Sacrifice - Scholarly Article
1. Why did God ask Abraham to offer up Isaac as a sacrifice?
God put Abraham through this “trial” in order to strengthen and demonstrate his trust in God, and to give an enacted prophecy about Jesus. In the first place, as Jewish scholar Nahum M. Sarna writes:
When “God put Abraham to the test” it was obviously not a trial, the outcome of which was meant to add to the sum of God’s knowledge. Such an idea would obviously be incompatible with the biblical concept of the omniscience of God. If the story is included in biblical literature it is doubtless due to its didactic value for man.
As Stephen M . Coleman observes:
God did not test Abraham to discover something about the patriarch that He did not know . . . . But God tested Abraham to reveal, strengthen, and prove the reality of his faith when he was called to trust God’s word of promise . . .
Catholic writer Fr. Vincent Serpa O.P. comments that:
In asking Abraham to sacrifice his son, God was not testing him for his own information but for that of Abraham. Up until this point Abraham did not know that he had such faith within himself. In making such a difficult request, God actually drew the best out of Abraham.
In the second place, from the Christian point of view, the story of Genesis 22 takes on aa additional significance as an example of enacted prophecy. As Andy Patton explains: The story of Abraham and Isaac takes on a larger significance when you place it in the context of prophetic reenactment. Throughout the Bible, God asked prophets to act out things that he said he would do (e.g., Ezek. 5:1-4). The acts themselves are a lot less strange when we see them in this light. Then we start asking [What] did God intend for us to learn through this? Just as God . . . told Ezekiel to lie on his side for over a year to symbolize the siege of Jerusalem (Ezek. 4), so God asked Abraham to play the part of God in the sacrifice of his own son . . . . Both Isaac and Jesus are long-awaited “beloved sons” who are born in miraculous circumstances (Gen. 22:1). Both sons carry the wood that is to be the instrument of their deaths on their backs (Gen. 22:6; John 19:17). In both stories, the father leads the son up a mountain, and the son follows obediently toward his own death (Gen. 22:3; Matt. 26:39). And in both scenarios, God provides the sacrificial substitute, which Abraham says will be a ram (a male lamb) and the New Testament authors identify as Jesus, “the lamb of God” (Gen. 22:8; John 1:29).
2. Why did Abraham follow God’s command?
Abraham had an active faith in God (i.e. he gave God his allegiance and placed his trust in Him) and was confident that God would be true to his covenantal word. Consequently, Abraham seems to have thought that God would either prevent the sacrifice of Isaac (and provide an alternative victim), or that God would bring Isaac back from the dead.
There are several deliberate ambiguities in the Genesis narrative about “the binding of Isaac” which suggest Abraham may have been unsure whether or not God wanted him to sacrifice Isaac; but Abraham was sure that one way or another, as he told his servants before he headed up the mountain with Isaac: “We will worship and then we will come back to you.” (Genesis 22:5, NIV, emphasis added).
According to Genesis 22:2, God asks Abraham to take Isaac to “the land of Moriah” and to “offer him there as [or “for” ] a burnt offering on one of the mountains [hills] of which I shall tell you.” Philosopher Paul Copan explains that:
The Hebrew word Moriah is derived from the Hebrew word ra’ha, “provide, see, show.” . . . . So in the very word Moriah (“provision”) we have a hint of salvation and deliverance.
Moreover, the Hebrew translated as “offer him up there as a sacrifice” literally means “cause him to ascend there as [for] a thing that ascends.” According to the medieval Jewish exegete Rashi, God gave Abraham an ambiguous command, omitting any explicit instruction to “slaughter” Isaac (which would’ve required the Hebrew word shachtehu ): because the Holy One . . . did not desire that he should slay him, but he told him to bring him up to the mountain to prepare him as a burnt offering. So when he had taken him up, God said to him, “Bring him down.”
In other words, God asked Abraham to offer Isaac as an offering, but He didn’t actually ask Abraham to kill or “slaughter” Isaac. The ambiguity of God’s request sets the scene for Abraham’s own apparent uncertainty about what would happen. Hence Rabbi Binny Freedman asks the rhetorical question: “What if Abraham actually was not sure what [God] really wanted of him?” Likewise, Paul Copan writes that: “Abraham knew that God would fulfill his promise regarding Isaac, but he didn’t know what God would do in the end.” As they were walking up the mountain: Isaac said to his father Abraham, “My father!” And he said, “Here I am, my son.” He said, “Behold, the fire and the wood, but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?” Abraham said, “God will provide for himself the lamb for a burnt offering, my son.” So they went both of them together. (Genesis 22: 7-8, ESV.)
Note the ambiguity of Abraham’s answer, which leaves it open as to whether Abraham is saying that God will provide “my son” (i.e. Isaac) as the metaphorical “lamb,” or whether Abraham is saying to his son (i.e. Isaac) that God will provide his own literal “lamb” for sacrifice. Jean E. Jones points out that: In Abraham’s birthplace Ur, religious rituals included human sacrifice. One of the most startling excavations from Ur is the so-called “Royal Cemetery” with its pits containing human sacrifices . . . . Abraham moved to Haran, not far from other sites where human sacrifices have been uncovered from the same age . . . . Although there were also infant sacrifices in the regions, these are mostly adult sacrifices. This is significant because at the time God tested Abraham by asking him to sacrifice Isaac, Isaac was not a child . . .
Indeed, the term Genesis 22:5 uses for both Isaac and the servants is used in Genesis 14:24 to describe a young man of military age. Alex Varughese and Christina Bohn report that: The word na‘ar (meaning “boy,” “youth,” “servant”) is used in v 5 for both the servants and Isaac . . . . the term is only indirectly related to age; it often indicates one’s status as a “person under the authority and protection of his father” or “his superior or commander” . . . Jewish Old Testament scholar Isaac Kalimi explains that: Some rabbis consider the Aqedah not only a test of Abraham but also of Isaac . . . he was aware that his father was leading him to death, yet willingly followed and obeyed him. This is the intention of the repeated phrase, “and they went both of them together” (Gen. 22:6b, 8b) . . . . The willingness of Isaac to be sacrificed is stated already by Josephus [Antiquities 1.232], Pseudo-Philo (Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum 32:1-3), and 4 [Maccabees] 7:13-14 . . .
Another textual clue within the Genesis narrative that points in this direction is the fact that Isaac was strong enough to carry the firewood for the sacrifice, and therefore could probably have resisted Abraham had he minded to do so: The tying up then simply means that Abraham acts in conformity to the rite of a burnt offering. The hints in this chapter that Isaac is complicit in what is happening provide a basis for Jewish interpretation’s focus on Isaac’s willingness to be sacrificed. This Jewish understanding of Genesis 22 makes sense against the cultural background of the ancient near east. As Jones observes: The people of Abraham’s day would not have thought there was anything immoral about human sacrifices. In fact, they considered it an act of great piety . . . in cultures that believed in gods that give blessings in return for sacrifices, sacrificing offspring would be considered a moral good . . . . the Lord God provided a ram to show that this God was different: This God did not want humans sacrificing humans. Danish archaeologist Laerke Recht comments that “the ancient people of the Near East may not have understood human, or indeed animal, sacrifice as a violent, repulsive act.” This Jewish interpretation of Genesis 22 influenced the Qur’an, where Abraham and his un-named son have this exchange: [Abraham] said: “O My son, I see in a dream that I am sacrificing you; see what you think.” He said, “O my Father, do as you are commanded; you will find me, God willing, one of the steadfast.” (Sura 37:102)
While contemporary Muslims often think that the son in this exchange is Ishmael, “the earliest Islamic commentators were divided over which son was intended.” See Episode Eight: Question Seven for more details about this. Finally, note what Abraham told his servants before he headed off with Isaac: “We will worship and then we will come back to you.” (Genesis 22:5, NIV, emphasis added). The New Testament book known as Hebrews observes that because Abraham “had received the promises [of God]” (Hebrews 11:17) – including the miraculous reversal of Sarah’s menopause and the subsequent conception of Isaac himself – he “considered that God is able to raise people even from the dead” (Hebrews 11:19). In other words, given his life experience following God, Abraham was confident that “the judge of the whole earth [would] deal justly,” (see Genesis 18:25) and that in some way, God would fulfill His covenant promises (Genesis 17:19). Hence, if God did want Abraham to actually sacrifice Isaac, then God would bring Isaac back from the dead, because that would be the only way for God to keep his covenant promise to Abraham, centered as it was upon Isaac’s descendants.
3. Episode Nine shows Isaac deciding to allow himself to be sacrificed. Is this realistic, and is it true to the Genesis narrative?
The portrayal of Isaac as being willing to be sacrificed is plausible in the cultural context of the ancient near east, and is a traditional Jewish interpretation of the Genesis 22 narrative that makes sense in light of several “clues” within the text.
Jewish Old Testament scholar Isaac Kalimi explains that: Some rabbis consider the Aqedah not only a test of Abraham but also of Isaac . . . he was aware that his father was leading him to death, yet willingly followed and obeyed him. This is the intention of the repeated phrase, “and they went both of them together” (Gen. 22:6b, 8b) . . . . The willingness of Isaac to be sacrificed is stated already by Josephus [Antiquities 1.232], Pseudo-Philo (Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum 32:1-3), and 4 [Maccabees] 7:13-14 . . . Another textual clue within the Genesis narrative that points in this direction is the fact that Isaac was strong enough to carry the firewood for the sacrifice, and therefore could probably have resisted Abraham had he minded to do so:
The tying up then simply means that Abraham acts in conformity to the rite of a burnt offering. The hints in this chapter that Isaac is complicit in what is happening provide a basis for Jewish interpretation’s focus on Isaac’s willingness to be sacrificed. This Jewish understanding of Genesis 22 makes sense against the cultural background of the ancient near east. As Jean E. Jones observes: The people of Abraham’s day would not have thought there was anything immoral about human sacrifices. In fact, they considered it an act of great piety . . . in cultures that believed in gods that give blessings in return for sacrifices, sacrificing offspring would be considered a moral good . . . . the Lord God provided a ram to show that this God was different: This God did not want humans sacrificing humans.
As Jones points out: In Abraham’s birthplace Ur, religious rituals included human sacrifice. One of the most startling excavations from Ur is the so-called “Royal Cemetery” with its pits containing human sacrifices . . . . Abraham moved to Haran, not far from other sites where human sacrifices have been uncovered from the same age . . . . Although there were also infant sacrifices in the regions, these are mostly adult sacrifices. This is significant because at the time God tested Abraham by asking him to sacrifice Isaac, Isaac was not a child . . .
Danish archaeologist Laerke Recht comments that “the ancient people of the Near East may not have understood human, or indeed animal, sacrifice as a violent, repulsive act.” This Jewish interpretation of Genesis 22 influenced the Qur’an, where Abraham and his un-named son have this exchange:
[Abraham] said: “O My son, I see in a dream that I am sacrificing you; see what you think.” He said, “O my Father, do as you are commanded; you will find me, God willing, one of the steadfast.” (Sura 37:102) While contemporary Muslims often think that the son in this exchange is Ishmael, “the earliest Islamic commentators were divided over which son was intended.” See Episode Eight: Question Seven for more details about this.
Recommended Resources for Episode 9
Sam Shamoun, “Abraham and the Child of Sacrifice – Isaac or Ishmael?” https://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/sacrifice.htm
Sam Shamoun, “Was Abraham commanded to sacrifice Isaac or Ishmael?” https://www.judaism-islam.com/was-abraham-commanded-to-sacrifice-isaac-or-ishmael/
Sam Shamoun, “Reply to Mohamed Ghounem’s: Was Isaac or Ishmael to be sacrificed?” https://www.answering-islam.de/Responses/Ghounem/isaac.htm Paul Copan. Is God A Moral Monster? (Baker, 2011), Chapter Five. Dennis Prager. The Rational Bible: Genesis (Regnery Faith, 2019) N.M. Sarna. Understanding Genesis Through Rabbinic Tradition and Modern Scholarship (The Heritage of Biblical Israel). (The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 2014)
God put Abraham through this “trial” in order to strengthen and demonstrate his trust in God, and to give an enacted prophecy about Jesus. In the first place, as Jewish scholar Nahum M. Sarna writes:
When “God put Abraham to the test” it was obviously not a trial, the outcome of which was meant to add to the sum of God’s knowledge. Such an idea would obviously be incompatible with the biblical concept of the omniscience of God. If the story is included in biblical literature it is doubtless due to its didactic value for man.
As Stephen M . Coleman observes:
God did not test Abraham to discover something about the patriarch that He did not know . . . . But God tested Abraham to reveal, strengthen, and prove the reality of his faith when he was called to trust God’s word of promise . . .
Catholic writer Fr. Vincent Serpa O.P. comments that:
In asking Abraham to sacrifice his son, God was not testing him for his own information but for that of Abraham. Up until this point Abraham did not know that he had such faith within himself. In making such a difficult request, God actually drew the best out of Abraham.
In the second place, from the Christian point of view, the story of Genesis 22 takes on aa additional significance as an example of enacted prophecy. As Andy Patton explains: The story of Abraham and Isaac takes on a larger significance when you place it in the context of prophetic reenactment. Throughout the Bible, God asked prophets to act out things that he said he would do (e.g., Ezek. 5:1-4). The acts themselves are a lot less strange when we see them in this light. Then we start asking [What] did God intend for us to learn through this? Just as God . . . told Ezekiel to lie on his side for over a year to symbolize the siege of Jerusalem (Ezek. 4), so God asked Abraham to play the part of God in the sacrifice of his own son . . . . Both Isaac and Jesus are long-awaited “beloved sons” who are born in miraculous circumstances (Gen. 22:1). Both sons carry the wood that is to be the instrument of their deaths on their backs (Gen. 22:6; John 19:17). In both stories, the father leads the son up a mountain, and the son follows obediently toward his own death (Gen. 22:3; Matt. 26:39). And in both scenarios, God provides the sacrificial substitute, which Abraham says will be a ram (a male lamb) and the New Testament authors identify as Jesus, “the lamb of God” (Gen. 22:8; John 1:29).
2. Why did Abraham follow God’s command?
Abraham had an active faith in God (i.e. he gave God his allegiance and placed his trust in Him) and was confident that God would be true to his covenantal word. Consequently, Abraham seems to have thought that God would either prevent the sacrifice of Isaac (and provide an alternative victim), or that God would bring Isaac back from the dead.
There are several deliberate ambiguities in the Genesis narrative about “the binding of Isaac” which suggest Abraham may have been unsure whether or not God wanted him to sacrifice Isaac; but Abraham was sure that one way or another, as he told his servants before he headed up the mountain with Isaac: “We will worship and then we will come back to you.” (Genesis 22:5, NIV, emphasis added).
According to Genesis 22:2, God asks Abraham to take Isaac to “the land of Moriah” and to “offer him there as [or “for” ] a burnt offering on one of the mountains [hills] of which I shall tell you.” Philosopher Paul Copan explains that:
The Hebrew word Moriah is derived from the Hebrew word ra’ha, “provide, see, show.” . . . . So in the very word Moriah (“provision”) we have a hint of salvation and deliverance.
Moreover, the Hebrew translated as “offer him up there as a sacrifice” literally means “cause him to ascend there as [for] a thing that ascends.” According to the medieval Jewish exegete Rashi, God gave Abraham an ambiguous command, omitting any explicit instruction to “slaughter” Isaac (which would’ve required the Hebrew word shachtehu ): because the Holy One . . . did not desire that he should slay him, but he told him to bring him up to the mountain to prepare him as a burnt offering. So when he had taken him up, God said to him, “Bring him down.”
In other words, God asked Abraham to offer Isaac as an offering, but He didn’t actually ask Abraham to kill or “slaughter” Isaac. The ambiguity of God’s request sets the scene for Abraham’s own apparent uncertainty about what would happen. Hence Rabbi Binny Freedman asks the rhetorical question: “What if Abraham actually was not sure what [God] really wanted of him?” Likewise, Paul Copan writes that: “Abraham knew that God would fulfill his promise regarding Isaac, but he didn’t know what God would do in the end.” As they were walking up the mountain: Isaac said to his father Abraham, “My father!” And he said, “Here I am, my son.” He said, “Behold, the fire and the wood, but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?” Abraham said, “God will provide for himself the lamb for a burnt offering, my son.” So they went both of them together. (Genesis 22: 7-8, ESV.)
Note the ambiguity of Abraham’s answer, which leaves it open as to whether Abraham is saying that God will provide “my son” (i.e. Isaac) as the metaphorical “lamb,” or whether Abraham is saying to his son (i.e. Isaac) that God will provide his own literal “lamb” for sacrifice. Jean E. Jones points out that: In Abraham’s birthplace Ur, religious rituals included human sacrifice. One of the most startling excavations from Ur is the so-called “Royal Cemetery” with its pits containing human sacrifices . . . . Abraham moved to Haran, not far from other sites where human sacrifices have been uncovered from the same age . . . . Although there were also infant sacrifices in the regions, these are mostly adult sacrifices. This is significant because at the time God tested Abraham by asking him to sacrifice Isaac, Isaac was not a child . . .
Indeed, the term Genesis 22:5 uses for both Isaac and the servants is used in Genesis 14:24 to describe a young man of military age. Alex Varughese and Christina Bohn report that: The word na‘ar (meaning “boy,” “youth,” “servant”) is used in v 5 for both the servants and Isaac . . . . the term is only indirectly related to age; it often indicates one’s status as a “person under the authority and protection of his father” or “his superior or commander” . . . Jewish Old Testament scholar Isaac Kalimi explains that: Some rabbis consider the Aqedah not only a test of Abraham but also of Isaac . . . he was aware that his father was leading him to death, yet willingly followed and obeyed him. This is the intention of the repeated phrase, “and they went both of them together” (Gen. 22:6b, 8b) . . . . The willingness of Isaac to be sacrificed is stated already by Josephus [Antiquities 1.232], Pseudo-Philo (Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum 32:1-3), and 4 [Maccabees] 7:13-14 . . .
Another textual clue within the Genesis narrative that points in this direction is the fact that Isaac was strong enough to carry the firewood for the sacrifice, and therefore could probably have resisted Abraham had he minded to do so: The tying up then simply means that Abraham acts in conformity to the rite of a burnt offering. The hints in this chapter that Isaac is complicit in what is happening provide a basis for Jewish interpretation’s focus on Isaac’s willingness to be sacrificed. This Jewish understanding of Genesis 22 makes sense against the cultural background of the ancient near east. As Jones observes: The people of Abraham’s day would not have thought there was anything immoral about human sacrifices. In fact, they considered it an act of great piety . . . in cultures that believed in gods that give blessings in return for sacrifices, sacrificing offspring would be considered a moral good . . . . the Lord God provided a ram to show that this God was different: This God did not want humans sacrificing humans. Danish archaeologist Laerke Recht comments that “the ancient people of the Near East may not have understood human, or indeed animal, sacrifice as a violent, repulsive act.” This Jewish interpretation of Genesis 22 influenced the Qur’an, where Abraham and his un-named son have this exchange: [Abraham] said: “O My son, I see in a dream that I am sacrificing you; see what you think.” He said, “O my Father, do as you are commanded; you will find me, God willing, one of the steadfast.” (Sura 37:102)
While contemporary Muslims often think that the son in this exchange is Ishmael, “the earliest Islamic commentators were divided over which son was intended.” See Episode Eight: Question Seven for more details about this. Finally, note what Abraham told his servants before he headed off with Isaac: “We will worship and then we will come back to you.” (Genesis 22:5, NIV, emphasis added). The New Testament book known as Hebrews observes that because Abraham “had received the promises [of God]” (Hebrews 11:17) – including the miraculous reversal of Sarah’s menopause and the subsequent conception of Isaac himself – he “considered that God is able to raise people even from the dead” (Hebrews 11:19). In other words, given his life experience following God, Abraham was confident that “the judge of the whole earth [would] deal justly,” (see Genesis 18:25) and that in some way, God would fulfill His covenant promises (Genesis 17:19). Hence, if God did want Abraham to actually sacrifice Isaac, then God would bring Isaac back from the dead, because that would be the only way for God to keep his covenant promise to Abraham, centered as it was upon Isaac’s descendants.
3. Episode Nine shows Isaac deciding to allow himself to be sacrificed. Is this realistic, and is it true to the Genesis narrative?
The portrayal of Isaac as being willing to be sacrificed is plausible in the cultural context of the ancient near east, and is a traditional Jewish interpretation of the Genesis 22 narrative that makes sense in light of several “clues” within the text.
Jewish Old Testament scholar Isaac Kalimi explains that: Some rabbis consider the Aqedah not only a test of Abraham but also of Isaac . . . he was aware that his father was leading him to death, yet willingly followed and obeyed him. This is the intention of the repeated phrase, “and they went both of them together” (Gen. 22:6b, 8b) . . . . The willingness of Isaac to be sacrificed is stated already by Josephus [Antiquities 1.232], Pseudo-Philo (Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum 32:1-3), and 4 [Maccabees] 7:13-14 . . . Another textual clue within the Genesis narrative that points in this direction is the fact that Isaac was strong enough to carry the firewood for the sacrifice, and therefore could probably have resisted Abraham had he minded to do so:
The tying up then simply means that Abraham acts in conformity to the rite of a burnt offering. The hints in this chapter that Isaac is complicit in what is happening provide a basis for Jewish interpretation’s focus on Isaac’s willingness to be sacrificed. This Jewish understanding of Genesis 22 makes sense against the cultural background of the ancient near east. As Jean E. Jones observes: The people of Abraham’s day would not have thought there was anything immoral about human sacrifices. In fact, they considered it an act of great piety . . . in cultures that believed in gods that give blessings in return for sacrifices, sacrificing offspring would be considered a moral good . . . . the Lord God provided a ram to show that this God was different: This God did not want humans sacrificing humans.
As Jones points out: In Abraham’s birthplace Ur, religious rituals included human sacrifice. One of the most startling excavations from Ur is the so-called “Royal Cemetery” with its pits containing human sacrifices . . . . Abraham moved to Haran, not far from other sites where human sacrifices have been uncovered from the same age . . . . Although there were also infant sacrifices in the regions, these are mostly adult sacrifices. This is significant because at the time God tested Abraham by asking him to sacrifice Isaac, Isaac was not a child . . .
Danish archaeologist Laerke Recht comments that “the ancient people of the Near East may not have understood human, or indeed animal, sacrifice as a violent, repulsive act.” This Jewish interpretation of Genesis 22 influenced the Qur’an, where Abraham and his un-named son have this exchange:
[Abraham] said: “O My son, I see in a dream that I am sacrificing you; see what you think.” He said, “O my Father, do as you are commanded; you will find me, God willing, one of the steadfast.” (Sura 37:102) While contemporary Muslims often think that the son in this exchange is Ishmael, “the earliest Islamic commentators were divided over which son was intended.” See Episode Eight: Question Seven for more details about this.
Recommended Resources for Episode 9
Sam Shamoun, “Abraham and the Child of Sacrifice – Isaac or Ishmael?” https://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/sacrifice.htm
Sam Shamoun, “Was Abraham commanded to sacrifice Isaac or Ishmael?” https://www.judaism-islam.com/was-abraham-commanded-to-sacrifice-isaac-or-ishmael/
Sam Shamoun, “Reply to Mohamed Ghounem’s: Was Isaac or Ishmael to be sacrificed?” https://www.answering-islam.de/Responses/Ghounem/isaac.htm Paul Copan. Is God A Moral Monster? (Baker, 2011), Chapter Five. Dennis Prager. The Rational Bible: Genesis (Regnery Faith, 2019) N.M. Sarna. Understanding Genesis Through Rabbinic Tradition and Modern Scholarship (The Heritage of Biblical Israel). (The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 2014)
