I recently stumbled upon some school work done by young children. In the assignment, the teacher asked each of her students to come up with an analogy for what God is like. Here are some of their answers:
1. God is like scotch tape, you can't see Him but you know He's there
2. God is like Sears, He has everything
3. God is like Hallmark Cards, He cared enough to send His very best
4. God is like Tide, He gets the stains out that others leave behind
Interestingly, I think these comments can help us make sense of and understand the story of Abraham taking his son Issac to be sacrificed on the mountain. Of course, that story occurs in Genesis 22 and begins with these words: "Some time later God tested Abraham. He said to him, 'Abraham!' 'Here I am," he replied. Then God said, 'Take your son , your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about.'"
For starters, there may be grammatical clues that alert the reader that they are not meant to take this story as seriously as Abraham did. For example, E. Speiser has noted that the Hebrew "Elohim" here has the definite article "ha" attached to it (thus, "haelohim). While this is not an incredibly strong argument, it can be the case that when the definite article is attached to a pronoun in Hebrew, it is done so for the sake of emphasis (more on this in a moment). Also, in Hebrew, the common word order is Verb-Subject-Object. Now, when this word order is interrupted in Hebrew, it is almost always on purpose and for the sake of emphasis; that is done here in 22.1. So, it could be argued, from a grammatical standpoint, that the author of Genesis 22 may have been "over-emphasizing" things so much, so that there would have been no way the reader would have taken the command as seriously as Abraham did. Thus, from a grammatical standpoint, the seemingly harsh and terrible story really gets softened. However, when understood contextually, the story really gets softened and is actually not very disturbing at all.
It is well known that in the ancient world, the cult of Molek (a.k.a. Molech) existed. One of the signature marks of this cult was that its devotees often sacrificed their children as offerings to the god. For example, Leviticus 18.21 says, "Do not give any of your children to be sacrificed to Molek for you must not profane the name of your God. I am the Lord." And Leviticus 20.2 says, "Say to the Israelites: ‘Any Israelite or any alien living in Israel who gives any of his children to Molek must be put to death. The people of the community are to stone him." (Other verses mentioning Molek include: Leviticus 20.3, 4, 5; 1 Kings 11.7; 2 Kings 23.10 and Jeremiah 32.35.)
It is within this context that the story of Abraham sacrificing Isaac must be read. I would argue that from the start, God was not seriously going to have Abraham go through with this act. In fact, that would defeat the purpose of the story. That would also mean overlooking the "softening" grammar in the opening verse. It would also not make sense of God's providing of the ram. Anyway, I believe that God was meeting Abraham on his level here; He was teaching Abraham a lesson about who He was. For sure, Abraham was familiar with Molek and Molek's cult. So, it was not unthinkable, at least not to Abraham, that a god would ask his followers to do this. But here's the catch, God had Abraham go through all of this so that, in the end, He could make the point: "Abraham, Molek's followers claim that Molek wants their devotion, well, I am the same way, I am just like that. However, I am also very different. I do want your devotion but I will not ask you to kill your son to prove your devotion to me."
Just like the sayings of those children at the beginning of this post, Abraham had an experience here where he learned what God was like. Yet, in learning what God was like, he also learned what God was not like. And what an evangelistic tool this could have been. Imagine Abraham speaking to one of Molek's followers and saying, "You know, about Molek, God is like that, but...guess what, He's also very different!"
I don't know about you but this story has always bothered me. However, when read in its proper literary and social contexts, it makes all the sense in the world. In fact, I think it is an incredibly profound story now that I see the ingenuity behind it. And doesn't God still work like that today? Isn't He always up to something in our lives, something where He can teach us about who He is and what He is like? Have you ever had any of those experiences? And can you experience this story differently now? What say you?
