[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 833 KB, 497x720, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15104982 No.15104982 [Reply] [Original]

Why did God put Abraham up to killing his own son? It seems kind of mean out of character for him.

I'm a Christian but its something even I struggle to understand.

>> No.15104988

Because he was a schizophrenic jew and didn't actually hear anyone. Read Spinoza.

>> No.15104990

>>15104982
It’s a fucking story retard. Respect what the old timers said, keep up jahs legacy, but don’t fucking go autistic wonder why Frodo left the shire faggot

>> No.15104993

>>15104988
Can you sum up what he said?

>> No.15104997

>>15104988
>>15104993
Kys

>> No.15105004

>>15104982
Abraham was obviously schizophrenic.

>> No.15105010

>>15104997
I thought he said to kill Isaac, not himself.

>>15105004
Schizophrenia didn't exist back then.

>> No.15105011

The point was that faith and obedience come before understanding

>> No.15105015

>>15104997
Triggered christard

>> No.15105028

>>15105011
Couldn't he have taught the message without the killing.

>> No.15105032

>>15105010
>>15105015
He said to kill his son, and that’s what I’m doing when I say KYS FAGGOT(s)

>> No.15105033

>>15105010
>Schizophrenia didn't exist back then
lol Abraham invented it, obviously

>> No.15105036

>>15104982
The story of Abraham's attempted sacrifice of Issac is a story about faith more than about human sacrifice. Abraham trusts God and so he believes that there is no such thing as a bad future; God won't let it happen.

Fear and Trembling by Kierkegaard

>> No.15105040

>>15105028
There was no killing

>> No.15105045

>>15105028
The entire point is radical obedience and humility, in the end he didn't actually have to kill his son God was just testing Abraham.

>> No.15105071

>>15104988
>Read Spinoza
You first

>> No.15105137

>>15104982
The same reason He sacrificed His Son for us.

>> No.15105255

>>15104982
Because God likes to fuck with your mind to see how blindly you will trust him.

>> No.15105262

>>15105036
>>15105045
>>15105137
The correct answers.

>> No.15105274

>>15104982
God told him he would be the father of all nations so when he told Abraham to sacrifice his only son, Abraham had such powerful faith that he believed God would bring Isaac back to life, a miracle possible in the same way that even having a son at his age was possible.

>> No.15105284

>>15105137
To remove the eternal sin?

>> No.15105401

>Christian
>caring about the Old Testament
Come on.

>> No.15106623

>>15105401
Jesus specifically said the old testament still applies.

>> No.15106722

read what Kierkegaard has to say about it, it's the best that ever came out of that line of thinking

>> No.15106800

>>15104982
Hes God and he wanted proof that Abraham loved him even more than his son. Simple as. Stop binding God to secular morality.

>> No.15106803

>>15106623
Except for the parts that don't, like keeping kosher.

>> No.15106857

>>15106623
Actually, Christ and the bible both state an awful lot of the OT has fallen out of necessity. Especially if you're not born into Jewish culture.
Don't tell you think the parable laden Christ only mentioned like four or five somewhat obscure practices without implying all that wacky shit is in the past, thanks to his new covenant

>> No.15106935

>>15106857
The rituals are abolished but the theology and morals are not except what is explicitly stated.

>> No.15106994

>>15104982
he didn't? he had him kill a ram. consider ibn ezras commentary on genesis 22:1 below
https://www.sefaria.org/Genesis.22.1?lang=en&aliyot=0&p2=Ibn_Ezra_on_Genesis.22.1&lang2=en

i just drafted a paper on this, ask me if you want more info

>> No.15107012

>>15106994
short addendum, sforno's commentary on the same verse is also a suitable explanation
https://www.sefaria.org/Genesis.22.1?lang=en&aliyot=0&p2=Sforno_on_Genesis.22.1.1&lang2=en

>> No.15107064

>the creator of the universe is slightly demanding of me while actively promising an afterlife of happiness to me if I listen as well as everyone else who endures suffering in this world
>I can't justify this theologically!
Unironically why are Christians like this?

>> No.15107077

The real redpill is that pre-exilic Jews practiced human sacrifice and Abe did actually kill Isaac and the version of the story put in the bible is a heavy revisionist redaction made after the return from Babylon

>> No.15107115

>>15104988
Spinoza is based but I don’t think that’s something he said

>> No.15107145

>>15107077
proof

>> No.15107171

As a joke

>> No.15107273

>>15107145
Proof? There is only evidence. Like the text stating that Abe came down from the mountain and not mentioning Isaac being with him, then Isaac for some reason living apart from his father (in a highly patriarchal society mind you), then there are several occurences with literal human sacrifices, like the one in Numbers, where every 500th prisoner of war or something like that was to be either given to God or given to Priests (the context is spoils of war, like stock, being sacrificed), or that one general sacrificing his daughter by mistake (it isn't shown in a good light, but it being actually carried out implies that it was at least an option), or the ease with which kings "fucked up" and sacrificed to Moloch (moloch itself possibly being not a god, but a verb meaning something along the lines of "to make a burnt offering"). There was also that one "misshap" where Isaiah (? maybe it was the other prophet, not gonna check now) actually condoned putting your children "through fire" (quite literally "giving to Moloch" in the context).

>> No.15107318

>>15107273
Im not even Christian but this is the worst sort of erroneous headcanon. Killing prisoners of war is not human sacrifice.
>implies it was at least an option
No it doesnt. This is just more conjecture.
>Moloch was metaphorical
Once again little to no evidence and even more unlikely when falling into polytheism was an explicit theme in these chapters

>> No.15107357

>>15107273
There was also Moses talking about giving your firstborn to God and it being literally among the offerings. Now, later of course it is explicitly stated by him that human sacrifice is reprehensible, but considering that OT is a collective work, that could've been a redaction.
The reason Moses gives Pharaoh for why his people can't just make a sacrifice without going into the desert is "it is reprehensible to your people (egyptians)". One has to wonder, what kind of sacrifice can be so reprehensible for egyptians who did themselves practice animal sacrifice. The sacrifice was carried out in the end anyway — egyptian firstborns.

>> No.15107386

>>15104982
Demiurge be like

>> No.15107416

>>15107318
I'm just saying brah. This is an actual hypothesis in biblical studies. I'm not married to it or anything.
>>Moloch was metaphorical
No, I'm not talking about anything metaphorical. Just a mistranslation which is a pretty normal occurence.
>No it doesnt. This is just more conjecture.
The fact that nobody stopped him, even the priests who should've known better (it's them who carry out all sacrifices in the end), can point to sort of accaptence.