**First and foremost I want to thank you all for this discussion. I am not here to condemn anyone’s views…but rather to learn. If one is not forced to defend their beliefs how can you know they’re the right beliefs?
I would like to address some points in Cindy’s post;**
Let me restate the part of the previous replies that resonated with me . . . I won’t go back and re-read them, so maybe I’ll use different words and ‘accidentally’ clarify what I saw in them.
Abraham is from a culture in which sacrificing one’s offspring was a commonly accepted practice and not an unusual thing for a god to ask of his followers.
Cultural practices and religious practices are two different things. Are you saying that God in the Old Testament accepted human & animal sacrifice/burnt offerings
and then in the New Testament his Son comes along and now he does not condone sacrifices of any kind?
It’s not jiving for me sorry. To me God is PERFECT and INFALLIBLE…Not someone that learns & evolves as he goes along. I don’t believe that he would he say something like “Ok people, back in the day I liked it when you sacrificed living things to me but not anymore…I changed my mind.”
Yes you can bring up Jesus’ death on the cross as a sacrifice but it’s a little different when He says “Abraham, I have one more test to prove your devotion to me, I want you to kill your son.” The difference is that the Father, the Son & Holy Spirit are three in one. So in essence God sacrificed himself but God can’t really die so it’s not the same as a human sacrifice…because God/Jesus/Holy Spirit are not human.
Though (as Jason pointed out) Abraham has passed one test in that he pleaded for Sodom and Gomorrah, God still has work to do in revealing Himself to Abraham. So He gives Abraham another situation to deal with to ‘see what he will do’ – not that He doesn’t know, but Abraham doesn’t know what he’ll do and God wants him to know. (imo) Because Abraham doesn’t go into this expecting to lose his son, he is willing.
So he goes into this because he knows God will stop him before it’s too late. Hmm I would rather have God that tests me with acts of good rather than horrific acts.
The thing that amazes me is that Isaac is willing too, as (I probably already said) he is not a little boy at this point but a strapping young man indubitably stronger than his aging father. They are alone on Moriah. Isaac must choose to submit to this drama and he may not have the faith of his father that he will be restored – nevertheless we’re not told that he resisted in any way. The assumption has to be that he voluntarily cooperated.
This turns into a beautiful picture of the cooperation of Father, Son and Holy Spirit in Jesus’ own sacrifice much later – especially in that God does in fact provide Himself a sacrifice. The sons of Adam are not sacrificed, but rather God sacrifices Himself to reconcile us to Himself. Amazing love.
But Abraham – I don’t think it was as bad for Abraham as we might imagine in our society. Yes, he loved his son, but the idea of sacrificing a son to one’s god was nothing like as horrifying to him as it would be to us
Wow, really? The act of killing ones child was not as disturbing then as it now?
You make it sound like it was just another day at work.
And going to back to an earlier statement about human sacrifices being acceptable in his day – see my comments above.
Second, Abraham had been walking with God for many, many, many years and had come to genuinely trust Him. Abraham talked with God face to face on many recorded occasions and possibly on other occasions as well. Abraham was ready for this demonstration of God’s love. I think it’s reasonable to think that this was one more object lesson in Abraham’s development. Abraham already did not believe God would permanently deprive him of his son. He trusted the earlier promises. He needed to learn that this is not a thing his God would ever require of humans. God Himself provides the needed sacrifice.
And I agree with Jason that Abraham’s response, while good, was most likely not the best response possible. Nevertheless, it showed his trust in God’s love and faithfulness. So . . . that’s what I heard – a father – THE Father – teaching the father of His chosen people that He will provide the sacrifices and that He is not the kind of god that requires or desires or is pleased with the sacrifice of one’s offspring.
**My closing thoughts:
One of the most noticeable contrasts one notices between the two books is that the Old Testament is full of violence & vengeance. A sharp contrast to the New Testament of Jesus’ teachings of Love & Compassion.
I have taken the liberty to illustrate some of these contrasts:**
In His sermon on the mount, in Matthew chapter five, Jesus teaches in contrast to the Law of Moses at least six times. One of which was “Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.” (Lev .24:20 & Matt. 5:38&39) He continued; “But I tell you not to resist an evil person.” Jesus taught against taking revenge. “Repay no one evil for evil’. (Romans 12:17) Jehovah always sought revenge! While the Heavenly Father loves and is not revengeful!
30. Concerning the Heavenly Father, Jesus told the Pharisees, “You have never heard His voice nor seen His form.” (John 5:37) John said, “No one has seen God at anytime”. (John 1:18, 1st John 4:12) According to the Old Testament Jehovah had been both visually seen and audibility heard several times. “So Jehovah spoke to Moses face to face, as a man speaks to his friend.” (Exodus.33:11) Moses also saw him. Jehovah was visible but God the Father is Spirit and invisible. Paul used the expression, “the invisible God”. (Col.1:1`5)
Jesus had the following to say, “No one knows the Son but the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and he to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.” (Matthew 11:27) According to Jesus, the Heavenly Father was not known in the world until He revealed Him. He told the Jews, “It is my Father who honors Me, of whom you say He is your God. Yet you have not known Him”. (John 8:54) Jesus once and for all confirms to the Pharisees, the Heavenly Father was not the God of their religion neither was He known in the Old Testament. He was not known until Jesus revealed Him. (Matthew 11:27)
**I have read here many versions of “oh he was going to save him at the end all along” but no one has answered:
- Why a loving benevolent God would use a heinous act to prove devotion?
- Why didn’t Jesus ask of disciples to perform such acts in order to follow him?
In the Old Testament Jehovah destroyed anyone and anything for Israel. Jesus on the other hand lived in a occupied land. Palestine in those days was a Roman province and under the rule of the Caesars. Something the residents did not like. Why didn’t “Jehovah” smite all the Romans with Jesus at the helm? No instead Jesus’ approach was the complete opposite of anything in the Old Testament. Apart from the Binding of Isaac story the other huge contradiction is “An eye for an eye” vs. " Turn the other cheek".
How many of you ask of your children heinous acts to prove their love of their parents only to stop them at the last moment? That to me is diabolical in nature. If I were Abaraham after God stopped me I would still be in a state of mental distress.
One last thing that I cannot get my head around is the term “Christian Jews”. To me that is a text book oxymoron. You are either Christian or Jewish. Jew, Jewish, Judaism is a religion not a race of people or a geographical place on the earth. Would it be true to say a “Christian Muslim”? or a “Christian Budist” etc?
I know I will probably get banished from here for my views.
Respectfully
Frank **