God tests Abraham

[839311]

Genesis 22: 1-12

Some time later God tested Abraham. He said to him, “Abraham!”
“Here I am,” he replied.
Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.”

Early the next morning Abraham got up and loaded his donkey. He took with him two of his servants and his son Isaac. When he had cut enough wood for the burnt offering, he set out for the place God had told him about. On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place in the distance. He said to his servants, “Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then we will come back to you.”
Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, “Father?”
“Yes, my son?” Abraham replied.
“The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?”
Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together.
When they reached the place God had told him about, Abraham built an altar there and arranged the wood on it. He bound his son Isaac and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood. Then he reached out his hand and took the knife to slay his son. But the angel of the LORD called out to him from heaven, “Abraham! Abraham!”
“Here I am,” he replied. “Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.”




There are at least two things wrong with this situation.

First, Abraham was willing to murder his son because God asked him to. He didn't ask his son if it was ok that he be sacrificed, he was just going to kill him whether he wanted it or not.

Second, isn't it cruel on God's part to give this test? How would you feel, and what would you do, if God called your name and then told you to sacrifice your child?

It seems that Abraham was terrified of what God would do to him or his family if he refused. When you look at the last verse above, God was testing whether or not Abraham feared him. Fear. Interesting choice of emotion to develop in a relationship. Evil comes to mind. So does insanity.

But, its open for debate. Any rational arguments out there that can justify this test?

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

I don't think it can be justified. As a former Christian, I've read all the apologetic works to explain this, but none of it really makes any sense. I would not, under any circumstance, even consider the thought of harming either of my two kids. I would rather die before anything bad happened to them. One thing I will point out about this, though, since you mention the fear of god, is that Christian apologists will say that "fear" when used of how we are to look at god, actually means awe or reverence. The problem is, for all the studies I've done on the Greek and Hebrew, I found that this is not the case. When the Bible says fear god, it means exactly what it says: fear.

 

[arthra]

839311 wrote:

"There are at least two things wrong with this situation.

First, Abraham was willing to murder his son because God asked him to. He didn't ask his son if it was ok that he be sacrificed, he was just going to kill him whether he wanted it or not...."

........................................

My comment:

Actually in the Qur'an Surih 37 there's a different version...

102 And when (his son) was old enough to walk with him, (Abraham) said: O my dear son, I have seen in a dream that I must sacrifice thee. So look, what thinkest thou ?

He said: O my father! Do that which thou art commanded. Allah willing, thou shalt find me of the steadfast.

103 Then, when they had both surrendered (to Allah), and he had flung him down upon his face,
104 We called unto him: O Abraham!
105 Thou hast already fulfilled the vision. Lo! thus do We reward the good.
106 Lo! that verily was a clear test.

So in the Qur'an Abraham asks His son and both were "surrendered". Then God says: "Thou hast already fulfilled the vision".

Sacrificing your only son has a deep resonance especially since a son was most prized and an only son even more so! The implication being that Abraham was willing to give up everything for God.

 

[Student of X]

Very interesting, thanks for sharing that Arthra.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It's a story - and a brilliant one - that conveyed to its audience just the opposite of what today's audience understands.

 

[Corkscrew]

Now wait a minute, we all know the real version went:
Oh God said to Abraham, "Kill me a son"
Abe says, "Man, you must be puttin' me on"
God say, "No." Abe say, "What ?"
God say, "You can do what you want Abe, but
The next time you see me comin' you better run"
Well Abe says, "Where do you want this killin' done ?"
God says. "Out on Highway 61".
Witnessed by Bob Dylan

 

[CarlinKnew]

It's a story - and a brilliant one - that conveyed to its audience just the opposite of what today's audience understands.

Today's audience views it as a cruel test of Abraham's loyalty to God. The opposite of that is what?

 

[connermt]

It doesn't matter who is tested by this god, there's no reason for it. If god knows your heart, it knows what you will and won't do for it. There's no legitimate need for it to test anyone. Unless it gets off on watching its creation squirm.

 

[Levite]

Genesis 22: 1-12

Some time later God tested Abraham. He said to him, “Abraham!”
“Here I am,” he replied.
Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.”

Early the next morning Abraham got up and loaded his donkey. He took with him two of his servants and his son Isaac. When he had cut enough wood for the burnt offering, he set out for the place God had told him about. On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place in the distance. He said to his servants, “Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then we will come back to you.”
Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, “Father?”
“Yes, my son?” Abraham replied.
“The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?”
Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together.
When they reached the place God had told him about, Abraham built an altar there and arranged the wood on it. He bound his son Isaac and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood. Then he reached out his hand and took the knife to slay his son. But the angel of the LORD called out to him from heaven, “Abraham! Abraham!”
“Here I am,” he replied. “Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.”




There are at least two things wrong with this situation.

First, Abraham was willing to murder his son because God asked him to. He didn't ask his son if it was ok that he be sacrificed, he was just going to kill him whether he wanted it or not.

Second, isn't it cruel on God's part to give this test? How would you feel, and what would you do, if God called your name and then told you to sacrifice your child?

It seems that Abraham was terrified of what God would do to him or his family if he refused. When you look at the last verse above, God was testing whether or not Abraham feared him. Fear. Interesting choice of emotion to develop in a relationship. Evil comes to mind. So does insanity.

But, its open for debate. Any rational arguments out there that can justify this test?

This story is widely considered to be the most troubling text in Torah. Many have and many still do wrestle with its meaning.

I was never satisfied with any meaning for it until I read a midrash that teaches that God was waiting for Abraham to refuse and to argue with Him over this, and He was shocked and saddened when Abraham never did. God concluded that Abraham had failed the test because he was getting old, and had lost the vigor and clarity of younger days, so He did not hold Abraham responsible for failing, but rather repeated His old promise to Abraham as a comfort and a kindness to the old man. And the midrash teaches that this is why, when the People Israel sin by making the Golden Calf at Sinai, God goes out of His way to say to Moses "Now let me be and stand aside, so that I may destroy the people and begin again with you," so that Moses understands that he must argue with God over this decision, which he does, and so passes the test that Abraham failed.

 

[Octavia156]

For me, there is a simple answer to this question.
Based on the evidence I have seen, the Abrahamic God was in fact one of many Sumerian gods from which Abraham "chose".
His name was Enlil.

Abraham was a Sumerian.... a polytheistic culture and true authors of most of stories from Genesis (in a different order). The true Genesis stories do not suggest that the world was created by one God at all. Rather it documents the history of the first tribes of men, who were begot by the gods (plural)

Abraham was a devotee of one of the Sumerian Gods - Enlil. Enlil was the Storm God of the Mountain [brother to Enki the Light Bringer). He was typically vengeful and jealous, and in Sumerian mythology, sacrificing a son to prove your devotion on top of a mountain was exactly the kind of thing Enlil would request.

It should be noted that Abraham was a resident of mesopotamia and was told, whilst there, by Enlil to leave his homeland for a new "promised one". The tribe of Abraham and his sons implied that their God was the one God... (which in turn implies there were many).

It looks like Enlil used Abraham to split off from the other Gods, (jealous that he was) and rewrote the story of Genesis with himself at the helm. Its like hte early Old Testament was jumbled together by a splinter SUmerian tribe who were trying to remember the stroies from Sunday School. All the characters from Genesis are detailed in Sumerian scripture, but in a different order... "Adam" for example, was not the first man. I believe he was a descent of Noah but I'd have to check. The length of time they are 'alive' suggests that they were tribes or families rather than individuals... i think this translates to the OT and solves the whole issue of life-length for me.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

This story is widely considered to be the most troubling text in Torah. Many have and many still do wrestle with its meaning.

I was never satisfied with any meaning for it until I read a midrash that teaches that God was waiting for Abraham to refuse and to argue with Him over this, and He was shocked and saddened when Abraham never did. God concluded that Abraham had failed the test because he was getting old, and had lost the vigor and clarity of younger days, so He did not hold Abraham responsible for failing, but rather repeated His old promise to Abraham as a comfort and a kindness to the old man. And the midrash teaches that this is why, when the People Israel sin by making the Golden Calf at Sinai, God goes out of His way to say to Moses "Now let me be and stand aside, so that I may destroy the people and begin again with you," so that Moses understands that he must argue with God over this decision, which he does, and so passes the test that Abraham failed.

This is the best explanation I've seen of this text. I'm kind of surprised I haven't heard it before.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Today's audience views it as a cruel test of Abraham's loyalty to God. The opposite of that is what?

You're in Canaan - centuries ago - listening to this story. What are your preconceptions? What is your take-away?

There are literally reams of commentary on the Akedah. It's an immensely rich and sustaining topic.

 

[BruceDLimber]

There's also the relatively unimportant distinction (which the Baha'i Faith also stipulates) that the Qur'an says that it was Ishmael whom Abraham was to sacrifice rather than Isaac.

Bruce

 

[outhouse]

For me, there is a simple answer to this question.
Based on the evidence I have seen, the Abrahamic God was in fact one of many Sumerian gods from which Abraham "chose".
His name was Enlil.

Abraham was a Sumerian.... a polytheistic culture and true authors of most of stories from Genesis (in a different order). The true Genesis stories do not suggest that the world was created by one God at all. Rather it documents the history of the first tribes of men, who were begot by the gods (plural)

Abraham was a devotee of one of the Sumerian Gods - Enlil. Enlil was the Storm God of the Mountain [brother to Enki the Light Bringer). He was typically vengeful and jealous, and in Sumerian mythology, sacrificing a son to prove your devotion on top of a mountain was exactly the kind of thing Enlil would request.

It should be noted that Abraham was a resident of mesopotamia and was told, whilst there, by Enlil to leave his homeland for a new "promised one". The tribe of Abraham and his sons implied that their God was the one God... (which in turn implies there were many).

It looks like Enlil used Abraham to split off from the other Gods, (jealous that he was) and rewrote the story of Genesis with himself at the helm. Its like hte early Old Testament was jumbled together by a splinter SUmerian tribe who were trying to remember the stroies from Sunday School. All the characters from Genesis are detailed in Sumerian scripture, but in a different order... "Adam" for example, was not the first man. I believe he was a descent of Noah but I'd have to check. The length of time they are 'alive' suggests that they were tribes or families rather than individuals... i think this translates to the OT and solves the whole issue of life-length for me.

Not a bad take on it. But many details not exactly accurate.

But ill add that, ancient hebrews were using oral tradition of the story as you state from mesopotamian sources before it was written.

collections of writings before compilation and redaction were all given the hebrew spin to give hebrews identity in their own mythology.

I was never satisfied with any meaning for it until I read a midrash that teaches that God was waiting for Abraham to refuse and to argue with Him over this,

I dont buy that. I think sits a excuse to cover up the violent and barbaric nature of early men in early civilizations.



This whole legends is just dealing with the new theology of strict Yahwehism after the fall of the temple. Theres no magically beauty hidden in this scripture to teach morals or lessons like many other early legends,

 

[839311]

Actually in the Qur'an Surih 37 there's a different version...

102 And when (his son) was old enough to walk with him, (Abraham) said: O my dear son, I have seen in a dream that I must sacrifice thee. So look, what thinkest thou ?

He said: O my father! Do that which thou art commanded. Allah willing, thou shalt find me of the steadfast.

That takes care of the first problem. You still have the second problem to deal with.

 

[839311]

I was never satisfied with any meaning for it until I read a midrash that teaches that God was waiting for Abraham to refuse and to argue with Him over this, and He was shocked and saddened when Abraham never did.

That doesn't seem to address what the verses say at all. The last verse in the OP is, "Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.” It seems that God wanted to see whether or not Abe feared him, which, understandably, he did.

Your response also makes me wonder how powerful you think the god you believe in is? Omnipotence and omniscience are usually thrown around quite liberally, but what you wrote above seems to indicate a much weaker being.

God concluded that Abraham had failed the test because he was getting old, and had lost the vigor and clarity of younger days, so He did not hold Abraham responsible for failing, but rather repeated His old promise to Abraham as a comfort and a kindness to the old man.

So, other than terrifying Abraham, what would the point of the test have been?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

There's also the relatively unimportant distinction (which the Baha'i Faith also stipulates) that the Qur'an says that it was Ishmael whom Abraham was to sacrifice rather than Isaac.

Bruce

No, it does not, although there are those who infer this to be the case.

 

[839311]

There's also the relatively unimportant distinction (which the Baha'i Faith also stipulates) that the Qur'an says that it was Ishmael whom Abraham was to sacrifice rather than Isaac.

Well, the Torah came first. Id say the only reason the author of that part of the Koran changed it was because he didn't want muslims to think they were worse than Jews. Seeing as Mohammed decided to use the bible as a source, it was an issue he had to address.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

... I read a midrash that teaches that God was waiting for Abraham to refuse and to argue with Him over this, and He was shocked and saddened when Abraham never did. God concluded that Abraham had failed the test because he was getting old, and had lost the vigor and clarity of younger days, so He did not hold Abraham responsible for failing, but rather repeated His old promise to Abraham as a comfort and a kindness to the old man. And the midrash teaches that this is why, when the People Israel sin by making the Golden Calf at Sinai, God goes out of His way to say to Moses "Now let me be and stand aside, so that I may destroy the people and begin again with you," so that Moses understands that he must argue with God over this decision, which he does, and so passes the test that Abraham failed.

Just for the record: I find rationalizations such as this deeply dissatisfying (but perhaps necessary if one views the story as historical fact).

 

[Octavia156]

Not a bad take on it. But many details not exactly accurate.

But ill add that, ancient hebrews were using oral tradition of the story as you state from mesopotamian sources before it was written.

collections of writings before compilation and redaction were all given the hebrew spin to give hebrews identity in their own mythology.

cool.

yeh, my argument is apocryphal conjecture... when it comes to motive that is! I've seen some interesting family trees that layout the Sumerian ancestry. Noah's there, Lilith and Adam. All in a different order.
I like the theory that these were ealy tribes of men, perhaps led by philosopher kings or shamans. Whats so amaing is that the Sumerian tablets are our ealriest History, but they detail a history that goes back way further, they were simply the first to write it down.