by BlogSpotThinker
September 13, 2011
(Revised October 4, 2011)
Overview
Genesis 11 through Genesis 22 appear to be intended to describe God’s development of the nation of Israel, beginning with the travel of Terah, Abraham’s father from his homeland, Ur of the Chaldeans, toward Canaan. An apparently reasonable suggestion appears to be that, perhaps, Ur of the Chaldeans was a community that was involved in, or close to one or more communities that were involved in, religious child sacrifice. As a result, perhaps Abraham was familiar with the practice, and, despite possible anguish regarding the idea, especially in light of the conditions that the Bible appears to suggest surrounded the birth of Isaac, was willing to accept it based upon Abraham’s faith in this apparently “new” God that the Bible appears to suggest had apparently approached Abraham in Genesis 12.
The Bible appears to suggest that God emphasized the salient point of Abrahams’ perspective, not as being Abraham’s willingness to accomplish a horrendous act, but as being willing to not withholding his own son from an act that might have been viewed by Abraham not as necessarily inconceivable or horrible, but perhaps somewhat common, yet representative of a sacrifice of that which Abraham considered most valuable. In contrast to Adam and Eve, Abraham, here appears to exemplify the spirit of the first of the Ten Commandments: nothing and no one is to be esteemed above God.
The Possible Potential for Humanity’s Idolatry of Human Logic and Reason
The human school of thought appears to esteem logic and reason above human credentials, perhaps for good reason. Reports appear to suggest that many attempts at deception as well as many good-faith errors by the credentialed are considered to have been revealed by analysis of the logic and reason of their suggestions. As a result, secular humanity appears to consider humanly-understood logic and reason to be the “litmus test” for propriety, an apparent reliance that the Bible appears to suggest has been adopted since humanity (Adam and Eve) was convinced to turned its back on God, the original and still unreplaced standard for propriety.
One possible moral of this Biblical incident appears to suggest that God is supreme authority, even over human logic and reason. To clarify, the suggestion appears not to be that God is above logic and reason, but that logic and reason are established by God and that, therefore, it is God who establishes the point of reference for what is logical and reasonable. Further, humanity’s inability to recognize existent logic and reason appears Biblically suggested not to impact the existence of said logic and reason. Perhaps human knowledge is too limited to recognize God’s suggested superior knowledge, logic and reason. Even differences in human knowledge might result in different conclusions regarding what is logical and reasonable. Reasonable examples of such differences might include the confusion that a child might experience regarding pain imposed by the application of iodine to a cut, the medical practice of removing a body part to save the amputee's life, or threatening potential committers of homicide with death to prevent their carrying out their misdeed.
Potential Logic and Reason of Abraham
The general human logic regarding the Abraham/Isaac incident appears suggested to be that harm is not good and is not to be introduced without good reason, and that the information regarding the circumstance of the Abraham/Isaac incident appears not to suggest appropriate introduction of the apparently God-suggested harm.
An apparently reasonable theory appears to be that, given the additional background information that God knew Abraham well enough to know Abraham’s ability to appropriately experience the suggestion, the harm-introducing suggestion might appear less illogical and unreasonable.
God’s Apparent Purpose in the Incident
The Bible appears to suggest that this incident occurred at the apparent inception of the nation of Israel and that God intended for Israel to exemplify to the world the potential for the God/human relationship. In light of this and the preceding suggestions, a possible purpose of the apparently Biblically-suggested Abraham and Isaac incident appears to be the establishment (or perhaps reestablishment, if Adam and Eve are considered) of the fundamental ground rule that there is never a valid reason to disobey or distrust God.
The Role of Fundamental Ground Rules
The role of fundamental ground rules appears not to be taken lightly. Consequently, I tread humbly and lightly. Therefore, it appears prudent to clarify that this post does not suggest that every human suggestion, regarding God or regarding any other subject, that cannot be proved to be illogical should be accepted. The Bible appears to suggest that only God merits such faith - not others claiming to be God's interpreter or other claimed representative - just God, and it appears to recommend referring and entrusting questions about any matter directly to God.
No comments:
Post a Comment