Why did God continue to favor Jacob and Rachel when they were both deceivers?

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

Jacob and Rachel were both jerks who lied, cheated and stole and yet God kept his promises to them (or to Rachel through Jacob.) What meaning should we take out of this?

[Blue3]

Well, Abraham was also a cuck who pimped his sister-wife out... more than once.

[Cokeland Saxton]

Because "God" is a massive hypocrite

[VBM]

Because he saw a lot of himself in them

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

That is the question, isn't it? It's one that the Bible starts asking itself when it gets to King David, who is constantly doing horrible things to which God clearly takes exception without ever lastingly losing God's favor. The orthodox Christian (and I think also the usual Jewish and Muslim?) answer is that this is, put simply, all of us, but that doesn't explain why there are other figures in the Bible--such as, for instance, Esau--of whom this doesn't seem to be outwardly true.

[Irenaeus of Smyrna]

Jacob and Rachel were both jerks who lied, cheated and stole and yet God kept his promises to them (or to Rachel through Jacob.) What meaning should we take out of this?

Becouse God always keeps his promises. Like that is the whole story of the bible why did God keep his promises to His people when they constantly fail him. Becouse God love is perfect think of the parable of the prodigal son. We might fail God and fail to keep end of the deal but he will always keep his promise.

I hope this answered your question i feel bad that you have not been given an answer to this question before.

[vitoNova]

Answer C: most religious texts tend to be a mish-mash of nonsensical word-salad, with only a small kernel of truth.

Just sayin’

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

Jacob and Rachel were both jerks who lied, cheated and stole and yet God kept his promises to them (or to Rachel through Jacob.) What meaning should we take out of this?

Becouse God always keeps his promises. Like that is the whole story of the bible why did God keep his promises to His people when they constantly fail him. Becouse God love is perfect think of the parable of the prodigal son. We might fail God and fail to keep end of the deal but he will always keep his promise.

I hope this answered your question i feel bad that you have not been given an answer to this question before.

I have been given the answer to the question before. That brings up other questions though like isn't God concerned about the possible negative ramifications of keeping a promise to two people who have shown themselves to not exactly be deserving of God's promise.  

Not that I'm trying to say that I'm perfect (or anywhere near it) but I try to keep my promises to people who have deceived me as well, but what I do doesn't really have any significance at either the micro or the macro level.

In other words, didn't God have broader things to consider than just the specific act of keeping a promise?

[Irenaeus of Smyrna]

Jacob and Rachel were both jerks who lied, cheated and stole and yet God kept his promises to them (or to Rachel through Jacob.) What meaning should we take out of this?

Becouse God always keeps his promises. Like that is the whole story of the bible why did God keep his promises to His people when they constantly fail him. Becouse God love is perfect think of the parable of the prodigal son. We might fail God and fail to keep end of the deal but he will always keep his promise.

I hope this answered your question i feel bad that you have not been given an answer to this question before.

I have been given the answer to the question before. That brings up other questions though like isn't God concerned about the possible negative ramifications of keeping a promise to two people who have shown themselves to not exactly be deserving of God's promise.  

Not that I'm trying to say that I'm perfect (or anywhere near it) but I try to keep my promises to people who have deceived me as well, but what I do doesn't really have any significance at either the micro or the macro level.

In other words, didn't God have broader things to consider than just the specific act of keeping a promise?

God did punish him but it was to teach Jacob a leason. He was forced out of Canaan to escape his brother Esau’s anger making him estranged with his family for over 20 years.

Laban's deception of Jacob mirrors Jacob's deception of Isaac. Laban tricked him by switching Leah and Rachel forcing Jacob to marry Leah and stealing his flocks Jacob ends up doing free labor for 14 year. When Laban saw that Jacob’s flocks were outnumbering his. Later on his 10 sons lied to him saying that Joseph was dead with them concocting an evidence by dipping the torn technocolor dreamcoat into the goat’s blood. All of these forced Jacob to taste his own medicine of tricking his blind dad into posing as Esau and stealing his brother’s blessing.

The story is about reconciliation Jacob greatly fears retribution from Esau, Esau runs to Jacob with his arms open and hugs his younger brother. Also Esau seems to have done fine without Jacob all that time and ends up having equal wealth. In the end Jacob went through alot and learned from it. Jacob that tricked to his father is now willing to give Esau part of his wealth — cows and sheep, and Esau says, “What for do I need more cows and sheep? Keep them, brother, keep them. And with my blessing, no less.” Reconciliation is the main theme and that is why I tie to the parable of the prodigal son.

Hope this was a more specific and better answer, For question like this it always better to ask a priest as they are ordained to the ministry and not rely what random people say online. But still hope it helped.

[wnwnwn]

That is the question, isn't it? It's one that the Bible starts asking itself when it gets to King David, who is constantly doing horrible things to which God clearly takes exception without ever lastingly losing God's favor. The orthodox Christian (and I think also the usual Jewish and Muslim?) answer is that this is, put simply, all of us, but that doesn't explain why there are other figures in the Bible--such as, for instance, Esau--of whom this doesn't seem to be outwardly true.

I suppose Moses and Saul were treated fairly.
I would say that Peter's only wrongdoing was a step necessary in his path to become the church leader in the next years, but maybe that's too much of a catholic idea.