The Binding of Isaac: Part 1
I was in a feisty, combative mood. The scotch and wine I had shared with some close pastor friends was probably fueling my desire for a theological throwdown. I meet regularly with a small group of pastors that I count as good friends. Our time together is often spent checking in on each other, creating space for us all to share about the challenges and joys of pastoral ministry. This group has been a lifeline for me.
And yet, at other times, we pastors just can't seem to help ourselves. Our meetings, on occasion, function as a sort of theological royal rumble. Throw out experimental ideas and takes on Scripture or the life of faith, and then duke it out. Pick ideas apart, expose their weaknesses, and see what sticks and what doesn't. I love it.
On this evening I was itching to get in the ring and wrestle things out. I had a bee in my bonnet. You see, the week prior, a person who used to attend Nexus Church, but had recently lost their faith and left our community, posted some thoughts to social media that made me cringe.
"I can't believe I used to believe in a God who ordered Abraham to kill his own son. I am embarrassed to think I used to see this story as an example of outstanding faith rather than evidence of a cruel and bloodthirsty God (which I no longer believe in). Funny isn't it how preachers always avoid this story. I suppose if they didn't avoid it, they might come to the same conclusion I did. This imaginary, bloodthirsty God isn't worth believing in."
Ouch! There was a double sting in seeing this person's post. Most vexing to me was that I HAD preached on this story, within the last year in fact (and I think I did a pretty good job of it, all things considered). Second, though, it stung because this person wasn't entirely wrong. Pastors/preachers DO avoid this story. And if we didn't, maybe we WOULD come to the same conclusion as this person. The story of God asking Abraham to sacrifice his own son in cold blood is an incredibly disturbing story. As Leon R. Kass writes, "No story in Genesis is as terrible, as powerful, as mysterious, as elusive as this one. It defies easy and confident interpretations, and…continues to baffle me."
Baffle indeed. It can be easy for Christians to ignore, or even just spiritualize, some of the more disturbing elements of the Old Testament. "Are you willing to give up the thing that matters most to you for God?" a preacher might ask, as though this story preaches in the same way as Jesus asking a rich young ruler to give up his wealth. This Abraham story doesn't bend so easily, however, to spiritualizing. In fact, this episode in Genesis is affirmed as exemplary in the New Testament. In Hebrews 11, the writer mentions the story of Abraham being willing to kill Isaac as a testament to faith. Really? What do you do with that?
The reality is that if any of us heard a voice asking us to kill our child, we would seriously question that voice and maybe even check ourselves into some mental health institution (or at least I hope we would). Today, we might applaud a person willing to give up all their wealth for God. But there is no way we would applaud the person who would claim willingness to kill their child for God.
We can suppose it unfair to impose our cultural realities and values onto a story that comes to us from a very different time and place. Fair enough, "presentism" is without question a lens too many people bring to Scripture. Moreover, I happen to think it is the height of arrogance to insist characters from history behave by our set of rules and standards. Even still, this isn't a question primarily about human action, but divine action. Regardless of how Abraham performs within the story, the harder question is wrestling with whether God ordered someone to kill their child? And even if this God stopped Abraham in the knick of time, what kind of cruel experiment is it to test someone's faith by way of their willingness to murder or not?
Something is amiss here. And so, with a glass of midnight wine in my hand, I lobbed these hard questions at this consortium of pastors I call friends. "How can any of you defend this story? Give me your best interpretation. If someone were to ask you how you can believe in a God who would employ this cruel and unusual test of faith, what would you say?" Debate and bedlam ensued, each pastor vigorously trying to work out how to explain this story, none of us content with our own answers by the end of the evening.
So, what do we do with this story? Are we left either trying to ignore it, or worse, trying to defend and rationalize how being willing to murder is a sign of faith?
For Christmas last year, a mentor of mine gifted me a book that I only got around to reading recently. Abraham's Silence: The Binding of Isaac, the Suffering of Job, and How to Talk Back to God by J. Richard Middleton. This book is remarkable and has totally upended the way I see both the story in question, but also the entire book of Job. Walter Brueggemann calls the book "interpretation at its most daring and at its best." Rabbi Irving Greenburg says the book is "a masterpiece of once-in-a-generation quality." That is some lofty praise, and I certainly agree.
And so, over the next little while, I want to share some of the daring and bold insights this book provides on some of the most uncomfortable stories of the Old Testament. Rather than tackle this story head-on, Middleton builds a case, drawing from different sections of the Old Testament. The book is divided into three sections: he begins by having us examine the Psalms and in particular, the Psalms of lament. Next, he unpacks the book of Job. Only after showcasing the precedents set in the Psalms and Job, does he address the story of Abraham and Isaac head-on. So, if you have ever wondered what to make of the story of Abraham and Isaac, I invite you to follow along over the next week.
The artwork is by Caravaggio, Sacrifice of Isaac, 1602