|
|
A Parable on Genesis 22
Walter Schwenk, for the 2007 Unity Conference
We’ve read and heard, in times past, of how Yahweh tested Abraham, commanding him to “offer up” Isaac; and we’ve scratched our heads in wonder. Let’s look at it again, now, from the perspective of a parable!
To what can we compare the trial of Abraham? Who are we to challenge his faithfulness? Could we walk a mile in his shoes? Let’s try!
We’ve wondered, “What is the real meaning of Genesis 22:2, “Offer him up there, for a burnt offering”? Let’s look back to the Hebrew roots, which read, being transliterated, “W’ha’aleyhu sham l’olah.” Literally, this means, in plain English, “Cause him to ascend there, to what is ascending.” You see the difference between the commonly translated figurative interpretation “Offer him up there for a burnt offering”, and the plain meaning “Cause him to ascend there, to what is ascending.” Let’s try to walk a mile in Abraham’s shoes. Are you ready?
Abraham was the leader of his considerable entourage, a prince of Elohim, the friend of Yahweh, a sojourner in a strange land, yet held in high esteem by the natives; a strategist in battle, a diplomat of peace, and father of a multitude of nations. Who could walk any distance in his shoes? Depends. Are we asking on a figurative, or on a plain meaning level? Are we questioning the candidate’s ability to act consistently with Abraham’s character, strengths, and ability, or do we merely need to know the relative shoe sizes?
This “character trait - shoe size” dilemma, though, can be a key to our understanding of Abraham’s trial. When we start to realize that Genesis 22:2 can be perceived more than one way, we are on the road to understanding. Next in importance, is realizing that this is one more example of, as with many other idioms, the plain meaning being secondary, and the idiomatic, figurative meaning being primary. It is as in the proverb, many first shall be last; many last first. Here, the derived, figurative meaning is primary; and the “plain” meaning is rarely even considered, and often suppressed.
What Abraham thought Yahweh told him to do is obvious to us, from the course of action that he undertook. Similarly, it is obvious to anyone familiar with the story of Abraham, that only a man of outstanding character, righteousness, integrity, and courage, could “walk a mile” in Abraham’s shoes. Or is it? Perhaps the truth instead is that anyone with the same size and shape of feet as Abraham could walk a mile, with reasonable comfort, in his shoes. And perhaps also in retrospect, it is evident that Abraham could have been equally justified, perhaps more justified, by inviting Isaac up to the top of Moriah to join him in prayer, rather than to prepare him for slaughter and immolation by binding him upon the altar. To prove that, or to disprove it, we would need to search hard for evidence.
Much of our understanding of Genesis 22 is derived not so much from what the scripture says, but from what it does not say. References, few though they are, are usually oblique rather than explicit. The only commentary on the event that mentions death explicitly refers to it in a proverbial sense, “Avraham received Yitschak back from death, in a figure”. The sum total reference to Genesis 22 in the rest of scripture is very much like the reference to Noach’s drunkenness and peripherals after the flood, as if deliberately veiled. Was someone a bit embarrassed? Hey, things happen in families.
What else in scripture should be considered a reference to Genesis 22? Paul said, (Rom12:1-2) “I entreat you brethren, 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…” And Yahshua said, quoting from the prophet Hosea, “Kindness delights me, and not sacrifice…” (Hosea 6:6, Mt 9:13) Should our future considerations of Genesis 22 be in harmony with the spirit of these thoughts? There is a broad way that promotes a culture of glorification of death; and there is also a narrow way; that which nullifies the covenant with death. Let’s choose life!
In the “baseball game” of life, as played in Genesis 22, was Abraham determined to hit a “home run”, when perhaps he should have been planning to “bunt”? In the “hunting trip” of life, was Abraham “loaded for moose”, when the actual game was “quail”? In the “home improvement project” of life, did Abraham bring a sledge hammer, when the actual job was, unbeknownst to him, driving tacks to hang a picture on the wall? Yahweh knows. We can speculate though; and in entering into the discussion, we can start to appreciate even more the depth of character of Abraham, by considering the multiple dimensions in, and many levels on which Yahweh tested him. Could we walk a mile in his shoes? What size do you wear?
Have we disregarded, in consideration of the Akedah, that Yahweh has the ability to test his servants in more subtle and complex ways than we can imagine? Have we discounted that Yahweh might also have a perfect sense of humor, and is capable of “humoring” us, until such a time as we “get it”? Should we expect Yahweh to be faithful and consistent? I believe so, and am convinced that is the lesson of Genesis 22. May Yahweh bless your understanding of his word, and may your trials always be light.
*******************************
The above material is a brief synopsis of a study entitled
“Glory to Yahweh”, or “After the Last Trial”
The study in full, periodically updated, is accessible at
www.schwenkcarpentry.com
92 Sweet Arrow Lake Road,
Pine Grove, PA 17963
570-345-2168
Webster’s and other Definitions
Akedah: A Hebrew word meaning approximately “binding”, from the incident in Genesis 22:9, “…and bound Isaac his son…”; designation generally for the events of Genesis 22.
Humor: vt to adapt oneself to, (synonym, indulge: to yield to the desire of: HUMOR .)
Idiom: …an expression in the usage of a language that is peculiar in itself…in having a meaning that cannot be derived from the conjoined meanings of it’s elements…; an expression whose accepted meaning is not directly related to or derived from that of it’s roots, not obviously derived.
Parable: A short narrative which uses patterns of thought and comparisons to enhance perception and understanding for the hearer or reader; often sharing characteristics of proverbs, allegories, or riddles.
|
|