Akedah!
Dear Reader: These few notes before you are intended as an exercise in the justification of Yahweh, and in the sanctification of his holy name. They are also intended as an answer to those who may have considered it audacious of the writer to suggest that Avraham, the father of the faithful, should be considered worthy of somewhat less respect and honor than what is due to his creator, Yahweh. Also, for your convenience, a simple Hebrew Lesson, as well as a Glossary are appended to this study. Please enjoy the reading, as I have the writing, and may Yahweh take the glory, as we live his word together.
And so it was written, (Gen22:1) “Elohim did prove Avraham.” And yet, our beloved teaching elder, Yaacov, (Yaacov 1:13-14) said, “…Yahweh cannot be tested with evil, and he himself tests no man, but each man is tested, when he is drawn away by his own lust, and enticed.” Superficially, do we see here a contradiction between “Elohim did test Avraham” and “…Yahweh cannot be tested with evil, and he himself tests no man…?” But in faithfulness, is it not fair to say that what Yaacov meant was that, as Yahweh cannot be tested by (a man committing) evil, so Yahweh tests no man (by compelling him to do evil)? For we can hardly deny that Yahweh did test Avraham. But did he test him by commanding him to do evil? Did he expect him to do something that later would be considered one of the most flagrant violations of Torah?
Hardly so. For as it is written, “…I, Yahweh, change not…” and there is evidence that Avraham knew and practiced Torah, with the blessing of Yahweh, even before it had been given formally to Israel at mount Sinai. As it is written, (Gen18:19) “…I have known him, to the end that he may command his children and his household after him, that they may keep the way of Yahweh, to do righteousness and justice…” And yet nearly all the bible translations of all the world’s religions agree, that Yahweh commanded Avraham to “offer up” Yitschak for a “burnt offering”, even teaching that the commandment specifies, or at least implies a sacrifice, and killing, and immolation as required, with Yitschak as the victim. Yet would not that course of action have perhaps violated the law of redemption of the first born, and even possibly the law of murder? Just exactly what then, is the meaning of the words that have so popularly been translated “…and offer him there for a burnt offering…”?
And just how accurate and faithful are these nearly universally accepted translations? Have their commentators pushed figurativism far beyond what should be acceptable? Have their hyperbolic interpretations limited the spirit of the truth of Yahweh to the point that the importance of the literal meaning of his holy words would be reduced to redundancy or even superfluity? Having esteemed the literal meaning of the Word of Yahweh an inconvenience, what were their hidden, ulterior, and devious motives for having done so? Is there any justification for their blatant adding to and unrighteous manipulation of Torah? Can any man be more honorable and faithful than his creator? Was Yahweh’s testing of Avraham a belligerent, unfriendly, or cruel act, or is the opposite motivation more likely? We will explore these questions and more, in our study of the real meaning of Genesis 22:2. And not merely explore, but also disseminate real answers, not only for the messianic believers, but also for all the Torah-observant who love the word of Yahweh their creator. So join me now please, for an adventure, not merely of words and thoughts, but of drawing near to the very kingdom of the heavens, and of sanctification of the very name of the most high.
As we review the pleas for truth, let us begin by gleaning a little evidence from messianic resources. The Israeli Bible Society B’rith Hachodheshah (renewed covenant, or “new testament”) in Hebrew helps us to affirm our literal interpretation of a Torah-consistent Genesis 22:2. Please translate from Hebrews 11:17 literally, and we find support for our contention that what Yahweh commanded Avraham to accomplish with his son Yitschak was a “bringing near”, הקריב (hikriv - rhymes with “quick, leave”), and not an explicit human blood requirement. Yaacov 2:21 affirms in parallel, a command for only “elevations”,
העלות (ha’aloth – rhymes with “half a loaf”). And as the next verse implies, Yaacov 2:22, (roughly and somewhat literally translated) “Behold you; seeing that the faith helped for his doings, and from the midst of doings the completion of faith.” This rough translation shows that Avraham’s works “needed a little help” from faith, and that from the midst –– not in the midst –– of the action, faithfulness was perfected.
As it will be alleged in another place, Yahweh “coached” Avraham through it, and so in mercy he was counted faithful. (Reader please note; in most grateful appreciation, the student author wishes to acknowledge the contribution of Elder Jacob O. Meyer, pastor of the “Assemblies of Yahweh”(®), Bethel PA 19507 in suggesting incorporation of the above mentioned quotes from the Renewed Testament books of Hebrews and Jacob into this discussion. His wise counsel will be sorely missed.) Or as the sent-out one, Paul said, (Romans 12:1-2) from so many years later, yet as if face to face with Avraham and Yitschak, in their hour of trial, “I entreat you …brothers, to present your bodies a living sacrifice…and be not fashioned after this world…that you may prove what is the good and acceptable and perfect will of Elohim” Or as Yahshua affirmed, quoting from Hosea, "For kindness delights me, and not sacrifice." (Hos 6:6, Mt 9:13)
And from traditional mainstream Judaism also there is much wisdom to be contributed to the exchange. We will not look to their “standard” interpretation, however, of the events of Genesis 22, for there does not appear to be one. As it is often quipped, “Two Jews; three opinions” (explanation—yours, mine, and “ours”). Since the account of the offering up of Yitschak has engendered such radically diverse theories, explanations, and interpretations, there has been some difficulty finding enough common ground even to define the event by name. One aspect of the story, though, that appears to have remained above the fray of contention, is the fact that Yitschak was bound (tied, restrained) to immobilize him upon the altar. Thus, the name “Akedah”, Hebrew for “Binding” (of Yitschak) has acquired conventionality of use, to refer to the events of Genesis 22. The fact of this popular naming of the event is in itself evidence that consensus on other aspects of the matter has been elusive, conclusions are far from “cut and dried,” and that wisdom will keep an open mind to new ideas on the subject.
So, what truly was Yahweh’s intent that Avraham should do? And what was Avraham’s response, that he won praise and a blessing? Is there a way to find concord in this seeming incongruity? Is there a way to justify Avraham, yet justify Yahweh even more? And give Yahweh all the glory? Perhaps we will find an interpretation that will enable us to do so. Perhaps we will find it in a very narrow way, restricted, which few have found. And why should it not be so? Has not our Elohim decreed, through his servant Yahshua ha-navi (the prophet, De18:15) that thus (Mat. 7:14) shall the way to the entrance to life be?
And accompanying us for a little while on the aforementioned narrow way shall be two friendly volumes of Torah, with interesting notes. First, The Soncino Press Pentateuch & Haftorahs, Hebrew Text — English Translation & Commentary, Edited by Dr J H Hertz, London, copr. 1960. The text contains the typical “…and offer him there for a burnt-offering…” But the notes contain the interesting “…and offer him there. lit. ‘lift him up’ (upon the alter). [Elohim], in His command, did not use the word which signifies the slaying of the sacrificial victim. From the outset, therefore, there was no intention of accepting a human sacrifice, although Abraham was at first not aware of this.” And secondly, The Artscroll Series / Stone Edition The Tanach; Student Size Edition, by Mesorah Publications, New York, copr. 1996, 1998, renders the phrase in question as “…bring him up there as an offering…” The notes teach us that “[Elohim] did not say, ‘Slaughter him,’ because he did not intend for Isaac to be slaughtered, but only that he be brought up to the mountain and be prepared as an offering.” So you see, even though our companions (please see "Links-Studies") are not in complete agreement with us, at least we are not alone, and we can be assured that in due time, Yahweh will take all the glory, and affirm the word of his servants.
But sometimes it is a day of small things, and that is Yahweh’s will. Take, for example, the account of Naaman the Syrian (2 Kings 5) and his cure of leprosy. He was indignant because the prophet Elisha did not perform a great spectacle of wondrous glory to heal the leprosy, but only said “wash and be clean.”
So: was it a fault in Avraham that he imagined that Yahweh would only be pleased with a great and terrible deed? For when Yahweh commanded what in retrospect appears to have been an ambiguous statement, Avraham assumed the radical meaning. Not that it can be easy to fault him for having done so, however, for that radical meaning is (although evidently idiomatic and figurative) also conventional, understood by context, supported by Torah, and translated so in nearly every Bible. Avraham’s reasonable, but ultimately unfounded perceptions also correspond to several questionable speculations being promulgated today, concerning the “Akedah.” Not only among religious people of all persuasions, but also among those who would discredit the walk of faith, are several erroneous notions ranging in description all the way from misguided to blatantly deceptive.
Some of them, briefly, we will list at this point. First: Avraham was told, approximately, according to some of the more traditional Bible versions, “…and offer him there for a burnt offering…”, yet, in discussions too numerous to recount, we have heard it changed to “…offer him there as a burnt offering…” Further, some translations do additional substitutions, as giving sacrifice him in place of offer him, and claiming that he was to have been offered for a sacrifice, rather than for a burnt offering. Perhaps even more radical is the idea that Yahweh commanded explicitly, and actually willed and expected that Avraham should kill Yitschak at that time. This being topped, perhaps only by theories that he actually was killed, and perhaps not even merely once. Slightly milder is the allegation that since Avraham brought fire and a knife to the place of the offering, his act was in itself proof that Yahweh commanded him to bring these items, and no doubt expected him to use them.
Some will be saying at this point, “Nitpicker, you’re clutching at straws; even if these points are valid, they lack relevance. Make your point, and sit down.” Ok, I’ll try. Suppose you are a visitor on Cannibal Island, and you have been asked to be a dinner guest. How concerned would you be to know exactly whether you had been invited to supper, or as supper? I’m sure that you would be very interested in discerning thereby if you were expected to bring an appetite, or be prepared to satisfy appetites. Details count. So we would prefer to leave to the proponents of these aforementioned claims the essential burden of their own substantiation. The concerns are valid. Their proof also may be difficult enough, by reason of the loose, figurative, and sometimes highly fanciful acts of translation and interpretation upon which these speculations have been built. We should not wish to add to their discomfort.
In fact though, it need not be our goal to disprove or discredit any of these ideas at this time, or perhaps ever, but rather, hopefully, we shall find the truth wherever it may be, and pray that it might be agreeable to our souls. Moreover, we often depend more than we may like to admit on those with whom we disagree, to show us the error of our ways and thoughts. Is it not wise, therefore, to make our words sweet, in anticipation of needing to eat them? Moreover, most of these ideas, no matter how ultimately untenable, have at least some reasonable claim to derivation from torah in Genesis 22. This is due in part to the “balance” that each faithful one attempts, as he hears words of Torah, to strike a balance between literal and figurative, between explicit and subtle. In other words, did Yahweh really mean what he said? Or am I to read into his words some hidden meaning? And even with the benefit of hindsight, is not our ofttimes consternation itself witness against us, as we ponder the complexities of the mysteries of the trial of the faith of the beloved patriarch Avraham?
next…
Torah on Guard!
Index to all 7 segments of "After The Last Trial"
After the Last Trial ; an overview of the Akedah, “ looking beneath the surface”
Yahweh’s Private “Turf”; remaining within our prerogative, deference to Yahweh
Akedah!; .............................. remember, Yahweh chose the words
Torah on Guard! ; lechaiim! (to life) renouncing the “covenant with death”!
Just Following Orders? why not just follow the instructions? .
Praise Is Comely; a refining pot for silver,…and a man according to his praises…
Give Glory to Yahweh!; …”can’t we all just give Glory to Yahweh?”...