God's Command to Abraham to Sacrifice Isaac

Ok, I am going to ask something that has bugged me for a long time.

Everyone loves the story of God commanding Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. It's a great story with a lot of depth and meaning.

But does it bother anyone that what God asked Abraham to do was nothing short of human sacrifice? Why would God command a human sacrifice, regardless of whether he knew ultimately it would not happen?

In at least one other case (Jepthah's vow)it is strongly indicated in the text that He in fact accepted a human sacrifice- the text says Jepthah fulfilled his vow which evidently means God did not intervene.

Heb 11:17
By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,

Heb 11:18
of whom it was said, "In Isaac your seed shall be called,”[fn]

Heb 11:19
concluding that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead, from which he also received him in a figurative sense.

The focus is not on human sacrifice but on faith. We are given a detailed testimony of Abraham's life with respect to God's promise being worked out in the life of Abraham. Through walking with the Lord, his failures or lack of understanding, Abraham witnessed how God established His promise with Abraham. After living so long witnessing God's work, Abraham was able to conclude that even though he didn't understand how God was going to accomplish His promise, "In Isaac your seed shall be called," but because God had always been faithful in the past, He would also keep His promise this time.

This testimony highlights the inability of man to understand beforehand what He is able to accomplish in those who hear His word and do what He says. Human sacrifice as you suggest is troubling, that is the point of this testimony, the hope for the substance of what is not seen.

Just think of how Isaac's understanding changed that day.

God confirmed the land promises to Abraham in his command to sacrifice Isaac. Abraham died never having completely received the promises and passed still seeing them from a distance. Yet God had promised Abraham that he himself personally would inherit the land along with his descendants after him and they would dwell there perpetually. Isaac was as good as dead in the Lord's eyes because Abraham not only fully intended to sacrifice him but was actually in the act of performing the sacrifice of the child of promise. So God counted it as done and Isaac was given back to Abraham in a typological manner of the resurrection. Abraham knew if Isaac was indeed the child of promise a resurrection would have to occur after the sacrifice of Isaac. And Abraham knew Isaac's resurrection would be a guarantee of his (Abraham) own personal resurrection that would allow permanent continuance in the land. Resurrection and eternal life were not unknown in the world of Abraham's day. Jesus said Abraham looked ahead to His day and rejoiced when he saw it. Why would Joseph ask that his bones be carried back to Canaan unless he was anticipating a resurrection? Abraham looked ahead to a day when the curse had been reversed and the Deliverer of Genesis 3:15 (strongly prefigured in the sacrifice of Isaac) would have come and gone His work of undoing the curse. Likely Abraham looked ahead and saw a day of deliverance and resurrection that would allow him and his descendants to live in the land continually free from the curse. It is doubtful that when Abraham asked God, "How shall I know that I shall possess the land?," that he had in mind a entirely other worldly heavenly realm. The Hebrews never divorced the coming kingdom from all earthly association. What better befits a "better country" than a land whose inhabitants have transcended death and are living free from the curse that enveloped them and their descendants unto death? An inward regeneration made possible by the atonement of the coming Deliverer and His resurrection from the dead assures Abraham's own resurrection. In Isaac, Abraham looked ahead to Jesus' day and rejoiced when he saw it (John 8:56). Perpetual continuance in the land is not possible without a personal resurrection of Abraham himself. The promised Deliverer has come and has offered and sacrificed Himself even unto death yet was personally resurrected. The problem of sin and its consequences stood in the way of the fulfillment of the promises made to Abraham including the specific land promises. Now the personal resurrection of Christ is living proof the obstacles have been removed. Abraham and his descendants dwelling in the land continually will be a resurrection phenomena of new inward resurrection life and personal bodily resurrection.

There is also a deeper spiritual meaning to sacrifice of Isaac. Abraham here is a symbol of God the father sacrificing his own son for us. If that is not human + God sacrifice then what is that?

Our salvation depends on human sacrifice.

I think drifter had your statements in mind bear when he made his comment.

But does it bother anyone that what God asked Abraham to do was nothing short of human sacrifice? Why would God command a human sacrifice, regardless of whether he knew ultimately it would not happen?

Some thoughts from my heart ..

This is what I believe... God wanted to see if Abraham loved Him more than he loved his son.. If God asks us anything we should obey.. Obedience is the highest form of worship.I believe...
I believe God is a jealous God and we are to love Him first above all else. This is the greatest commandment.
Deut 6:4Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: 5And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. 6And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart:

Mark 12:30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’[a] 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b] There is no commandment greater than these.”

"Our salvation depends on the death of the Son of God for our sins."

Right, what I said. He sacrificed Himself for our sins. That's human sacrifice.

Kind of silly to split hairs over terminology.

Lots of good responses:)

Another potential is when we want a thing and when God delivers we sometimes become enamored with the gift. Abraham wanted a son and he waited a long time before God delivered Isaac,... and so perhaps God was also testing wether Abraham loved Isaac (the gift) more than the giver (God).

This particular biblical story is overflowing with teaching, more than most in my experience. Every aspect is pregnant with meaningful foreshadowing of our coming Christ. Never get tired of hearing thoughts/preaching on Abraham.

Another really cool thing about God being faithful to His promise to make Abraham the father of many nations whose seed would number as the stars is this-
Many of us grew up singing, "father Abraham has many sons, I am one of them and so are you so let's just praise the Lord", as children....
Now some 3800+ yrs after Abraham, on a continent they didn't know existed, in a country not yet existing,... we identify ourselves as Gods children thru the obedience of Abraham!
I can't imagine that Abraham had the slightest clue to the degree which God would honor His promise-

We serve an awesome God:)

Which is probably exactly what drifter meant.

Christ was as fully human as He was God.

Heb 7:27 - "when He offered Himself."

Offer was what a priest did on behalf of the people. Therefore, Christ offered Himself and a man hung on the cross.

Of course I believe only Jesus could have sufficed as the perfect sacrifice for our sins. Of course I believe He is fully God. Of course I believe He is fully human.

Come on Blaine. I'm not a heretic. Put away the thumbscrews brother.

Christ was definitely a human sacrifice, as a high priest offering him self, he had to suffer as a man and taste death as a man for every one ....

No not see that is to not see the gosple , to not understand the suffering involved nor hypostasise, , that Christ was also fully man , and things he accomplished wile on the earth , was his humanity , filled with out measure with the spirt as the seconed Adam ...........

TMK: My suggestion is that you begin searching out all scriptures dealing with God's covenant with Abraham, both New and Old Testament. Three from Hebrews have already been posted, and the poster is right about them. The point is not human sacrifice. There is so much more going on here.

God has always dealt with man through covenant. He made covenant with Abraham and promised Abraham that in his seed would all nations of the earth be blessed. Paul makes a very big distinction in Galatians that God said seed singular and not seeds plural, meaning a particular descendant of his son Isaac (in Isaac shall thy seed by called) was to bless all nations.

The writer of Hebrews shows us that Abraham accounted that God would raise his son from the dead, from which he had already received him in a figure.

If God is in covenant with Abraham, and if Abraham offers his only begotten son (Look that on up if you will. Abraham had two sons, but God calls Isaac his only begotten. Very interesting, but born out in Romans 7 by Paul.) If Abraham offers his only begotten, then God is allowed to (perhaps obligated to) offer His only begotten Son as well. It is part of covenant. This is why we, being born again believers, are no longer under the covenant of law, but are now under the same covenant as Abraham. A covenant of faith.

So I believe that Abraham was actually shown by God the end game of His sacrifice. He, in my opinion , showed Abraham the sacrifice of Christ. This is born out by Jesus words in John 8:56. Abraham rejoiced to see my day, and saw it, and was glad.

So Abraham goes boldly to offer his son, knowing that just like Jesus was going to be raised from the dead, his own son Isaac would have to be. Why, because God had already showed Abraham Jesus day in a figure. Amazing stuff, and sheds some really powerful light on the plan of salvation. Praise God that Abraham believed God and was obedient in offering his son.

My take. Blessings as you study this out.

By the way, if we are born again, we have actually become, by an act of our death to self and new life in Him, human sacrifices. I beseech ye therefore brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present yourself a living sacrifice...

Sorry. It was Galatians 4, not Romans 7 that I rmeant to reference in the previous post.

Bro. Blaine: May I suggest that apart from incarnation there is no redemption. It is the very fact that the Son of God humbled Himself and became a man that qualifies Him to be the propitiation for our sins. Although He never gave up His identity as God, He became a man for the suffering of death. Since man gave it all away, only the sacrifice of man could restore it.

1 Cor. 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.

Hebrews 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unot his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

Isaac served as the pattern for this sacrifice. Christ was the fulfillment of the pattern.

However, I think this is the point you are trying to make, and I agree if that is the case. As the incarnate Son of God, He was the only man who could ever be that sacrifice. No other man who ever did or who ever will live could have been that sacrifice. That is, I think, a point that we will all agree upon.

Y'all are missing the point I was trying to make. I understand all the nuances and significance and foreshadowing etc etc.

But I have a hard time figuring out why God would command Abraham to do something that He (God) found detestable when practiced by pagan Baal worshippers.

If God told you to sacrifice your child on an altar, would you do it or might you expect you were actually hearing someone else's voice, because of what you know about the character of God?

What if God had told Abraham to commit adultery, then stopped him right before he consummated the act. Isn't it strange that God would have commanded him to sin in the first place?

Because telling Abraham to sacrifice (murder) his son was commanding him to sin, no matter how you slice it.

Yet it had already been determined that the coming Deliverer of Gen 3:15 who would bruise the serpent's head and reverse the curse would be a human who would be sacrificed. Maybe a prefiguring in Isaac of the coming human to be sacrificed was not as wrong as it appears to us.In Isaiah 53, after a prophetic portrait of the suffering human servant pouring out His soul into death it says, "It pleased the Lord to bruise Him." God's altars of sacrifices are holier than our ways of thinking no matter if they contain bulls and goats or humans. The same with Isaac.

Tmk I don't know if we are missing the point , it just doesn't bother us or me , for the king of creation , to command his most upright creature in Abraham to prove his obedience,

To prove obedience christ basically command his apostal to preach the gosple , in doing so they would be killed , This was basically suicide, but he actually didn't stop them in this case .....

To offer his son under the knife , was letting Abraham prove obedience and faith in gods promise to Abraham , what a position to be in ,

Gods ways are above our ways , why would we question his ways , or accuse god of unrighteousness

Maybe that why we have this account in scripture , to let us all either accuse god , or admit he ways are beoned finding out , this side of heaven ..........

Blessings

The whole gosple , can become a reason to accuse god ,,

It pleased the lord to crush his own son and bruise him ,

I want to throw something out there. At what point was it made known that our God is a God who does not delight in human sacrifices? This is just food for thought, I am not trying to make a point. It was widely practiced in the day and Abraham did not have the revelation of God we do. I would even go so far as to say his vision of God was most likely blurred by his up bringing to an extent (making his faith truly remarkable).

Without law there is no sin and the law against child sacrifice had not been given yet so Gods command was not sin? There is a question mark there because I do not know I am just thinking out loud.

So perhaps the commandment to us is sinful because we have the law (written and in our hearts) but putting yourself in Abraham's shoes and in that time it was not "sinful.

Continuing to think aloud God is unchanging so to him it would have been sin however God spoke to the ancients where they were, according to the times and the weakness of the flesh. I think this story illustrates also the abolition of human sacrifice as well as it's deeper meanings. To support this thought I would like to point out that God commanded much killing yet Jesus preached to turn the other cheek and to love your neighbor. God then, in the Old Testament, went against His true nature revealed in Jesus. Why? Because he dealt with those men according to the time (historical and spiritual) and catered to their weakness until the time when we could be made free from the flesh.

God condemned men sacrificing their children to false Gods such as Baal and Molek. God did not condemn Abraham offering his son to God and trusting God to take care of his son in the process. The first is abominable to God, the second is faith and is set forth as an example to us by God. The issue is not the physical act, but the motive of the heart.

I don't think we can compare this to adultery. The analogy would break down pretty quickly. Marriage is the picture or the figure of the intimacy that we are to have with God through Christ, and the intimacy that we have as Christ's bride and His body with Him as our groom and head. Sexual purity and the sanctity of marriage is the picture, and a powerful one, of that relationship. Even the act of consummating the marriage that continues in the relationship is such a powerful picture of this spiritual intimacy that we have. People pervert the picture because they do not understand the reality. They do not honor the human relationship, which is the picture of that with Christ, because they do not have, nor do they understand the spiritual intimacy that accompanies real relationship with God through Christ.

So the issue is not that we should not be unfaithful because God condemned it under the law. The issue is that human unfaithfulness demonstrates the fact that we do not understand, nor walk in, sanctification. We do not understand what it means to be in love with our God and what it means to be totally sold out to Him as a result. We do not understand the life of intimacy with God.

In the same way, we cannot think that simply because God condemned men for sacrificing their children to idols, that somehow God broke His own rules in this case.

God never intended for Abraham to kill Isaac in an act of human sacrifice. God intended for Abraham to keep covenant in a way that opened the door, if you will, for God to do the same.

When God created man, He gave man authority to rule and reign in this earth. Man was given a degree of autonomy in that he was given dominion over creation, and was given the power of choice. When man chose to sin, God would have been breaking His own word to intervene to stop it. Remember, since by man came sin, by man came also forgiveness of sin. Abraham's covenant and his willingness to sacrifice Isaac opened the door for God to do the same. It opened the door, through covenant, for God to keep covenant through the incarnation and sacrifice of Christ for our redemption.

God did not ask Abraham to perform a pagan rite of child sacrifice. God asked Abraham, through covenant, to open the door for incarnation. And if we study the scriptures carefully, we find that Abraham knew this before he ever started up the hill with the wood, and the fire. Thank you markuskiwi for reminding me of that scripture.

Faith comes into play here because Abraham did not know that God would stop him before the actual physical death of Isaac. He just knew that since God's son was going to be raised from the dead, and since he was in covenant with God, then God would have to raise Isaac from the dead as well. That is a huge act of faith. The consequence if God does not come through is devastating to the human mind. Yet God told Abraham that his seed that would be so numerous that trying to count them would be as pointless as trying to count the stars or the sand grains would come through this child of promise, Isaac. And he and Sarah were now absolutely too old to manufacture a replacement. It is no wonder that Abraham is called the father of faith.

I appreciate all your thoughts. Martyr- I think you are very likely correct in your thinking.

Just to be clear I am not accusing God of anything. I just laid out the facts and most folks probably just accept them at face value without consideration and I consider them too much- which is a fault of mine.

I also wanted to point out that this episode is probably my second favorite episode in scripture, for the reasons that have all been mentioned.

Because telling Abraham to sacrifice (murder) his son was commanding him to sin, no matter how you slice it.

I think the problem with TMK's understanding is he considers this act of faith by Abraham as sin because it included a human sacrifice. No act by itself can be sin. God does not look at our action but our motives. Yes God's commands tell us what is Sin and not sin but God is above his commands. In short sin is anything done against the will of God. What God's will is, is shown to us in his commandments, but that is not the complete will of God is.

For example I as a father keep telling my children not to shout at home. But if they are in another room and hurt themselves badly in an accident, I also expect them to shout to alert me. So I as a father, I am more than my own command.

There are plenty of instances where God also has proven himself above his own commands. Rehab's lie to protect the spy, Jesus breaking the Sabbath to heal people according to God's will etc.

Abraham was so sure that he was doing God's will. He did not discuss his act with even his own servants or Issac. I do not believe he even discussed with Sarah. He was very clear to do what God wanted him to do. He also new this act will not be acceptable in the sight of men that is why he did not discuss with anyone before doing it.

Todd, my "common sense" view on this is, the all knowing God knew what he was doing, and I truly believe what God was doing was just testing Abraham's faith. As for as human sacrifice, if Jesus wasn't sacrificed, I sure don't know what else you would call it. I'm no Bible scholar like some here, but I do think a lot of folks here tend to "overthink" things.

I love what scripture say's in Proverbs, Trust God from the bottom of your heart; don’t try to figure out everything on your own. Listen for God’s voice in everything you do, everywhere you go; he’s the one who will keep you on track.
Don’t assume that you know it all. Praise Jesus!

Sree, you say "No act by itself can be sin. God does not look at our action but our motives" but this is incorrect. In the levetical sacrificial system there were sacrifices to atone for unintentional sins.

I am in agreement with OP. Human sacrifice is a sin no matter how you slice it, the fact that faith was demonstrated by it does not annul that. I feel like no one is addressing that issue but is instead talking around it

TMK, this is something that deals with who our God is. I don't think you're over thinking at all. It is a good question!!

If human sacrifice is a sin no matter how you slice it does it hurt or change our perspective any to remember that in the prophetic utterance of Gen 3:15 that God had already decided that the bruising of the serpent's head would be accomplished through a human sacrifice? And that God Himself would provide the sacrifice (Gen 22:14)?

What was the cross? First and foremost it was a HUMAN SACRIFICE.

26 He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the SACRIFICE OF HIMSELF. (Heb 9:26)

27 who does not need daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for his own sins and then for the people's, for this He did once for all when He OFFERED UP HIMSELF. (Heb 7:27)

13 For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh,

24 how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit OFFERED HIMSELF without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to served the living God? (Heb 9:13-14)

It may have been wrong for the nations surrounding Israel and for Israel to practice human sacrifice to appease stone and wooden gods but in God's eternal purpose a human sacrifice did and still stands at the heart of His redemptive plan. All prefigured in the command to sacrifice Isaac. So was what the nations and Israel were forbidden to do completely taboo if God undertook it in Christ? I acknowledge freely Christ being man and God yet the man Christ Jesus hung on the cross as a human sacrifice. Was God really coming out of left field and commanding Abraham to perform a totally unseemly act? God had already determine before the foundation of the world to engage in a human sacrifice to provide for mankind's redemption. If the nations and Israel were forbidden to do it did that mean God couldn't?

Jesus gave himself up which is a subtle yet important distinction.

Yes it was Gods plan but Jesus was complicit every step of the way.

Sree wrote: I think the problem with TMK's understanding is he considers this act of faith by Abraham as sin because it included a human sacrifice.

No-- I certainly don't think Abraham sinned. It SEEMS that God tempted him to sin but we know that cannot be true.

Query: did God know Abraham would not plunge the knife in? If so, was it a real test?

I am in agreement with OP. Human sacrifice is a sin no matter how you slice it, the fact that faith was demonstrated by it does not annul that. I feel like no one is addressing that issue but is instead talking around it

I gave a very clear explanantion why human sacrifice is not a sin in this case. It is not the act but the motive that God sees. If you call the sacrifice of Issac as sin then you should also call Jesus breaking the Sabbath also a sin. Hence he is not your perfect sacrifice! Jesus not stoning the adlulterous women is also a sin! Again when you want you are willing to twist the argument but in all other cases you want to see black and white based on commandment. It is not always black and white.

It shows me that many here live by letter instead of spirit. That is why they cannot understand how by spirit the sacrifice of Issac is not sin. But if you live by letter with an old covenant life, then you will see it as sin like how Pharisees saw everything that Jesus did as Sin.

Do you have kids? Slicing a 14 year olds neck open is not a sin as long as you mean Well? Now answer my question about the sacrifice for unintentional sins. If the heart was right then why were those things counted as sins needing atonement?

The Sabbath was made for man not man for Sabbath. That is different then killing another human, take your own advice and stop painting it black and white. Those are two completely different things

Todd, maybe you answered your own question when you stated the following:
"Jesus gave himself up which is a subtle yet important distinction."
"Yes it was Gods plan but Jesus was complicit every step of the way."

If as generally believed Issac was around 14 years old, he would also have been complicit and willing. There is no mention that Abraham forced him onto the alter, but I think he trusted his father. Therefore this is the exact typology of what God would accomplish through His son Jesus. Jesus said "Abraham saw my day and rejoiced". Was it at this point that Abraham got the revelation of what God was going to do through the sacrifice of Jesus. I believe it was.

You know it's interesting that he could've been much older, even the same age as Jesus....

Sarah had him early 90's and died at 127... doesn't scripture record she died shortly after Abraham took him up?

But it would (to me) seem that he was submitting to his father just as Jesus did His,...also by faith:)

And since it was apparent mankind was under the curse of death, how was Abraham and his descendants going to possess and dwell in the land forever without a personal bodily resurrection? As Abraham looked ahead to Jesus' day and rejoiced it doesn't seem unreasonable this is part of what he saw. The coming one who would bless all nations would also ensure a victory over death without which the land promises could never be fulfilled.

Heydave-

Good point.

And they have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, which I did not command, ***nor did it come into my mind.*** Jer. 7:31

Interesting TMK. Definitely food for thought.