Was God wrong to tell Abraham to sacrifice Isaac in Genesis 22?

Was God wrong to tell Abraham to sacrifice Isaac in Genesis 22?            By Jack Kettler

In Genesis 22, God commands Abraham to do something forbidden elsewhere, as in Jeremiah 7:31.

“And he said, take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.” (Genesis 22:2)

How can this apparent contradiction be resolved? The complexity of this theological puzzle is intriguing, inviting believers to delve deeper into the text.

In Genesis 22:2, God issues a profound command to Abraham, a command that seems to contradict the prohibition against child sacrifice found in Jeremiah 7:31. This command, however, is not a call to violence, but a test of Abraham’s faith, a test that carries immense weight and significance.

Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers, a valuable resource, sheds light on the context of child sacrifice:

“(31) High places. — Not the same word as in Jeremiah 7:29, but bamoth, as in the “high places” of Baal, in Numbers 22:41; Numbers 23:3, the Bamoth-baal of Joshua 13:17. The word had become almost technical for the mounds, natural or (as in this passage) artificial, on which altars to Jehovah or to other gods were erected, and appears in 1 Samuel 9:12; 1 Kings 3:4; Ezekiel 20:29; Amos 7:9.”

“Tophet. — This appears to have been originally, not a local name, but a descriptive epithet. The word appears in Job 17:6 (“by-word” in the Authorised version) as a thing spat upon and loathed. Its use is probably therefore analogous to the scorn with which the prophets substituted bosheth, the “shameful thing,” for Baal (e.g., Jeremiah 3:24; Jeremiah 11:13). When the prediction is repeated in Jeremiah 19:5; Jeremiah 32:35, we have the “high places of Baal,” and “Tophet” here is obviously substituted for that name in indignant contempt. The word in Isaiah 30:33, though not identical in form (Tophteh, not Tophet), had probably the same meaning. Other etymologies give as the meaning of the word “a garden,” “a place of burning,” or “a place of drums,” i.e., a music grove, and so connect it more closely with the Molech ritual. Possibly the last was the original meaning of the name, for which, as said above, the prophets used the term of opprobrium.”

“The son of Hinnom. — Possibly the first recorded owner, or a local hero. The name is perpetuated in later Jewish language in Ge-henna = Ge-Hinnom = the vale of Hinnom. It was older than the Molech worship with which it became identified, and appears in the “Doomsday Book” of Israel (Joshua 15:8; Joshua 18:16).”

“To burn their sons and their daughters. — The words are important as determining the character of the act more vaguely described in Jeremiah 32:35, as “making to pass through the fire.” The children were, in some cases at least, actually burnt, though often, perhaps (see Ezekiel 16:21), slain first. Horrible as the practice seems to us, it was part of the Canaanite or Phœnician worship of Molech or Malcom (Leviticus 18:21; Leviticus 20:2-5), and had been practised by Ahaz (2 Kings 16:3; 2 Chronicles 28:3) and Manasseh (2 Kings 21:6; 2 Chronicles 33:6).” (1)

To resolve this apparent contradiction, one can consider the following points:

1. The context of the command: In Genesis 22:2, God never intended for Abraham to actually sacrifice Isaac. It was a test of Abraham’s faith and obedience. As soon as God saw that Abraham was willing to obey, He provided a ram for the sacrifice instead of Isaac.
2. The purpose of the command: The command was not given to promote child sacrifice but rather to test Abraham’s faith and demonstrate his unwavering commitment to God. This event also foreshadows the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, who willingly gave His life for the salvation of humanity.
3. The difference in time and context: The command to Abraham in Genesis 22 took place in a different time and context than the prohibition against child sacrifice in Jeremiah 7:31. The latter was given to the Israelites during a time when child sacrifice was a common practice among the surrounding nations, and God wanted to make it clear that such practices were not acceptable.

“And Abraham said, ‘My son, God will provide for Himself the lamb for a burnt offering.’ So, the two of them went together.” (Genesis 22:8)

Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary sheds more light on this apparent dilemma:

22:11-14 It was not God’s intention that Isaac should actually be sacrificed, yet nobler blood than that of animals, in due time, was to be shed for sin, even the blood of the only begotten Son of God. But in the mean while God would not in any case have human sacrifices used. Another sacrifice is provided. Reference must be had to the promised Messiah, the blessed Seed. Christ was sacrificed in our stead, as this ram instead of Isaac, and his death was our discharge. And observe, that the temple, the place of sacrifice, was afterwards built upon this same mount Moriah; and Calvary, where Christ was crucified, was near. A new name was given to that place, for the encouragement of all believers, to the end of the world, cheerfully to trust in God, and obey him. Jehovah-jireh, the Lord will provide; probably alluding to what Abraham had said, God will provide himself a lamb. The Lord will always have his eye upon his people, in their straits and distresses, that he may give them seasonable help. (2)

In conclusion, the apparent contradiction between Genesis 22:2 and Jeremiah 7:31 can be resolved by considering the context, purpose, and time of the commands. The key takeaway is that God never intended for Issac to be sacrificed, and the command to Abraham was a unique test of faith that ultimately pointed to the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15)

Notes:

1. Charles John Ellicott, Bible Commentary for English Readers, Jeremiah, Vol. 5, (London, England, Cassell and Company), p. 35.
2. Matthew Henry, Concise Commentary, Genesis, (Nashville, Tennessee, Thomas Nelson), p. 275.

Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife, Marea, attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of 18 books defending the Reformed Faith. Books can be ordered online at Amazon.