The statement “God hated Esau is applied in a way Scripture itself does not support.

 A solid comment should affirm what Scripture actually says while correcting what is being overstated or misframed.

---

The statement “God hated Esau” is biblical language, but it is being flattened and absolutized in a way Scripture itself does not support.

First, the quotation comes from Malachi 1:2–3, not Genesis. Malachi is speaking centuries after Jacob and Esau lived, addressing Israel and Edom as nations, not infants in a womb. The text itself frames the issue historically and covenantally, not psychologically or emotionally.

In Hebrew idiom, love and hate are covenantal terms of preference and rejection, not statements of emotional hostility. The Torah itself uses “hate” this way (for example, in inheritance and marriage laws), meaning chosen / not chosen, not beloved / despised. This is reinforced by the fact that Esau is blessed by Isaac (Genesis 27:39–40) and later reconciles with Jacob (Genesis 33). A being God “hates” in the modern sense is not treated that way.

Second, Genesis 25 does not say God rejected Esau morally before birth. It says:

“Two nations are in your womb… and the older shall serve the younger.”

That is a statement about historical role, not eternal damnation. Scripture repeatedly distinguishes between election for purpose and judgment for conduct. Esau is not condemned in Genesis for unbelief, violence, or apostasy—those charges appear later, in the prophets, once Edom’s actions justify them.

Third, Malachi’s condemnation of Edom is explicitly tied to Edom’s later pride, violence, and betrayal (cf. Obadiah). Malachi is not explaining why Esau sold his birthright; he is explaining why Edom stands judged now. The text does not teach that God hated Esau instead of Jacob before either acted—it teaches that God faithfully preserved Israel while judging Edom for its historical sins.

Fourth, Romans 9 uses Malachi rhetorically to make a corporate, covenantal argument, not to declare that God arbitrarily despises individuals. Paul is addressing Israel’s election and God’s freedom to choose vessels for historical purpose, not asserting that Esau was damned because he liked stew.

Finally, the claim “God rejected Esau because he treated the sacred as expendable” is partly true but incomplete. Esau’s sale of the birthright shows contempt—but Scripture never presents that act as the sole or sufficient reason for Malachi’s later judgment language. The prophets ground Edom’s rejection in ongoing hostility, arrogance, and violence, not a single youthful failure.

---

In short:

• Yes, this is covenant language, not sentimentality.

• No, it is not proof of arbitrary divine hatred.

• Election is for purpose, judgment is for conduct.

• Malachi speaks to nations with histories, not infants with destinies sealed in the womb.

God is holy—but He is also consistent, patient, and just, and the text does not support turning covenant preference into metaphysical favoritism.