(Edition 2.0 19980407-20000425)

This paper is available from the World Wide Web page:
http://www.logon.org and http://www.ccg.or

In The Institute of Judaic-Christian Researcher, Volume 1, November 1986, Rabbi E. Ben-Yehuda published an article entitled The Sacrifice of Isaac.

The author gives only one stated purpose for the examination of this issue. "All Jewish responses have come up short before the Christian claim that the enormity of the sacrifice of Jesus upon the stake makes it absolutely necessary for all Jews to accept this Messianic role as well as his divinity. The following dissertation tries to show that the Jews had an incident in their history long predating the Passion which had a similar impact upon the Jewish outlook" (page 1). The only stated motive is "coming to grips" with that issue.

The writer of this Paper No. 244 makes 15 points of the dissertation and refutes each. The writer bases these refutations on the foundations of Scriptural disclosure, using logic, and addressing the rabbi’s limited use of translations.

To fully appreciate these arguments one would be encouraged to read the whole script of Paper No. 244.

The rabbi’s study is flawed also in that it fails to present an explanation of such Scriptures as Genesis 22:2 and Genesis 22:16 where Isaac is referred to as the only son of Abraham. There was never a time when Isaac was Abraham’s only son. The writer addresses what appear to be inconsistencies in the Masoretic text.

In Genesis 16:15, Hagar bears a son called Ishmael to Abram. Genesis 17:17-19 shows that Ishmael was alive before Isaac’s birth. Genesis 21:2,3 shows the birth of Isaac after Ishmael’s circumcision at age 13 (Gen. 17:23-27). Further, Ishmael is alive (Gen. 25:9) after the events of Genesis 22. Therefore Isaac was never the only son of Abraham, according to the text.

Judaism uses the Genesis 22 text as a revelation that God does not accept human sacrifice. Christianity uses it to emphasise the lesson of obedience, which is in direct conflict to the command from God, "thou shalt not kill" (Ex. 20:13), thus confusing any thinking Christian.

Isaac is a willing participant in the events of Genesis 22, and in verses 7 and 8 he asks, "Where is the lamb", as though he expects not to be sacrificed, and Abraham answers, "The lamb will be provided", indicating that Isaac is not to be sacrificed.

So in Genesis 22 the Bible is actually describing an event in which a father and son are enacting a preset formula. The other young men in the entourage are left to guard the camp, while father and son continue the enactment. Isaac is called "the only son" here and this factor is unique to the event, and the text ignores the theological problems.

At this point we have exhausted the biblical information.

This type of situation is identified as a rite of passage in many societies, and there are examples of texts with an initiatory structure, such as the wording in Genesis 22, found in ancient religious texts. So there is no reason why we should not recognise this in the Genesis 22 scenario.

The speeches are set speeches with set responses. It must be understood that this rite of passage occurs for every young man in the given culture when appropriate.

However, in the case of Isaac, it is possible that the ritual is in reference to the first-born of every woman (Ex. 13). In which case this activity would also have been enacted for Ishmael as the first-born of Hagar.

The traits of a rite of passage are common to the structure of Genesis 22. Most rites of passage end with a blessing and this is consistent with verses 15-18. Some initiates, in accordance with the new status of manhood bestowed, are left to demonstrate this newly gained maturity to find their own way home (verse 19).

The interpretation of Genesis as a rite of passage shows no inconsistencies with the biblical text.

We are justified in accepting the initiatory interpretation because the redemption of the first-born is commanded in Exodus 13 and described and alluded to many times. Anything that is commanded and alluded to must also have a practice. It is the practice that is described in Genesis 22.

The moral of the story for Judaism in Genesis 22 is that God graphically taught Abraham that He did not accept human sacrifice. Christianity sees Genesis as a lesson in obedience for all to follow.

The Qur’an reports the same events for Ishmael instead of for Isaac.

Ishmael and Isaac, both being first-born of their mothers, would have had to be redeemed. The initiatory redemption, the substitutionary sacrifice was performed for both of them.

In the end, the biblical text is coherent, and the Bible and the Qur’an are both right. Everyone is disarmed and we are all faced with living together in peace. Can we rise to that challenge?