"What Would You Withhold from God?"
By Dr. Mickey Anders
First Christian Church
Pikeville, Kentucky
June 27, 1999
Like many of the wonderful stories in Genesis, today's scripture is one filled with meaning and possibilities. It's a passage that is difficult to understand and never fails to spark lots of discussion and many points of view. That was certainly the case as the Internet Discussion Group I belong to examined it. The listserv, called "Preaching the Revised Common Lectionary," involves about 800 ministers who are preaching from the same text each week. Every week, we share our ideas and interpretations of the lectionary texts. But this week, the volume of e-mail grew large as ministers from all over the world argued their respective points of view. The ideas and varied points of view were so inspiring that I found myself wishing that all of you could listen in to the electronic conversation. Then as I struggled to find a way to present this text, I decided that the best method might be to just let my preacher-friends speak for themselves. So today, I want to share excerpts from that lively discussion as a way of examining the text.
Linda Pope, of Apache, Oklahoma, set the stage for the text by asking
this question:
"Can you imagine the father of your child returning home from a trip
and announcing that God told him to kill the child? Being faithful
to God, the father then tells you that he attempted to kill the child,
but luckily God stopped him before he killed it. We would probably
call the pastor or the police, or at least insist the father get some mental
health counseling." Then she says, "I have a good Jewish friend who
calls this story the ultimate in child abuse!"
Then she explains the difficulty of the text by saying, "This story gets tricky. On one hand God tells Abraham that Isaac is essential to the promised future, and to listen and do as Sarah tells him. Then God tells Abraham to kill Sarah's only child. Abraham experiences God saying, in essence, 'Forget everything I have told you about the future, about Sarah, about Isaac. Listen to this one commandment; disregard everything else I have ever told you.'" Then she observes, "And this is interpreted as a demonstration of faith? What is wrong with this picture?"
Then Rev. Pope delves into the meaning of faith itself: "In our thinking, as influenced by the traditional histories and retellings of the biblical story, obedience means doing exactly what God says. The tradition says we should follow God's commands to the letter without questioning. That is faith, or so we are told. But," she argues, "this is not the understanding of obedience in the Old Testament stories. One only has to look at Abraham and Sarah to see this."
Then she points out that "Abraham is quick to argue with God for the lives of the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah. Moses does the same thing and convinces God to save the lives of the people. God does not demand obedience to every word we think we hear God say. In the bigger picture, God demands righteous living.
Then she points to a contemporary illustration: "I imagine that David Koresh in Waco believed very strongly that God told him to do what he was doing. Jim Jones in Guyana heard God tell him to give his followers poisoned Kool-Aid. They heard God telling them to kill their followers. And Abraham heard God telling him to kill Sarah's only child, the child who held the promise for the future of Israel." She concludes, "Blind obedience to the voice of God is not always a good thing."
From Bethesda, Maryland, Jack McKinney shares his personal struggle
with the kind of God presented in this text:
"I have followed with interest the discussion on Genesis 22 this week.
Many wonderful thoughts have been shared. I must confess, though,
that I have always avoided preaching this text. It disturbs me greatly
to think that God would require something so heinous as a loyalty test.
But I am not going to dodge it this time around. I am preaching a
sermon titled 'Which Voice Belongs to God?' My argument will be that
the voice Abraham perceives to be God in this text is not.
"Will this offend some of my members, and perhaps some of you?
Undoubtedly. But I cannot be true to my understanding of God otherwise.
Is this a 'low' view of inspiration, weak hermeneutics, and borderline
heresy? Perhaps. But I would rather wrestle with the text,
even (rail) against it, than dismiss it. Is my doctrine of God hopelessly
influenced by Enlightenment thinking? Probably. But in any age I
cannot conceive how you worship a God who devises such a test."
From North Dakota, Janet Weiblen considers the possibility that the voice Abraham heard wasn't God's at all. She describes the honest questioning that most contemporary people bring to the Bible when she says, "No longer do people say: 'That's simply what God did.' Now they are inclined to ask, 'But why; why would God do that?'
"What kind of God would ask us to sacrifice our only child? If this is some kind of a test, I'd fail. If the God depicted in this story is the kind of God we have, I'm not so certain I want to believe.
"Could it be that God didn't want Abraham to acquiesce to the command, but rather that God wanted Abraham to stand up and fight for one of his sons? He seems almost too quick at following directions, whether they be from Sarah or God. Could it be that Abraham - instead of being a man of great faith - was instead a forgetter of promises? Could it be that even God was surprised at Abraham's reaction to the request?"
She considers the possibility that the voice initially heard by Abraham isn't God's. Rather God is the one who acts to stop the destruction and reinforce the promise.
She goes on to suggest a method to determine if something is true. She says, "There's a test of authenticity, which some scholars use when they're dealing with Biblical stories: the story is taken as true IF the story is in character with the rest of the Biblical witness. It's not unlike testing the validity of a story we hear about someone else: if the story confirms what we know about the person, we usually accept it as true; if it conflicts with what we know, we hesitate to accept it because it raises doubts about what we already know. This story raises doubts for me; not only don't I like Abraham much after I've read the story, but it really raises issues for me about God. Nevertheless, while I don't like Abraham much, the story doesn't conflict with what I already know: Abraham is usually acquiescent to everyone, and more often than not, Abraham does whatever's necessary not to create problems for himself. That being the case, this story is not out-of-line with Abraham's usual behavior. On the other hand, this story relative to God conflicts with what I know of God. A gracious and merciful God wouldn't propose such a horrific test simply to learn something; the brutality isn't justified.
From Nashville, Tennessee, Fayetta Clark also believes the voice was
not the voice of God. She says, "One direction I have considered
is that the voice that Abraham hears and 'believes' is from God is the
voice of the 'religious tradition' of his time. The religious tradition
in the area in which he lived definitely believed that God required the
sacrifice of children.
"What Abraham finds as he makes the journey to the mountain and binds
Isaac on the altar is that the God of Israel, rather than desiring a sacrifice
of his son, requires a sacrifice of his heart, his desire, his will. What
he finds on the mountain is not the God he expected to find when he started
the journey, but rather a God of grace and understanding who does not call
us to sacrifice our children but rather calls us to sacrifice our ego's
desire for greatness. "
From Winter Haven, Florida, Mark Whittaker takes a much more conservative approach. He grew weary of those who were trying to explain away the text. He says, "Instead of trying to figure a way around the text I would like to accept it at face value. The test was a test of faith and Abraham had to decide whether or not he would follow God's orders."
Then as he examines the test he asks, "Is it a test if you know the answer? Is it a test if you have a cheat sheet and the freedom to copy it onto the test paper? God's order is not monstrous if Abe knew that nothing would ultimately be changed by the demand.... Abe knows that God will provide a son who will carry on his name and receive the promise. So it is not much of a deal to gather the wood and the knife and the donkey and go where God has instructed him to go and offer Isaac. The only thing he doesn't know is How it is going to work out."
From Miami, Larry Winebrenner explains that God was using a dramatic method to teach humankind a lesson once and for all times. "God hated the idea of child-sacrifice, but (He) realized that simply telling people not to do it wouldn't make much of an impression. God decided to tell them in a way that they would never forget, so he chose Abraham and conducted this test."
From Wichita Falls, Texas, Michael Harbour expressed his hesitancy to question God's actions. He said, "I am loathe to indict God, based on my Aristotelian leanings... If we take the story and remove the mystery of God from it, it is awful. But if the God we know is present, then we know that the outcome will be a blessing."
From Canada, Richard Fairchild acknowledges that the story is horrific,
but says that's the point of the story:
"The real twist to the story is that God does NOT require (the sacrifice
of Isaac). Something new about God is disclosed by the Abraham story.
The very thing that allows all the rest of us to say how horrible it is
for God to ask Abraham to sacrifice Isaac is the very point of the story.
So did God ask? Of course. Did God do it to be cruel to Abraham
and Isaac? No. Does it matter if Abraham and Isaac had a terrible
three or four days? Not really."
From Plainview, Texas, John Zolk recognizes that Abraham is a difficult
character-study, but in the end he was faithful.
"Just last week in scripture, (Abraham) tried to kill his only other
son at the orders of his wife. But he wavered. He did give
them food and water and, therefore, a chance to survive. It might
be said that although guilty of attempted murder, he was not very committed
in the carrying out of the deed. It would be a tough funeral, 'tried
to kill both sons.' But his greatness is that he did follow
God without hesitation or question.
"The sacrifice would not happen. God would not let it. But if we are to have eternal life, if we are to take up the cross, we have to be willing to sacrifice without question our old life for the new life."
From New Zealand, David Boyd finds in this passage the lesson that "our
commitment to God must come before everything else - even our family, and
our natural desire to avoid death.... We are asked to surrender everything
to God; all that is ours; all that we are; all that we possess. We
are to forget about ourselves completely and stand before God naked and
helpless, depending solely upon his grace. This is the mark of true
faith, and of true worship.
Could it be that the wonderful gift of the son that God had given to
Abraham and Sarah was now standing between them and God?
"Faith here is radical obedience to God, no matter what the cost... The question here is not whether child sacrifice is right or wrong, but whether or not Abraham is willing to do even that, which by all ethical standards he should NOT do, in obedience to God. Faith is unqualified trust in the God who will provide...
From Hillsboro, Oregon, Fred Kane says, "The story tells me that I shall have no other gods before God. Not the god of family. Not even the god of right ethical judgment, perhaps. I am led again and again to Kierkegaard. As a follower of Jesus I hear his call for my life as a call to infinite resignation. I have to be willing to resign it all away. Everything. All that I have. All that I am. All that is important to me. Even life itself. Even the life of another. And I know that is shocking. I know it sounds heartless and cold and cruel. But, there is a radicality to discipleship commanding me to single-hearted devotion. And that single-hearted devotion even demands that I may be called to suspend the ethical....
"God calls. What is my answer? God commands. What do I do?"