It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

In the bible, Jacob deceive Isaac and steal Esau’s birthright - was Esau a missing link??

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Just a simple question I've had for a long time. Jacob had to wear fur in order to fool Isaac because Esau was extremely hairy.
So how hairy was Esau -- say hairy enough to be perhaps he might have been the missing link between primate and man?

I'm not saying he was or wasn't the missing link, I just thought that if was THAT hairy there is something strange going on. And that maybe this would be a fun topic for evolutionists to think about.

Thoughts.




posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:04 PM
link   
a reply to: SachaX

For this to actually matter the story would have to be true, believing any stories in the bible is like alice in wonderland and the rabbit hole. So, no such missing link will be ascertained by this method.



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: SachaX
Just a simple question I've had for a long time. Jacob had to wear fur in order to fool Isaac because Esau was extremely hairy.
So how hairy was Esau -- say hairy enough to be perhaps he might have been the missing link between primate and man?

I'm not saying he was or wasn't the missing link, I just thought that if was THAT hairy there is something strange going on. And that maybe this would be a fun topic for evolutionists to think about.

Thoughts.


yes.. esau was a neanderthal who had no time for God. this is how the line of prophets were chosen. those who mistakenly assumed it is by blood inheritence alone makes them a prophet were taught the hard way. the birthright was given to the one that did what God instructed and devoted themselves to God. failing this prophethood was denied to all descendents who neglected their spiritual duties in favour of pleasing themselves in this material world.



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:33 PM
link   
a reply to: SachaX


I'm not sure

but I wouldn't mind reading the Good Book again
with the mindset of Eric von Daniken.



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:45 PM
link   
neanderthals and cavemen (hunter gatherers) were long gone by then werent they



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 10:45 PM
link   
It's metaphorical, it didn't really happen.

Jacob was a thief and represents those of us who steal from our siblings (we're all brothers and sisters) for our own benefit, he represents greed. Esau was a victim and represents those of us who are content with what we have right now, he represents those who are prone to being taken advantage of.

Esau represents those of us who desire instant gratification instead of long term fulfillment, Jacob represents the opposite. Esau is like someone with a credit card, swiping away for instant gratification; Jacob is like the credit card company, taking advantage of Esau's instant gratification to stock up more money for themselves.

Why are people greedy (Jacob)? Because they want more than what they have/need right now, so they hoard it for future fulfillment. This is why Jacob (greed) bought Esau's inheritance for a cup of porridge and why Esau (contentment) accepted Jacob's offer for the instant gratification of something to eat.

Esau lives in the moment and is not worried about the future, Jacob is lost in thought and does worry about the future.

As for Jacob stealing Esau's blessing, Jacob covered himself in goat fur to mimic Esau's hairiness. Jacob being covered in goat fur is the same concept as a "wolf in sheep's clothing" except flipped, goats and sheep are diametrically opposed metaphorically. Sheep are grazers, eating anything they happen to come by; goats are browsers, they are picky with what they eat. Sheep live in the moment whereas goats are lost in thought with their pickiness. Those who think about the future (Jacob) tend to be greedy whereas those who go with the flow (Esau) are content with instant gratification and may be foolish enough to eat something poisonous (Esau selling his inheritance).

The blessing that Jacob stole says something about "those who curse you will be cursed, those who bless you will be blessed", this sounds a lot like the authoritative structure our society has today, those who curse corruption are cursed whereas those who bless the corruption are blessed.

The "blessing" that Esau receives later in the passage talks about Esau serving Jacob and living by the sword, this represents those in power (Jacob/greed) employing the common citizen (Esau/contentment) to fight their wars (living by the sword). It also goes on to say that when Esau gets tired of Jacob he will shake off Jacob's yoke (burden), which means we all have the choice of going against the greed and the choice to break free from the illusion.

The OT is rife with symbolic stories. Not very much of what is said in the OT actually happened, they are mostly symbolic stories written down to teach an esoteric message.



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 11:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: blacktie
neanderthals and cavemen (hunter gatherers) were long gone by then werent they


i actually meant it to say.. he was a big dumb oaf. who only loved wine women and song



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 01:22 AM
link   

edit on 17-8-2015 by Gothmog because: added incorrect info



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 01:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: SachaX
Just a simple question I've had for a long time. Jacob had to wear fur in order to fool Isaac because Esau was extremely hairy.
So how hairy was Esau -- say hairy enough to be perhaps he might have been the missing link between primate and man?

I'm not saying he was or wasn't the missing link, I just thought that if was THAT hairy there is something strange going on. And that maybe this would be a fun topic for evolutionists to think about.

Thoughts.


Isnt this story supposed to be about Father Abraham's 2 sons , Isaac and Ishmael (where Ishmael was the elder son and should have inherited Abraham's estate) To where Sarah dressed Isaac in goat hide to fool Abraham , who by this time could not see? Am I missing something here ?



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 02:18 AM
link   
I don't know but interesting speculation and thank you for bringing it to my attention.



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 02:24 AM
link   
a reply to: SachaX
The Bible goes on to say that Esau was the ancestor of the tribe of Edom, who lived east of the Dead Sea. Later they occupied the territory south of Jerusalem. The Romans called them Idumaeans, and they included the Herod family.
Lots of variation of hairiness (and height) within the normal human species, no reason to see anything more.


edit on 17-8-2015 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 04:37 AM
link   
a reply to: SachaX

This is yet another biblical story that simply smacks of deceitful behaviour that is made pious. For a mother to substitute someone else who is not due to inherit is actually vile and sly, hardly god-fearing traits, just manipulative ones.

It astounds me, having actually read the bible from cover to cover how people can consider this book holy - most people have never read it, just accepted it as told to by some superior.

A read through would shock decent minded folk were they not so lazy about their reading material and religious beliefs.
Also a read though literature excluded from the bible, from that time + the Nag Hammadi and Dead Sea Scrolls (what the catholic church didn't destroy) plus the Babylonian mythology should astound most who consider the biblical word of God the ultimate.

People blindly place their 'faith' in something most have never researched - a strange thing to do because there is so much more information available out there today. Importantly, some of it is uncensored by vested interested parties whose motive has always been their own survival and obtaining money from people they are exploiting, especially the poor.



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 04:51 AM
link   
a reply to: SachaX

Hypertrichosis - Wikipedia


edit on 17/8/2015 by chr0naut because: stuffed up the link



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 04:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: SachaX

This is yet another biblical story that simply smacks of deceitful behaviour that is made pious. For a mother to substitute someone else who is not due to inherit is actually vile and sly, hardly god-fearing traits, just manipulative ones.

It astounds me, having actually read the bible from cover to cover how people can consider this book holy - most people have never read it, just accepted it as told to by some superior.

A read through would shock decent minded folk were they not so lazy about their reading material and religious beliefs.
Also a read though literature excluded from the bible, from that time + the Nag Hammadi and Dead Sea Scrolls (what the catholic church didn't destroy) plus the Babylonian mythology should astound most who consider the biblical word of God the ultimate.

People blindly place their 'faith' in something most have never researched - a strange thing to do because there is so much more information available out there today. Importantly, some of it is uncensored by vested interested parties whose motive has always been their own survival and obtaining money from people they are exploiting, especially the poor.


The whole point of the Bible is that despite the lying, cheating, stealing, fraudulent, murderous behavior of the people in the Bible, God forgives and even rehabilitates them. How do you read the Bible and yet miss that?



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 05:33 AM
link   
I view the bible as a work of fiction but many others believe it is absolute fact.
Thanks for all the answers! Reading them was a blast.



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 05:49 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

So are you saying we are all supposed to worship a religion where one group of people can do whatever they like against their own God's 10 commandments and they get forgiven even for murder etc, but the rest of us all have to abide by biblical law and - take it seriously?

Religion is supposedly the guardian of human morals - or so its sold on that assumption. But clearly not for all.

Its a dangerous idea to think that anything you care to do can be forgiven, it also robs you of your humanity towards others - something else that we are supposed to have learn't from the bible.

Reading through it, especially the parts which one never hears referred to in church etc or elsewhere, I gained a very different perspective on its content which actually shocked me and made me rethink exactly what the moral of God's forgiveness means. Rehabilitation perhaps you could explain that?



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 06:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: SachaX

This is yet another biblical story that simply smacks of deceitful behaviour that is made pious. For a mother to substitute someone else who is not due to inherit is actually vile and sly, hardly god-fearing traits, just manipulative ones.

It astounds me, having actually read the bible from cover to cover how people can consider this book holy - most people have never read it, just accepted it as told to by some superior.

A read through would shock decent minded folk were they not so lazy about their reading material and religious beliefs.
Also a read though literature excluded from the bible, from that time + the Nag Hammadi and Dead Sea Scrolls (what the catholic church didn't destroy) plus the Babylonian mythology should astound most who consider the biblical word of God the ultimate.

People blindly place their 'faith' in something most have never researched - a strange thing to do because there is so much more information available out there today. Importantly, some of it is uncensored by vested interested parties whose motive has always been their own survival and obtaining money from people they are exploiting, especially the poor.


what you are doing is called being a bigot. and so to your bigot friends will support. but.. esau was such a foolish materialistic buffoon.. that he SOLD his birthright to jacob for a pot of his stew. he said to himself.. what good is a blessing from invisible God when i can have stew/steak right now. there was no cheating really. the universe simply conspired in favour of jacob because esau threw it all away. jacob thus.. took up the mantle that esau did not have time for. do you not think God was seeing all this all the time. u think Jacob tricked God too? read the story.. and dont let other people "rumours and deductions' cloud your judgement.

however.. the most important moral of the story is that God dont save no man unless he does the good work of the Lord. you could be the son of Jesus Christ. if you dont serve the Lord.. u will perish in this world of perishing things that you love so much. it is not by blood inheritance alone that you shall be considered a Jew(true follower of God and his prophets). so just because ur father was a prophet who attained the divine right to rule, doesnt mean you should automatically get his divine right to rule with your unenlightened and ungodly mind. this is why.. kings were abolished and replaced with democracy by Jesus and via the apostle Paul. because noone was enlightened. thus noone deserved to be king. because noone knew God anymore. and only a man that truly knows God.. deserves to rule on earth.



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 07:20 AM
link   
Its a half baked idea but the Bible does say Esau was red coloured and a good hunter. Hairy, red headed meat eater does sound like a neanderthal.
edit on 17/8/15 by Cinrad because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 10:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: SachaX

This is yet another biblical story that simply smacks of deceitful behaviour that is made pious. For a mother to substitute someone else who is not due to inherit is actually vile and sly, hardly god-fearing traits, just manipulative ones.

It astounds me, having actually read the bible from cover to cover how people can consider this book holy - most people have never read it, just accepted it as told to by some superior.

A read through would shock decent minded folk were they not so lazy about their reading material and religious beliefs.
Also a read though literature excluded from the bible, from that time + the Nag Hammadi and Dead Sea Scrolls (what the catholic church didn't destroy) plus the Babylonian mythology should astound most who consider the biblical word of God the ultimate.

People blindly place their 'faith' in something most have never researched - a strange thing to do because there is so much more information available out there today. Importantly, some of it is uncensored by vested interested parties whose motive has always been their own survival and obtaining money from people they are exploiting, especially the poor.


I guess when you are brainwashed by the Msm reading a story that isn't all unicorns, fairy floss and rainbows it can be a bit confrontingguess
most people just want to hear how good and noble everyone is irrespective the truth.


I find the warts and all nastiness of the Old Testament refreshing

Interesting how it does seem uncensored, yet you seem to complain it's uncensored

I don't think you know what you think you know
I



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: chr0naut

So are you saying we are all supposed to worship a religion where one group of people can do whatever they like against their own God's 10 commandments and they get forgiven even for murder etc, but the rest of us all have to abide by biblical law and - take it seriously?

Religion is supposedly the guardian of human morals - or so its sold on that assumption. But clearly not for all.

Its a dangerous idea to think that anything you care to do can be forgiven, it also robs you of your humanity towards others - something else that we are supposed to have learn't from the bible.

Reading through it, especially the parts which one never hears referred to in church etc or elsewhere, I gained a very different perspective on its content which actually shocked me and made me rethink exactly what the moral of God's forgiveness means. Rehabilitation perhaps you could explain that?



We were never saved by the law. It only condemns us because we transgress, even in minor ways, and are therefore guilty.

But God had other plans. Plans to forgive. He came and lived as a mortal, so that no-one could accuse God of not knowing about our situation. Jesus (God as a human) went through it, but He didn't sin. Yet He still suffered the punishment in our place. His death didn't make us not sin, it made us not punishable by double jeopardy, in legal terms.

So we can be forgiven both morally and legally. God's plan is for us to be ultimately god-like, immortal, unified in love, with Him and each other, and with him both in Heaven and on Earth. He cannot get us there if we are condemned.

Every human but one has broken the law. Even all those Old Testament 'greats' are simply humans after all. The real and only hero of the piece is God in the person of Jesus Christ.

Once we are free from the punishment of the law, we are able to be be sorry for our wrong actions and can try to never transgress again. We also receive the Holy Spirit as a guide and comforter to help us along the way to better ourselves. By no means are we suddenly sinless and temptation free, the process is long and difficult but we have begun on the way and have a hope where none existed before. That is rehabilitation. The impure gets purified, metaphorically, the base iron becomes steel.


edit on 17/8/2015 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join