Yesterday, in my Biblical Hebrew class, we discussed the theory that Abraham actually did kill Isaac in Genesis 22. While pondering this theory I found this article and wrote a response to it:
I just went over this chapter in my Biblical Hebrew class in the last two months. My teacher mentioned this theory in our class yesterday, while emphasizing that he was not preaching doctrine, and the more I think about it the more I think it makes sense. Consider afterwards how Abraham leaves the mountain without Isaac, and how Abraham goes directly to Beersheba, not back to Horeb, where his wife is. In fact, his wife dies before he returns to Horeb. Why? In class we joked about how Sarah would kill Abraham if she learned that he had killed their precious son. Perhaps that isn’t completely off. Maybe Abraham didn’t return because he couldn’t bring himself to face her. Now, if Isaac was killed then he must have been raised from the dead, because we know his story later in the scriptures. I believe the strongest evidence that I know of for this is Hebrews 11:17 and 19. This story may be one of those plain and simple truths that was corrupted and lost to us. If this theory were true though, how do you think members of the Church – or anyone for that matter – would handle God commanding a father to sacrifice his son? If this theory is true, then I suggest that it requires a more spiritually mature perspective, of which many of us do not yet have. Our Heavenly Father feeds our spirits line upon line and precept upon precept, baby steps, so that we can fully digest truth and prepare ourselves for greater understanding. For this reason I believe that the full truth of this story is yet to be made known to us.
1 comment:
Who knows, but something that important, if correct probably would have had its own JST version. The lesson either way does teach us about God's sacrifice of his son and of Christ's willing obedience to his father.
Post a Comment