For Parents: If God Told You To...

[ChristineES]

Yes, it has been repeated, and it continues to be irrelevant each time. The point is that Abraham was willing to murder his own son. Sure, in the end it didn't actually happen, and god didn't really intend for him to do so, but it doesn't change the fact that it was in Abraham's heart and mind. So go ahead and repeat it some more.



Does it really make sense to you that a supreme being would require a pile of dead animals?



If Abraham was truly a righteous man, he would've known that what god had asked of him was evil and unjust, and that the moral coarse of action would be to defy god. That should've been the test. The story would've been a lot more meaningful.

It isn't that God requires a "pile of dead animals". It is the willingness to give up the best of your flock or your harvest (they sacrificed wheat and grains, too)- one you would normally keep to breed- for the love of your God. And the people who sacrificed ate the lamb or the fruits of their harvest- they didn't just kill and burn it up, as some people seem to think.
But this is our beliefs- I really can't explain it to you- I don't think anyone can, unless you actually follow it.
And the story was about defying God or not defying God and trusting God's judgment. If you don't believe in God and/or believe that God is malevolent, is going to see it the way you do- but I totally understand your point of view- even though I don't agree with it (Not totally understand, I couldn't do that unless I was you, but you know what I mean, I hope). I used to be an agnostic and thought the same way.

 

[waitasec]

It isn't that God requires a "pile of dead animals". It is the willingness to give up the best of your flock or your harvest (they sacrificed wheat and grains, too)- one you would normally keep to breed- for the love of your God. And the people who sacrificed ate the lamb or the fruits of their harvest- they didn't just kill and burn it up, as some people seem to think.
But this is our beliefs- I really can't explain it to you- I don't think anyone can, unless you actually follow it.
And the story was about defying God or not defying God and trusting God's judgment. If you don't believe in God and/or believe that God is malevolent, is going to see it the way you do- but I totally understand your point of view- even though I don't agree with it (Not totally understand, I couldn't do that unless I was you, but you know what I mean, I hope). I used to be an agnostic and thought the same way.

i wonder what the point is in willing to give up what means the most to you...

seems sort of "cultish" to me.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Limited human understanding.

(See dog example above.)

You know, parents deal with the same thing. It's a sort of life cycle.

You have kids. You teach them understanding and they grow in maturity over the years. But for many years, they simply do not have the capability to understand the depth of adult reasoning - for instance, WHY we would want them in bed by 8 pm on school nights, when they so desperately want to stay up later. WHY do we move out of state, forcing them to leave their friends and school? WHY do we tell them they can't play in the street, when it makes such a perfect place to bounce a ball or run races? WHY can't they live off ice cream rather than learning to eat vegetables?

So - when they are young, we don't burden them with explanations about everything. They have to accept some things they don't understand, on faith. Another word for this is "obedience."

Nothing bugs me more than a three year old screaming in a check out line, "But WHY can't I have the candy? WHY, MOMMY, WHY?" I want to turn around and tell the mother, "You know what - sometimes it's OK to tell them it's because YOU SAID SO."

As they grow in maturity, we allow them more questioning, more leeway, and we give them more information. But there are many, many things they simply won't understand...till they become parents themselves, perhaps.

As a Christian, I have accepted that there are some things about God's character that I simply can't grasp with my limited human intellect. My wisdom is limited by my own humanity. Does this mean that I can't question, or shouldn't question? No - I should and do seek wisdom and understanding. And guess what - when I seek it, I find it - not in my time, but in God's time, and when I need it.

I have faith, and that faith has never failed me. Even when it has been shaken, even when I thought I would lose it, God has shown me the depth of His love.

That's just my personal perspective. You can take it or leave it, but that's how my life has played out so far.

I think you're trying to have it both ways.

If your limited human understanding is enough for you to say that your god wouldn't command you to kill your child, why wouldn't it be enough for Abraham?

If Abraham's supposed to unthinkingly obey God's commands, why aren't you?

 

[Hope]

I think you're trying to have it both ways.

If your limited human understanding is enough for you to say that your god wouldn't command you to kill your child, why wouldn't it be enough for Abraham?

If Abraham's supposed to unthinkingly obey God's commands, why aren't you?

I think it's a mistake to assume that Abraham "unthinkingly" obeyed God's command. I'm sure Abraham put a lot of thought into it.

Having "blind" faith doesn't necessarily mean chucking our brains at the door.

 

[Storm]

I think it's a mistake to assume that Abraham "unthinkingly" obeyed God's command. I'm sure Abraham put a lot of thought into it.

Having "blind" faith doesn't necessarily mean chucking our brains at the door.

Yeah, it does. That's the distinction between blind faith and plain old faith.

 

[waitasec]

I think it's a mistake to assume that Abraham "unthinkingly" obeyed God's command. I'm sure Abraham put a lot of thought into it.

Having "blind" faith doesn't necessarily mean chucking our brains at the door.

can you define blind faith
and compre that to just faith?

 

[Me Myself]

I understand what you're saying, but I think it's important to remember that anybody can have faith in anything....Abraham's faith should be celebrated because of Who he had faith in. The object of our faith is also extremely important. If Abraham believed God was the sort of God who took pleasure in killing people, then he would have obeyed God with even more alacrity. Perhaps even with outright cheerfulness. But that's not what I get when I read the story. He obeyed because he knew the object of his faith would not contradict His own nature. Or His word. (Because God had promised Abraham he would be the father of many nations.)

You are confused. It is very clearly implied that Abraham was willing to sacrifice his son. To the point God says "And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son:"

He WAS going to kill his son for God. He wasn´t withelding it. This hypothesis of yours that he knew he wouldn´t die at the end is unbiblical.

Chances are Abraham just thought God as the god that was his god . I dobt he was making judgements of if it was moral or not, and if he was, the writer seriously thought that part wasn´t important. As to who he had faith in and wanteed to give obedience with, he had faith in someone who told him to kill his son.

That´s bad enough right there. (because he didn´t know that God would tell him not to kill him at the end, so in that time, that is what God was)

 

[Kathryn]

I think you're trying to have it both ways.

If your limited human understanding is enough for you to say that your god wouldn't command you to kill your child, why wouldn't it be enough for Abraham?

If Abraham's supposed to unthinkingly obey God's commands, why aren't you?

I didn't say we are supposed to UNTHINKINGLY obey. Sometimes, in spite of all our questioning and thinking (which I didn't denounce, by the way), we still can't understand God's perspective. He has a lot more information at hand than we do. He sees the entire picture - we only see a part.

My point - and I'll make it again, since you seem to have missed it the first go round - is that Abraham didn't have the luxury of all the information we now have about God's character. For instance, he knew nothing of God's plan for a Savior, for grace, for a once and forever sufficient sacrifice of atonement. God had not revealed to mankind at that point what He has revealed to us from our 21st century perspective. God hasn't changed - He continues to reveal more of His character as His plan unfolds.

From the luxury of my 21st century Christianity, I understand that God will not ask us to sacrifice our children on an altar. We have the Bible, and Jesus - two important elements of my faith that were unknown to Abraham.

 

[BobbyisStrange]

I didn't say we are supposed to UNTHINKINGLY obey. Sometimes, in spite of all our questioning and thinking (which I didn't denounce, by the way), we still can't understand God's perspective. He has a lot more information at hand than we do. He sees the entire picture - we only see a part.

My point - and I'll make it again, since you seem to have missed it the first go round - is that Abraham didn't have the luxury of all the information we now have about God's character. For instance, he knew nothing of God's plan for a Savior, for grace, for a once and forever sufficient sacrifice of atonement. God had not revealed to mankind at that point what He has revealed to us from our 21st century perspective. God hasn't changed - He continues to reveal more of His character as His plan unfolds.

From the luxury of my 21st century Christianity, I understand that God will not ask us to sacrifice our children on an altar. We have the Bible, and Jesus - two important elements of my faith that were unknown to Abraham.

Do you need the Bible when the source is in direct contact with you?

 

[BobbyisStrange]

And by your argument you are claiming to know and understand God's motives and plans? If god asked you to sacrifice your child, who are you to say that his plan isn't good or right? Perhaps it has always been his intent...if you say this can't happen, you are absolutely making a knowledge claim about God. So in a sense you're saying no one knows the mind of God except me.

 

[Kathryn]

Do you need the Bible when the source is in direct contact with you?

The Bible is one way I have direct contact with the Source.

 

[Kathryn]

And by your argument you are claiming to know and understand God's motives and plans? If god asked you to sacrifice your child, who are you to say that his plan isn't good or right? Perhaps it has always been his intent...if you say this can't happen, you are absolutely making a knowledge claim about God.

What? I have specifically stated that from my perspective, there is no way I can see or fully understand all of God's plans or motives. So not sure where you're getting this idea from.

 

[Me Myself]

My point - and I'll make it again, since you seem to have missed it the first go round - is that Abraham didn't have the luxury of all the information we now have about God's character. For instance, he knew nothing of God's plan for a Savior, for grace, for a once and forever sufficient sacrifice of atonement. God had not revealed to mankind at that point what He has revealed to us from our 21st century perspective. God hasn't changed - He continues to reveal more of His character as His plan unfolds.

So the only thing he knew was that this spiritual entity was asking him to kill his son. It is still very obvious that Abraham obidience was straigth immoral.

His ignorance only makes it worst quite honestly.

not that the info is much better anyways (You know, that this God could revert everyone´s sin directly because of omnipotence, but chose to kill his own son (that is also himself) because we wouldn´t feel right to forgive anyone any other way )

 

[Nakosis]

I didn't say we are supposed to UNTHINKINGLY obey. Sometimes, in spite of all our questioning and thinking (which I didn't denounce, by the way), we still can't understand God's perspective. He has a lot more information at hand than we do. He sees the entire picture - we only see a part.

My point - and I'll make it again, since you seem to have missed it the first go round - is that Abraham didn't have the luxury of all the information we now have about God's character. For instance, he knew nothing of God's plan for a Savior, for grace, for a once and forever sufficient sacrifice of atonement. God had not revealed to mankind at that point what He has revealed to us from our 21st century perspective. God hasn't changed - He continues to reveal more of His character as His plan unfolds.

From the luxury of my 21st century Christianity, I understand that God will not ask us to sacrifice our children on an altar. We have the Bible, and Jesus - two important elements of my faith that were unknown to Abraham.

So would you maybe say that that event was necessary specific to time and place perhaps to instill in man the necessity of trusting in God.

God being God obviously picked Abraham knowing he would act as he did. Knowing it would not take place. Knowing the impact the story would have on man.

That event having the necessary effect, now Jesus shows up with a different but also necessary message for man. So maybe it's not the logic/morality of the story that is important but the effect these events had.

 

[Father Heathen]

Okay, let's say god didn't intervene and Abraham killed his son in cold blood, only for "god" to take his mask off, revealing himself to be the devil in disguise. See the problem with abandoning reason and conscience for the sake of blind obedience? A real god wouldn't gift us with a conscience and the ability to reason if he expected us to forgo their use.

 

[Kathryn]

So would you maybe say that that event was necessary specific to time and place perhaps to instill in man the necessity of trusting in God.

God being God obviously picked Abraham knowing he would act as he did. Knowing it would not take place. Knowing the impact the story would have on man.

That event having the necessary effect, now Jesus shows up with a different but also necessary message for man. So maybe it's not the logic/morality of the story that is important but the effect these events had.

Hmmmm, interesting perspective. I'll have to think on it, but it sounds plausible on the surface.

 

[Father Heathen]

It isn't that God requires a "pile of dead animals". It is the willingness to give up the best of your flock or your harvest (they sacrificed wheat and grains, too)- one you would normally keep to breed- for the love of your God. And the people who sacrificed ate the lamb or the fruits of their harvest- they didn't just kill and burn it up, as some people seem to think.
But this is our beliefs- I really can't explain it to you- I don't think anyone can, unless you actually follow it.

Seems like a catch22; you can't understand without following it, yet how does one begin to follow something they don't understand?

And the story was about defying God or not defying God and trusting God's judgment. If you don't believe in God and/or believe that God is malevolent, is going to see it the way you do- but I totally understand your point of view- even though I don't agree with it (Not totally understand, I couldn't do that unless I was you, but you know what I mean, I hope). I used to be an agnostic and thought the same way.

My belief is that, if there is a god, he/she/it would be a being of pure love and pure logic, thus anything devoid of compassion or reason is not of god. Not all deity concepts fall beneath the abrahamic perspective/portrayal. Dead goat herders as middlemen isn't a prerequisite.

 

[waitasec]

So would you maybe say that that event was necessary specific to time and place perhaps to instill in man the necessity of trusting in God.

God being God obviously picked Abraham knowing he would act as he did. Knowing it would not take place. Knowing the impact the story would have on man.

That event having the necessary effect, now Jesus shows up with a different but also necessary message for man. So maybe it's not the logic/morality of the story that is important but the effect these events had.

nah, i would say it was a way to keep people in line...
we need to do this, because god said so...so don't ask questions....and cause waves....it's gods order.

 

[BobbyisStrange]

I understand that God will not ask us to sacrifice our children on an altar. We have the Bible, and Jesus - two important elements of my faith that were unknown to Abraham.

Please explain how this isn't a knowledge claim about what God will or will not do?

 

[Kathryn]

Okay, let's say god didn't intervene and Abraham killed his son in cold blood, only for "god" to take his mask off, revealing himself to be the devil in disguise. See the problem with abandoning reason and conscience for the sake of blind obedience? A real god wouldn't gift us with a conscience and the ability to reason if he expected us to forgo their use.

You're playing the "what if" game.

There is no "what might have been." There is only "what is."

"What is" is that God did not intend for Abraham to sacrifice Isaac.

Here's an interesting article from a Jewish perspective:

The Binding of Isaac - My Jewish Learning