Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 5 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Romans Commentary Chapters 9-16  /  Romans 9:10-13 the Two Nations from Jacob and Esau Part Two  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 5
Clifton says early Christians didn’t view Jacob as a “dishonest schemer” but as a “simple man” (innocent/upright), citing Origen; how does that challenge common modern preaching about Jacob, and what might be at stake spiritually if we normalize the idea that God’s chosen people are basically selected scoundrels?
Another way to ask: If early Christians saw Jacob as upright instead of a sneaky trickster, how does that challenge common sermons about him? What could go wrong spiritually if we start thinking God mainly chooses people who are basically scoundrels?

Direct Answer The transcript challenges the modern habit of portraying Jacob mainly as a manipulative schemer by saying early Christians saw him as “innocent and upright,” which supports Terry’s larger argument that God’s choices align with foreknown character. Spiritually, the stakes (as implied here) include whether we think God’s calling is consistent with righteousness or whether we excuse ungodliness by assuming “God chooses scoundrels anyway.”

Support from Transcript:

  • Clifton: “Although it has become popular today to paint Jacob as a dishonest schemer, the early Christians had no such view of him.”
  • “The scriptures describe Jacob as a ‘simple man,’ Genesis 25:27… simple has the sense of innocent and upright.”
  • Origen is quoted: Jacob was prepared “because of his innocence and because of the simplicity of his soul… a vessel of honor.”
  • Contrast with Esau: Hebrews 12:16 calls him “sexually immoral… profane… who sold his birthright for one meal.”
  • The logic of Romans 9 in this lesson: God “foreknew their dispositions,” so choice fits character rather than randomness.
Discussion Follow-ups When preaching emphasizes Jacob’s faults, does it weaken the transcript’s claim that God’s choice is “in accordance with character”? How might our view of God’s holiness shift depending on which portrayal dominates?

Jumpstarter 5 of 10
Back Questions Next