Genesis 22:1-2 God Lies To Abraham.

[Miles]

.

The setup:

Genesis 22:1-2
22 After these things God decided to test Abraham’s faith. God said to him, “Abraham!”

And he said, “Yes!”

2 Then God said, “Take your son to the land of Moriah and kill your son there as a sacrifice for me. This must be Isaac, your only son, the one you love. Use him as a burnt offering on one of the mountains there. I will tell you which mountain.”

The lie:

God told Abraham he wanted him to sacrifice his son Isaac, which god actually didn't want at all. All god really wanted was for Abraham to honestly attempt to sacrifice Isaac so as to prove his faith. God knew that if Abraham was about to truly carry out the deed He would stop him before it could happen. And if Abraham never attempted to sacrifice his son, Isaac would live on anyway. So, either way god had no intention of letting Isaac die, although the lie he told Abraham led the old man to believe this was exactly what would happen if he was to prove his faith to god.

Now, one may pass this off as a white-lie or even a justified lie, but the way I look at it a lie is a lie is a lie. Why? Because when people claim god never lies they never qualify it, ever; therefore all lies are admissible. So just as the Bible shows that god makes mistakes it also shows he lies. So: Nobody's perfect, or are they?

.

[Shem Yoshi]

.

The setup:

Genesis 22:1-2
22 After these things God decided to test Abraham’s faith. God said to him, “Abraham!”

And he said, “Yes!”

2 Then God said, “Take your son to the land of Moriah and kill your son there as a sacrifice for me. This must be Isaac, your only son, the one you love. Use him as a burnt offering on one of the mountains there. I will tell you which mountain.”

The lie:

God told Abraham he wanted him to sacrifice his son Isaac, which god actually didn't want at all. All god really wanted was for Abraham to honestly attempt to sacrifice Isaac so as to prove his faith. God knew that if Abraham was about to truly carry out the deed He would stop him before it could happen. And if Abraham never attempted to sacrifice his son, Isaac would live on anyway. So, either way god had no intention of letting Isaac die, although the lie he told Abraham led the old man to believe this was exactly what would happen if he was to prove his faith to god.

Now, one may pass this off as a white-lie or even a justified lie, but the way I look at it a lie is a lie is a lie. Why? Because when people claim god never lies they never qualify it, ever; therefore all lies are admissible. So just as the Bible shows that god makes mistakes it also shows he lies. So: Nobody's perfect, or are they?

.

Hebrews 11 says this "17 By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had embraced the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, 18 even though God had said to him, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 19 Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead, and so in a manner of speaking he did receive Isaac back from death."

Notice what I have bolded... It seems that this is up for different interpretation then what is given in the OP.

[Miles]

.

The setup:

Genesis 22:1-2
22 After these things God decided to test Abraham’s faith. God said to him, “Abraham!”

And he said, “Yes!”

2 Then God said, “Take your son to the land of Moriah and kill your son there as a sacrifice for me. This must be Isaac, your only son, the one you love. Use him as a burnt offering on one of the mountains there. I will tell you which mountain.”

The lie:

God told Abraham he wanted him to sacrifice his son Isaac, which god actually didn't want at all. All god really wanted was for Abraham to honestly attempt to sacrifice Isaac so as to prove his faith. God knew that if Abraham was about to truly carry out the deed He would stop him before it could happen. And if Abraham never attempted to sacrifice his son, Isaac would live on anyway. So, either way god had no intention of letting Isaac die, although the lie he told Abraham led the old man to believe this was exactly what would happen if he was to prove his faith to god.

Now, one may pass this off as a white-lie or even a justified lie, but the way I look at it a lie is a lie is a lie. Why? Because when people claim god never lies they never qualify it, ever; therefore all lies are admissible. So just as the Bible shows that god makes mistakes it also shows he lies. So: Nobody's perfect, or are they?

.

Hebrews 11 says this "17 By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had embraced the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, 18 even though God had said to him, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 19 Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead, and so in a manner of speaking he did receive Isaac back from death."

Notice what I have bolded... It seems that this is up for different interpretation then what is given in the OP.

It certainly does put a kink in the story. It implies that god's test was no real test at all. God, being omniscient, would have known that Abraham had no reason to fear losing Isaac and would go along with god's the little drama as if it was a sincere test. Like, who's fooling whom here? In any case, god did tell a lie. Although, more and more it sounds as if the whole thing was a fictional event. All of which raises the question of which account, Genesis 22:1-2 or Hebrews 11:17, should one subscribe to? Personally, I'm picking the Genesis account, but only because it's the one I've grown up with.



.

[TRANSPONDER]

.

The setup:

Genesis 22:1-2
22 After these things God decided to test Abraham’s faith. God said to him, “Abraham!”

And he said, “Yes!”

2 Then God said, “Take your son to the land of Moriah and kill your son there as a sacrifice for me. This must be Isaac, your only son, the one you love. Use him as a burnt offering on one of the mountains there. I will tell you which mountain.”

The lie:

God told Abraham he wanted him to sacrifice his son Isaac, which god actually didn't want at all. All god really wanted was for Abraham to honestly attempt to sacrifice Isaac so as to prove his faith. God knew that if Abraham was about to truly carry out the deed He would stop him before it could happen. And if Abraham never attempted to sacrifice his son, Isaac would live on anyway. So, either way god had no intention of letting Isaac die, although the lie he told Abraham led the old man to believe this was exactly what would happen if he was to prove his faith to god.

Now, one may pass this off as a white-lie or even a justified lie, but the way I look at it a lie is a lie is a lie. Why? Because when people claim god never lies they never qualify it, ever; therefore all lies are admissible. So just as the Bible shows that god makes mistakes it also shows he lies. So: Nobody's perfect, or are they?

.

Hebrews 11 says this "17 By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had embraced the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, 18 even though God had said to him, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 19 Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead, and so in a manner of speaking he did receive Isaac back from death."

Notice what I have bolded... It seems that this is up for different interpretation then what is given in the OP.

It certainly does put a kink in the story. It implies that god's test was no real test at all. God, being omniscient, would have known that Abraham had no reason to fear losing Isaac and would go along with god's the little drama as if it was a sincere test. Like, who's fooling whom here? In any case, god did tell a lie. Although, more and more it sounds as if the whole thing was a fictional event. All of which raises the question of which account, Genesis 22:1-2 or Hebrews 11:17, should one subscribe to? Personally, I'm picking the Genesis account, but only because it's the one I've grown up with.



.

I should like to see the whole context of that (Paul writing to the 'Hebrews'?) but changing his mind about killing someone is hardly equivalent to resurrection. If it was, the Gospel resurrections (Son of Nain, Jairus' daughter, Lazarus and Jesus) would be no more than "Meh...so what?"

[brunumb]

Does the story of Abraham and Isaac have a message for the people?
Maybe.

"Listen up people. God told Abraham to kill his son. Even though it would have been the hardest thing on earth for him to do, Abraham obeyed and was prepared to do whatever God asked of him. As we priests are God's spokesmen here on earth, you should also do whatever we ask you to do in his name, no matter how hard you might find it. Now, we are getting hungry and God says you should bring us lunch."

[1213]

....

God told Abraham he wanted him to sacrifice his son Isaac, which god actually didn't want at all....
...

God doesn't say in the Bible that He wants... ...He says "take your son...

There really is no lie in that.

[Tcg]

....

God told Abraham he wanted him to sacrifice his son Isaac, which god actually didn't want at all....
...

God doesn't say in the Bible that He wants... ...He says "take your son...

According to the story, God said "Take your son to the land of Moriah and kill your son there as a sacrifice for me."

The author couldn't make it any clearer.


Tcg

[1213]

....

God told Abraham he wanted him to sacrifice his son Isaac, which god actually didn't want at all....
...

God doesn't say in the Bible that He wants... ...He says "take your son...

According to the story, God said "Take your son to the land of Moriah and kill your son there as a sacrifice for me."

The author couldn't make it any clearer.


Tcg

If the author would have wanted to say "God wants him to sacrifice", he would have said so, instead of "take your son...". They are not necessary the same. Also, even if we would accept it means God wants, how can you say God didn't want at all? Preventing it to happen doesn't necessary mean God didn't want it at all.

Sorry, I think you are reading to much of your own to the story.

[brunumb]

....

God told Abraham he wanted him to sacrifice his son Isaac, which god actually didn't want at all....
...

God doesn't say in the Bible that He wants... ...He says "take your son...

According to the story, God said "Take your son to the land of Moriah and kill your son there as a sacrifice for me."

The author couldn't make it any clearer.


Tcg

If the author would have wanted to say "God wants him to sacrifice", he would have said so, instead of "take your son...". They are not necessary the same. Also, even if we would accept it means God wants, how can you say God didn't want at all? Preventing it to happen doesn't necessary mean God didn't want it at all.

Sorry, I think you are reading to much of your own to the story.

What part of "kill your son there as a sacrifice for me" is not clear to you? Good grief.

[Tcg]

....

God told Abraham he wanted him to sacrifice his son Isaac, which god actually didn't want at all....
...

God doesn't say in the Bible that He wants... ...He says "take your son...

According to the story, God said "Take your son to the land of Moriah and kill your son there as a sacrifice for me."

The author couldn't make it any clearer.


Tcg

If the author would have wanted to say "God wants him to sacrifice", he would have said so, instead of "take your son...". They are not necessary the same. Also, even if we would accept it means God wants, how can you say God didn't want at all? Preventing it to happen doesn't necessary mean God didn't want it at all.

Sorry, I think you are reading to much of your own to the story.

Reading into the story? I simply quoted from the story that which you cut out. Let's see, who is trying to change the story? One who cuts it apart or one who quotes the full phrase?


Tcg