The Spurgeon Series 1859 & 1860. Charles H. Spurgeon

rise up in judgment against you to condemn you. Woe to you, London, woe to you, for if the words which have been preached in your streets had been proclaimed in Sodom and Gomorrah, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. Woe to you, you sons and daughters of pious parents, children trained in the Sunday School, hearers of God’s Word; for “except you repent, it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for you.” “I speak as to wise men; judge what I say,” and may God guide you rightly.

      Jacob And Esau

      No. 239-5:113. A Sermon Delivered On Sunday Evening, January 16, 1859, By C. H. Spurgeon, At New Park Street Chapel, Southwark.

       I have loved Jacob, but I have hated Esau. {Romans 9:13}

      1. Do not imagine for an instant that I pretend to be able thoroughly to elucidate the great mysteries of predestination. There are some men who claim to know all about the matter. They twist it around their fingers as easily as if it would be an everyday thing; but depend upon it, he who thinks he knows all about this mystery, knows only a very little. It is only the shallowness of his mind that permits him to see the bottom of his knowledge; he who dives deep, finds that there is in the lowest depth to which he can attain a deeper depth still. The fact is, that the great questions about man’s responsibility, free will, and predestination, have been fought over, and over, and over again, and have been answered in ten thousand different ways; and the result has been, that we know just as much about the matter as when we first began. The combatants have thrown dust into each other’s eyes, and have hindered each other from seeing; and then they have concluded, that because they put other people’s eyes out, therefore they could see.

      2. Now, it is one thing to refute another man’s doctrine, but a very different matter to establish my own views. It is very easy to knock down one man’s hypothesis concerning these truths, not quite as easy to make my own stand on a firm footing. I shall try tonight, if I can, to go safely, if I do not go very fast; for I shall endeavour to keep simply to the letter of God’s Word. I think that if we kept more simply to the teachings of the Bible, we would be wiser than we are; for by turning from the heavenly light of revelation, and trusting in the deceitful will-oh-the-wisps of our own imagination, we thrust ourselves into quags and bogs where there is no sure footing, and we begin to sink; and instead of making progress, we find ourselves firmly stuck. The truth is, neither you nor I has any right to want to know more about predestination than what God tells us. That is enough for us. If it should be worth while for us to know more, God would have revealed more. What God has told us, we are to believe; but to the knowledge thus gained, we are too apt to add our own vague notions, and then we are sure to go wrong. It would be better, if in all controversies, men had simply stood hard and fast by “Thus says the Lord,” instead of having it said, “Thus and thus I think.” I shall now endeavour, by the help of the Holy Spirit, to throw the light of God’s Word upon this great doctrine of divine sovereignty, and give you what I think to be a Scriptural statement of the fact, that some men are chosen, other men are left, — the great fact that is declared in this text, — “I have loved Jacob, but I have hated Esau.”

      3. It is a terrible text, and I will be honest with it if I can. One man says the word “hate” does not mean hate; it means “love less”: — “I have loved Jacob, but I have loved Esau less.” It may be so; but I do not believe it is. At any rate, it says “hate” here; and until you give me another version of the Bible, I shall keep to this one. I believe that the term is correctly and properly translated; that the word “hate” is not stronger than the original; but even if it is a little stronger, it is nearer the mark than the other translation which is offered to us in those meaningless words, “love less.” I like to take it and let it stand just as it is. The fact is, God loved Jacob, and he did not love Esau; he did choose Jacob, but he did not choose Esau; he did bless Jacob, but he never blessed Esau; his mercy followed Jacob all the way of his life, even to the last, but his mercy never followed Esau; he permitted him still to go on in his sins, and to prove that dreadful truth, “I have hated Esau.” Others, in order to get rid of this ugly text, say, it does not mean Esau and Jacob; it means the nation; it means Jacob’s children and Esau’s children; it means the children of Israel and Edom. I should like to know where the difference lies. Is the difficulty removed by extending it? Some of the Wesleyan brethren say that there is a national election; God has chosen one nation and not another. They turn around and tell us it is unjust in God to choose one man and not another. Now, we ask them by everything reasonable, is it not equally unjust of God to choose one nation and leave another? The argument which they imagine overthrows us overthrows them also. There never was a more foolish subterfuge than that of trying to bring out national election. What is the election of a nation but the election of so many units, of so many people? and it is tantamount to the same thing as the particular election of individuals. In thinking, men cannot see clearly that if — which we do not for a moment believe — that if there is any injustice in God choosing one man and not another, how much more must there be injustice in his choosing one nation and not another. No! the difficulty cannot be removed by this, but is greatly increased by this foolish wresting of God’s Word. Besides, here is the proof that that is not correct; read the verse preceding it. It does not say anything at all about nations; it says, “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 by works, but by him who calls: It was said to her, The elder shall serve the younger,” — referring to the children, not to the nations. Of course the threatening was afterwards fulfilled in the position of the two nations; Edom was made to serve Israel. But this text means just what it says; it does not mean nations, but it means the two individuals mentioned. “Jacob,” — that is the man whose name was Jacob — “I have loved Jacob but I have hated Esau.” Take care, my dear friends, how any of you meddle with God’s Word. I have heard of people altering passages they did not like. It will not do, you know, you cannot alter them; they are really just the same. Our only power with the Word of God is simply to let it stand as it is, and to endeavour by God’s grace to accommodate ourselves to that. We must never try to make the Bible bow to us, in fact we cannot, for the truths of divine revelation are as sure and firm as the throne of God. If a man wants to enjoy a delightful prospect, and a high mountain lies in his path, does he commence cutting away at its base, in the vain hope that ultimately it will become a level plain before him? No, on the contrary, he diligently uses it for the accomplishment of his purpose by ascending it, well knowing this to be the only means of obtaining the end in view. So must we do; we cannot bring down the truths of God to our poor finite understandings; the mountain will never fall before us, but we can seek strength to rise higher and higher in our perception of divine things, and only in this way may we hope to obtain the blessing.

      4. Now, I shall have two things to notice tonight. I have explained this text to mean just what it says and I do not want it to be altered — “I have loved Jacob, but I have hated Esau.” To take off the edge of this terrible doctrine that makes some people bite their lips so, I must just notice that this is a fact, and, after that I shall try to answer the question, — Why was it that God loved Jacob and hated Esau?

      5. I. First, then, THIS IS A FACT. Men say they do not like the doctrine of election. Truly, I do not want them to; but is it not a fact that God has elected some? Ask an Arminian brother about election, and at once his eye turns fiercely upon you, and he begins to get angry, he cannot bear it; it is a horrible thing, like a war cry to him, and he begins to sharpen the knife of controversy at once. But say to him, “Ah, brother! was it not divine grace that made you to differ? Was it not the Lord who called you out of your natural state, and made you what you are?” “Oh, yes,” he says, “I quite agree with you there.” Now, put this question to him: “What do you think is the reason why one man has been converted, and not another?” “Oh,” he says, “the Spirit of God has been at work in this man.” Well, then, my brother, the fact is, that God does treat one man better than another; and is there anything wonderful in this fact? It is a fact we recognise every day. There is a man up in the gallery, who works as hard as he likes, he cannot earn more than fifteen shillings a week; and here is another man that gets a thousand a year; what is the reason for this?