When I first learned about Abraham’s story as a child, it wasn’t something that I could even begin to comprehend. Here we see God asking a man to sacrifice his own child mere pages after God declares “Anyone who sheds the blood of a human being, by a human being shall that one’s blood be shed” (Gen 9:6). I do now recognize that I am looking back on an ancient culture, many customs of which I cannot begin to understand through my own modern lens, but it still seems like an insane request. So why did Abraham agree to it?
To me it seems that the answer must be trust and faith. In the moment Abraham makes clear his intention to do this seemingly insane act he acts in complete obedience to God’s will and not his own. Where many others before him disobeyed even simpler instructions, Abraham demonstrated that he was willing to obey even the toughest of commands. And, of course, it is made finally clear that God never intended for Abraham to complete the deed as he sent an Angel to stay Abraham’s hand.
So was he lying when he told his servents in Gen 22:5 that “we will worship and then come back to you” or could this hint that he trusted that God would spare his son in some way? And in Gen 22:8 he tells Issac that “God will provide the sheep for the burnt offering” he could be referring to his own son as the sheep or have some notion that his son wasn’t meant to be the true sacrifice to God. Whether he thought his son would be spared or not, the story makes it clear that Abraham was intent on carrying out the command.
I view this as a test which was designed by God to reveal the depths to which Abraham could place his trust in God. This command seems to conflict with God’s repeated promise that he would make Abraham’s descendents numerous. Surely killing off his heir would destroy that promise? But Abraham has faith that God will keep his end of the covenant as long as he keeps his end. I think this is meant to place both Abraham and God in a praiseworthy light, although that may seem insane from our modern viewpoint of the story. In the end, Issac’s life was spared and Abraham affirmed his trust in God to a level which no human before him was able to display.
Introduction to Theology: Charlotte Spraul 
Wow- your response is so well written! I had the first impressions as you when thinking about when I first learned of this story during grade school and being so shocked of the meaning. I agree that I think the major point of this strange command of sacrificing Isaac was to show his trust in the Lord. For anyone, there would definitely be a lot of doubt in their mind if asked to do such a deed. However, Abraham shows himself as an extremely worthy recipient of God’s covenant. I also do not think that Abraham was lying and that his point was to make sure he could follow out God’s command and show his ultimate trust. Do you think that there could be any argument that, upon first glance on these verses, would show Abraham in a less than praiseworthy light?
LikeLike
I entirely agree that at first glance my assessment of Abraham would be “He is not someone to look up to… he’s a mad man!” And I think that initial response is entirely warranted, which is why it becomes even more powerful when you realize the importance and gravity of his decision.
LikeLike
I noticed the same apparent contradiction between Abraham killing his son and still have numerous descendants? This is what eventually lead me to realize that rather than blindly following God’s request Abraham chose to place faith and trust that God would somehow save Isaac. Why would God, who has done all that he has promised, go back on his covenant with Abraham and Isaac to grant them, numerous descendants? How do you think Abraham’s willingness to trust in God’s plans parallels the themes from Genesis 1-11 of the disfigurement of mankind through their self-serving acts?
LikeLike
Great Question! I think that this action by Abraham acts as a direct antithesis to the self-centered actions of Genesis 1-11 that we saw running humanity into the ground. By that I mean that up until this point it was very self beneficial for Abraham to follow God’s will, because for the most part his commands were simple things like “move over there” and in turn he would receive a great name, vast land, and “descendants numerous as the stars” which seems like a pretty sweet deal. But when God says “actually, sacrifice your heir to me” that command is very much not easily in the best interest of Abraham if he sees himself as in charge of his own destiny. But he recognizes that God is in control, he doesn’t presume to “take” his chance at glory into his own hands. He obeys God and ultimately recognizes that this promised glory can only “given” to him by God.
LikeLike
This might be a little too similar to an earlier comment, but what about Isaac? This is a test, just like the test in the Garden of Eden, but Adam and Eve’s sin didn’t involve murdering someone unknowingly! If this were a test of faith for Abraham and Isaac, they both needed to have all the information so that Isaac could also make the choice to trust God. He has no moral agency or human dignity in this story. Likewise, if the test of faith was only for Abraham, couldn’t God have made it about killing himself? Sure, it’s grizzly, but it’s also way more fair than involving an innocent child who had no say in any of it.
LikeLike
Wow, you really did an amazing job in your response, it was a delight to read! I really enjoyed your connections to reading it as a child versus reading it now and how ancient cultures were very different (what’s an “insane request” now was not nearly as anomalous as sacrifice actually used to be common practice).
You also raise the point that “God will keep his end of the covenant as long as he keeps his end,” and I really like that this captures the relationship between God and his followers. Reading about these tests with Abraham, Eve, Cain, etc. having to prove their love and trust to God can make one forget that God too has a part in the relationship (such as by fulfilling his promises to Abraham in this narrative). With that being said, I was wondering if you think there is any one-sidedness in this relationship? For example, do you think one of them, God or Abraham, is more praiseworthy in their actions? And in general, do you think one side needs to be subject to more tests than the other (as it seems that people are put to the test more than we test God’s giving nature)? I would love to hear your thoughts.
LikeLike