The Implications of Abraham’s Test of Faith…

[grannymh]

You’re just joining in. That’s what started this thread to begin with.

It continues on this page and eventually comes to here…which is the first page of this thread we’re in right now.

By the way, I think you’re making the answer more complicated than it needs to be.

Did Abraham actually kill Isaac: Yes or No?

As one coming from the thread “Conference on Evolution” I just noticed that some facts are missing. At least, I haven’t spotted them recently.

These questions need to be asked – What was the relationship between Abraham and God? and What were the plans that God had for Abraham? My guess is that the answers will separate Abraham from the rest of the Jewish population and by extension separate him from us. Therefore, many of the comments so far are irrelevant to the facts.

Blessings,
granny

Human life is meant for eternal life.

 

[Peter_Dawson]

You do realize that your belief is an aberration from traditional Catholic theology, correct?

Does the Magisterium agree with your personal opinion?

Like the Magisterium of the Catholic Church and the witness of the Communion of Saints over the last 2,000 years?

I agree that this is a fore-shadowing of Christ. But you seem to be innovative in your approach, perhaps watering down certain elements to make it more palatable to your own personal opinions…

We agree. But you do need to remember that Galatians 3:8 says…

Is this fact or fiction?

You also need to remember that Galatians 3:14 says…

Is this fact or fiction?

You also need to remember that Galatians 3:16 says…

Is this fact or fiction?

Indeed, Galatians 3:29 says, “If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”

Is this fact or fiction?

In fact, now that I think of it, let’s take a look at Hebrews 11, the parts concerning Abraham…

Is this fact or fiction?

Look at the Book of James…

Is this fact or fiction?

We could come back to Hebrews 11…

There’s nothing within these pages that suggest this is a fictional account and a lot to suggest these promises were based on real events.

I’m sorry Peter Dawson, but your view regarding Abraham is an innovative one that bears little resemblance to traditional Catholic thoughts concerning Abraham. I would almost argue that it is heretical. I will admit that there is most likely some figurative language being used, but undermining the real event of Abraham’s test of faith does serious damage to the credibility of our common heritage in Abraham.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, one post says I’m “Satan” and you call me “innovative.”

Just tell me, Did a serpent talk to Eve? Did God at first try to match-up Adam with animals before He finally thought of “Woman”?

Or, are we looking at a Dr.-Seuss-level story inspired to teach theology.

It’s all the same issue, so please take a stand on this, and then I will go to the trouble of responding to your large post above.

 

[Camron]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, one post says I’m “Satan” and you call me “innovative.”

I think “innovative” is much more polite than “Satan”, yeah, yeah, yeah?

Just tell me, Did a serpent talk to Eve? Did God at first try to match-up Adam with animals before He finally thought of “Woman”?

This has nothing to do with the implications of Abraham’s test of faith. Please try to keep this on topic-- just like all my questions noted above were on topic.

Or, are we looking at a Dr.-Seuss-level story inspired to teach theology.

Not when it comes to Abraham, certainly not.

Now please address why Galatians 3 and Hebrews 11 are not considered references to actual events.

Thanks.

It’s all the same issue, so please take a stand on this, and then I will go to the trouble of responding to your large post above.

I thought I was fairly clear. The length of the posts was mostly due to the New Testament passages of the Bible that you seem to be conveniently ignoring in order to portray the passages concerning Abraham into nothing more than a Dr. Seuss level story inspired to teach theology.

I’m sorry but Tradition trumps innovation on almost all matters. The only area that I can see some compromise between innovation and tradition is when a new scientific discovery challenges a “pious tradition” that is not required to be taught for the sake of our salvation (such as the heliocentric theory, or the theory of evolution for example).

If you’re saying that the Story of Abraham within the Bible actually contains elements of a “pious tradition” that need not be true (overlapped onto a real person), then please explain your position more carefully. I’m willing to listen, because I do think there could be allegorical elements in the story of Abraham. But I highly doubt that comparing the earliest parts of the Bible to a Dr. Seuss level story is going to convince me of anything.

 

[Camron]

As one coming from the thread “Conference on Evolution” I just noticed that some facts are missing. At least, I haven’t spotted them recently.

These questions need to be asked – What was the relationship between Abraham and God? and What were the plans that God had for Abraham? My guess is that the answers will separate Abraham from the rest of the Jewish population and by extension separate him from us. Therefore, many of the comments so far are irrelevant to the facts.

Blessings,
granny

Human life is meant for eternal life.

I’ll bite.

What was the relationship between Abraham and God?

What were the plans that God had for Abraham?

I thought I had actually partially addressed these questions above to be honest (cf., Galatians 3 and Hebrews 11 do address these questions) .

But I’d be interested in hearing more.

 

[Peter_Dawson]

This has nothing to do with the implications of Abraham’s test of faith. Please try to keep this on topic-- just like all my questions noted above were on topic.

Many of the folks I talk to on this subject in this website call me “heretic,” “damned” and “Satan,” while they dishonestly failed to admit that they themselves do not believe that a lady cloned from a guy’s rib talked to a talking serpent, after God tried to match the guy up with the animals in a kind of dull-witted way, and then finally got the idea of “Woman” (instead of having the concept in His mind for all eternity), while all involved remain invulnerable, like superman, to mosquitoes, bacteria and viruses, as well as bees, wasps and tapeworms

For whatever reason, the same folks embarass the faith by insisting that incest was occurring between these cartoon-like characters.

You now look like one of those dishonest people.

Are you dishonest? Why not prove it, one way or the other?

If you are one of those dishonest people, then I don’t need to convince you of anything – you already deny the perfect historicity of Scripture.

Come on. Be brave. Commit yourself. I answered your questions about what I believe in the Sacrifice of Isaac story. Surely you can spend a few moments embarrassing yourself with some truth, either way.

Clearly, if you say that you do believe in talking serpents, a lot of people here will be shocked.

Clearly, if you say that you deny the historicity of parts, because you pick and choose what’s inerrant like vegetables from an hors-d’ouvres tray, a lot of people here will call you a “hypocrite” for calling me “innovative” but not yourself.

Be brave. It’s called “witnessing.”

I’m not being nasty, here. I did what I dare you to do, here. I say that the cartoon-like world portrayed in Genesis 2 to 4 is a fictional myth which teaches infallible theology. I believe, and say, that God expects Catholics to look at it, and realize, “HEY! THIS IS A MYTH TEACHING THEOLOGY. THIS ISN’T HISTORY. IF IT’S A DR.-SEUSS-LIKE MYTH, THEN THE QUESTION OF INCESTUOUS SEX DOES NOT EVEN ARISE, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE LIKE HAVING A SERIOUS DISCUSSION RESPECTING WHETHER THE CAT-IN-THE-HAT HAD SEX.”

 

[Camron]

Many of the folks I talk to on this subject in this website call me “heretic,” “damned” and “Satan,” while they dishonestly failed to admit that they themselves do not believe that a lady cloned from a guy’s rib talked to a talking serpent, after God tried to match the guy up with the animals in a kind of dull-witted way, and then finally got the idea of “Woman” (instead of having the concept in His mind for all eternity), while all involved remain invulnerable, like superman, to mosquitoes, bacteria and viruses, as well as bees, wasps and tapeworms

For whatever reason, the same folks embarass the faith by insisting that incest was occurring between these cartoon-like characters.

You now look like one of those dishonest people.

Are you dishonest? Why not prove it, one way or the other?

If you are one of those dishonest people, then I don’t need to convince you of anything – you already deny the perfect historicity of Scripture.

Come on. Be brave. Commit yourself. I answered your questions about what I believe in the Sacrifice of Isaac story. Surely you can spend a few moments embarrassing yourself with some truth, either way.

Clearly, if you say that you do believe in talking serpents, a lot of people here will be shocked.

Clearly, if you say that you deny the historicity of parts, because you pick and choose what’s inerrant like vegetables from an hors-d’ouvres tray, a lot of people here will call you a “hypocrite” for calling me “innovative” but not yourself.

Be brave. It’s called “witnessing.”

I’m not being nasty, here. I did what I dare you to do, here. I say that the cartoon-like world portrayed in Genesis 2 to 4 is a fictional myth which teaches infallible theology. I believe, and say, that God expects Catholics to look at it, and realize, “HEY! THIS IS A MYTH TEACHING THEOLOGY. THIS ISN’T HISTORY. IF IT’S A DR.-SEUSS-LIKE MYTH, THEN THE QUESTION OF INCESTUOUS SEX DOES NOT EVEN ARISE, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE LIKE HAVING A SERIOUS DISCUSSION RESPECTING WHETHER THE CAT-IN-THE-HAT HAD SEX.”

Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

Now could you please address why Galatians 3 and Hebrews 11 are not considered references to actual events?

Thanks.

 

[Peter_Dawson]

Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

Now could you please address why Galatians 3 and Hebrews 11 are not considered references to actual events?

Thanks.

No, friend. Not until you answer my question about the ridiculous components of the Adam and Eve story previously mentioned.

Because you are not talking eye-to-eye.

You are behaving very reserved. But “reserved” =/= " truth."

Did Eve really talk to a serpent? Did God really try to match Adam up with Animals before He made Eve?

 

[Camron]

No, friend. Not until you answer my question about the ridiculous components of the Adam and Eve story previously mentioned.

Because you are not talking eye-to-eye.

You are behaving very reserved. But “reserved” =/= " truth."

Did Eve really talk to a serpent? Did God really try to match Adam up with Animals before He made Eve?

You’re just stalling now.

In regards to the implications of “Abraham’s Test of Faith”, why are Galatians 3 and Hebrews 11 not considered references to actual events?

You have read Galatians 3 and Hebrews 11 before, right?

 

[grannymh]

I’m not being nasty, here. I did what I dare you to do, here. I say that the cartoon-like world portrayed in Genesis 2 to 4 is a fictional myth which teaches infallible theology. I believe, and say, that God expects Catholics to look at it, and realize, “HEY! THIS IS A MYTH TEACHING THEOLOGY. THIS ISN’T HISTORY. IF IT’S A DR.-SEUSS-LIKE MYTH, THEN THE QUESTION OF INCESTUOUS SEX DOES NOT EVEN ARISE, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE LIKE HAVING A SERIOUS DISCUSSION RESPECTING WHETHER THE CAT-IN-THE-HAT HAD SEX.”

And what is the “infallible theology” you are referring to?

 

[Peter_Dawson]

You’re just stalling now.

In regards to the implications of “Abraham’s Test of Faith”, why are Galatians 3 and Hebrews 11 not considered references to actual events?

You have read Galatians 3 and Hebrews 11 before, right?

See? You are really exactly like Toby. You can’t answer a simple, simple question, directly relevant to the issue – a kind of stake through the heart of the vampire – and would rather extemporize endlessly on other things without getting to the real point.

You can see an example of the same kind of refusal to pick one of two choices here…

27 They returned once more to Jerusalem. As he was walking in the temple area, the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders approached him
28 and said to him, “By what authority are you doing these things? Or who gave you this authority to do them?”
29 Jesus said to them, “I shall ask you one question. Answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things.
30 Was John’s baptism of heavenly or of human origin? Answer me.”
31 They discussed this among themselves and said, “If we say, ‘Of heavenly origin,’ he will say, ‘(Then) why did you not believe him?’
32 But shall we say, ‘Of human origin’?”–they feared the crowd, for they all thought John really was a prophet.
33 So they said to Jesus in reply, “We do not know.” Then Jesus said to them, “Neither shall I tell you by what authority I do these things.” Mark 11:27-33.

 

[Camron]

See? You are really exactly like Toby. You can’t answer a simple, simple question, directly relevant to the issue – a kind of stake through the heart of the vampire – and would rather extemporize endlessly on other things without getting to the real point.

You can see an example of the same kind of refusal to pick one of two choices here…

27 They returned once more to Jerusalem. As he was walking in the temple area, the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders approached him
28 and said to him, “By what authority are you doing these things? Or who gave you this authority to do them?”
29 Jesus said to them, “I shall ask you one question. Answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things.
30 Was John’s baptism of heavenly or of human origin? Answer me.”
31 They discussed this among themselves and said, “If we say, ‘Of heavenly origin,’ he will say, ‘(Then) why did you not believe him?’
32 But shall we say, ‘Of human origin’?”–they feared the crowd, for they all thought John really was a prophet.
33 So they said to Jesus in reply, “We do not know.” Then Jesus said to them, “Neither shall I tell you by what authority I do these things.” Mark 11:27-33.

You’re trying to trick me into giving away something. It won’t work.

I’ve already given my own views on earlier parts of Genesis – in detail too (answering all questions from Post #295). You can read it when you have about an hour or so to do so.

But we’re talking about The Implications of Abraham’s Test of Faith, aren’t we?

I’ve been very clear about this too. So if you are incapable or unwilling to actually answer why Galatians 3 and Hebrews 11 are not considered references to actual events then I think it’s time you just gave up already.

 

[Camron]

And what is the “infallible theology” you are referring to?

That is a very good question!

 

[grannymh]

That is a very good question!

BTW I haven’t forgotten that I owe you an answer to your post 44. I have 65 1/2 excuses for my procrastination.

 

[Peter_Dawson]

And what is the “infallible theology” you are referring to?

The infallible theology taught by the Adam and Eve story is this…

Mankind is “fallen.” We will foul-up every single moral decision, by making the evil choice. Do you see what hypothetical Eve does? Well, without grace, that’s us!

Why did I pick on Eve there? Am I sexist?

No. Eve is us, in the Adam and Eve hypothetical.

Adam is a type, or symbol, of Christ.

That’s why He seems to takes the fruit from Eve like an idiot – that’s Christ voluntarily taking our sins upon His Own back, in the form of taking the punishment for our sins upon His Own back, to pay the price for saving grace exacted by God’s Own perfect justice.

When God imposes punishment for sin at the end of the hypothetical, because Adam symbolizes Christ in the story God imposes on Adam the Passion of Christ as his punishment! –

** 17 To the man he said: "Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree of which I had forbidden you to eat, “Cursed be the ground because of you! In toil shall you eat its yield all the days of your life.
18 Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to you ** – there’s the crown of thorns – , as you eat of the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your face – there’s the special sweat of Christ in Gethsemane, but to what end? – ** shall you get bread to eat ** – the Eucharistic bread! – **Until you return to the ground, from which you were taken; For you are dirt, and to dirt you shall return.” ** – Jesus’ burial. ** Genesis 3:17-19. **

There is your infallible theology.

 

[Camron]

The infallible theology taught by the Adam and Eve story is this…

Mankind is “fallen.” We will foul-up every single moral decision, by making the evil choice. Do you see what hypothetical Eve does? Well, without grace, that’s us!

Why did I pick on Eve there? Am I sexist?

No. Eve is us, in the Adam and Eve hypothetical.

Adam is a type, or symbol, of Christ.

That’s why He seems to takes the fruit from Eve like an idiot – that’s Christ voluntarily taking our sins upon His Own back, in the form of taking the punishment for our sins upon His Own back, to pay the price for saving grace exacted by God’s Own perfect justice.

When God imposes punishment for sin at the end of the hypothetical, because Adam symbolizes Christ in the story God imposes on Adam the Passion of Christ as his punishment! –

** 17 To the man he said: "Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree of which I had forbidden you to eat, “Cursed be the ground because of you! In toil shall you eat its yield all the days of your life.
18 Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to you ** – there’s the crown of thorns – , as you eat of the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your face – there’s the special sweat of Christ in Gethsemane, but to what end? – ** shall you get bread to eat ** – the Eucharistic bread! – **Until you return to the ground, from which you were taken; For you are dirt, and to dirt you shall return.” ** – Jesus’ burial. ** Genesis 3:17-19. **

There is your infallible theology.

I think there’s a few errors in your reasoning here.

You seem to be portraying Adam and Eve as fictional people. But they were real people, even if the story is coloured by pre-ancient language and metaphors. Besides that, you have not clearly demonstrated why the account of Abraham should be read in the same light as books like Tobit, Esther, and Jonah for example.

Many will not argue with you about the story of Adam and Eve using beautiful metaphors and story elements from pre-existing stories that preceeded the rise of the Hebrews. I know I won’t.

But Abraham seems to set the marker where the Hebrews depart from the ancients and I think you are doing a serious error in treating these stories as being no different in substance than various Cat in the Hat books. There nothing within traditional Catholic thought, either in the Bible or Tradition, which suggests this is necessary.

I still feel that you are simply over-allegorizing various elements to accomodate your own personal distaste for the story as presented in the Bible.

 

[grannymh]

I’ll bite.

“My, what big teeth you have,” said Little Red Riding Hood.

:sad_yes: sorry, Camron, I couldn’t resist.

What was the relationship between Abraham and God?

What were the plans that God had for Abraham?

I thought I had actually partially addressed these questions above to be honest (cf., Galatians 3 and Hebrews 11 do address these questions) .

But I’d be interested in hearing more.

Some of the posters who previously dealt with this topic took it personally and tried to imagine what would happen if they had been asked by God to sacrifice their child. Not sure how to describe the feelings which found their way to the keyboard. Do know I don’t want to see them return.

My dilemma was based on the old advice to meditate on Scripture by placing oneself in the picture.

The only way out would be to meditate on God’s interactions with Abraham, thus, my questions. And yes, you did answer them with Scripture quotes. Then I got stuck on the word “implications” in the topic. This is how I finally dealt with it all.

Abraham is one of the all-time greats of Scripture. It is his loving and obedient relationship with God that stands out. It so reminded me of the relationship between God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ, True God and True Man. From there it was easy to go to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. There Christ is both Priest and Victim. There Jesus Christ is truly present under the signs of bread and wine. Actually, when one looks at the bread and wine, it is, in a way, a test of faith. And the implications? Answered by that song – Taste and see the goodness of the Lord…

Blessings,
granny

John 3: 16 & 17

 

[Camron]

“My, what big teeth you have,” said Little Red Riding Hood.

:sad_yes: sorry, Camron, I couldn’t resist.

Some of the posters who previously dealt with this topic took it personally and tried to imagine what would happen if they had been asked by God to sacrifice their child. Not sure how to describe the feelings which found their way to the keyboard. Do know I don’t want to see them return.

My dilemma was based on the old advice to meditate on Scripture by placing oneself in the picture.

The only way out would be to meditate on God’s interactions with Abraham, thus, my questions. And yes, you did answer them with Scripture quotes. Then I got stuck on the word “implications” in the topic. This is how I finally dealt with it all.

Abraham is one of the all-time greats of Scripture. It is his loving and obedient relationship with God that stands out. It so reminded me of the relationship between God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ, True God and True Man. From there it was easy to go to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. There Christ is both Priest and Victim. There Jesus Christ is truly present under the signs of bread and wine. Actually, when one looks at the bread and wine, it is, in a way, a test of faith. And the implications? Answered by that song – Taste and see the goodness of the Lord…

Blessings,
granny

John 3: 16 & 17

Once bitten, twice shy…

Good answer. Thank you.

BTW, if we’re looking for the relationship between our Heavenly Father and His Heavenly Son should we also look for a test of faith for Isaac too? It’s never really discussed that faith that he had placed in his father Abraham. But if we’re looking for analogies perhaps we could look at Isaac’s faith in his father too and see if there is any analogy between Isaac’s faith and Jesus’s faith.

 

[ryanoneil]

If I understand this correctly, it seems to be contended that Abraham’s test of faith could be equated with the capricious whims of an evil deity, therefore the Old Testament Bible is portraying God as resembling nothing like the God presented within Christianity. I disagree with this contention and would like to discuss it further if possible

I apologize for not reading the entire thread. I’m no scholar and this is my opinion. The ancient people believed God/gods authored everything so if someone did something it was meant to be. God didn’t expect Abraham to perform human sacrifice, but Abraham thought he was supposed to do what his neighbors were doing. In that sense, God “sent” him out to sacrifice Isaac to reveal that He was not like the pagan gods, and that He really wants to rescue us from death.

 

[Camron]

I apologize for not reading the entire thread. I’m no scholar and this is my opinion. The ancient people believed God/gods authored everything so if someone did something it was meant to be. God didn’t expect Abraham to perform human sacrifice, but Abraham thought he was supposed to do what his neighbors were doing. In that sense, God “sent” him out to sacrifice Isaac to reveal that He was not like the pagan gods, and that He really wants to rescue us from death.

This was perhaps the most beautiful post I’ve read here at Catholic Answers in a very looong time. So much of the Hebrews walk of faith is portrayed in direct contrast to the pagan cultures they encountered along the way and their struggles to free themselves from the bondage of the polytheistic religions that troubled them so.

Your post was simple and elegant, straight to the point, and perhaps the most wonderful defense of Abraham’s faith in God that I’ve ever read.

Now if only others would stop decrying the Biblical record and actually listen to this wisdom that you just shared… It’s quite scandalous that fellow Catholics of little faith would so vehemently disparage the Bible, blatantly comparing it to Cat in the Hat, just 'cause they “don’t like it”.

It’s quite pathetic actually.

Thank you for sharing that Ryan! God bless you Ryan!

 

[ryanoneil]

You are welcome. God bless you also!