Comments on: OT Lesson 9 Study Notes: Abraham 1; Genesis 15-17, 21-22

By: GHD NZ

GHD NZ — Sun, 20 Nov 2011 03:53:48 +0000

GHD NZ…

[...]OT Lesson 9 Study Notes: Abraham 1; Genesis 15-17, 21-22 « Feast upon the Word Blog[...]…

By: Jim F.

Jim F. — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 17:21:33 +0000

Good point, Kirk. If we think of what happens at Moriah as “the binding of Isaac,” we see it differently.

By: Jim F.

Jim F. — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 17:20:44 +0000

I agree that the story can’t be only about Abraham and his test. I hope I made that clear. Another way to see that the story must be about more is to look at the parallels to Hagar and Ishmael and to wonder what is going on. I don’t think those parallels are just coincidence.

By: kirkcaudle

kirkcaudle — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 20:56:36 +0000

For those that follow the Hebrew Bible the story is called The Akedah, or “The Binding.” Christians call this narrative the story of Abraham sacrificing Issac, or God testing Abraham. Therefore, One title focuses on Issac being bound to the Alter, while the other focuses the obedience of Abraham.

Why does this matter?

I think the way we read the Biblical stories is influenced by the title of the story. We can go into a story with preconceived notions just because of what a story is called. I think this is sometimes the case with Gen. 22. The title shifts our focus.

By: RobF

RobF — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 20:45:51 +0000

Jim, I’m not disputing that the Lord “tested” Abraham, as the text indicates. I’m just wondering why we have to think that the test is what the story is really about (ie. the theme or main point of the story). I know we traditionally read it that way, but wonder what we might be missing by focusing on the presumption that that is what the story is really all about.

By: kirkcaudle

kirkcaudle — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 11:22:33 +0000

Thanks for the link to your article Jim.

By: Jim F.

Jim F. — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 04:18:33 +0000

RobF, do we have any access to what really happened at Moriah other than what the author of the text wrote (and, of course, what may be revealed by prophets at other times)?

Isn’t the best translation of nasah “to test, to try, to prove, to assay”? (Brown-Driver-Briggs gives that definition.) Verses 1-2 seem to me to pretty clearly say “God tested Abraham by commanding him to sacrifice his son, Isaac.” Then the story of that sacrifice follows. But of course that doesn’t say that the story is only about Abraham’s test.

Given Isaac’s probable age, it had to be a test of him as well. He had to go along with what his father was doing, willingly allowing himself to be tied up, for example. (There’s a Jewish midrash that says Isaac asked to be tied up so that, at the last minute, he wouldn’t flinch and ruin the sacrifice.)

Given the way that (via the angel’s repetition of the Abrahamic blessing) the story immediately shifts to the family after the sacrifice, I assume that it is also about the birth of Rebekah. (Notice that “after these things” [verse 20], the first thing that happens is that Abraham is told about the birth of Nahor’s children, which include Rebekah.)

For anyone with the philosophical disease, I’ve written about this connection to the family in “The Past and Future Community: Abraham and Isaac; Sarah and Rebekah, . . . .” Levinas Studies: An Annual Review, vol. 3 (2008), 79-100.

By: RobF

RobF — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 03:42:04 +0000

In the first verse we are told that the Lord tempted (nacah) Abraham. Are we sure we know what tempting means in this case? Does this statement really mean that “this story is about Abraham’s test”? I’m also wondering how much slippage there might be between what the author of this story is telling us hundreds of years later, and what may have really happened on that mount. Can we be true to the text and still see a bigger divine purpose in this event than just a test of Abraham?

By: Jim F.

Jim F. — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 00:29:42 +0000

I agree that there is a great deal to learn by asking about Isaac’s role in the sacrifice. In the end, this is a story about the nation of Israel and not just about Abraham, so it must also be about Isaac. But there is that first verse of chapter 22, announcing that this story is about Abraham’s test.

By: kirkcaudle

kirkcaudle — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 22:40:19 +0000

Rob, I read the story somewhere along those lines. In fact, I think somehow the story is about the “sanctification” of Issac.

By: RobF

RobF — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 17:00:47 +0000

While I was sitting in this class last week, I was struck that we always read this story as being about Abraham. What if we read it as being more about Isaac? About Abraham and the Lord staging a sacred sacrificial ritual so that Isaac could have the experience of being saved (“snatched” like Alma?), just as Abraham had been saved from the Lion Couch scene in Facsimile 1? Like Lehi is later snatched out of a perilous Jerusalem? Like we can be snatched from being in Satan’s power?

By: RobF

RobF — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 16:49:06 +0000

Amen. I’ve often only gotten through just a verse or two while leading a class discussion. Perhaps by modeling a careful and thoughtful reading of just a verse or two, we can encourage class participants to spend more time with the scriptures themselves. Class wouldn’t be about giving them what the chapters mean, but a way to model how to, as Jim said, “read the scriptures in a way that continues to give them insight.”

By: Eunice Robertson

Eunice Robertson — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 16:41:00 +0000

In our class we also noted that Isaac was the same age that our Saviour was when he was crucified, and that the journey to the place of sacrifice was three days, the same period of time that our Saviour was in the grave.We noted also the parallel between Heavenly Father having to sacrifice our Saviour and Abraham being tested in the same way.

By: Viliam

Viliam — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 09:00:07 +0000

One of our readers recommended this blog post:…

In Arabic, even today a person answers a call with something similar—“Ready”—and that is part of the import of this response. In scriptures we find this phrase commonly used when prophets respond to a call. ….. At the end of chapter 21 ( verse 34) we…

By: kirkcaudle

kirkcaudle — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 11:08:55 +0000

Robert, I agree, and I do the same thing. There are times when I literally read a verse or two and see where the text takes us. The right question(s) can lead to great discussions and insights.

With that said, I would like less verses/chapters to pick from. I know I am going to have to omit 90% of the lesson; I would just like 50% less to omit.

As a practical matter I know this will never happen. I just get greedy when there is so much good stuff to talk about!

By: Robert C.

Robert C. — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 11:00:51 +0000

Kirk, as a practical matter, I’ve had success focusing in on one or two verses when I teach lessons. I usually summarize the context of the particular verse, and often pick a verse that could be argued to be a kind of centerpiece of the assigned readings—this way I am able to appease those who might worry that we’re not covering enough of the assigned lesson material, but then we’re able to really dig in to the scriptures and learn from them, without just glossing or proof-texting.

I think quality time with the scriptures is much like spending quality time with others: quantity of time cannot make up for poor quality. Applied to teaching, then, this idea has directed me toward a less-is-more approach, really working through only a verse or two, or even less, but really giving those passages quality time….

By: kirkcaudle

kirkcaudle — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 07:25:31 +0000

The problem with Sunday School is that we only have one year to get through the entire Old Testament. This is not news to any of us of course, but it is a problem, imo.

What would you think about spending 2 years on the Old Testament in Sunday School? Afterall, the Old Testament is half the size of the entire standard works! Do you think that would make us less “illiterate” when it came to the scriptures?

In fact, I think one could make the case of spending two years on each of the standard works!

By: Jim F.

Jim F. — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 06:02:58 +0000

Yes, I wish we could slow down and look more carefully at the things we read. From what I see in my classes at BYU is that the result of not doing so is a kind of scriptural illiteracy: students know the scriptural stories and they know what those stories are “supposed” to teach them, but they don’t know how to read the scriptures in a way that continues to give them insight. Some figure that out on their own, but many do not.

By: Lesson #9 - God will provide himself a Lamb - LDS Mormon Forums

Lesson #9 - God will provide himself a Lamb - LDS Mormon Forums — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:39:05 +0000

[...] Here are Jim F's study notes for Lesson 9 – Lots of deep probing questions to ponder… __________________ Rameumptom: A Holy Stand or Podium, where I can pontificate to my heart's delight. rameumptom.weebly.com [...]

By: kirkcaudle

kirkcaudle — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 15:45:13 +0000

It’s amazing Genesis 22 can be in a lesson with four other chapters.

By: OT Lesson 9 Study Notes: Abraham 1; Genesis 15-17, 21-22 | Times & Seasons

Thu, 25 Feb 2010 06:05:23 +0000

[...] to this post should be made at Feast Upon the Word 0 people like this [...]