Binding of Isaac situational argument

[Keyeotee]

I was reading through a discussion on Yahoo Answers earlier and stumbled across a young woman’s post that sent me for a loop. A classic Atheistic move to make one stumble upon their words. The argument went as follows…

The God Morality Dilemma!

1. Does your morality come from God or the bible? Also you may asking where does their their morality come from but be prepared for a long, long answer that ends up as god or bible
   Either answer works

1.a Do you believe in the 10 commandments?
This only shows that they acknowledge that the new testament and old testament are related and can not be separated.

1. Can God Change his mind or rules for us to follow at any time, either now or in the future?
   The only answer to this can be yes!

1. Do you believe your Gods word absolute?
   The only answer they can give if they believe is “Yes”

1. Hypothetically if god ordered you to kill your own child, would you?

If they answer yes then they are an immoral person and have no humanity. If they answer
no then they do not really believe in god and treat religion as an authority figure head.
This also shows how the psyco religious really are

Maybe, due to a slight ignorance of the faith that I still continue to grow with, I couldn’t wrap my head around it. Also, her prerequisites that lead up to the question may very well be flawed. I do know that there was a case of a woman who attempted to kill her child because God told her. It was featured in that one anti-Catholic documentary on Netflix: “The God Who Wasn’t There”? Something along those lines. So, I suppose I’m asking for a two part answer to this young woman’s conundrum.

In the actual Binding of Isaac story, what was God’s intention of Abraham? Was it a test, for Abraham had a long road ahead of him and God wanted to be sure of him?

And, how would one refute what this woman said?

 

[Giants]

One problem here is that if God is omniscient, then no test would be necessary. God would already know that Abraham was obedient to him.

 

[devoutchristian]

One problem here is that if God is omniscient, then no test would be necessary.

Incorrect. God’s knowledge of human decisions is observational, not intuitive. As for the argument presented on Yahoo, the arguer commits the fallacy of begging the question by claiming as a premise that obedience to God could be immoral, a premise that would not be accepted by the intended recipients of his/her argument.

 

[meltzerboy]

One problem here is that if God is omniscient, then no test would be necessary. God would already know that Abraham was obedient to him.

The test is for the benefit of Abraham; it is not a test of G-d’s omniscience. It shows Abraham that his free will choice to trust and love G-d is even stronger than his compassion toward his own son.

 

[meltzerboy]

The test is for the benefit of Abraham; it is not a test of G-d’s omniscience. It shows Abraham that his free-will choice to trust and love G-d is even stronger than his compassion toward his own son.

 

[TomD123]

I’ll say a few things, try to answer the questions as best I can. my comments will be in bold

The test is for the benefit of Abraham; it is not a test of G-d’s omniscience.

One problem here is that if God is omniscient, then no test would be necessary. God would already know that Abraham was obedient to him.

**This isn’t for God to “find out.” Just like our life isn’t for God to “find out” God sometimes tests us in order that we may learn to follow Him and learn to cultivate virtue or at least accept God’s gift of virtue. **

In the actual Binding of Isaac story, what was God’s intention of Abraham? Was it a test, for Abraham had a long road ahead of him and God wanted to be sure of him?

And, how would one refute what this woman said?

1. I do not know of the exact answer as to interpreting the Abraham story. Probably some CAF apologists would have good answers. I think multiple interpretations are possible. I do think however two things are clear: a) God NEVER intended for Abraham to actually kill Isaac as God cannot change and b) This story was a way of confirming human sacrafice was wrong…as for the rest, ill defer to the experts and scholars

2. I would refute what the woman said as follows:
Why is the answer to #2 yes? That isn’t true and doesn’t make sense. God cannot change his mind. His will and intellect are eternal–outside of the realm of change and time. Now, the morality from natural law is built into our nature (e.g. not murdering, which includes our own kids obvious to any Catholic—we are the pro life ones I would remind this atheist) and God does not change the natural law. this could get into a detailed philosophical discussion on ethics but I’ll just say this wouldn’t happen because our nature doesn’t change. There is some morality however, which may be said to be temporary. For example, ceremonial laws of the Jews or Cannon Law now. Even though it may come from God or at least be inspired by God, they are regulatory rules for a certain people for a certain time. Cannon Law is Church Law, ie human law even though God does play a role in guiding the Church. The ceremonial laws of the OT Idk about for sure but they are not natural laws on morality. So God can change these laws.

**Ill give an analogy…imperfect as it is I think it captures a point. Parents ask that their kids always do certain things. They ask for respect and family unity and things like that. This is because of the nature of hte family, its a constant “rule.” Just like natural law with God. But parents do change other “rules” like bedtime. So it is with God who changes other rules. But for basic morality, no God does not change that nor could he unless he changed human nature. **

**Btw…her conclusion in #4 is dumb. God would not order us to kill a child…the Abraham story tells us this. We know this through revelation. We know more than the Jews of that time, we are Christians and God has shown us he would not order this. So we do not believe GOd would order this…The argument does not stand. Its like asking could God make himself no longer exist. **

 

[atheistgirl]

Incorrect. God’s knowledge of human decisions is observational, not intuitive.

So God didn’t know Mary would say yes?

God didn’t know Jesus (the man) would go through with the sacrifice?

Sarah x

 

[devoutchristian]

So God didn’t know Mary would say yes?

God sees all moments in time as one. Thus he always knew of the choices that humans would make, however, it is impossible to know by intuition how free will will be used.

God didn’t know Jesus (the man) would go through with the sacrifice?

Jesus was God. Thus he couldn’t have made a decision that was contrary to God’s will.

 

[Iron_Donkey]

God sees all moments in time as one. Thus he always knew of the choices that humans would make, however, it is impossible to know by intuition how free will will be used.

Do you have a source on that last bit (the intuition part)? It clashes a bit with what I’ve heard, unless I misunderstood you (it may be that it’s the phrase “by intuition” that’s throwing me off). In particular, it seems that God must know what decisions people would make in certain circumstances in order to know which circumstances it would be best to bring about. If He cannot, then while He would have perfect knowledge of the future, it would leave the molding of the future to some sort of divine trial and error.

See newadvent.org/cathen/06259a.htm.

But it is certainly true that God experience all of history and the future as a now. And it is also true that if He wanted Abraham to be the person who has made that choice, then He would have to bring those circumstances about. But if God simply wanted to know what Abraham would do in certain circumstances, without using circumstances to change Abraham at all, I do not think a test would be required.

To the OP: If God actually ordered you to kill your child (and never stopped the order) it would not be immoral to do so, and any atheist that argues otherwise does not know what we mean by God. Or perhaps to put it in the contrapositive - if it were immoral to kill your child, God would not order you do so (and go through with it). This is simple logic and is incontrovertible. For your atheist friends, focus on the second part - if it is truly immoral, God would not get you to do it.

As a practical matter though, if a person were to receive a command he thought came from God that that person thought was immoral, then that person would have to resolve that conflict and determine if the command truly came from God, or if he was incorrect about what he thought was moral, before proceeding.

If a particular person has voices in his head that he thinks belong to God and order him to do things that are certainly immoral, then the problem is that that person is insane, not that religion is wrong.

 

[St_Francis]

I have always seen God’s request to Abraham as a “type” of the Crucifixion: we are horrified by the story but yet, isn’t this what God did for us? We see God as terrible for asking this of Abraham, but at the same time, this is what humanity demanded from God, so we are “terrible.” And since we went through with it, unlike God, we are much more terrible than we think God is. And since we didn’t give God His Son, as He gave Abraham Isaac, we are even more terrible!

 

[InJesusItrust]

Well, God did sacrifice His Son for man, so now she is in a mess. Think about the kind of love God has to even sacrifice His Son for our sake–knowing full well that the majority of men would refuse the offer anyway.

God is no hypocrite when He tells us: “Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.”