Genesis 22

Genesis 22

The Sacrifice of Isaac,
The Akedah,
Or
Is This Really What a Test of Faith Looks Like?


There are few words that I could use to begin any conversation or discussion of this chapter, mostly because there are already so many words in print concerning the content of this passage. Suffice to say that there are few stories in the Old Testament that are both as controversial and foundational to the Jewish and Christian perceptions of faith as when God asks Abraham to sacrifice Isaac upon Mount Moriah. Thus, like with similar chapters and/or stories that can be quite difficult to interpret and translate (to anyone, no matter their age), I will be selecting some quality commentary selections for the reader to peruse along with some reflection of my own, as opposed to an in-depth lesson. After that, I will present some guidelines that teachers can use in telling this story to the students in their classes.


Genesis – Robert Alter
“2. Your son, your only one, whom you love, Isaac. The Hebrew syntactic chain is exquisitely forged to carry a dramatic burden, and the sundry attempts of English translators from the King James Version to the present to rearrange it are misguided. The classical Midrash, followed by Rashi, beautifully catches the resonance of the order of terms. Rashi’s concise version is as follows: “Your son. He said to Him, ‘I have two sons.’ He said to him, ‘Your only one.’ He said, ‘This one is an only one to his mother and this one is an only one to his mother.’ He said to him, ‘Whom you love.’ He said to him, ‘I love both of them.’ He said to him, ‘Isaac.’” Although the human object of God’s terrible imperative does not actually speak in the biblical text, this midrashic dialogue demonstrates a fine responsiveness to how the tense stance of the addressee is intimated through the words of the addresser in a one-sided dialogue.” (p103)

“7. The fire and the wood. A moment earlier, we saw the boy loaded with the firewood, the father carrying the fire and butcher knife. As Gerhard Von Rad aptly remarks, ‘He himself carries the dangerous objects with which the boy could hurt himself, the torch and the knife.’ But now, as Isaac questions his father, he passes in silence over the one object that would have seemed scariest to him, however unwitting he may have been of his father’s intentions – the sharp-edged butcher knife.” (p105)

“11. And the Lord’s messenger called out to him from the heavens. This is nearly identical with the calling-out to Hagar in 21:17. In fact, a whole configuration of parallels between the two stories involved. Each of Abraham’s sons is threatened with death in the wilderness, one in the presence of his mother, the other in the presence (and by the hand) of his father. In each case the angel intervenes at the critical moment, referring to the son fondly as na’ar, “lad.” At the center of the story, Abraham’s hand holds the knife, Hagar is enjoined to “hold her hand” (the literal meaning of the Hebrew) on the lad. In the end, each of the sons is promised to become progenitor of a great people, the threat to Abraham’s continuity having been averted.” (p106)


The Jewish Study Bible: JPS Tanakh Translation
“22.1-19: Abraham’s last and greatest test. This magnificently told story, known in Judaism as the ‘Akedah’ (“binding”), is one of the gems of biblical narrative. It also comes to occupy a central role in rabbinic theology and eventually to be incorporated into the daily liturgy. Jewish tradition regards the Akedah as the tenth and climatic test of Abraham, the first Jew.” (p45)

“2: The order of the Heb[rew] is ‘your son, your favored one, the one whom you love, Isaac’ and indicates the increasing tension. Not only is Isaac the son upon whom Abraham’s life has centered; he also loves him. If Abraham did not love Isaac, the commandment to sacrifice him would not have constituted much of a test. The expression to go (“lekh-lekha”), which otherwise occurs only in [Genesis] 12:1, the initial command to Abraham, ties this narrative to the beginning of Abraham’s dealings with God.” (p45)

“3: … Some have wondered why Abraham, who protested God’s decision to destroy the innocent with the guilty in Sodom (18.22-32), here obeys without objection. The essence of the answer is that the context in ch[apter] 18 is forensic, whereas the context of the Akedah is sacrificial. A sacrifice is not an execution, and in a sacrificial context the unblemished condition of the one offered does not detract from, but rather commends, the act.” (p46)

“12: In the Tanakh, the ‘fear of God’ denotes an active obedience to the divine will. God is now able to call the last trial of Abraham off because Abraham has demonstrated that this obedience is uppermost for him, surpassing even his paternal love for Isaac.” (p46)


The Torah: A Modern Commentary – W. Gunther Plaut
“Few narrative sections of the Torah have been subjected to as much comment and study as the Akedah (binding [of Isaac]). Jewish, Chrisitan, and Moslem theologies have tried to fathom its intention. In his introduction to this chapter, Abarbanel called the story ‘worthier of study and investigation than any other section.’ Its subject matter ranges from the God who tests to the man who is tested, from the nature of faith to the demands it makes, and it considers many other questions as well. Says Von Rad: ‘One should renounce any attempt to discover one basic idea as the meaning of the whole. There are many levels of meaning.

The literary pattern of the section is reminiscent of the first passage of the Abraham story: A divine command is issued asking Abraham to set out toward an as yet undetermined place. The same unusual reflexive phrasing (see Gen 12:1) contains the directive lech-lecha (go forth). It is almost as though the external elements of the tale, while clear enough, hide deeper problems under the cover of simpler words.” (p145)


Genesis: Interpretation – Walter Brueggemann
“… In our present text, unexpected things happen. Only now do we see how serious faith is. This narrative shows us that we do not have a tale of origins, but a story of anguished faith. The narrative holds rich promise for exposition. But it is notoriously difficult to interpret. Its difficulty begins in the aversion immediately felt for a God who will command the murder of a son.” (p185)

“The life of Abraham, then, is set by this text in the midst of the contradiction between the testing of God and the providing of God; between the sovereign freedom which requires complete obedience and the gracious faithfulness which gives good gifts; between the command and the promise; and between the word of death which takes away and the word of live which gives. The call to Abraham is a call to live in the presence of this God who moves both toward us and apart from us (cf. Jer. 23:23). Faithful people will be tempted to want only half of it. Most complacent religion will want a God who provides, not a God who tests. Some in bitterness will want a God who tests but refuse the generous providing. Some in cynical modernity will regard both affirmations as silly, presuming we must answer to none and rely upon none, for we are both free and competent. But father Abraham confessed himself not free of the testing and not competent for his own provision.” (p192-193)

“The text asserts that God is this way with his people. There are deep problems with affirming that God both tests and provides. The problems are especially acute for those who seek a “reasonableness” in their God. But this text does not flinch before nor pause at the unreasonableness of the story. God is not a logical premise who must perform in rational consistency. God is a free lord who comes as he will. As the ‘high and holy One,’ God tests to identify his people, to discern who is serious about faith and to know in whose lives he will be fully God. And as the one among the ‘humble and contrite,’ God provides, giving good gifts which cannot be explained or even expected. We are not permitted by this narrative to choose between these characteristics of God (cf. Isa. 57:15). (p193)

Genesis 21:8-21

Genesis 21: 8-21

Hagar & Ishmael are Cast Out Into the Wilderness
Or
Sarah Plays the Lovely Homemaker Once Again



Once again, we see the “First Family” in turmoil and tumult, greatly akin to the conflict in Genesis 16. In that chapter, we find Sarai encouraging Abram to birth a child through her handmaiden Hagar in an attempt to fulfill God’s prophecy on her terms. However, with the birth of Isaac, the subsequent, eight-day-later, celebratory ritual circumcision (known as a bris) and the weaning feast that occurred typically ate age 3 (Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible: NIV, p46), it seems that Sarah and Hagar have again entered into a conflict over who has the true place in the household. And as mothers are prone to do, the welfare of their children takes precedence in any circumstance, decent social behavior be damned.

At the party to mark the occasion of Isaac’s birth and circumcision, Sarah sees Ishmael fooling around and she didn’t quite like it. Gazing across several translations of Genesis 21:9, there are several different English words in use – “laughing” (ESV), “mocking” (NIV), “laughing” (Alter, p98), “playing” (JPS Tanakh), “mocking” (NASB), and “poking fun” (The Message). Any mother that I have ever known who has ever held a party for one of their children would have, at the least, been quite perturbed at Ishmael’s behavior as he played around at the party. And at the most, the mother would have reacted quite strongly and harshly to a supposed celebrant mockingly making fun of the person who was the focal point of the party, and most likely would have quickly called the child’s mother onto the carpet for the child’s behavior.

Plaut’s Commentary on the Torah does attempt to give this explanation of this passage: “Some commentators have suggested that it was sexual play that brought forth Sarah’s strong reaction. There is nothing, however, to substantiate this. The use of metzachek is an allusion to Yitzchak (i.e., Isaac). The word play seems to indicate that Sarah, seeing the children together, suddenly realizes their close affinity. It is then that she resolves to end the relationship by freeing Hagar and sending her away.” (Plaut, p139)

Now, without parsing the Hebrew a bit to finely, though some commentators do so in an attempt to disparage Hagar’s mothering ability, I would make the claim that Sarah’s declaration to Abraham that Hagar and Ishmael must be cast out of the house is quite understandable. What it is not is acceptable – Sarah could have handled the content and context of this situation with greater finesse. However, as we have seen in the last 10 chapters, tact, discretion, and subtlety are absent from Sarah’s repertoire of necessary societal skills. But Sarah pays no mind to how Hagar feels, since she realizes that, with the birth of Isaac, Ishmael has no place in their tents because Isaac is the son of promise. Whether it’s a matter of maternal politics or societal politics, Hagar and Ishmael are on their way out of the tent doors and out to wander in the wilderness.

Now, Abraham, as the biological father, remembers the lessons that he learned from Chapter 16 and is quite distressed over having to make such a harsh decision concerning his son. However, God is quite aware that Abraham is distraught over having to perpetrate this difficult deed and issues this promise to Abraham: “Be not displeased because of the boy and because of your slave woman. Whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you, for through Isaac shall your offspring be named. And I will make a nation of the son of the slave woman also, because he is your offspring.” (Genesis 21:12b-13, ESV) It seems that God was both honoring Sarah’s faith and belief in the promises of God regarding Isaac as well as Abraham’s faith and belief in the promises of God regarding any of his offspring (Brueggemann, p183).

Thus, with such a promise received, Abraham sends out Hagar and Ishmael into the deserts of Beer-Sheba (the Sinai Peninsula) with a bag of water and some bread. “Why doesn’t Abraham do more to prepare Hagar and Ishmael for their exile? Why does he give them only ‘some bread and a skin of water’ (21:14)? Why provision them so meagerly? He could have also given them a camel or a servant – or, at the very least, a blessing. In acting this way, Abraham demonstrates his faith that God will provide. He takes to heart God’s promise that Ishmael will become a great nation. This episode is a rehearsal of his later test of faith with his other son [Isaac].” (Frankel, p29) However, as idyllic and wonderful as that answer to those pointed questions sounds, my cynical nature takes over and wonders how Abraham could have sent his own son and his son’s mother out into the desert with “approximately three gallons” of water (Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible: NIV, p46). It just doesn’t seem right to me, on several levels.

From here, Hagar and Ishmael wander in the desert, but their period of wandering doesn’t last very long, or at least the timeline provided in this passage doesn’t allow for much time to have transpired. Granted, two people were being forced to share about 3 gallons of water in the midst of a wide, uncivilized expanse of desert; 3 gallons wouldn’t last very long before one or both parties would quickly begin to expire. So, Hagar has Ishmael lie down under a bush, in hopes of getting him out from under the direct sunlight and to give him a bit of relief in his last moments on earth. From there, she walked “a bowshot away” (Genesis 21:16, JPS Tanakh) so that she would not see her son die and begin to weep in distress.

“God heard the boy crying, and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven and said to her, ‘What is the matter, Hagar? Do not be afraid; God has heard the boy crying as he lies there. Lift the boy up and take him by the hand, for I will make him into a great nation.’” (Genesis 21:17-18, TNIV)

Then, amidst what should be a slow, agonizing death in the desert, an angel comes to visit Hagar, much in the same way as she was visited in Genesis 16. Indeed, these two scenes are reminiscent of each other because they are both rooted in similar circumstances. The timeline in both instances runs like this: 1) Sarah sees something in Hagar’s (or Ishmael’s) behavior that she doesn’t like; 2) Sarah complains to Abraham about it and asks him to get rid of her; 3) Abraham is reluctant to do so because Ishmael is his son; 4) Hagar leaves to die in the desert; and 5) an angel appears to her, making her aware of God’s desire to save her and Ishmael’s life because, as Abraham’s son, Ishmael is able to receive the protection and privileges afforded the biological offspring of Abraham.

Over and over again, it seems that God has a place and a plan for Ishmael that doesn’t quite agree with how Sarah sees the world. Rest assured, Sarah is acting with faith in God’s promises concerning Isaac’s status as the miraculous child of promise through whom Abraham and Sarah will sire a great nation. I do not feel that we are to attack Sarah out of pure sympathy for her treatment of Hagar and Isaac; to do so rejects Sarah’s faith in the promise of God. However, what we are to see is that human strategies and designs quite often fail and pale in comparison to how God sees the world and how God just might want humanity to see the world. God often blesses whomever God feels is worthy of such treatment, even if God’s opinions of a certain person or persons don’t quite agree with ours.

Thus, if you want a thesis statement, Hagar and Ishmael were protected, helped, healed, and given promises all their own because God honored the promises Abraham received about any children he would bear. God’s children will always be taken care of, no matter the shape, color, stripe, pattern, hue, tone, ability level, or individual eccentricity.

And in case you might like some additional scholarly texts to read through on this topic, I present the following passage from Interpretation: Genesis by Walter Brueggemann:

“The conflict between the two sons, between the two mothers and within the reluctant, ambiguous father, is complex (cf. 16:1-6). The story knows what it wants to tell. Isaac is the child of the future. But the story has no easy time imposing its will on the characters. Ishmael will not be so easily reduced. He has some claims. He has a claim because he is the oldest son of father Abraham. He is not adopted, not an intruder, but born to the man of promise. And Abraham is not ready to discard him (cf. 17:18). … But most compelling, God has this special commitment to Ishmael (cf. 16:7-12). For some inscrutable reason, God is not quite prepared to yield easily to his own essential plot. … God cares for the outsider whom the tradition wants to abandon. There is no stigma attached to the ‘other’ son. All are agreed on the preciousness of Ishmael – Yahweh, angel, Hagar, Abraham – all but Sarah. … The text is unambiguous: Isaac is the child of promise. That much is not in doubt. … But the text is equally clear that God is well inclined toward Ishmael. The ‘other son’ is not to be dismissed from the family. … It is, of course, evident that Ishmael’s promise is short of the full promise given to Isaac. And yet it is a considerable promise not to be denied. God is attentive to the outsider (cf. 30:17). God will remember all the children like a mother remembers all her children (cf. Isaiah 49:15). … Isaac is a gift to be explained in no other way than as a wonder. And Ishmael is a child gotten by skillful determination and planning. As oldest son, Ishmael is the child of ‘entitlement,’ possessing all natural rights.” (Brueggemann, p183-184)

The first steps on the journey have been taken...

Well, it’s official – I have completed my application to seminary. The waiting game now begins, but I’m quite OK with that waiting time. I have spent the last 4-6 months of praying, conversing, sharing, debating, and pondering with others and myself as to if I should be pursing graduate-level work in Waldorf education and working for The Harvest as a Grades level teacher or attending seminary as a way to step into full-time ministry (with an option to seek more theological training and education afterwards). Often, I would fall on one side with great weight and great determination, only to pick myself up and hoist my present and future onto the other side with equal resolve and belief in my decision. But this one has been made and I am excited to see what lies ahead for the next 2-3 years.

For most of February and March, I had decided to pursue both options equally, feeling that, having been given the chance to make a choice, I would be best served by walking down both paths for as long as possible, in hopes that my way would be illuminated at some point. I began communicating with representatives from Biblical Seminary and Regent College to determine which institution would be best suited for me and I for them. I eventually chose Biblical because of their focus upon training and educating pastors and lay leaders who cannot afford to attend seminary full-time because of the fact that they’re already in full-time ministry. Having such a program and heavily promoting such a program by Biblical was the impetus I needed to select them over Regent.

From the other side of the fence, The Harvest, a school and community that has been absolutely wonderful and redemptive for me in the past year, offered me a job opportunity that was quite hard to refuse. For every summer/year of training that I attended (funded by monies that I and the school attained through loans), by working at the school for the school year, those loans would be waived. They were offering a one-to-one, loan-to-grant arrangement wherein I would be working with children and teaching music all week long, training as a Grades teacher. This has been a place full of staff, faculty, parents, and children who have loved me, accepted me, honored me, encouraged me, and shown me intense love and appreciation for my talents and abilities. They sincerely were investing a great deal into my life and I have been greatly humbled throughout the school year by being a part of their lives.

But during the course of Holy Week – Maundy Thursday, Gethsemane Vigil, Good Friday, and Easter Sunday – I experienced a moment of clarity of purpose that I had been seeking after during my quest. I came to the belief that, had I chosen the training that The Harvest was offering me, I would have been relying upon my life, my own abilities, and myself in general. By staying in the Houston area for the next 3-4 years, I would not have grown in ways in which I feel I should been – seeing the larger world around me, experiencing an intense theological education I feel would be foundational to the rest of my life, and following my heart and passion for God and the God’s creation.

However, by choosing to attend seminary for the next 2-3 years, I am going to be relying on God’s guidance to see me through on this path. My funding has not been confirmed – I am seeking grants from the school, seriously considering loans, and definitely looking to work 16-20 hours a week at a job. I cannot rely on myself in these situations – I will second-guess my decisions and backpedal from what I do not and cannot know; but by leaving this to God, I am going to be living according to a depth of faith that I will totally new, fresh, exciting, engaging, and exhilarating – all while being quite scary and frightening. I’d be naïve not to be nervous in making this step of faith, but it has to be made.

The Harvest has been fabulously supportive of my decision and I will be doing free-lance work for them all summer long: helping with their website, editing and compiling a revised set of handbooks, and development of their overall program. The rest of my summer will be spent in preparation for my departure: securing funds, attaining a job, finding a place to live, and saying good-bye to my family and friends in Texas. And oh yeah – I’m hoping to complete between 30-35 chapters of my Genesis commentary before the summer ends. That project has been such a stabilizing (yet freeing) creative and theological force in my life during this tumult. If anything, Genesis In My Eyes has been both my muse and the motivation behind my decision – I want to do justice to my writing and to the lives & stories in the book of Genesis.

To everyone I’ve talked to about this decision – thank you for everything. I love you all so very much and, if you’re a Texas resident, I will miss you tremendously. Your support, encouragement, and kicks-in-the-ass will never be forgotten; it is because of them that I write this today. Peace…

Genesis 21:1-7

Isaac is Born, Fulfilling the Promises of God
Or
How to Really Begin a Never-Ending Story


With these 8 verses, the past 10 chapters of Genesis come to a culmination that Abraham and Sarah often thought would never come to pass. God has finally blessed them with the arrival of their first child, a son named Isaac. This was a birth backed by decades of prophecy declaring the event, but no actual child had yet been born to fulfill those prophecies. Sarah and Abraham had battled their individual and collective doubting during this whole process, calling God’s knowledge and their own physical ability into question.

However, the writer of Hebrews counts these two as faithful believers in God, 100 and 90 years of age respectively. Their experiences throughout the past 30 years of their lives reads like a best-selling novel or some well-written narrative history. Few of us would ever hope to be called to such a life, but maybe we would be the better for such a journey, across physical terrain as well as the physical and spiritual terrain of faith. And that, to me, is what sets Abraham and Sarah apart, why they are counted as righteous – they kept walking and following God, even though they didn’t often really believe. As I’ve said before, belief often implies reliance upon a set of understood and accepted facts, while faith needs none of that, often doubting the conventional wisdom.

Annotated Chronology:
1) Abram and Sarai leave their homeland with their family (Genesis 11:27-32);
2) Abram hears promises from God that he and Sarai will be the parents of a great nation (Genesis 12:1-4);
3) They leave their family to embark on a map-less and direction-less trek across the desert (Genesis 12:5-9);
4) Lot, Abram’s nephew and their only family, leaves them (Genesis 13:1-18);
5) More promises are made by God about that son who will supposedly start off this great nation (Genesis 15:1-21);
6) Ishmael is born to Abram and Sarai by a surrogate mother named Hagar, Sarai’s handmaiden, causing great trouble in the household (Genesis 16:1-16);
7) God initiates the covenant with Abraham, including definite promises and the details of circumcision, the means by which God has decided that the Jews will be physically set aside as God’s children (Genesis 17:1-14);
8) God changes both of their names – Abram becomes Abraham and Sarai becomes Sarah (Genesis 17:5, 15);
9) God reiterates the promise of the birth of a son, to be named Isaac, causing Abraham to laugh in disbelief, due to both of their advanced ages (Genesis 17:15-21);
10) God again delivers these promises in person, coming in human form as a theophany and accompanied by two angelic companions, causing Sarah to laugh in disbelief at such a pronouncement (Genesis 18:1-15);
11) Abraham is told about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, whereby Abraham decides to barters with God for the salvation of the city based upon the righteous in those 2 cities, as his nephew Lot and his family is living in Sodom (Genesis 18:16-33);
12) Sodom and Gomorrah are destroyed, though God honors Abraham by making sure that Lot and his family are saved, though they seemed quite reluctant to be rescued (Genesis 19:1-38).

“The Lord visited Sarah as he had said, and the Lord did to Sarah as he had promised. And Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age at the time of which God had spoken to him. Abraham called the name of his son who was born to him, whom Sarah bore him, Isaac. And Abraham circumcised his son Isaac when he was eight years old, as God had commanded him. Abraham was one hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him. And Sarah said, ‘God has made laughter for me; everyone who hears will laugh over me.’ And she said, ‘Who would have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse children? Yet I have borne him a son in his old age.’” (Genesis 21:1-8, ESV)

“The Birth of Isaac. The report of Isaac’s birth concludes the story begun with Sarah’s barrenness (11:27-32). The covenantal arrangement is underscored: God kept his promise to give Abraham a son through Sarah (vv. 1-2; 17:1-6, 15-16; 18:1-15), and Abraham obeyed the Lord by naming him Isaac (v. 3; 17:16) and by circumcising him (v. 4-5; 17:9-14), while Sarah responded with praise (v. 6-7). This episode illustrates God’s faithfulness to his promise to make Abraham’s descendents numerous.” (Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible: NIV, p45)

“How mystical is the process of birthing children! God opens Sarah’s womb. Sarah conceives and gives birth to a child. Abraham provides his seed and names him. All three acts – opening the channel of life, nurturing and sending the child forth, giving the child an identity – are equally essential to the child’s development; and they are only the beginning. It has been said that it takes a whole village to raise a child. Actually, it takes the whole world.” (Frankel, p27-28)


What we should realize throughout this “review” of the past several chapters is that the promises of God will always be fulfilled and come to pass, no matter how long it might take. Abraham and Sarah heard God declared many things to them, in dreams, visions, and in person for nearly 30 years, with things never coming to pass in the ways that they though would be best or expedient. All through the Old and New Testament, God never follows humanity’s timetable, quite often doing whatever it takes to break down humanity’s reliance upon its own abilities and turn their attention to God. But no matter what happens, whenever God makes a promise (or, in Biblical terminology, creates a covenant), the terms of that promise always come to pass.