THE LITERARY AND HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BINDING

OF ISAAC
By: Paul Dexter, 11:00 AM REL 250WI
Edits:
Fixed biblical citation of multiple verses from the same chapter. Fixed punctuation;
removed periods at the ends of quotes, using one period per sentence. Added suggested “one,”
“the,” and “biblical”; various grammatical clarifications/edits as per suggestions. Added indents
to paragraphs lacking them, clarifying paragraph topic shifts. Formatted paper to 12 pt. font,
Times New Roman. Added citation for paraphrase from Coogan and Chapman, concerning the
scholarly opinions of the Elohist source. Removed sentence suggesting similarity between J and
E source to keep the paraphrase accurate to the source and concise. Fixed misspelled words
(“painting”). Fixed syntax surrounding Abraham’s demeanor toward God. Organized the
paragraph about Abraham’s demeanor to support the paragraph’s main thesis. Changed transition
between the sections of Abraham’s demeanor and the Hebrew meaning of “religious”. Removed
apostrophe “s” from non-possessive phrases to make the paper more formal. Addressed God’s
promise to Abraham pre-Akedah, clarifying that God finally gives Abraham land and progeny
upon passing God’s test. Changed transitions from “however” to avoid the implication that the
ideas written are contradictory. Added transition from the criticism paragraph to the traditions
paragraph to relate interpretations of the text to their use in religious traditions. Clarified the
meaning of “the nobility of sacrifice” concerning interpretations of the text and their impacts on
religious traditions. Deleted final sentence to avoid yet another clarification of the meaning of
“faith,” as well as to avoid the misconception of God not making prior promises to Abraham.
Replaced “form” criticism with “literary” criticism because the following paragraph concerns
analysis of the rhetorical meaning of the text. Changed the “literary use of God” section to
include a few sentences that acknowledge the view of God in the Ancient Near East as a deity to
be feared. Accordingly, the section that defends the idea of a loving God has been formatted to
be an “alternative hypothesis.”
 Paul Dexter

11-11-17

11:00 AM

The Literary and Historical Significance of the Binding of Isaac

Faith is a central concept to most religions; the primary three modern religions

(Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) are no exception. Interestingly, all three of these religions

share certain texts. Underlining the concept of faith is the biblical text Genesis 22. The relevance

of this text must not be understated, considering many of its theological and ethical implications.

Correspondingly, this paper is a detailed analysis of the biblical text Genesis 22, taking into

consideration the world in, behind, and in front of the text. The binding of Isaac (from the

Hebrew “Akedah”) has traits reflective of the Elohist source, and is used to demonstrate the

virtue of faith (or more accurately, God-fearing), as well as martyrdom in both the text and in

later interpretations.

Importantly, if one is to understand its text, one must know the story itself. It begins with

a peculiar request from God: To test Abraham, God tells Abraham to offer Isaac as a burnt

offering atop a mountain in the land of Moriah (Gen 22:1-2). So, Abraham prepares for the trip

by getting up early, gathering firewood for the offering, and saddling his donkey. Once he is

ready, he gathers “two of his young men with him” as well as Isaac and departs for the mountain

in Moriah (Gen 22:3). The group travels together for three days, eventually making it to the

mountain. Once the group arrives, Abraham tells the two “young men” to stay with their donkey,

reassuring them that he and Isaac would climb the mountain to worship and come back for them

later (Gen 22:4-22:5). Abraham and Isaac then proceed to climb up the mountain together,

carrying the firewood, a torch, and a knife. However, Isaac realizes that they do not have any
lamb to slaughter, and asks Abraham where they will find something to sacrifice. Abraham

replies, “God himself will provide the lamb for a burnt offering, my son” (Gen 22:6-8).

Once Abraham and Isaac make it to the top of the mountain, Abraham builds an altar and

lays out the wood in the necessary order for a burnt offering. Then, Abraham ties up (binds)

Isaac and places him on the altar for sacrifice (Gen 22:9). Abraham then grabs his knife and

raises it, ready to kill Isaac (Gen 22:10). But in the nick of time, an angel of God calls to

Abraham from Heaven, and tells him not to kill Isaac. The angel says that Abraham has proven

his fear of God, since he has not withheld his only son from God’s will (Gen 22:11-12).

Abraham looks up and discovers that God has provided him with a ram to sacrifice, “caught in a

thicket by its horns” (Gen 22:13). So, Abraham sacrifices the ram instead of Isaac, and proclaims

that “The Lord will provide” (Gen 22:13-14).

The angel of God proceeds to tell Abraham that he will be blessed with “offspring as

numerous as the stars of Heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore,” and that “your offspring

shall possess the gate of their enemies” (Gen 22:15-17). The angel tells Abraham that humanity

will gain the blessing because Abraham passed the test (Gen 22:18). Once Abraham hears the

message of the angels, he returns to the young men awaiting him at the bottom of the mountain

and the trio goes on to live in Beer-sheba (Gen 22:19). Strangely, the text gives no indication that

Isaac returns to the young men as well. Gen 22:19 simply states, “Abraham returned to his young

men.” Isaac essentially disappears from this chapter of text, and never speaks to Abraham again.

Then, the passage ends with the angel detailing the descendants of Abraham’s brother Nahor

(Gen 22:20-24).

According to biblical scholars, there are several indications that the story is written

largely by the “E” (Elohist) source. Now, it must be mentioned that there is a great deal of
scholarly debate concerning the existence of the E source. Many modern Bible scholars point out

the heavily fragmented nature of the E source throughout the text, and this suggests that the E

source may not have existed at all (Coogan and Chapman 50). However, the E source is very

difficult to eliminate entirely as a concept, since many of the traits listed below are not

necessarily indicative of any of the other three Documentary Hypothesis sources (Coogan and

Chapman 50). While many scholars attempt to resolve this conflict by suggesting the existence

of a combined JE source, Genesis 22 largely indicates authorship based on Wellhausen’s theory

of the E source (Coogan and Chapman 50). Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, the

assumption will be made that the Elohist source does indeed exist.

Several markers indicate the E source: First, God is referred to as “Elohim” (Coogan and

Chapman 48). Second, God appears indirectly within the story, not appearing as a cosmic entity

or anthropomorphic being. Instead, God employs prophets, dreams, and divine messengers such

as angels (Coogan and Chapman 48). Genesis 22 provides several examples of these traits.

Biblical scholar Howard Moltz writes, “After the sacrifice is aborted, Abraham simply gives a

name to the place at which the sacrifice would have occurred (22.14), but he does not address

God” (Moltz 60). Moltz suggests that the text indicates a limited presence of God within the

passage, consistent with the E source. Moltz also points out, “Abraham never again speaks to

God or seeks his blessing; instead, he speaks only about God. When, for example, the sacrifice is

stopped, Abraham does not respond with either praise or thanksgiving, but provides only a place-

name for the sacrificial site” (Moltz 60). According to Moltz, God is not addressed directly by

Abraham in this passage. Once again, this matches with characteristics of the E source, since

God uses indirect communication with mortals. Additionally, the NOAB Notes also indicate

traits of the E source: Gen 22:15-18 indicate God’s message to Abraham as a divine response to
Abraham’s passing of the test; however, an angel indirectly accomplishes this, concurrent with

traits of the E source.

Using the lens of literary criticism, the Akedah serves as a story to illustrate God’s

power, as well as rewards for obedience to him. Given the extreme nature of God’s request, one

interpretation of Gen 22 would be that God is some form of sadist, forcing Abraham to complete

a morally reprehensible task for his own will. However, another interpretation suggests that God

is not necessarily a sadist in the passage; it is possible that God legitimately must test Abraham,

since prior actions of Abraham call into question his moral character. Namely, since Abraham

“let Sarah into the harem of a foreign king (Gen 12 and Gen 20)” (Davis). Therefore, God makes

a strong demand to Abraham in order to demonstrate that Abraham “is not in control of the

covenant relationship” (Davis). Based on this interpretation of the text, it makes sense that

Abraham is written to be entirely subject and unquestioning to God’s request. By making

Abraham such a weak individual compared to God’s strength and will, this exaggerates the idea

that God is indeed a being of great power; one that must be followed. By the same token,

Abraham is the first person in the Bible to be written in Hebrew as “religious.” Notably, the

literal translation in Hebrew is “one-who-fears-God,” suggesting that Abraham may not have

committed the Akedah out of love for God, but rather, out of fear (Davis). This relationship is

indicative of the observed view of God in the Ancient Near East as a being to be feared.

Alternatively, some scholars suggest that the literary use of God in Gen 22 is to not portray a

purely fear-based relationship of deity and man. By this interpretation, it is relevant in the

passage that God finally grants Abraham the promised rewards of both land and offspring as

rewards for passing the test (Gen 22:16-18). These rewards are extremely generous in nature,

establishing God as not only a powerful being, but a benevolent being. Experts like Howard
Moltz hypothesize that these contradictory suggestions about the nature of God’s command to

Abraham may indicate a literary need for both interpretations of the command. There is a

reference to the distinction a “‘covenant of grant’ as distinct from a ‘covenant of treaty,’”

meaning that God is portrayed as both charitable and unquestionably powerful (Moltz 61).

These concepts from the Akedah have been adapted by modern religious traditions to fit

their particular needs. Interestingly, they all hold in common the idea of the nobility of a

sacrifice; namely, these interpretations of the text promote the idea that one should be willing to

do anything for God, including the sacrifice of oneself and others. Just as the text idolizes

Abraham for his willingness to sacrifice his son, different traditions endorse this idea for their

own traditions. The NOAB Notes for 22:9-13 state that Jewish and Christian traditions highlight

the Akedah with a different ending, in which Isaac is instead sacrificed, and thus creates a model

for martyrdom. This view is especially influential to Christian beliefs, due to the central nature of

martyrdom in Christianity’s founding. While some basic details of the story were modified for

use within Muslim interpretation, the theme of noble sacrifice remains present in the story: “The

immolation of the son of Abraham—which is, let us recall, the origin of the Feast of the Sheep in

Muslim tradition, in which the victim is Ishmael, not Isaac” (Martin-Achard 470). The NOAB

Notes for 22:1-19 state that later traditions saw the story as exceedingly important; ironically,

there is no specific indication in the text that this is an important story. Rather, its importance has

been extrapolated over time through interpretation. This indicates the perceived importance of

faith through cultural interpretations. Robert Martin-Archard also writes, “A later text, the

Biblical Antiquities (of Pseudo-Philo, 1st century C.E.), equally considered that the sacrifice of

Isaac had been accomplished and saw in this the reason for the election of the Israelites (18:5):

the blood of Isaac thus sealed God’s covenant with his people (L. A. B. 18:5; cf. 32:1-4; 40:2)”
(Martin-Archard 469). Later interpretations tended to stray from the original story; while they

retain the themes of noble sacrifice and faith, they strayed from the text to meet certain political

needs in different societies.

The cultural interpretation of Genesis 22 also includes other contributions to culture, such

as Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio’s “The Sacrifice of Isaac.” The paining displays Abraham

bent over Isaac, holding a knife. He is looking behind him, and he sees the angel who has

grabbed his hand, preventing him from killing Isaac. The angel is pointing at Abraham with his

off hand, and Abraham has a very grim look on his face. Isaac appears to be in severe distress,

and is being held down by Abraham. Isaac is not wearing a shirt, and the ram is adjacent to Isaac.

Notably, this picture is not accurate to the text; the ram only shows up after Abraham unties

Isaac, and the miracle is used to show God’s power. While many interpretations display Isaac as

willing to sacrifice himself, Isaac is visibly upset in this depiction. Isaac displays very little

opposition or support for the act in the text. The background of the image does not necessarily

match the text, since the text places the scene atop a mountain. Here, a town is present; it could

possibly be Beer-sheba, where Abraham and Isaac go after the Akedah. All these errors in the

continuity of the painting and story indicate the changing adaptation of Genesis 22 into different

cultures in over time.

The Akedah is reflective of the beliefs of its Elohist writers, and its use throughout

history has generally been to glorify the concept of martyrdom, as well as to illustrate God’s

power and to display that God will reward those who follow his commands, even if those

commands happen to be extreme in nature.

 Works Cited

Coogan, Michael D., and Cynthia R. Chapman. The Old Testament. 4th ed. New York: Oxford
University Press, 2017.

Davis, Ellen. “The Binding of Isaac (Gen 22:1-19).” Bible Odyssey. Accessed 11/2/2017.
https://www.bibleodyssey.org/en/passages/main-articles/binding-and-sacrifice-of-isaac

Martin-Achard, Robert. “Isaac” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary 3, ed. by D.N. Freedman (New
York: Doubleday, 1992), 462-470.

Moltz, Howard. “God and Abraham in the binding of Isaac.” Journal for the Study of the Old
Testament 26 no. 2 (2001): 59-69.