In contrast to Dodson, Kierkegaard's entire contention in Fear and Trembling is that Abraham exercised pure faith in going to sacrifice Isaac.
The parallels between Hagar and Ishmael's exile and Abraham and Isaac's journey are striking. I think the oft forgotten detail that Abraham later had six sons with Keturah, after Sarah's death, and that he gave those sons gifts before sending them away from Isaac, highlights how poorly Ishmael was treated - he, alone of all Abraham's sons, recieved nothing from his father. Yet he is the only one who helps Isaac bury Abraham.
Yes! A related parallel that struck me on these passages a few months ago: within the Pentateuch, I think they’re foreshadowing the Day of Atonement. One son is sent out into the wilderness (like the scapegoat); the other son led up Mt Moriah (future site of the temple) to be sacrificed. The significance? (I think): these foundation stories help establish the significance of the sacrificial system—the two goats on the Day of Atonement are provision from the God who sees so that the children of Abraham can live.
Totally, one thought on significance: we often read the binding of Isaac in the abstract (“Is God commanding child sacrifice?”), which is legit to grapple with, but for original audience—ancient Israel—I think there was a more immediate existential tension in the story: “If Isaac dies, we don’t exist.” (ie. he’s their great-great-great, grandpa: if he goes, they’re never born). So the existence of the ppl hangs in the balance of the story’s outcome. —> Related: I think the call to sacrifice Isaac is bound up with the preceding Hagar/Ishmael story (depicted as a Fall story for Abraham & Sarah, with the “saw/took/gave” pattern from Gen 3 now applied to them as “new Adam & new Eve,” where Hagar is the tempting fruit they “take” failing to trust the promises of God). If so, in the literary flow of Genesis, then Isaac’s impending death is connected to the sin of his ppl (and arguably foreshadows Joseph’s going down to Egypt—Hagar’s homeland—via Ishmaelites and Exodus’s impending death hanging over firstborn in all of Egypt). So, this whole thread arguably speaks to sin of ppl, existential threat of impending judgment, and need for atonement/reconciliation ie. setup for the sacrificial system. —> Significance for Day of Atonement: every time high priest sends goat into wilderness and leads goat up Mt Moriah he’s re-enacting Abraham’s sending/leading of his children—only now instead of the children/ppl being sent/led, it’s their substitute, reminding them of the God who sees and provides for the children of Abraham, the people of God under existential threat, and the eschatological future of the family of God. The Day of Atonement resolves this tension via substitution so the people can live. —> Significance in Jesus: he was both “sent away” (carrying our sin outside the camp) and “led up” Mt Moriah to Golgotha via high priest: our existential threat hung in the balance, but he resolved for all the children of God. /END. Sorry that was long, but first time getting to process that out loud!
Huh. That's all fascinating! Thinking out loud here...
Have you read Rillera's Lamb of the Free? The arguments were hit-or-miss for me, but I did find his argument about the Day of Atonement pretty compelling—that the sacrifice on the Day of Atonement was about decontamination rather than a substitutionary death.
I'm trying to think through whether this would still work with a decontamination model ... I think it would, though it wouldn't be quite as tidy.
We could still have Abraham and Sarah's fall + the theme of judgment and need for atonement (cleansing, in this case) + a reenactment of this particular fall narrative on the Day of Atonement.
Or do you think kipper-as-substitution is integral here?
I’ve read part of Rillera but still need to finish. My leaning is to see decontamination and substitution as integrated facets of atonement rather than opposing: both attempting to deal with the underlying problem of death. My article this morning actually dealt a bit with the decontamination angle in Leviticus. My book “The Pursuing God” attempted to approach both decontamination and substitution from the starting point of recapitulation (similar to Joshua McNall’s “The Mosaic of Atonement”).
Really cool analysis on this very well know story. I am continually amazed of the depth of Scripture and Genesis in particular. So many of the stores interweave together to tell a much deeper story.
The typological reference has always been a popular one and for good reasons. I also wonder how this story is to be interpreted in light of NT Revelation. Especially in Hebrews where Abraham is commended for his faith in this moment.
Thank you! Yes, Hebrews (plus, honestly, the text of Genesis) is a big part of why I’m hesitant to go all the way to Middleton’s reading and say that Abraham failed the test.
But I think Middleton may be onto something, and there may have been multiple faithful responses that Abraham could’ve given to God in response to the command. Interested in playing with that more, but I need to read more of Middleton’s book first!
I have always thought about that. Like hooray God provided a ram, but what does that moment mean for Isaac’s relationship with his Dad, and his ability to be a good father?
I’m struck by God’s consistent conversations with Abraham until the sacrifice of Isaac. After that narrative, God doesn’t speak to him again. Also, the next mention of Sarah is her death.
It highlights for me that it would have been better for Abraham to have pleaded to spare Isaac like he pleaded for the people of Sodom and Gomorrah.
I'm not saying that the writers didn't intend for these stories to parallel each other, but I think I prefer imagining this is just one of those situations where the intentions of God are put into scripture at the ignorance of man. If we assume that the writers of these stories were not thinking of these stories, then there's a meta message through evaluating both stories: God sees not just Hagar and Ishmael, but even the sufferings we do not see. Anyways, outstanding post. I really enjoyed it.
I found this understand of your interpretation of the story of Abraham and Isaac as a reasonable understanding of the events described. I have listened to Dr. Gary A. Rendsburg’s Great Courses lectures on Genesis. He points out that it was the ancient practice that if a wife was barren that it was her responsibility to provide a surrogate to assure that her husband would have an heir. Despite that it is not surprising that there would be conflict between Hagar and Sarah and their sons.
Thank you for a splendid post and such thoughtful comments. My reading this week (preparing a sermon) is to take the widely accepted idea that G-d is testing Abraham on its head, rather that Abraham is testing G-d. Abraham argued with G-d over the number of saved men in Sodom, but says nothing in response to killing his own son? Abraham finally, done with the obtuse commands needs to answer the existential question, can I trust. He’s pretty sure, it’s an affirmation of faith, “The Lord will provide.” But will He? Humanity puts the benevolence of the Divine to the test at every turn. Adam, Cain, Jacob, Peter, over and over, because we (humanity) are essentially insecure about, well everything. Like children calling out to our parents in the night, “Mom, Dad. Are you there?” When will we trust, and move forward with that understanding of our relationship with a beneficent universe. It’s time to grow up. As Hillel said, “if not now when?”
I've never considered the parallels in these two stories and I LOVE that you pointed out the connecting story with the well and the sheep in the middle. But I'm not sure I am reading your conclusion right: are you saying that Abraham was unfaithful in both the Ishmael AND Isaac story? Or...he failed once but then passed later? Or something else?
I think he certainly failed in the matter of Ishmael.
The Binding of Isaac is more complicated—I think he did pass through his faith, but I lean toward the idea that he might have also been able to pass by arguing with God. But I need to dig into that element of it more, and consider Richard Middleton’s book more thoroughly.
I've been away for a bit and super late. But thank you for the shout out! This is a fascinating passage. My PhD research focuses on Isaac in the Epistle to the Hebrews, so I love what you're doing here!
Wow! Thank you. I also read long that Jewish tradition holds that when Sarah heard that Abraham had taken Isaac she immediately died of a broken heart. Hagar's heart mustve felt the same.
In contrast to Dodson, Kierkegaard's entire contention in Fear and Trembling is that Abraham exercised pure faith in going to sacrifice Isaac.
The parallels between Hagar and Ishmael's exile and Abraham and Isaac's journey are striking. I think the oft forgotten detail that Abraham later had six sons with Keturah, after Sarah's death, and that he gave those sons gifts before sending them away from Isaac, highlights how poorly Ishmael was treated - he, alone of all Abraham's sons, recieved nothing from his father. Yet he is the only one who helps Isaac bury Abraham.
Oooh, great detail! I hadn’t noticed that!
“The story had to have had a point when it was written too”
Why have I never thought of that 😅
We’ve been trained to read this passage and shortcut straight to Jesus!
Yes! A related parallel that struck me on these passages a few months ago: within the Pentateuch, I think they’re foreshadowing the Day of Atonement. One son is sent out into the wilderness (like the scapegoat); the other son led up Mt Moriah (future site of the temple) to be sacrificed. The significance? (I think): these foundation stories help establish the significance of the sacrificial system—the two goats on the Day of Atonement are provision from the God who sees so that the children of Abraham can live.
Oh, that’s a killer observation!
Framed another way: On the Day of Atonement, they reenact these stories.
I’m trying to sort through how I’d read the significance, but I find it so interesting.
Totally, one thought on significance: we often read the binding of Isaac in the abstract (“Is God commanding child sacrifice?”), which is legit to grapple with, but for original audience—ancient Israel—I think there was a more immediate existential tension in the story: “If Isaac dies, we don’t exist.” (ie. he’s their great-great-great, grandpa: if he goes, they’re never born). So the existence of the ppl hangs in the balance of the story’s outcome. —> Related: I think the call to sacrifice Isaac is bound up with the preceding Hagar/Ishmael story (depicted as a Fall story for Abraham & Sarah, with the “saw/took/gave” pattern from Gen 3 now applied to them as “new Adam & new Eve,” where Hagar is the tempting fruit they “take” failing to trust the promises of God). If so, in the literary flow of Genesis, then Isaac’s impending death is connected to the sin of his ppl (and arguably foreshadows Joseph’s going down to Egypt—Hagar’s homeland—via Ishmaelites and Exodus’s impending death hanging over firstborn in all of Egypt). So, this whole thread arguably speaks to sin of ppl, existential threat of impending judgment, and need for atonement/reconciliation ie. setup for the sacrificial system. —> Significance for Day of Atonement: every time high priest sends goat into wilderness and leads goat up Mt Moriah he’s re-enacting Abraham’s sending/leading of his children—only now instead of the children/ppl being sent/led, it’s their substitute, reminding them of the God who sees and provides for the children of Abraham, the people of God under existential threat, and the eschatological future of the family of God. The Day of Atonement resolves this tension via substitution so the people can live. —> Significance in Jesus: he was both “sent away” (carrying our sin outside the camp) and “led up” Mt Moriah to Golgotha via high priest: our existential threat hung in the balance, but he resolved for all the children of God. /END. Sorry that was long, but first time getting to process that out loud!
Huh. That's all fascinating! Thinking out loud here...
Have you read Rillera's Lamb of the Free? The arguments were hit-or-miss for me, but I did find his argument about the Day of Atonement pretty compelling—that the sacrifice on the Day of Atonement was about decontamination rather than a substitutionary death.
I'm trying to think through whether this would still work with a decontamination model ... I think it would, though it wouldn't be quite as tidy.
We could still have Abraham and Sarah's fall + the theme of judgment and need for atonement (cleansing, in this case) + a reenactment of this particular fall narrative on the Day of Atonement.
Or do you think kipper-as-substitution is integral here?
I’ve read part of Rillera but still need to finish. My leaning is to see decontamination and substitution as integrated facets of atonement rather than opposing: both attempting to deal with the underlying problem of death. My article this morning actually dealt a bit with the decontamination angle in Leviticus. My book “The Pursuing God” attempted to approach both decontamination and substitution from the starting point of recapitulation (similar to Joshua McNall’s “The Mosaic of Atonement”).
https://joshuabutlerpdx.substack.com/p/you-cant-get-jesus-dirty?r=3yy00k&utm_medium=ios
Really cool analysis on this very well know story. I am continually amazed of the depth of Scripture and Genesis in particular. So many of the stores interweave together to tell a much deeper story.
The typological reference has always been a popular one and for good reasons. I also wonder how this story is to be interpreted in light of NT Revelation. Especially in Hebrews where Abraham is commended for his faith in this moment.
Really interesting stuff! Great work!
Thank you! Yes, Hebrews (plus, honestly, the text of Genesis) is a big part of why I’m hesitant to go all the way to Middleton’s reading and say that Abraham failed the test.
But I think Middleton may be onto something, and there may have been multiple faithful responses that Abraham could’ve given to God in response to the command. Interested in playing with that more, but I need to read more of Middleton’s book first!
Next installment, how generational trauma shows up in Jacob and Esau…
Excellent post!
What a dysfunctional family.
I have always thought about that. Like hooray God provided a ram, but what does that moment mean for Isaac’s relationship with his Dad, and his ability to be a good father?
The Word of God speaks. It’s not the ram that stops the sacrifice; it is the Word, which is the provided sacrifice ie the only son.
Mmm, yes!
I love both your analysis and writing!
I’m struck by God’s consistent conversations with Abraham until the sacrifice of Isaac. After that narrative, God doesn’t speak to him again. Also, the next mention of Sarah is her death.
It highlights for me that it would have been better for Abraham to have pleaded to spare Isaac like he pleaded for the people of Sodom and Gomorrah.
And the text seems to suggest that Abraham and Sarah may have lived apart after this!
I'm not saying that the writers didn't intend for these stories to parallel each other, but I think I prefer imagining this is just one of those situations where the intentions of God are put into scripture at the ignorance of man. If we assume that the writers of these stories were not thinking of these stories, then there's a meta message through evaluating both stories: God sees not just Hagar and Ishmael, but even the sufferings we do not see. Anyways, outstanding post. I really enjoyed it.
I found this understand of your interpretation of the story of Abraham and Isaac as a reasonable understanding of the events described. I have listened to Dr. Gary A. Rendsburg’s Great Courses lectures on Genesis. He points out that it was the ancient practice that if a wife was barren that it was her responsibility to provide a surrogate to assure that her husband would have an heir. Despite that it is not surprising that there would be conflict between Hagar and Sarah and their sons.
Thank you for a splendid post and such thoughtful comments. My reading this week (preparing a sermon) is to take the widely accepted idea that G-d is testing Abraham on its head, rather that Abraham is testing G-d. Abraham argued with G-d over the number of saved men in Sodom, but says nothing in response to killing his own son? Abraham finally, done with the obtuse commands needs to answer the existential question, can I trust. He’s pretty sure, it’s an affirmation of faith, “The Lord will provide.” But will He? Humanity puts the benevolence of the Divine to the test at every turn. Adam, Cain, Jacob, Peter, over and over, because we (humanity) are essentially insecure about, well everything. Like children calling out to our parents in the night, “Mom, Dad. Are you there?” When will we trust, and move forward with that understanding of our relationship with a beneficent universe. It’s time to grow up. As Hillel said, “if not now when?”
I've never considered the parallels in these two stories and I LOVE that you pointed out the connecting story with the well and the sheep in the middle. But I'm not sure I am reading your conclusion right: are you saying that Abraham was unfaithful in both the Ishmael AND Isaac story? Or...he failed once but then passed later? Or something else?
I think he certainly failed in the matter of Ishmael.
The Binding of Isaac is more complicated—I think he did pass through his faith, but I lean toward the idea that he might have also been able to pass by arguing with God. But I need to dig into that element of it more, and consider Richard Middleton’s book more thoroughly.
yea I can see that!
Very illuminating - look forward to more
I've been away for a bit and super late. But thank you for the shout out! This is a fascinating passage. My PhD research focuses on Isaac in the Epistle to the Hebrews, so I love what you're doing here!
The story of Isaac and Abraham has always disturbed me! Thank you for writing about it! It’s a lot more complicated than I ever realized! Fascinating.
That’s a fruitful parallel! Thanks for sharing
Wow! Thank you. I also read long that Jewish tradition holds that when Sarah heard that Abraham had taken Isaac she immediately died of a broken heart. Hagar's heart mustve felt the same.