R
Rutherford2
Guest
If God already knows Abraham’s heart, why would He test his heart again by telling him to sacrific Isaac?
- Status
S
Syttu
Guest
If i am not mistaken, it was for Abraham to test his faith in God.
po18guy
Well-known member
Because Abraham retained free will. God is HUGE on freedom. Abraham’s choice did not alter God; it did not reveal that there was something that God did not know.
It tested Abraham, and as it is with prayer, it changed Abraham forever after.
Look at the Archangel Raphael’s words to Tobit and Tobias in the 12th chapter of the Book of Tobit:
It tested Abraham, and as it is with prayer, it changed Abraham forever after.
Look at the Archangel Raphael’s words to Tobit and Tobias in the 12th chapter of the Book of Tobit:
T
TechieGuy
Guest
Abraham failed that test…
M
Mike_from_NJ
Guest
“And he said, 'Do not stretch out your hand against the lad, and do nothing to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me,”
The text clearly states God lacked knowledge until Abraham showed he was willing to kill his son.
Last edited:
T
Thom18
Guest
God already knew, but Abraham didn’t.
J
Justin_Mary
Guest
The text clearly says,
I think it is important to understand sacred texts are written to reveal God to a people in a way they can understand. One, or even several, instances of God not knowing doesn’t contradict the overall revaluation that God knows everything.
You have been tested, you will be tested. God already knows which you will pass & which you will not. All those tests will form you into the person God created you to be if you persevere.
.
M
Mike_from_NJ
Guest
Last edited:
J
Justin_Mary
Guest
I’m no doctor of the Church, but as I said earlier, this doesn’t contradict revelation that God knows all things. This is written in a way that we can understand. It is not by confessing with our lips that we may know true love, but in action.
It would not have been enough for our Lord & Saviour to be brought to the brink of death that we would know the depth of God’s love for us.
We have to read every bit of scripture in light of Jesus. Doing so we see this adaptation of this event is not about the limitations of the one who was, is, & always will be. But a foreshadow of the Love Our Father has for us.
Last edited:
M
Mike_from_NJ
Guest
It absolutely contradicts it. How does God not knowing something, allow for God to know all things?
As far as whether God’s command to Abraham is love. I will get to that, but I want to focus for now on what I think is a very open-and-shut case that God has admitted to a lack of knowledge.
Last edited:
J
Justin_Mary
Guest
When I read it I read, “You did not spare your son, by this I know that you love me. I knew that you love me, I’m only saying this so 5000 years from now people will understand that when I do not spare my son for you it means I love you.”
I’m saying it is Abraham who demonstrated love here. God demonstrates his love on the cross.
P
PennyinCanada
Guest
Throughout the Old Testament we see images of Christ who was to come. The telling of this story, it being written down for us and the generations before us, is to reveal how God was looking forward in time to when Christ would be the son, carrying the wood of the cross to Calvary.
Genesis 22:8
Abraham answered, “ God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together.
And God did provide the Lamb who John the baptist announced at the appointed time, “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world”.
Genesis 22:8
Abraham answered, “ God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together.
And God did provide the Lamb who John the baptist announced at the appointed time, “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world”.
M
Mike_from_NJ
Guest
Your reading adds to scripture, which believers are not supposed to do. God all-wise and all-powerful, would know what to say to convey to Abraham how good it is to be willing to sacrifice that which they love for God is a good thing without outright stating he wasn’t all-knowing. He could have said, “Stop! By your willingness to obey you have shown yourself that which is right and good, etc etc etc.” But because of what’s written, now believers have to make up things to try to convince non-believers that sometimes when God says X he really means not X.
Last edited:
W
Wesrock
Guest
It’s called exegesis, and who are you to tell faiths like Judaism and Catholicism what they’re “supposed” to do with their holy texts?Justin_Mary:
Your reading adds to scripture, which believers are not supposed to do.
M
Mike_from_NJ
Guest
I’m simply following the rules listed in the Bible:
As far as your understanding that “Now I know” really means “I’ve always known”, I have two questions:
If a group claims to follow a certain set of standards, it’s right to point out when it’s believed those standards are not being. Take practically any CAF thread regarding the origins of Mormonism. Catholics and other faiths will point out trouble spots with that faith, and the followers of Mormonism will try to disprove those claims. One doesn’t need to be a Mormon to point out issues with that faith, and the same goes for any belief system.
As far as your understanding that “Now I know” really means “I’ve always known”, I have two questions:
- How did you derive your exegesis to say that the passage means its exact opposite?
- If God wanted to convey that seeing Abraham be willing to kill his son let him know at that moment that Abraham loved God what words would he have used? Wouldn’t he have said “Now I know”?
Last edited:
W
Wesrock
Guest
The quote from Revelation is specific to Revelation. Deuteronomy to Deuteronomy. And it refers to altering the words of the text of a single book, not rejecting the tradition around it. Such an approach of Bible-alone is foreign to our faith and has been for thousands of years, and you’re coming off as someone who’s just being a smart aleck. That’s not our hermeunetic, and it’s not the approach to scripture Jews take either.
(1) The greater tradition and Biblical context.
(2) He could have if that was the case.
(1) The greater tradition and Biblical context.
(2) He could have if that was the case.
Last edited:
A
ATraveller
Guest
Not this again.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Ancient Hebrew isn’t modern English. “Now I know” isn’t a perfect translation.
A
ATraveller
Guest
It’s also not familiar to Lutherans or many in the Reformed traditions, who actually hold to Sola Scriptura. Martin Luther didn’t advocate for a blank slate approach or DIY personal interpretations.
J
Justin_Mary
Guest
No. Your reading adds to scripture if you read that God lacked knowledge of any kind at any time.
Like when God asks Adam, “where are you?” Or Cain, “where is your brother?” Or Sarai, “why do you laugh?” He doesn’t ask because he doesn’t know.
I’m applying what was revealed in the New Testament to the old. It’s the same God never changing.
T
Thom18
Guest
God already knew. He knows everything, that’s why He was able to reveal knowledge of future events (such as the Incarnation, or King Paul’s death) to His prophets.
- Status