The Binding of Isaac: Genesis 22—The Akedah

With these words the Bible opens or introduces the story. Why does God prove man?

The Hebrew word for ‘did prove’ is nissah, which has the following additional meanings: to test, to tempt, to try, to put to a test, to experiment on, to examine. It is used in the Bible for God, who examines man (Gen. 22, 1; Ex. 16, 4; Ps. 26, 2), but also for man who proves God (Ex. 17, 2, Ps. 78, 18; Isaiah 7, 12). If somebody has to prove the other, it shows his doubts about the other; in the biblical story, this doubt about Abraham is in the Godhead.

All the numerous commentators of this biblical story have more or less dealt extensively with this question. I shall cite two commentators in order to present the generally known approaches to this chapter. Kierkegaard sees a paradox in Abraham's behaviour, ‘a moving in faith’ (KIERKEGAARD 13). Out of his deep-rooted belief in God, Abraham was able to plunge himself, with confidence and naivety, into the absurd. God's demand to kill Isaac is, for Kierkegaard, evil itself. But because of this evil coming through God's deeds, the ethic is suspended. Thus evil became good. In other words, because the demand to sacrifice Isaac came from God, fulfilling the godly command is good. Kierkegaard's God image is one of a good God, and he therefore has to make this construction of the suspension of the common ethic.

Modern Jewish commentators tend to support Kierkegaard's approach, with regard to the Akedah story, as a proof of absolute faith (EPSTEIN 6, pp. 88-9).

Gunkel sees the primary subject of Genesis 22 as the testing of man (GUNKEL 9). God wanted to prove Abraham and see whether he would obey his command. Gunkel sees in this story an anthropomorphism which excludes God's omniscience but contends that the narrator was not conscious of this. God wanted to prove Abraham in order to find out if he was God-fearing. When this was proven, then the actual execution of the sacrifice was superfluous