Abraham and Isaac

[brittany111]

In Genesis 22 God tests Abraham by asking him to be willing to sacrifice Isaac (his only son and representation of the promise). Often when we read this story the emphasis is on Abraham. How incredible his faith was and how much he must have trusted God to be willing to sacrifice his son. But, the other day as I listened to a friend of mine tell the story to a group of children, I couldn't help but think about the willingness and faith of Isaac.

Isaac not only had faith and trust in God, but also in Abraham (trusting that what Abraham heard was really from God). He willingly obeyed his father in climbing on the alter. In hearing and reading the story I try to think what I might do if I were Isaac and I think I might have proteseted, even doubted that Abraham was hearing from God. To me Isaac (in this story) shows a great example of obedience (just as much as Abraham does.)

 

[wayseer]

In Genesis 22 God tests Abraham by asking him to be willing to sacrifice Isaac (his only son and representation of the promise). Often when we read this story the emphasis is on Abraham. How incredible his faith was and how much he must have trusted God to be willing to sacrifice his son. But, the other day as I listened to a friend of mine tell the story to a group of children, I couldn't help but think about the willingness and faith of Isaac.

Isaac not only had faith and trust in God, but also in Abraham (trusting that what Abraham heard was really from God). He willingly obeyed his father in climbing on the alter. In hearing and reading the story I try to think what I might do if I were Isaac and I think I might have proteseted, even doubted that Abraham was hearing from God. To me Isaac (in this story) shows a great example of obedience (just as much as Abraham does.)

Child sacrifice was common and children knew what to expect. The 'shock/horror' response we demonstrate today is not how things where back then.

The important lesson is that God stopped the practice at this point.

 

[St_Worm2]

Child sacrifice was common and children knew what to expect. The 'shock/horror' response we demonstrate today is not how things where back then.

The important lesson is that God stopped the practice at this point.

So you are saying that it was no big deal for Isaac to willingly obey his father in this?

You know, the need to eat green vegetables is very common these days and children know what to expect when they come to the dinner table, but my 13 year old still complains about it loudly every day!!

 

[wayseer]

So you are saying that it was no big deal for Isaac to willingly obey his father in this?

Kids were expendable and generally where - life morbidity was horrific.

You know, the need to eat green vegetables is very common these days and children know what to expect when they come to the dinner table, but my 13 year old still complains about it loudly every day!![/QUOTE]

Hmmm ... I don't think you should scare him into eating his greens.

 

[Blessedj01]

Are you serious wayseer? I don't think child-sacrifice was common for God-fearing Jews.

I don't think kids were at all considered "expendable". Read the story of Joseph - his father endlessly lamented the loss of his son. At one point where it seemed he'd lose another son, the other brothers warned Joseph that he would physically die if he was grieved again.

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

If you think about it the same type faith is required of us today.

Mark 8:35
For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it.

You gotta be willing to lay it all on the line and put your faith and trust in God and his Word.

 

[ebia]

Kids were expendable and generally where - life morbidity was horrific.

You know, the need to eat green vegetables is very common these days and children know what to expect when they come to the dinner table, but my 13 year old still complains about it loudly every day!!

Hmmm ... I don't think you should scare him into eating his greens.[/QUOTE]

Shocking to whom? To some of Abraham's comtempories, possibly not. Though the whole point of the story is that all of Abraham's hopes and dreams are invested in this boy, and this is not an infant but a lad old enough to be aware of what is happening. To the audience of Genesis it certainly is intended to be shocking.

 

[x141]

Isaac believed the word of his Father ...

Gen 22:7-8 And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering? And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.

Amo 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?

 

[Resha Caner]

I've always wondered how much Isaac was actually aware of what was happening ... until it was too late. Could he have resisted? After all, it was Isaac who carried the supplies up the mountain. Even though he was younger and stronger, he might have been winded. Or maybe Abraham drugged him to make it easier for them both. Who knows.

Regardless, and whether or not it is just my imagination, I always thought I sensed a certain coldness in Isaac after this incident.

 

[Blessedj01]

I'm pretty sure death wasn't as scary to these people as it is to us. They were willing to put everything on the line for God 'cos they knew it that it wasn't the end.

 

[ebia]

I'm pretty sure death wasn't as scary to these people as it is to us. They were willing to put everything on the line for God 'cos they knew it that it wasn't the end.

Um no. There is no concept of life after death in the OT. The grave, Sheol, is it for all; a shadowy non-existence.

Resurrection only comes on the scene with Daniel 12 and the deuterocanonical texts written in the "intertestimental" period.

 

[Blessedj01]

Um no. There is no concept of life after death in the OT.

...

To be honest I'm not even going to both argueing about this one. I don't know what you're trying to achieve, or what you can hope to achieve by spreading stuff like that.

Next you'll be saying that they weren't looking forward to the Christ.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Jewish tradition indicates that Issac was an adult when this incident occurred.

 

[ebia]

...

To be honest I'm not even going to both argueing about this one. I don't know what you're trying to achieve, or what you can hope to achieve by spreading stuff like that.

Next you'll be saying that they weren't looking forward to the Christ.

In hindsight we can see that Jesus is the climax in the story, to which God was headed all the time.

But go look - the OT has no notion of "life after death" in the Christian sense. It's all about living here and now, and God's promised vindication of his people. It's less than a couple of hundred years before Jesus that the concept of individual resurrection emerges in Jewish thinking.

 

[Blessedj01]

In hindsight we can see that Jesus is the climax in the story, to which God was headed all the time.

But go look - the OT has no notion of "life after death" in the Christian sense. It's all about living here and now, and God's promised vindication of his people. It's less than a couple of hundred years before Jesus that the concept of individual resurrection emerges in Jewish thinking.

Jesus isn't "hindsight." There were many events in the OT that foreshadowed Jesus' sacrifice and many people in the OT who displayed the kind of faith in God required for righteousness, the same faith we now invest in Jesus. There are many instances of faith foreshadowing the work that Christ would do on the cross - it isn't just hidnsight.

The OT does have a notion of "life after death," in the Christian sense. I mean, Enoch and Elijah went straight to Heaven and that's just for starters. Plus they knew that God would 'gather up His people." I'm not going to do the work for you though if you've already made up your mind about this topic. If you want to believe they only thought of God's salation in the physical sense, then that's really up to you.

 

[ebia]

Jesus isn't "hindsight." There were many events in the OT that foreshadowed Jesus' sacrifice and many people in the OT who displayed the kind of faith in God required for righteousness, the same faith we now invest in Jesus. There are many instances of faith foreshadowing the work that Christ would do on the cross - it isn't just hidnsight.

Hindsight is exactly what it is. Looking back and being able to say "ah, yes, now that makes extra sense because...". Or, more properly, "ah yes - that past event gives a way to understand what has just happened". That's why so many of the "prophesies" mentioned in the New Testament had nothing to do with the messiah in their original OT context.

It doesn't mean the people of the OT were ever expecting messiah who would come and do what Jesus did with the consequences that has.

The OT does have a notion of "life after death," in the Christian sense. I mean, Enoch and Elijah went straight to Heaven and that's just for starters.

You're reading those though your Christian lens. They originally stood out precisely because the fate of everyone else was thought to be Sheol and they appeared to escape that.

Plus they knew that God would 'gather up His people."

As a people. Not the individual living at their point in time but their descendants.

I'm not going to do the work for you though if you've already made up your mind about this topic. If you want to believe they only thought of God's salation in the physical sense, then that's really up to you.

Go back and try to read it without imposing your Christian worldview on the text. You'll start to encounter how it works in its own right - ultimately to the enrichment of your Christian faith.

 

[Blessedj01]

Hindsight is exactly what it is. Looking back and being able to say "ah, yes, now that makes extra sense because...". Or, more properly, "ah yes - that past event gives a way to understand what has just happened". That's why so many of the "prophesies" mentioned in the New Testament had nothing to do with the messiah in their original OT context.

It doesn't mean the people of the OT were ever expecting messiah who would come and do what Jesus did with the consequences that has.

Of course, that would be impossible. That'd require them to all see into the future. It doesn't mean that that none of them looked forward to the Christ though, or that their faith being accounted to them as righteousness was not the same kind of faith we have in Jesus.

You're reading those though your Christian lens. They originally stood out precisely because the fate of everyone else was thought to be Sheol and they appeared to escape that.

So OT people did or didn't have an afterlife? So Heaven did or didn't exist? They can't have both. There can't be both not a Heaven and also a Heaven.

As a people. Not the individual living at their point in time but their descendants.

I'm not that theologically strong on this subject but God gave me a direct answer to your assertions that for the OT there was no afterlife - because the next day after posting here, I woke up and read my Bible...and the chapter I read included:

"Then he charged them, and said to them, "I am to be gathered to my people; bury me with my fathers in the cave that is in the field of Ephron the Hittite, 30 in the cave that is in the field at Mach-pe'lah, to the east of Mamre, in the land of Canaan, which Abraham bought with the field from Ephron the Hittite to possess as a burying place. 31 There they buried Abraham and Sarah his wife; there they buried Isaac and Rebekah his wife; and there I buried Leah-- 32 the field and the cave that is in it were purchased from the Hittites." 33 When Jacob finished charging his sons, he drew up his feet into the bed, and breathed his last, and was gathered to his people. - Genesis 49.

So what did Jacob do? He died, 'breathed his last' and...was gathered to his people. It doesn't say that this happened to him during his life, it happened after breathed his last. He says "I am to be gathered to my people...bury me." He says this denoting that it is going to happen as a result of his death and he doesn't say it of his descendants.

Go back and try to read it without imposing your Christian worldview on the text. You'll start to encounter how it works in its own right - ultimately to the enrichment of your Christian faith.

What enrichment? The supposed "enrichment" that OT people weren't saved? It's not true. Moses is in Heaven. Elijah is in Heaven. David is in Heaven. Etc.

 

[ebia]

Of course, that would be impossible. That'd require them to all see into the future. It doesn't mean that that none of them looked forward to the Christ though,

Well, the idea of a messiah is a late development in the OT, and is still quite different from what the word connotes for most Christians.

[quote{So OT people did or didn't have an afterlife?[/quote]
They didn't - only the shaddowy non-life of Sheol.

So Heaven did or didn't exist? They can't have both. There can't be both not a Heaven and also a Heaven.

Heaven is God's throne room, not where people go when they die.

I'm not that theologically strong on this subject but God gave me a direct answer to your assertions that for the OT there was no afterlife - because the next day after posting here, I woke up and read my Bible...and the chapter I read included:

"Then he charged them, and said to them, "I am to be gathered to my people; bury me with my fathers in the cave that is in the field of Ephron the Hittite, 30 in the cave that is in the field at Mach-pe'lah, to the east of Mamre, in the land of Canaan, which Abraham bought with the field from Ephron the Hittite to possess as a burying place. 31 There they buried Abraham and Sarah his wife; there they buried Isaac and Rebekah his wife; and there I buried Leah-- 32 the field and the cave that is in it were purchased from the Hittites." 33 When Jacob finished charging his sons, he drew up his feet into the bed, and breathed his last, and was gathered to his people. - Genesis 49.

So what did Jacob do? He died, 'breathed his last' and...was gathered to his people. It doesn't say that this happened to him during his life, it happened after breathed his last. He says "I am to be gathered to my people...bury me." He says this denoting that it is going to happen as a result of his death and he doesn't say it of his descendants.

He is "gathered to his people" - buried with his family. That's the best outcome - to be at least in the company of ones family when dead.

What enrichment? The supposed "enrichment" that OT people weren't saved?

The question here is not what place they have in the resurrection - which has not yet happened - but what their understanding was in their lifetimes and the times when the texts about them were written.

If you let the OT speak on its own terms you'll see how focused it is on what happens here and now in this life, not "pie in the sky", and that's an important corrective to Christians who see everything in terms of an afterlife.

 

[Blessedj01]

Well, the idea of a messiah is a late development in the OT, and is still quite different from what the word connotes for most Christians.

...so? Abraham's faith was accounted to him for righteousness. That's the exact same faith we're supposed to have. There's foreshadowing of the Christ all throughout the OT... whether they had the exact same picture of the Christ we do doesn't really matter - they seem to have understood what the prophecies meant concerning who He would be and what He was coming for.

They didn't - only the shaddowy non-life of Sheol.

Again...so the OT people did or didn't have an afterlife? How can they have one and not have one at the same time? Also I hope you realize there's other opinions outside your own, also concerning the nature of Sheol and where the righteous Jews could have been placed within Sheol if that's indeed where they went. Also there's different views as to whether they believed that was the end of their fate.

Heaven is God's throne room, not where people go when they die.

Oh, so we're not going to Heaven now?

He is "gathered to his people" - buried with his family. That's the best outcome - to be at least in the company of ones family when dead.

I think it means more than that, as do many other people.

The question here is not what place they have in the resurrection - which has not yet happened - but what their understanding was in their lifetimes and the times when the texts about them were written.

Well, that's an entirely different debate but again, the God of the OT and the NT is not a different God. Their faith was accounted to them for righteousness, which means they were saved.

If you let the OT speak on its own terms you'll see how focused it is on what happens here and now in this life, not "pie in the sky", and that's an important corrective to Christians who see everything in terms of an afterlife.

This is not "pie in the sky." Who is really "in the sky?" Abraham is in Heaven. Elijah is in Heaven. Moses is in Heaven. David is in Heaven. The OT saints went to Heaven!

I do agree that Christians tend to see things too often in terms of the afterlife, but there's absolutely no incentive for someone to give their life if they believe they will be completely dead and forgotten afterwards. Even the Christ, who freely gave His life, did so knowing He would conquer death.

 

[St_Worm2]

..............the OT has no notion of "life after death" in the Christian sense. It's all about living here and now, and God's promised vindication of his people.

Hi Ebia, if this is true, the OT Jews sound very much like the 1st century Sadducees. This belief is not supported by the OT however as the OT indicates in many places and in many ways that life exists beyond the grave.

Thanks!

--David