Skip to main content

Through the Whole Bible: Genesis 22

Apologies for skipping Saturday. Through the Whole Bible continues on today, and I'll try not to make you wait too long for the next installment.

A second note: due to not preaching from written outlines this past Sunday, I really have no material for my typical sermon-wrap up post. Here is a link to the morning audio: Morning Sermon. Here is a link to the evening audio: Evening Sermon. Thanks!

Genesis 22 (link) is not really one of my favorite chapters in Scripture. I know that, for some, this chapter is one of the high points of the Old Testament. Here we see Abraham act in faith by offering Isaac as a sacrifice, only to be stopped by God. Instead, God provides a ram as a substitute here, and this picture the giving of Jesus as the substitute at Calvary. It really is a great picture of the love God has for us.

Moreover, the mountains of Moriah are in the Jerusalem region and tradition puts either the Temple at this spot or, less likely, Golgotha at this same place. I'd favor the Temple guess, that the Temple was built in the same place. We see the faith of Abraham when he tells the servants that "we will come back" in Genesis 22:5, the calmness of Isaac when he does not protest.

The whole thing reads well, and is a testament of faith. Even Hebrews 11:17-19 bears witness to that idea. The author of Hebrews (be it Peter, Paul, or Mary) sees Abraham believing in the power of God raise the dead here.

That's all well and good.

I just struggle with the story. After all, the same God told us that we must become like little children to enter the Kingdom (Matthew 18:3), forbad child sacrifice (Leviticus 18:21), and commanded humanity not to murder (Genesis 9, Exodus 20:13). He then commands Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, and Abraham apparently asks not one single question about the idea.

Not one. At least, none that are recorded. It seems out of character for God Almighty to ask for this sacrifice, and it seems odd that Abraham just floats along with the idea. To tell you the truth, I do not think I would take my son up that mountain.

Abraham, though, does. We have no idea how old Isaac is at this point: he's certainly no infant, as he is able to reason that the sacrifice is missing. He's not big enough to break out and run away from his century-old dad, either, so he's probably not in his 20s yet.

However, the text is not there to be liked, is it? It's there because God has inspired it and preserved it to us for a reason. So, what can we learn here?

#1: Sometimes God asks for the things nearest our hearts. Even when those things are what we have because of His promise. Even when those things are not things at all. That's a tough spot. We have to choose faith that obedience is better in the long-run of eternity than disobedience.

#2: We see the character of God. There were, historically, many regional deities and demigods and other such foci of belief. Nearly all of them were more pleased the better your sacrifice was. A big sheep was better than a little sheep, a cow better than a sheep, and so on.

That included religious beliefs that giving a child over to lifetime service was good, but a killed sacrifice was sometimes better. Moreover, a daughter was ok but a son was great. And an only son? Even better.

We see, though, that God does not want to be identified as like the other gods of the region. He is not the bloodthirsty, kill to gain my approval type of God.

He responds to faith and obedience. He responds to people living their life in step with His commands.

That's a good thing: bloodlust is not the answer, but rather lives living out Galatians 5:22-23 by the power of the Spirit of God. Lives surrendered to the One who died for them—not one who is like any other god any place else, but who is quite unique.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Book Review: The Heart Mender by @andyandrews (Andy Andrews)

The Heart Mender: A Story of Second ChancesEver read a book that you just kind of wish is true?  That's my take on The Heart Mender by Andy Andrews.  It's a charming story of love and forgiveness, and it's woven into the historical setting of World War II America.  For the narrative alone, the book is worth the read, but the message it contains is well worth absorbing as well.However, let's drop back a minute.  This book was originally published under the title Island of Saints.  I read Island of Saints and enjoyed it greatly.  Now, Andrews has released it under a new title, with a few minor changes.  All of this is explained in the Author's Note at the beginning, but should be noted for purchaser's sake.  If you read Island of Saints, you're rereading when you read The Heart Mender.  Now, go ahead and reread it.  It will not hurt you one bit.Overall, the story is well-paced.  There are points where I'd like more detail, both in the history and the geog…

Abraham Lincoln Quoted by Jesus! Mark 3

Mark records a curious event in his third chapter (link). If you look at Mark 3:25, you'll see that Jesus quotes the sixteenth President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln. After all, one of the highlights of the Lincoln years is his famous speech regarding slavery in the United States where he used the phrase that "a house divided against itself cannot stand." This speech was given in 1858 when he accepted the nomination to run against Stephen A. Douglas for Senate, but is still remembered as the defining speech regarding slaveholding in the United States. I recall being taught in school how brilliant and groundbreaking the speech was, how Lincoln had used such wise words to convey his thought. Yet the idea was not original to Lincoln. Rather, it was embedded in Lincoln from his time reading the Bible. Now, I have read varying reports about Lincoln's personal religious beliefs: some place him as a nearly completely committed Christian while others have him somewh…

Independence Day 2017

I don’t know if Thomas Paine will be aggrieved that I paste his thoughts from Common Sense here, from the electronic edition. It’s a Public Domain work at this point, so hopefully none will be bothered that I am not paying for it...I think there is value in seeing the underlying reasons of Independence. I find a couple of things noteworthy in his introduction:First, he speaks of those who disagree and, while calling those out, holds the strength of his affirmative argument will be enough to straighten them out. We could do well to think more like that.Second, his final sentence should be a required view: the influence of reason and principle. Not self-interest masquerading as principle. Not party propaganda disguised as reason.That being said, not everything Paine said is right. If he and I lived at the same time, we’d argue religion over a great deal. However, the idea of “natural rights of man” follows from the idea of humanity as a special creation—that all are created equal and en…