Quote from Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, "Fragments of Light: A View as to the Reasons for the Commandments," in The Lights of Penitence, The Moral Principles, Lights of Holiness, Essays, Letters, and Poems, trans. Ben Zion Bokser (New York: Paulist Press, 1978), pp. 320-321.
Rav Kook was the first Ashkenazi chief rabbi of Palestine, and is one of the most celebrated and influential rabbis of the 20th century. A compilation of extracts from his writing, compiled by his disciple Rabbi David Cohen and titled by him "A Vision of Vegetarianism and Peace," depicts a progression, guided by Torah law, towards a vegetarian society.
I noticed this while listening to yesterday's episode (I think), but I don't think Fr Mike mentioned it.
Verse 2:
>He said, โTake your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains that I shall show you.โ
Verse 12:
>He said, โDo not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.โ
It's interesting how it furthers the parallel with Jesus as God's only son.
A well-known myth in the Greek world was that while saiing to Troy Agamemnon angered Artemis and was forced to sacrifice his daughter Iphigenia to appease her. However in some versions of the myth, Artemis saves Iphigenia at the last moment by miraculously providing a deer to be sacrificed in her place. The parallels with Abraham and Isaac are obvious, but is there any evidence beyond these narrative similarities?
Ok this could be old news to people here but in my search for Knowledge I just stumbled on this. So growing up I was of course told that the only birthdays mentioned in the bible were pagan. Pharoh, Herod etc.
But I just found Gen 21:8. "Now the child grew and was weaned and Abraham prepared a big feast on the day that Isaac was weaned." A brief web search later and I discovered that although every birthday is not a big deal. Traditionally Jews (yes going far far back) celebrated landmark birthdays in a childs life.
Now I think wait a second, Jesus actually was baptised on his 30th birthday according to JWs. So it could be said that he obviously participated in these celebrations growing up.
Then I think about Colossians 2:16 where it says not to let anyone judge you for observing festivals or the new moon..... and I think WTF????
There is absolutely no scriptural reason not to celebrate birthdays. Birthday deprograming complete Thank you for reading.
So my mom just told me that when my brother was 6 years old my dad did a very accurate reenactment of Abraham attempting to sacrifice Isaac in front of the congregation (adults and children). They went all out, and apparently it made a ton of people cry โtears of joyโ. It already seems so crazy to me that Christians glorify that story so much, but to act it out with your own child? How did no one see anything wrong with that? My mom confessed she wasnโt even able to stay in the room because it made her so uncomfortable, so I canโt even imagine how my brother felt.
As I was walking her home we discussed the story and I told her how awful Isaac must have felt thinking he was about to be killed and how awful Abraham must have felt, feeling he must kill his son. It's a horrible story when you think about it.
She agreed that it wasn't a very nice thing for God to have done - I'm hoping I've sown the seed for her to think about and question her faith (which was imposed on her at school), although now I feel like whatever the Atheistic version of a demon is, tempting a godly person to Hell.
So goes a comment at the watchtower study last week.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is becoming as culty as it can get.
Mostly a copy and paste job
kรฎ apparently mean something similar to, in this context, for, because etc
Does this mean that if Abraham was not willing to give up Isaac that Isaac would have been hurt? Because the two ideas that kรฎ joins are 1. That Issac wasn't to get hurt 2. That Abraham was willing to have done it.
So my question is was it the case that when God said, " โTake your son, your only son, whom you loveโIsaacโand go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.โ ", God actually meant it? As in he meant to for Isaac to be a burnt offering.
It always scared the shit out of me as a kid. I saw my parents as good people that took care of me but I would also wonder...if God told them to kill me, would they do it?
But now, I wonder why all those headlines we see of the people who killed their children and said "God told them to do it"...aren't they just like Abraham? Why was he a devout, God fearing man who should be celebrated and these people are demonized? (I'm in no way defending people that murder their children and claim God spoke to them) shouldn't it be the same?
People keep saying it's about how your sacrifice is rewarded later in life and how you should have trust in God. But all I believe it to be is a show of total and absolute obedience and cruelty.
For Abraham to not even try to protect his child or even question his belief in the one who would ask him to kill Isaac is insane. For God to ask Abraham (someone who is devoted to God) to kill his son even if it is a bluff is incredibly wrong. To have a person prove their faith by making a choice between their child and you is just cruel.
People say that Abraham knew God was going to make things right and that's why he went along with it but I don't know how Isaac felt about being tied to an altar and about to be stabbed by his own father because someone told him to. If I was Isaac I would never feel safe around Abraham again, always scared of what God is going to ask of him next. Talk about being traumatized.
I donโt get how people can make it a lesson on anything but a red flag.
Edit: I don't mean Abrahamโ test was meant to be a moral lesson, nor do I believe it was wrong for that time period/society(except for the whole not even questioning killing his child, grown adult or kid doesn't matter). I'm talking about people using it as a moral lesson today, in a time where many religions condemn the practice of human sacrifice.
On an unrelated note I was sitting here wondering why my title felt off and realizing it's because there was an or between good and moral.
Amos, First Isaiah, and Micah frequently use "(house of) Jacob" as another name for Israel. There are also a few places where Amos refers to Israel as "(the house of) Joseph" and "(the house of) Isaac." There's a single mention of "Abraham" in the last verse of Micah, which seems to be yet another name for Israel.
My understanding is that all of these books predate the book of Deuteronomy, which refers to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as the ancestors of the Jews, and that the bulk of Deuteronomy in turn predates the various components of the book of Genesis.
Before the Torah was written, were these names understood to have the same meaning that they are given in the book of Genesisโnamely, that the four were the legendary ancestors of the Jews, and that Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Joseph? Did these names originate as the names of places or groups of people that were later used as the names of individuals in the Torah, much like Noah's grandsons or Lot's children/grandchildren? Does their origin come from something else entirely?
I am also the son of the herd that Abraham prepared for the three men standing by him among the oaks of Mamre.
If you are jealous of me then remember that you too could be somewhere in the Bible and brought back to life.
If you think I am ignorant or liar remember that you too will be negatively judged by others and rejected.
I know what I am saying is so helpful that you could never repay me fully for its benefit if you tried.
I am currently reading through Genesis and In chapter 24 Abraham commands one of his servants to go back to his country and find a wife within his relatives. He makes it clear that he can not take his son back there and Iโm assuming the reason being that he will leave the land that God has promised him? Was the servants mission to find one of Abrahamโs relatives all too keep the land under his families bloodline? Im very curious and any opinions or theories are appreciated!
I believe in Jehovah, Elohim, Elyon, Christ, etc. whatever you want to call Him. Many parts of the BoM and Bible say that He is eternal, and never ending. Alpha and Omega. However, various things of Mormon Doctrine seem to say that he is part of a progression, and that there may be many โgodsโ (with a little g I believe). Iโm not refuting that, in fact as a Hinduism enthusiast and LDS member, I find this part of Mormonism fascinating, but many would say that it is evil due to the Bibleโs take on the matter. And the BoM also does not mention anything of progression towards godhood, much like the Bible. What are your opinions on this?
A theory.
The angel who stopped Abraham was never named. We are never told when war happened in heaven. It's plausible the angel could have been Lucifer. Then Yahweh made sure the books made it look like he never actually wanted the sacrifice and he sent an anonymous angel to stop it.
Then he threw Lucifer down to become Satan. But not before Lucifer and his army of rebel angels fought like hell to dethrone Yahweh for the sake of mankind.
Hail Satan.
- If Isaac was sacrificed, how was Jacob born?
- Is it likely that the Midrashic narative likely followed were Isaac was brought back to life?
- Is it likely that the timeline was edited were previously, Isaac was married earlier and Jacob and Esau were born before the sacrifice?
Please give your scholarly views.
Read the guidelines and rules before adding a comment below.
Those events are in Genesis 22:1-19, and the NT mentions the events in two places:
Hebrews 11, verses 17 to 19, say:
>> By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son, of whom it was said, โThrough Isaac shall your offspring be named.โ He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead, from which, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back.
James 2, verses 20 to 24, say:
>> Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, โAbraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousnessโโand he was called a friend of God. You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.
The question here is not really about Abraham, but what do those events say about God, whether He is of good character. Some people say that God commanding Abraham to do that indicates that God is not good.
Amos, First Isaiah, and Micah frequently use "(house of) Jacob" as another name for Israel. There are also a few places where Amos refers to Israel as "(the house of) Joseph" and "(the house of) Isaac." There's a single mention of "Abraham" in the last verse of Micah, which seems to be yet another name for Israel.
My understanding is that all of these books predate the book of Deuteronomy, which refers to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as the ancestors of the Jews, and that the bulk of Deuteronomy in turn predates the various components of the book of Genesis.
Before the Torah was written, were these names understood to have the same meaning that they are given in the book of Genesisโnamely, that the four were the legendary ancestors of the Jews, and that Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Joseph? Did these names originate as the names of places or groups of people that were later used as the names of individuals in the Torah, much like Noah's grandsons or Lot's children/grandchildren? Does their origin come from something else entirely?
