows the consequences, and shows the unexpected when Jacobs say " I have seen God, and I am still alive" (my words), So how you could say the questions are out of context.

 

[ivanc0]

Jacob ~ 1500 BC
Hosea ~ 700 BC

will you trust someone who says "i did the math" but hasn't actually?



i don't trust myself either.

but hey, if you're cool with being wrong by orders of magnitude about one thing, why not others?
maybe Jacob "the deceiver" too.

I could fix this problem: 0.8 thousands of years.

 

[fredjames]

[SUP]Genesis 32
24 [/SUP]And Jacob was left alone, and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day.

[SUP]25[/SUP]And when the man saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob’s thigh was out of joint as he wrestled with him.

[SUP]26[/SUP]And the man said, “Let me go, for the day breaketh.” And he said, “I will not let thee go, unless thou bless me.”

[SUP]27 [/SUP]And he said unto him, “What is thy name?” And he said, “Jacob.”

[SUP]28 [/SUP]And he said, “Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel; for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.”

[SUP]29 [/SUP]And Jacob asked him, and said, “Tell me, I pray thee, thy name.” And he said, “Why is it that thou dost ask after my name?” And he blessed him there.

[SUP]30 [/SUP]And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel [that is, The face of God]: “For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.”

[SUP]31 [/SUP]And as he passed over Penuel the sun rose upon him, and he limped upon his thigh.

[SUP]32 [/SUP]Therefore the children of Israel eat not of the sinew which shrank, which is upon the hollow of the thigh, unto this day, because he touched the hollow of Jacob’s thigh in the sinew that shrank.


The story above has a number of serious contradictions.

God does not know the name of Jacob.
God is just a man.
God wrested a man and lost.
Jacob seen God's Face.
And his name will be Israel, because he has prevailed against....GOD!

Could some one please explain!

Thanks.

Dear ivanc0, ivanc0, ivanc0, why do you show that you 'despise' GOD and HIS Word the HOLY BIBLE and want to put HIM to the test continuously, with also again such a 'bitter comment', that unworthily we would only 'refute'?

As it is written and spoken by JESUS to HIS disciples, about someone who would make an 'assumption' like that;

"Oh ye of little faith, how longer must I be with you and how much longer must I put up with you."

There is indeed a 'serious contradiction' regarding a faith like that.

Why don't you explain to us, if you believe you know better than all of us and may be you have a different angle, that you are coming from using the Holy Scripture?

Anyway GOD bless you in the name of LORD JESUS CHRIST.

 

[posthuman]

I could fix this problem: 0.8 thousands of years.

i guess the lesson is,

"ivanc0 is not meant to be taken literally" ?​

 

[ivanc0]

Dear ivanc0, ivanc0, ivanc0, why do you show that you 'despise' GOD and HIS Word the HOLY BIBLE and want to put HIM to the test continuously, with also again such a 'bitter comment', that unworthily we would only 'refute'?

As it is written and spoken by JESUS to HIS disciples, about someone who would make an 'assumption' like that;

"Oh ye of little faith, how longer must I be with you and how much longer must I put up with you."

There is indeed a 'serious contradiction' regarding a faith like that.

Why don't you explain to us, if you believe you know better than all of us and may be you have a different angle, that you are coming from using the Holy Scripture?

Anyway GOD bless you in the name of LORD JESUS CHRIST.

Your have not addressed the issues posted at all.

Impotence? You just went to curse and try to insult. Not that your Insults affects me, but please address the issue , maybe your angle has the light.

By the way are your Jew?

 

[posthuman]

hey don't be sore. i'm making fun

we both agree that Jacob's impression of what happened is not the absolute truth of what really happened, right?
that's a good point - i shouldn't trust my first impressions either. like all the people writing you off as a cantakerous troll - we just need to learn better how to love, i think.
it's nice to agree.

off to work again, hope the sun shines on you today

 

[ivanc0]

i guess the lesson is,

"ivanc0 is not meant to be taken literally" ?​

It depends how to see it if you round 0.8 thousands of years , to thousands of years you get 1 thousand years. so relativistically, I have been correct.

 

[breno785au]

NO, This is what you said: He did not saw the face of God, but the Face of Incarnated Jesus, so He saw a different God.

This is how the word of Jesus and this passage of the scripture does not contradict ( Obviously your version not mine)

My Idea is clear: The old testament cannot be read literally, as contradicts many concepts of the New testament and people has to invent fantastic explanations to "fix" the problem.

Eh? That was my first post in the thread, I haven't interpreted anything, I only asked a question.

 

[ivanc0]

Eh? That was my first post in the thread, I haven't interpreted anything, I only asked a question.

NO , I did not wanted that answer, in reality I do not expect a particular answer, the verses seems contradictory to Christianity, I just want to know how other people are able to interpret it to conciliate with their believes.
To this point I am not taking the old testament literally.

 

[oldhermit]

By oldhermit

B. Jacob's name changed to Israel – “Because you have striven with God and with men AND HAVE PREVAILED.” He has power/influence with men and with God.

1. His strivings with man

a. In his birth
b. In his securing of the birthright – This was already his by right of supplanting. Remember, God is the one who made this choice between the two.
c. In his taking of the blessing – He reverted to subterfuge to obtain what was already his by divine decree. This is also a striving against Isaac.
d. In all his dealings with Laban – He NEVER repays injustice with vengeance. In his strivings, Jacob has become a man of impressive character.

2. His strivings with God

a. In his oath to God at Bethel - “If you will.....then I will.”
b. In his petitions to God – 32:9-12. “I did what you said, now protect me.”

C. The significance of the event – This certainly seems to be in response to his earlier petition to the Lord.

1. This is not a contest of power or strength. Jacob is no match for God.
2. This is strictly a representational event. The real wrestlings of Jacob is not this physical confrontation. It has been his dealings in life with both God and man. Jacob has learned to represent his life experiences through the lens of revelation. He has learned to respond to the words of the Lord rather than to his circumstances. He has learned to trust God to deal with the situation. No wonder God says, “Jacob have I loved,” Malachi 1:2.

D. Jacob names the place Peniel – I have seen God face-to-face and yet I have been preserved. This is the recognition of a passive state, i.e. he knows he played no part in the preservation of his life in this encounter. He knows he is still alive, not by his own might or strength but because the God with whom he had wrestled has preserved his life.

 

[ivanc0]

By oldhermit

B. Jacob's name changed to Israel – “Because you have striven with God and with men AND HAVE PREVAILED.” He has power/influence with men and with God.

1. His strivings with man

a. In his birth
b. In his securing of the birthright – This was already his by right of supplanting. Remember, God is the one who made this choice between the two.
c. In his taking of the blessing – He reverted to subterfuge to obtain what was already his by divine decree. This is also a striving against Isaac.
d. In all his dealings with Laban – He NEVER repays injustice with vengeance. In his strivings, Jacob has become a man of impressive character.

2. His strivings with God

a. In his oath to God at Bethel - “If you will.....then I will.”
b. In his petitions to God – 32:9-12. “I did what you said, now protect me.”

C. The significance of the event – This certainly seems to be in response to his earlier petition to the Lord.

1. This is not a contest of power or strength. Jacob is no match for God.
2. This is strictly a representational event. The real wrestlings of Jacob is not this physical confrontation. It has been his dealings in life with both God and man. Jacob has learned to represent his life experiences through the lens of revelation. He has learned to respond to the words of the Lord rather than to his circumstances. He has learned to trust God to deal with the situation. No wonder God says, “Jacob have I loved,” Malachi 1:2.

D. Jacob names the place Peniel – I have seen God face-to-face and yet I have been preserved. This is the recognition of a passive state, i.e. he knows he played no part in the preservation of his life in this encounter. He knows he is still alive, not by his own might or strength but because the God with whom he had wrestled has preserved his life.

Thanks for your post, Jacob is a curious character, but his brother Seems to be more forgiving and not resentful.
Is interesting that the fraud against Esau, (I am not sure Jacob has the right, as "Esau complains you have already taken my primogeniture and now my blessing",) was triggered by the mother, there were not identical twins, The event in his birth is not under his control, why to mention it?
The wresting is not physical, but is depicted as it was physical. How we call it metaphor? legend?
The last paragraph confirms that he saw God Face to face?

 

[oldhermit]

Thanks for your post, Jacob is a curious character, but his brother Seems to be more forgiving and not resentful.
Is interesting that the fraud against Esau, was triggered by the mother, there were not identical twins, The event in his birth is not under his control, why to mention it?
The wresting is not physical, but is depicted as it was physical. How we call it metaphor? legend?
The last paragraph confirms that he saw God Face to face?

I did not say that it Jacob's wrestling with God was metaphoric. I said it was representational. That is a world of difference. Yes, he literally wrestled with God during this theophonic manifestation but the meaning in the event represented something far greater that the experience itself.

 

[ivanC1]

Thanks for your post, Jacob is a curious character, but his brother Seems to be more forgiving and not resentful.
Is interesting that the fraud against Esau, (I am not sure Jacob has the right, as "Esau complains you have already taken my primogeniture and now my blessing",) was triggered by the mother, there were not identical twins, The event in his birth is not under his control, why to mention it?
The wresting is not physical, but is depicted as it was physical. How we call it metaphor? legend?
The last paragraph confirms that he saw God Face to face?

Be sure you fully believe in the bible, and do not mention "not to be taking literally" otherwise you will be banned.
We need to have unity of faith, otherwise we do not like you here!