Abraham failed the test

[changed]

8 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

You do realize Isaac was likely in his 30's or older when this happened?

Does it matter what age they were?  It sounds like Abraham wanted the birthright to go through Ishmael, not Isaac. Abraham had 2 kids, not 1.

Sounds like Abraham was not with Sarah when she died...

Edited August 25, 2019 by changed

[JLHPROF]

7 minutes ago, changed said:

Does it matter what age they were?  It sounds like Abraham wanted the birthright to go through Ishmael, not Isaac. Abraham had 2 kids, not 1.

Sounds like Abraham was not with Sarah when she died...

Abraham had many kids, just two to whom the birthright question applied.

And I am not sure what point you are making about Sarah's death.  Many husbands aren't able to be with their wives at the time of death.

[3DOP]

Hi changed,

According to both Testaments, Abraham passed the test.

"By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered Isaac: and he that received the promises, offered up his only begotten son; (To whom it was said: In Isaac shall thy seed be called.) Accounting that God is able to raise up even from the dead." (Heb. 11:17-19)

As Kevin Christensen points out, Abraham expected to return with Isaac alive according to Gen. 22:5. Abraham had confidence in God's promise, that through Isaac, his (Abraham's) seed would be called, even if the seed (Isaac) was to be first sacrificed. The rest of Genesis 22 is all full of praise and reward for Abraham's deed. The New Testament, following that lead, expands upon it, in Heb. 11, and other places. There is another hint in v. 7 or 8 of Gen. 22 that Abraham was expecting a deliverance from this test of faith. When Isaac asks his father where was the victim, Abraham discreetly replies that God would provide the victim. And so He did. 

Look at verses 16-18 of Gen. 22:

"By my own self have I sworn, saith the Lord: because thou hast done this thing, and hast not spared thy only begotten son for my sake: I will bless thee, and I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and as the sand that is by the sea shore: thy seed shall possess the gates of their enemies. And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because thou hast obeyed my voice."

I have faith in the historical record, but even more certainty that subsequent inspired commentary finds the act praiseworthy. In Abram/Abraham, we see God's dealings with one had been uniquely prepared for this test of faith. God knew that Isaac would live. Abraham showed that he believed that Isaac must live. Abraham had a clear conscience in this matter, because authority (God) had shown Himself to be worthy of Abraham's trust that Isaac would live. As for whether God should make this request, whatever Abraham does, Isaac lives, even if Abraham's faith in God's promises falter.  

-------------------------------------

In the opening post you write:

"I have thought similar things- that we are supposed to refuse to follow orders which go against our conscience, even if those orders come from apostles, prophets, or even G-d," 

Believing myself to be a faithful son of the Catholic Church and obedient to God, I have been disobedient to living popes and bishops of the Catholic Church for nearly fifteen years. I am sympathetic to anyone who points out the moral deficiency of pleading obedience to authority when our consciences should be troubled by "obedience". To plead authority to do what we believe to be wrong is lack of courage, and false obedience. I would caution that when authority asks us to do something which we perceive to be against our conscience, we should carefully examine our consciences in light of what authority may say in defense of the request or command. The soul with a well-formed conscience will fear self-deception, knowing that their own pride and stubborn wilfulness can hide itself behind "conscience". 

3DOP

      

[CV75]

14 hours ago, changed said:

Independent of the schoolmaster.... For many Jews,  I think, halacha trumps G-d’s command, so an observant Jew would not be permitted to sacrifice their child or commit any other sin even if they were sure it was the command of G-d

... the law, principles, are what save.

So do the Jews with whom you share this belief with believe that Abraham was saved (or not saved) by the law after he failed the test? What happened to him salvation-wise? He was not an observant Jew.

Edited August 25, 2019 by CV75

[changed]

4 hours ago, 3DOP said:

Believing myself to be a faithful son of the Catholic Church and obedient to God, I have been disobedient to living popes and bishops of the Catholic Church for nearly fifteen years. I am sympathetic to anyone who points out the moral deficiency of pleading obedience to authority when our consciences should be troubled by "obedience". To plead authority to do what we believe to be wrong is lack of courage, and false obedience. I would caution that when authority asks us to do something which we perceive to be against our conscience, we should carefully examine our consciences in light of what authority may say in defense of the request or command. The soul with a well-formed conscience will fear self-deception, knowing that their own pride and stubborn wilfulness can hide itself behind "conscience". 

3DOP

You know, I really wish there was someone on earth I could feel was an authority figure - it is a scary thing to be alone, with no guidance.  There are a lot of things to theoretically rationalize and justify - people have their own interpretations of everything - regardless of what actually did or did not happen - hopefully their interpretation inspires them to be good human beings.. it would be nice to hide behind a leader, behind one denomination or another, but there is that reality thing … truth isn't beautiful, but reality is reality … 

[Coop]

If God comes to me and asks me to sacrifice my oldest son, or even my only son, I hope that I will ask Him why before I do anything.  That’s not to say that I’m not going to follow thru on His request.  After all He is God and Father knows best as Fred MacMurray would argue.

But I believe that He expects us to question everyone, including Himself, especially anyone who is in authority over us, including our Church leaders.  Otherwise why would Joseph tell us about unrighteous dominion as a potential problem in our leaders.  I see the tests of life more as tests to learn who we are rather than tests to see if we are learning to be obedient.

Where I have trouble with this story is that it is often used to justify being perfectly obedient to God’s commandments, and by extension to God’s servants, as if obedience is a virtue.  Unfortunately obedience isn’t a virtue.  Obedience is simply behaviour.  Even Satan’s minions are obedient.

All the best,

Bob

[changed]

4 hours ago, CV75 said:

So do the Jews with whom you share this belief with believe that Abraham was saved (or not saved) by the law after he failed the test? What happened to him salvation-wise? He was not an observant Jew.

I have not had an "are you saved" conversation with any Jewish friends - that is more of a NT, Christian kind of conversation.  Jews do not perform baptisms, do not study the atonement, do not recognize Jesus, and I have never heard them talk about hell, or about needing to be saved from anything.... They do have a lot of laws - quite a bit more than the 10 commandments... "do not murder" is one of the commandments and they would hold this command over anything else... I mean, why would G-d command one thing in one breath, and then privately tell you something else?  They will stick with following tradition, with their laws.

[3DOP]

4 hours ago, changed said:

4 hours ago, changed said:

You know, I really wish there was someone on earth I could feel was an authority figure - it is a scary thing to be alone, with no guidance.  There are a lot of things to theoretically rationalize and justify - people have their own interpretations of everything - regardless of what actually did or did not happen - hopefully their interpretation inspires them to be good human beings.. it would be nice to hide behind a leader, behind one denomination or another, but there is that reality thing … truth isn't beautiful, but reality is reality … 

 

I liked your post for everything except...I am happily persuaded that truth is beautiful. The good news is that reality is good and beautiful.

If my Catholic religion is false, it proposes the most fantastically wonderful fiction that could be imagined. I could be deceived, but I am of the belief, the happy belief, that my religion is real.

My authority figures are dead. They were once on earth. Why do they have to be living at the same time as I am? I am not alone. I am guided the "dead", who are really more alive elsewhere than they were when they dwelt on earth. This is what Catholics mean when we recite the Apostles Creed in the ninth clause..."I believe in the communion of the saints". It means among other things, that we are not separated by death. There will always remain an intimate link between the dead and the living. What is the difference if my authority figure is alive in heaven or alive on earth in Rome? He says the same thing from heaven as he said in Rome on earth.

Gotta go...my dear boy is calling from overseas...God bless changed...on your journey. The willingness to be changed remains critical, but harder as we get older, at least on the natural level. May we retain the willingness to be changed.

[CV75]

13 hours ago, changed said:

I have not had an "are you saved" conversation with any Jewish friends - that is more of a NT, Christian kind of conversation.  Jews do not perform baptisms, do not study the atonement, do not recognize Jesus, and I have never heard them talk about hell, or about needing to be saved from anything.... They do have a lot of laws - quite a bit more than the 10 commandments... "do not murder" is one of the commandments and they would hold this command over anything else... I mean, why would G-d command one thing in one breath, and then privately tell you something else?  They will stick with following tradition, with their laws.

But they do believe in redemption, after their manner.

If you do not know how they see Abraham was redeemed, and thus they became a people of God despite his failing the test, or if this particular subset of Jews you are citing haven't taken the idea of failure any further, then you (and they) have only a limited sense of the power of Jewish morality, ethnic existence and inheritance.

[Ahab]

On 8/23/2019 at 8:52 PM, changed said:

Read something interesting today on a Jewish board, googled around a little more, and sure enough, quite a few Jewish people believe Abraham failed the test.  

They failed the test to recognize who their Messiah was, too.  Their opinion isn't worth very much, to me, theologically.

[Alaris]

Then Nephi "failed the test" in chapter 4:

10 And it came to pass that I was constrained by the Spirit that I should kill Laban; but I said in my heart: Never at any time have I shed the blood of man. And I shrunk and would that I might not slay him.

11 And the Spirit said unto me again: Behold the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands. Yea, and I also knew that he had sought to take away mine own life; yea, and he would not hearken unto the commandments of the Lord; and he also had taken away our property.

12 And it came to pass that the Spirit said unto me again: Slay him, for the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands;

13 Behold the Lord slayeth the wicked to bring forth his righteous purposes. It is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief.

[echelon]

Doesn't our conscience come from God?  How can a commandment from Jesus be at odds with our conscience if both God and Jesus are united in purpose?  If there is reluctance to follow through with the commandment it would be because of the reasoning of man, not because it does not feel right.

[echelon]

Doesn't our conscience come from God?  How can a commandment from Jesus be at odds with our conscience if both God and Jesus are united in purpose?  If there is reluctance to follow through with the commandment it would be because of the reasoning of man, not because it does not feel right.

[Ahab]

17 hours ago, echelon said:

Doesn't our conscience come from God?  How can a commandment from Jesus be at odds with our conscience if both God and Jesus are united in purpose?  If there is reluctance to follow through with the commandment it would be because of the reasoning of man, not because it does not feel right.

Sometimes it doesn't feel right to have to kill somebody even when that person needs to be killed, like the time when Nephi shirked away from the prompting to kill Laban to be able to get some records.  It was necessary and it was the right thing to do at that time but I can understand why Nephi would not have liked the idea.  And even after he did it, knowing that it needed to be done and that it was God who was telling him to do it, I'm sure he still felt kinda bad about it.  It would have turned out so much better if Laban had just given him the plates and had not tried to kill Nephi or anyone else who was on the Lord's side.

[3DOP]

On 8/26/2019 at 12:24 PM, Ahab said:

They failed the test to recognize who their Messiah was, too.  Their opinion isn't worth very much, to me, theologically.

Good point Ahab. It does appear that before the Messiah came and was crucified, Jews thought more highly of Abraham than they apparently do in this age. While LDS/Protestants would not accept that these passages from the Catholic Scriptures are canonical, I doubt that anyone would dispute that these passages represent Jewish sentiments before the Messiah came and was crucified:  

"They must remember how our father Abraham was tempted, and being proved by many tribulations, was made the friend of God."
[Judith 8:22]

"And when the third night is past, thou shalt take the virgin with the fear of the Lord, moved rather for love of children than for lust, that in the seed of Abraham thou mayst obtain a blessing in children."
[Tobias (Tobit) 6:22]---(as a side note, this passage might help explain to non-Catholics why Catholics have difficulty saying that the primary purpose in marriage is the enjoyment of the moment/love of spouse. It is hard for us to accept the idea that enjoyment of the moment/love of spouse is the primary purpose of marriage. Love of spouse/enjoyment of the moment IS a secondary GOOD, undeniably. However, the primary purpose of marriage is to make children who will populate God's kingdom. We may be thankful that God gave us other strong and HOLY incentives to motivate us to the primary purpose of marriage.)    

"Abraham was the great father of a multitude of nations, and there was not found the like to him in glory, who kept the law of the most High, and was in covenant with him."
[Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) 44:20]

"Was not Abraham found faithful in temptation, and it was reputed to him unto justice?"
[1 Machabees 2:52]

Edited August 27, 2019 by 3DOP

[Ahab]

12 minutes ago, 3DOP said:

"And when the third night is past, thou shalt take the virgin with the fear of the Lord, moved rather for love of children than for lust, that in the seed of Abraham thou mayst obtain a blessing in children."
[Tobias (Tobit) 6:22]---(as a side note, this passage might help explain to non-Catholics why Catholics have difficulty saying that the primary purpose in marriage is the enjoyment of the moment/love of spouse. It is hard for us to accept the idea that enjoyment of the moment/love of spouse is the primary purpose of marriage. Love of spouse/enjoyment of the moment IS a secondary GOOD, undeniably. However, the primary purpose of marriage is to make children who will populate God's kingdom. We may be thankful that God gave us other strong and HOLY incentives to motivate us to the primary purpose of marriage.)    

Yes I can see why some people would have a hard time with saying love of spouse/enjoyment of the moment is the primary purpose of marriage, or that there is only one primary purpose of marriage.  Marriage is a good thing for many different reasons and there is no real need to categorize those reasons in order of importance as long as it is understood that there are many good reasons.  Adam was lonely and Eve was provided for him to alleviate that loneliness.  And it was an Eve instead of a Steve so that they could have children together.  And with the power of the priesthood there is no good reason why the benefits of marriage should ever end, even at death. I, for one, am happy to know that what I have with my wife will not only never end but that it will continue to get better and better.

[3DOP]

3 hours ago, Ahab said:

Yes I can see why some people would have a hard time with saying love of spouse/enjoyment of the moment is the primary purpose of marriage, or that there is only one primary purpose of marriage.  Marriage is a good thing for many different reasons and there is no real need to categorize those reasons in order of importance as long as it is understood that there are many good reasons.  Adam was lonely and Eve was provided for him to alleviate that loneliness.  And it was an Eve instead of a Steve so that they could have children together.  And with the power of the priesthood there is no good reason why the benefits of marriage should ever end, even at death. I, for one, am happy to know that what I have with my wife will not only never end but that it will continue to get better and better.

Okay. That's fine. It was kind of spontaneous. My bad for distracting. Back to topic.

Edited August 27, 2019 by 3DOP

[changed]

On 8/25/2019 at 2:55 PM, Coop said:

If God comes to me and asks me to sacrifice my oldest son, or even my only son, I hope that I will ask Him why before I do anything.  That’s not to say that I’m not going to follow thru on His request. 

What if the correct answer to the test isn't a demonstration of following orders?  what if the correct answer is refusing to follow orders - no matter where they come from - if those orders are not in line with morality.  

Free agency - the ultimate test to think and act for oneself... a good parent does not want their children to eternally follow or rely on them.  

 

I would never kill one of my children, no matter who commanded it.  

Edited August 28, 2019 by changed

[Calm]

24 minutes ago, changed said:

would never kill one of my children, no matter who commanded it.  

What if you knew the alternative was much worse than death at your hands (at least you would it as quick and as painless and least fearful as possible)?  Not saying an arbitrary situation set up by a whimsical god, but one that was logical for our world...say your child was dependent on medication and a natural disaster happened where you knew there was no way to get that medication in time to save them and the alternative was a miserable death. 

Euthanasia in essence, do you think yourself capable of that? 

 

[Coop]

33 minutes ago, changed said:

What if the correct answer to the test isn't a demonstration of following orders?  what if the correct answer is refusing to follow orders - no matter where they come from - if those orders are not in line with morality.  

Free agency - the ultimate test to think and act for oneself... a good parent does not want their children to eternally follow or rely on them.  

 

I would never kill one of my children, no matter who commanded it.  

Sometimes I feel like yours is the correct answer.  Where I have problems with this position is the same problem I have with the obedient perspective and that is with the concept of absolutes in this life.  I like to keep my options open to all things having to do with religion.  Even if it means making a really tough decision.

And I'm not saying I would happily offer up my son anytime soon.  As far as I'm concerned if I can wait until I'm a god, and looking for volunteers among my children before I make that decision, that would be a good thing.

[changed]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

What if you knew the alternative was much worse than death at your hands (at least you would it as quick and as painless and least fearful as possible)?  Not saying an arbitrary situation set up by a whimsical god, but one that was logical for our world...say your child was dependent on medication and a natural disaster happened where you knew there was no way to get that medication in time to save them and the alternative was a miserable death. 

Euthanasia in essence, do you think yourself capable of that? 

 

or... your kid is standing on train tracks, and you have to decide between de-railing the train or killing your kid... that is not an illogical command though.  

Following illogical commands is wrong.  Euthyphro's Dilemma - I hold to the "God would cease to be God if unjust"... ie... no one is really following the commands of God - but rather - we are following the path of morality (which God also happens to be following or they would not be God).  

[Calm]

5 minutes ago, changed said:

or... your kid is standing on train tracks, and you have to decide between de-railing the train or killing your kid... that is not an illogical command though.  

Following illogical commands is wrong.  Euthyphro's Dilemma - I hold to the "God would cease to be God if unjust"... ie... no one is really following the commands of God - but rather - we are following the path of morality (which God also happens to be following or they would not be God).  

Assuming God is illogical is illogical imo.

[changed]

49 minutes ago, Coop said:

Sometimes I feel like yours is the correct answer.  Where I have problems with this position is the same problem I have with the obedient perspective and that is with the concept of absolutes in this life.  I like to keep my options open to all things having to do with religion.  Even if it means making a really tough decision.

And I'm not saying I would happily offer up my son anytime soon.  As far as I'm concerned if I can wait until I'm a god, and looking for volunteers among my children before I make that decision, that would be a good thing.

An informed volunteer is quite different from an uninformed participant...

 

Gen 22: 5“Stay here with the donkey,” Abraham told his servants. “The boy and I will go over there to worship, and then we will return to you.”

"we" will return - Abraham had no intention of killing Isaac, he expected both of them would return...   Abraham argued with god at Sodom, and perhaps knew God would stop him - it was Abraham's test of God rather than God's test of Abraham?

[changed]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

Assuming God is illogical is illogical imo.

Killing Isaac would be illogical.  

[Calm]

10 minutes ago, changed said:

Killing Isaac would be illogical.  

So it would seem.

Otoh, lots of things seem illogical until we know the bigger picture (the reverse is also true, sometimes things seem logical but the big picture renders them nonsensical).

Cutting someone's stomach out seems illogical until we understand the principles of surgery, etc.  And it may seem logical to remove most of the stomach because of stomach cancer until we learn the cancer has spread through the body and little chance of surviving the surgery that wouldn't give any more length of life anyway while really decreasing quality.

Perhaps Abraham needed to go through that experience of almost losing Isaac in order to appreciate others' lives and relationships more so that later in his life he withheld his hand from hurting an enemy unnecessarily (because he remember how sorrowful he was in contemplating losing Isaac).  Or maybe he came to value Isaac more as an individual because of Isaac's trust in him.  

It comes down to whether or not we trust the scriptures to be telling enough of reality imo to trust the story tells us something actually about God and is not just a collection of myths accepted as history by many.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Calm