To deceive is to say something that isn’t true. God telling Abraham to perform an action is in
euhhh, probably not the perfect comparison. I’m sure that Isaac understood.
One of the Jewish interpretations of this story (not necessarily the major interpretation) is that Abraham actually FAILED G-d’s test by blindly obeying G-d and not arguing with Him. What G-d told Abraham to do was contrary to moral behavior and Abraham should have debated G-d about that. Thus the lesson of the story, as told by G-d, is that blind obedience to ANY authority is dangerous. After this incident, G-d did not speak to Abraham directly. OTOH, it is also believed in Judaism that we should act or not act not merely because our reason tells us it is the right or wrong thing to do, but rather because G-d tells us to. As you can see, Judaism believes that good questions and debates are more important than answers.
I leanred that he did pass the test (as one of his ten tests), but that because he didn’t debate this with Gd he wasn’t as great as Moshe Rabeinu.
You may be right, Katrin. Let’s just say Abraham didn’t score as well as Moses and that neither was perfect.
Then, we have 2 Chron 18:21: “I will go and be a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all his prophets,’ he said. ‘You will succeed in enticing him,’ said the LORD.” This is in response to God’s question to the spirits in Heaven about who will go and cause the King of Israel to fall in battle, if I recall correctly.
Judaism interprets Isaiah quite literally: that is, evil as well as good is created by G-d but that does not mean that G-d wishes evil to exist. Mankind must play its role in fighting against evil.
Exactly! To both of those posts. When God saw Abraham was going to actually do it, that was all He needed, and He counted it as being done. Abraham showed that he trusted God enough to not put anything or anyone before God, not even his own son, and that test is tied into God Himself not with holding **His **only Son and allowing Jesus to die for our sins.
Abraham was willing to sacrifice his son for God so God was willing to sacrifice His Son for mankind, Jesus came from the line of Abraham. That’s what that test was about.That’s a Christian interpretation. One of the Jewish interpretations is that since G-d explicitly told Abraham NOT to sacrifice his son, this meant that G-d does not want human sacrifices or vicarious atonement for sins on His behalf, which was practiced by Pagans. What He wants is individual atonement for sins but not in the form of intentional self-destruction.Exactly! To both of those posts. When God saw Abraham was going to actually do it, that was all He needed, and He counted it as being done. Abraham showed that he trusted God enough to not put anything or anyone before God, not even his own son, and that test is tied into God Himself not with holding **His **only Son and allowing Jesus to die for our sins.
I’m truly curious. The Jewish faith fascinates me.
That ancient sacrifice was for unintentional sins only, not intentional sins. Further, not all Jews were even able to be present at the Temple. The poorer ones were also unable to offer their own animal blood sacrifices but used such things as flour instead. Finally, and perhaps most important, the Temple sacrifice was but a tangible manifestation of prayer without which it would be null and void, while prayer was always, in ancient Israel as today, the principal means of atonement toward G-d. And forgiveness from one’s fellow man had to be sought on a personal basis by means of corrective deeds as well as words.
The point here is that an animal is given to G-d as a thanksgiving offering in lieu of a human being. But the ram does not serve as a sin offering to wipe away the sins committed by Abraham or any other human when the ram’s horn is sounded during the High Holy Days of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. On the contrary, it is a reminder that we and we alone as human beings are responsible for our own atonement. Why should this be so? Individual atonement is a means of drawing closer to G-d by not relying on others to change our sinful behavior for us. We must make the effort ourselves, even though we may not be entirely successful. When a Tzadik (holy man) atones for the people, he is not absolving them of their sins by his own suffering but rather becoming more sensitive to and understanding of their needs and thus being better able to communicate these needs to G-d. Further, no holy man or prophet, including Moses himself, was asked by G-d to die for the sins of His people, even though Moses begged G-d to do so, since no lesson would therefore be learned by such action. Therefore, based on Torah Law, Judaism states that G-d does not want substitutionary or vicarious atonement but instead desires that we ourselves strive to improve our lives through both prayer and deed.