†. Gen 22:6b-7 . . He himself took the firestone and the knife; and
the two walked off together. Then Isaac said to his father Abraham:
Father! And he answered: Yes, my son. And he said: Here are the
firestone and the wood; but where is the sheep for the burnt
offering?
Oops! That's kind of like going out to a picnic and forgetting the hot dogs
and hamburger buns. The Tanakh's translation of the Hebrew word 'esh
(aysh) as firestone was probably an educated guess. 'Esh just simply means
fire, with no stone implied. A convenient way to transport fire in those days
was with a portable oven; viz: a fire pot (cf. Gen 15:17). So rather than a
stone, which implies striking sparks, they most likely just brought along the
camp stove, which held a receptacle for live coals. Fire pots in those days
were the equivalent of modern propane-fueled camping equipment.
Since Abraham was the patriarch, it was his prerogative, as well as his
responsibility, to actually kill the burnt offering and set it to fire; so he quite
naturally took custody of the weapon and the coals; as Isaac no doubt fully
expected him to.
The word for "sheep" is either she (seh) or sey (say) which means: a
member of a flock, which can be either a sheep or a goat. Neither the age
nor the gender mattered in this instance because Scripture up to this point
in time had not yet specified age or gender for a burnt offering. Abraham
could have used kids and lambs, or ewes, nannies, or rams; it made no
difference. Actually, Abraham might have offered birds too. Noah did in
chapter 8-- but there was something special about this instance that Isaac
somehow knew required something quite a bit more substantial than a bird.
†. Gen 22:8a . . And Abraham said: God will see to the sheep for His
burnt offering, my son.
Little did Isaac know the sheep of that day was to be him. Ol' Abraham and
his half truths are at it again.
†. Gen 22:8b . . And the two of them walked on together.
This is now the second time Genesis says they walked together. Neither one
led, nor brought up the rear, as in the case of so many husbands who leave
their wives dragging along behind at the malls. Incidentally, the dialogue
that took place between Isaac and his dad in verses 7 and 8 are the only
words they ever spoke to each other recorded in the whole Bible.
Arguments from silence insist that if something isn't clearly stated in the
Bible, then it's inferred from the silence that there was nothing to state. In
other words: according to the logic of an argument from silence, verses 7
and 8 are the only words that Isaac and Abraham ever spoke to each other
their entire lives: which of course is highly unlikely.
†. Gen 22:9a . .They arrived at the place of which God had told him.
When did that happen . . God telling him? Genesis doesn't say. Jewish
tradition says the site had an aural glow which Abraham and Isaac were
enabled to see from a distance.
I think it was right about here where Abraham and Isaac took time-out for a
heart to heart. And I don't think it was pleasant. Abraham informed his son
of their real purpose there that day and of what God required. Isaac must
have been shocked and terrified. How could he not be?
It would take quite a bit of salesmanship to convince Isaac that his death
was the right thing to do. He was much younger and could easily outrun his
dad. So if this was going to work, it would require his son's whole-hearted
consent because there was no one there to assist Abraham in the event that
Isaac chickened out. Besides, Isaac had to agree or the whole affair would
disintegrate into a ritual murder instead of a sacred burnt offering.
The servants were behind, guarding the burro. And God could not interfere
because burnt offerings are worship; and worship is supposed to be
voluntary rather than at the point of a gun. So all in all, the success of this
entire event hinged upon the wills of just two people that day: Abraham and
Isaac; a father and his son.
If you were Abraham, how would you approach Isaac to convince him to let
you slit his throat and incinerate his body to ashes?
Fortunately, Abraham was a man of God who walked with God. So his
influence with Isaac was fully functional and effective. If there was one thing
about his dad that Isaac knew was definitely not artificial, it was his
relationship with Yhvh. If his dad said that God wanted Abraham's boy for a
burnt offering, then by thunder that is what God said. I believe Isaac was
confident his dad would never lie about such a thing. He might lie about
other things, but not about that one especially since Isaac was a boy whom
Abraham dearly loved.
If Abraham was hurt by the loss of Ishmael, just think how much worse he
felt at the prospect of slicing Isaac with a knife and then cremating his
corpse. How would he explain that to Sarah? Would she understand? I don't
think so. Sarah had waited a lifetime for a baby of her own, and now
Abraham would kill it in a religious ritual before the boy even had a chance
to get married and have a family of his own. No, Sarah would not be
understanding about that at all; and how could anyone possibly expect her
to.
Anyway; it was a big hurdle, but Abraham got past it okay. However, he still
had one more objection to overcome.
I can almost hear Isaac ask: "Dad, if I'm dead, then how will God make of
me a great nation whose numbers exceed the stars of heaven? You told me
He promised you that". Yes; God did promise Abraham that in Gen 15:4-5,
and Gen 17:18-21.
It is here where Isaac's great faith is revealed; but not so much his faith in
God: rather, faith in his dad. Abraham's influence upon Isaac was
astonishing; so much so that no doubt the lad believed right along with his
dad that his death would only be temporary. Isaac was convinced that God
would surely raise him from the dead in order to make good on His promises
to Abraham.
That young man really had guts; and incredible trust in his dad too. I'll tell
you what: those two men deserve our deepest admiration. What an
incredible display of faith and courage; both on the part of Abraham and on
the part of his son Isaac.
Cont.
/
the two walked off together. Then Isaac said to his father Abraham:
Father! And he answered: Yes, my son. And he said: Here are the
firestone and the wood; but where is the sheep for the burnt
offering?
Oops! That's kind of like going out to a picnic and forgetting the hot dogs
and hamburger buns. The Tanakh's translation of the Hebrew word 'esh
(aysh) as firestone was probably an educated guess. 'Esh just simply means
fire, with no stone implied. A convenient way to transport fire in those days
was with a portable oven; viz: a fire pot (cf. Gen 15:17). So rather than a
stone, which implies striking sparks, they most likely just brought along the
camp stove, which held a receptacle for live coals. Fire pots in those days
were the equivalent of modern propane-fueled camping equipment.
Since Abraham was the patriarch, it was his prerogative, as well as his
responsibility, to actually kill the burnt offering and set it to fire; so he quite
naturally took custody of the weapon and the coals; as Isaac no doubt fully
expected him to.
The word for "sheep" is either she (seh) or sey (say) which means: a
member of a flock, which can be either a sheep or a goat. Neither the age
nor the gender mattered in this instance because Scripture up to this point
in time had not yet specified age or gender for a burnt offering. Abraham
could have used kids and lambs, or ewes, nannies, or rams; it made no
difference. Actually, Abraham might have offered birds too. Noah did in
chapter 8-- but there was something special about this instance that Isaac
somehow knew required something quite a bit more substantial than a bird.
†. Gen 22:8a . . And Abraham said: God will see to the sheep for His
burnt offering, my son.
Little did Isaac know the sheep of that day was to be him. Ol' Abraham and
his half truths are at it again.
†. Gen 22:8b . . And the two of them walked on together.
This is now the second time Genesis says they walked together. Neither one
led, nor brought up the rear, as in the case of so many husbands who leave
their wives dragging along behind at the malls. Incidentally, the dialogue
that took place between Isaac and his dad in verses 7 and 8 are the only
words they ever spoke to each other recorded in the whole Bible.
Arguments from silence insist that if something isn't clearly stated in the
Bible, then it's inferred from the silence that there was nothing to state. In
other words: according to the logic of an argument from silence, verses 7
and 8 are the only words that Isaac and Abraham ever spoke to each other
their entire lives: which of course is highly unlikely.
†. Gen 22:9a . .They arrived at the place of which God had told him.
When did that happen . . God telling him? Genesis doesn't say. Jewish
tradition says the site had an aural glow which Abraham and Isaac were
enabled to see from a distance.
I think it was right about here where Abraham and Isaac took time-out for a
heart to heart. And I don't think it was pleasant. Abraham informed his son
of their real purpose there that day and of what God required. Isaac must
have been shocked and terrified. How could he not be?
It would take quite a bit of salesmanship to convince Isaac that his death
was the right thing to do. He was much younger and could easily outrun his
dad. So if this was going to work, it would require his son's whole-hearted
consent because there was no one there to assist Abraham in the event that
Isaac chickened out. Besides, Isaac had to agree or the whole affair would
disintegrate into a ritual murder instead of a sacred burnt offering.
The servants were behind, guarding the burro. And God could not interfere
because burnt offerings are worship; and worship is supposed to be
voluntary rather than at the point of a gun. So all in all, the success of this
entire event hinged upon the wills of just two people that day: Abraham and
Isaac; a father and his son.
If you were Abraham, how would you approach Isaac to convince him to let
you slit his throat and incinerate his body to ashes?
Fortunately, Abraham was a man of God who walked with God. So his
influence with Isaac was fully functional and effective. If there was one thing
about his dad that Isaac knew was definitely not artificial, it was his
relationship with Yhvh. If his dad said that God wanted Abraham's boy for a
burnt offering, then by thunder that is what God said. I believe Isaac was
confident his dad would never lie about such a thing. He might lie about
other things, but not about that one especially since Isaac was a boy whom
Abraham dearly loved.
If Abraham was hurt by the loss of Ishmael, just think how much worse he
felt at the prospect of slicing Isaac with a knife and then cremating his
corpse. How would he explain that to Sarah? Would she understand? I don't
think so. Sarah had waited a lifetime for a baby of her own, and now
Abraham would kill it in a religious ritual before the boy even had a chance
to get married and have a family of his own. No, Sarah would not be
understanding about that at all; and how could anyone possibly expect her
to.
Anyway; it was a big hurdle, but Abraham got past it okay. However, he still
had one more objection to overcome.
I can almost hear Isaac ask: "Dad, if I'm dead, then how will God make of
me a great nation whose numbers exceed the stars of heaven? You told me
He promised you that". Yes; God did promise Abraham that in Gen 15:4-5,
and Gen 17:18-21.
It is here where Isaac's great faith is revealed; but not so much his faith in
God: rather, faith in his dad. Abraham's influence upon Isaac was
astonishing; so much so that no doubt the lad believed right along with his
dad that his death would only be temporary. Isaac was convinced that God
would surely raise him from the dead in order to make good on His promises
to Abraham.
That young man really had guts; and incredible trust in his dad too. I'll tell
you what: those two men deserve our deepest admiration. What an
incredible display of faith and courage; both on the part of Abraham and on
the part of his son Isaac.
Cont.
/
