Genesis 12:1-14
Let me begin with a question for you all. You do not need to put your hand up but just think about how you would answer the question.
“As a lifelong follower of Christ do you think that you have biblical values?”
It would be my suspicion that most of you would say, “Yes, I do”. And if I asked then how do you view the scriptures you may even quote a Bible verse at me, 2 Timothy 3:16.
“All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that the person of God may be proficient, equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:16) NRSV
Or maybe you like the NIV translation.
“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:16) NIV
But here is the problem if you answer affirmative to
those questions without any qualification you are possibly affirming ideas that
you would find unconscionable.
There are stories within the scriptures like the one that we read today that present an image of a God who plays with human lives in horrifying, distasteful, and even abusive. What do we do with these hard bits of scripture and the apparent vacillations of a God who appears to be capricious. For when we look closely, we find that there are inconsistencies with the decisions made by God in this story and the scriptures are contradictory.
The story of the Binding of Isaac, as it is traditionally known, read in our modern context should cause any sane person to recoil in horror and asl themselves, “Should I, can I, love such a God as this?” There is no escaping the trauma that was caused for the child Isaac who is the innocent party in this story. It is nothing less than child abuse and we need to name it as such.
Stories like this one which are upheld as a sign of Abraham’s faithfulness can cause people to simply say, “I cannot believe in such a God like this”. Or “I cannot take the Bible seriously”. And there is part of me that would say to them I understand, that is a fair call.
In his book on biblical values the Biblical scholar
John J. Collins indicates that when think about biblical values they “must be
sifted and evaluated” and they must be measured against the command to love
your neighbour.
Recalling Robin Whittaker’s view that we should “take the Bible seriously not literally” I want to suggest that there are lessons that we might glean from this horrific story without leaving such a distaste in our mouth about a God who may have asked a man to commit infanticide.
In coming across this piece of scripture, we may be left asking can I really trust a God such as this. And, is this piece of scripture actually God breathed and useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness?
In his reflections on his passage the Lutheran Scholar, Terence Fretheim, presents a nuanced understanding of this episode and suggests that what God is doing is testing whether Abraham will not kill Isaac?
Fretheim’s view is one that I have a lot of time for. Elsewhere in the first five books of the Bible known as the Pentateuch God’s command is to prohibit the sacrifice of children. This is found in Leviticus 20:18 and Deuteronomy 18:10. These decrees feel consistent with what we find in the Commandments that are handed down to Moses which include thou shalt not murder found in Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17.
Furthermore, the context of Isaac being the fulfilment of God's promise to Abraham to be the father of many nations also sits in stark contrast and contradiction to what God asked of Abraham in this story.
This seems consistent with Fretheim’s interpretation that what God is doing is testing whether Abraham will not kill Isaac.
Having said that and acknowledged the instruction that God gives elsewhere not to sacrifice children there is evidence within the Old Testament that at least three of the Israelite Kings practised child sacrifice. I am grateful to John Squires for his work on this passage. He notes that Molech, Ahaz and Mannesah all appear to have engaged with the of sacrificed children.
In Exodus 22 and Exodus 34 God demands animal sacrifices and the giving of the firstborn sons. It is unclear if this included sacrifices but as John J Collins says “God is the giver of life. One way of acknowledging this was to return the firstborn, and the first fruits, to God.”[1]
So, which is it? Are biblical values pointing at sacrificing children or not sacrificing them? Is God in favour or not? The Bible is not a simple consistent book that has a consistent story to tell us but raises for us difficult questions about the history of the people of God and their interpretation of what they believed God wanted them to do.
To return to the conundrum of Abraham and his son
Isaac one of the many troubling parts of this story is the blind faith with
which Abraham acts. Abraham is understood to be the father of faith for the
Jewish religion, the Christian religion and the Islamic religion. This story is
upheld by all as a story of Abraham’s faithfulness, but I believe we should be
questioning the blind faithfulness that is exhibited in this story.
Abraham appears to be willing to go through with God's command without question. And at least at two points in the narrative God appears to affirm Abraham’s willingness to do so. It could be argued that when Isaac asked the question “where is the lamb?” Abraham’s response that God will provide, alongside his indication to his servants that the two of them will return, do indicate that Abraham is trusting that God is going to allow this sacrifice to occur. Yet it appears that the faithfulness that is exhibited is precisely that Abaraham is prepared to go through with it.
Ultimately, the injunction that he is not to lay a hand on the boy, when the Angel speaks. However, the trauma inherent in this scene and this story do not sound like good news to me nor present a God who is easy to identify with and follow.
One of the things that Fretheim says about the story and the unquestioning obedience of Abraham is that it is inconsistent with Abraham’s previous willingness to question God. Just a few chapters earlier in the story God declares that he will destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. Abraham's response is to plead for these cities. In contrast to his innocent son. In the book of Ezekiel, we are taught that these cities were destroyed because “she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease but did not aid the poor and needy.” (Exodus 16:49) As an aside, even the notion that God has destroyed these cities can cause us to question whether God is a God of love.
The point is that Abraham questions God. Fretheim suggests that having already heard this story we as listeners should be willing to question what is happening in this story and question God's motives just as Abraham had done in the previous story. We should be asking the question can such a God be trusted?
As a follower of Jesus Christ, who is God's love Incarnate, this passage should draw us into critical reflection on our own blind faith and willingness to simply follow what we think might be God's command in the Bible. This is an uncomfortable teaching for many of us, but it is a Biblical teaching.
In digging into what lesson might come from this story, on the website my Jewish learning, James Goodman says, “I learned this story was God's way of proclaiming his opposition to human sacrifice”. This insight about the story is echoed by the ethicist and Rabbi Jonathan Sacks. This learning is often presented as an alternative to the child sacrifice by many ancient cultures. It is a distinguishing feature of Judaism that they do not sacrifice children. However, even ironically, as already noted in other passages God does command the sacrifice of children.
The possible learnings that we might glean from this passage are accompanied by what many of us will find an even more uncomfortable lesson. Again, it is Terrence Fretheim who provides this insight. It is God who is learning something in this story. It is God who is placing Godself in a position of vulnerability. As Abraham continues to follow through on the potential horrific act God's response is to say, “now I know”.
These words suggest that prior to this point in the story God did not know what would occur that God did not understand how things would play out. This suggests that God is not omnipotent (all knowing) and that God is changeable but also more importantly that human beings have the freedom to act of their own accord. Abraham can make his own decisions, and the word of God can be resisted.
Further that in the context of this story once God has said something it doesn't mean it has become law for God and that can change God's mind. God commands a human sacrifice and then says do not do this. If God had known how things were going to work out in the way this story is told, then the story has no meaning apart from the psychological damage on Abraham and Isaac. But if God is the one putting the covenant at risk because God does not know what will occur then despite its atrocious plot the meaning of the story changes.
There is a mystery in this story that invites a questioning of what it means to listen to God, to question God, to trust God, and to expect that God may not know the outcome of all things.
We did not continue to read the interaction between Abraham and God after this section of the story. But in the following verses God says to Abraham “by your offspring shall all the nations gain blessing”. I think it is important to return to this message that pops up repeatedly through both the Old and the New Testament. God's desire is for the good for all peoples. This is continually evident. This may be the kernel of truth for us to grasp onto as we continue to grapple with this difficult story; the nations of the earth will gain God’s blessing.
Before I leave the story of Abraham and Isaac, I want to pay tribute to Elizabeth Raine who parallels this story with a story found in the book of Judges, chapter 11, verses 29-40. It is a story in which one of the Israelite commanders called Jephthah makes a rash promise to God. After being granted victory in battle he says on his return home whoever comes out of the doors of his home he will sacrifice.
On returning home Jephthah’s daughter walks out of the doors of the house joyously to greet her father's return and he is heartbroken for he is made this promise. On explaining what is going to occur and the promise he has made is Jephthah’s daughter encourages her father to continue with the sacrifice. There is no intervention by God, there is no ram in any bush, and after two months of preparing for the event, his daughter is put to death.
Raine questions whether this is because women were of less value than of a treasured son, like Isaac. As much as we should be horrified at the story of the binding of Isaac this other story and how it unfolds way and the religious violence that is condoned rather than condemned is difficult for us.
Collins in his book suggest that we must have criteria for the values that we draw from the scriptures. The values that we might have and the good that we might seek as Christians are shaped by the God that we encounter in Jesus Christ. If there is anything that I would draw from the story of Abraham and Isaac into Jesus story it is the capacity for human freedom.
I would argue that in Jesus the man from Nazareth there is the freedom of choice that a human can make to follow a particular pathway or not. If Jesus was not susceptible to saying no to what was occurring in and through him then what Jesus does is devalued and devoid of meaning. It becomes all a sham. But if Jesus has genuine freedom of choice, then God takes a real risk in becoming human.
As followers of Jesus, we should be attentive to how Jesus himself debates with the rabbis and the scribes and the Pharisees. Jesus critiques the words of the scriptures and the way they were being interpreted.
If we are being blind in our faithfulness as followers of Jesus then we're not probably following Jesus and his example. When we look at passages as difficult as the one that we have today then we should not simply be dismissing them but looking deeply into them and trying to make sense of how we might explain them.
It might seem strange to have chosen to preach this sermon as we prepare for our Community Open Day. But when people come face to face with a story like this there needs to be some explanation as to why it sits within the corpus of our scriptures. And each of us needs to be able to explain what the Bible means to us without unintentionally opening the door to all kinds of evil.
In my view, the key to unlocking any of the Biblical stories is to go back to Jesus’ command to love God and love one another and to listen for what is written in the book of 1 John “God is love and those who abide in love abide in God”.
If you are asked do you abide by Biblical Values the answer you might give could be “which ones?” And if you are asked your view of the Bible maybe acknowledge that it can be a difficult book, but you still seek to listen for its wisdom.
No comments:
Post a Comment