The Binding of Isaac

September 14th, 2025                “The Binding of Isaac”                 Rev. Heather Jepsen

Genesis 21:1-3 and 22:1-14

          This morning we have jumped ahead 20 chapters in Genesis for our readings through the Bible for the year.  Last week we read the Priestly creation story which included 7 days of separating things into neat and good order.  We are skipping over the stories of Eden, Cain and Abel, the tower of Babel, and Noah and the flood.  Today our reading centers around Abraham.

          Abraham was a man of means living in a land called Ur.  He was told by God to leave that land and go to a new place that God would provide for him.  God made three big promises to Abraham, that he would be the father of a nation, that he would have land, and that he would be a blessing for generations to come.  And yet, Abraham and his wife Sarah remained barren.

          In their frustration to have a child, Sarah gave her slave girl Hagar to sleep with Abraham and that woman had a son named Ishmael.  We talked a few weeks ago about how the Islamic faith traces their roots to Abraham through Ishmael.  Jealousy ensued in the family and Ishmael and Hagar were sent away.  Sarah eventually conceived and gave birth to her own son, whom they named Isaac.

          We talked a bit last week about the 4 different authors writing in the Pentateuch.  This story was written by the Elohist author.  This is actually an older story then the one we read last week, as the Elohist author writes during the time of the split kingdoms of Israel and Judah, before the Babylonian exile.  This was written around 900-850 BCE.  We call this author Elohist because when they write God’s name they write Elohim.  This was the name of God before Moses received the name Yahweh at the burning bush.  The Elohist author is seen as a corrective voice, changing the stories from an older author called the Yahwist.

          In these stories, God has made huge promises to Abraham, all centering around an heir, so it seems strange that God would test Abraham by asking him to offer his son as a sacrifice.  Human sacrifice, while present in other religions at the time, was totally taboo for the Israelites.  The firstborn son always belongs to God, but families are never asked to kill that child.  It’s very troubling that God would ask this of Abraham.

          As the traveling party draws near to the sacrifice site, Abraham and Isaac leave behind their helpers.  Abraham tells them to wait saying, “we will be back” which implies that he is hopeful God will provide another way for them instead of requiring the death of Isaac.  When Isaac asks about the sacrifice, again Abraham shows his trust in God, “God will provide.”

          And yet somehow these two get to the point where things get very serious.  Abraham ties Isaac up and lays him on the altar for burnt offering.  As he lifts his knife to kill his son, suddenly an angel calls for him to stop.  A ram is provided instead, and the crisis is averted for now, although I would imagine Abraham and Isaac’s relationship is forever broken.  You don’t try to kill somebody and then suddenly we are all friends again.  Life doesn’t work like that.

          This is one of the most difficult stories to interpret in the Old Testament.  Why would God test a man in such a way?  It really doesn’t seem right.  What is the point of a story like this, other than to scare the listeners into obedience?

          This story is interpreted differently by the three Abrahamic faiths.  Judaism reads this as a story about God.  It teaches that no matter what, if we trust in God, then God will provide for all our needs.  This story is present in Islam as well, but they tell about it happening to Ishmael, not Isaac.  Their interpretation centers around Abraham’s obedience.  They praise hum for being willing to give everything up to God and follow all instructions as given.  Christians interpret this story centered around the character of Isaac.  If he was old enough to carry the wood for the offering, then he must have known what was happening and been a willing participant.  They see here a reference to Jesus Christ carrying his cross for his own sacrifice.

The Elohist author emphasized the state of Israel as a religious community.  They thought that the national life of Israel should be grounded in a faithful obedience to God.  Certainly, they saw this story as an example of the ultimate obedience.  Human sacrifice as the ultimate devotion had been operating in the area around Israel for some time.  The traditional interpretation of this story is that Abraham trusted and was obedient to God.  The test was to be obedient, and Abraham passed the test. 

Personally, I find this to be one of the most difficult stories in our scripture.  I don’t want to worship a God who asks me to kill my child.  And I don’t want my own father to offer my life up to appease his God.  In fact, I want nothing to do with a God who asks for human sacrifice at all.  If that is the test God is offering, then I know without a doubt I would walk away.  If God asked me to sacrifice Henry, I know I would say “Nope, I’m out.  You can keep your blessings and your land.  I am keeping my son.”

I think though that we might be able to read this another way.  What if Abraham failed the test instead of passing it?  “After these things God tested Abraham saying, “Take your son, your only son, and offer him as a burnt offering on the mountain I will show you.”  What if, instead of being a test of obedience, this was a test of saying no. 

God and Abraham have argued about saving the lives of the people in Sodom and Gomorrah.  Why wouldn’t Abraham argue about saving the life of his own son?  Why wouldn’t Abraham stand up and challenge God in this request, if he knows his son is a righteous man?  What if instead of being a test of obedience, this was a test of Abraham’s understanding of God?  Abraham fails the test, and God loves him anyway, so he stops him from following through with the murder of his own child.

           Is it possible that ultimate obedience to authority is not the mark of faith the church has painted it to be?  Are there not greater goods that we are called to in this life?  Perhaps to follow God is to question authority, to side with life, and to refuse to commit acts of evil even if someone is telling us that that’s what we are supposed to do.

          If we read this story as a metaphor for giving up things in life and trusting in God to provide for our needs, then I am all about that.  I have given up a ton of things in my call and service to God and I am ok with that.  But if this story is about blindly following orders even when they are for acts of evil, then I don’t want to have anything to do with that.  I believe our God wants us to always act on the side of love and justice, and killing a child has no place in God’s realm of love.

          Today we celebrate communion, and we remember that Jesus lays down his life to make us one with God.  Jesus’ willingness to experience suffering to teach us about love is a wonderful thing.  We know that Jesus faced hardship and loss, and that he chose to be the lamb of God.  Jesus gave up everything in his devotion to the Father, but it was a matter of his own will, not a command or a murder by someone else.

          I wish I had a nice little bow to wrap this story up with, but I don’t.  It’s just a super troubling text and yet it remains in our Bible as a story to be read, to challenge us to understanding, and to pull from us fresh interpretation.  I will leave it up to you to decide for yourself.  What exactly was the test?  And did Abraham pass it or fail it?  I don’t believe there is one right answer.

          Next week our story continues as we read about Isaac’s son, Jacob.  Until then, ponder this text about Abraham and let me know how you would interpret it.  I’m really curious what you think.  Amen.