Was Abraham insane?

[post-abrahamic]

spoken like a true believer defending the faith. But, bb, when do we get to criticize the Abrahamic religions, then? Never? We should just count our blessings from God to have Jews fighting Muslims, Muslims fighting Christians, Christians fighting Muslims, this is what we must accept without question?

I don't think so..

 

[Saltmeister]

spoken like a true believer defending the faith. But, bb, when do we get to criticize the Abrahamic religions, then? Never? We should just count our blessings from God to have Jews fighting Muslims, Muslims fighting Christians, Christians fighting Muslims, this is what we must accept without question?

I don't think so..

Criticising the faith? Criticise at will. I don't really mind. It must be interesting to know why people choose to uphold certain beliefs. I invite you to learn and find out why......and it's not as simple as just defending the castle and fighting for one's country. It's a matter of identity. We belong to something. We treasure it. We belong to different things, but there's common ground, which is why we're here.

Defending the faith? We must sound like a bunch of paranoid, cynical pessimists with a persecution complex so big we don't even know when to start discussing our differences. I aspire to convince you otherwise!!!

Are we at war? Actually things are quite cordial here in the Abrahamic forum. Not much fighting. More like a common social club......

As war as "defending the faith" is concerned, it's not really defence. It's just a matter of explaining what it all means to us......just giving our unique perspective. Sounds like we're combating some adversary......and yes, the comments of some posters here may be provocative, but it's just sarcasm. Don't take it too hard......or personal.......

You don't expect us to bore you here by agreeing and not disagreeing with you, eh? The world would be pretty boring if we all thought the same.

We're here to entertain........ I hope you're amused. Enjoy the experience.

 

[Francis king]

yeah, okay, my previous post was flippant yet...

personally, I find it difficult to accept that a) any kind of God worth worshipping would test a man this way, and take things so far he would expect a man to choose such a miserable God over his own son,
and b) that we are so quick to hold up these "examples of great faith" when today, in our time, we would view such behaviours as symptoms of some kind of psychotic disorder...

if God said to me- kill some children, I would tell him to go to hell, and if there really was no choice but to kill a child I would kill myself first, as a great act of defiance...

I would be far more likely to admire Abraham here if he had refused... if he had been tortured like a martyr, or dragged into hell by winged demons to suffer a millenia of misery, I'd pray for him- yet we uphold this gesture of his as something saintly...

what gives? You would kill your children for God if he asked? u wish u had that much faith that u could...? that's disturbing....

as for suggesting that we must view abraham in his rightful context and bear in mind that child killing was okay way back in the day I think we should remind ourselves that in cultures where ritual human sacrifice took place it was never fathers killing their own children, just like that... there was ceremony, process, ritual, and usually children were the last to be killed, as the goddess wanted- not women and children, but strong or handsome adult men, usually... there has been very little child sacrifice over the years, and it is only in rare cases does this happen and it is usually for the sake of the individual doing the killing, (the souls of children are considered pure, to these types, and they use the killing to increase their own power or longevity) not for the greater good of the community, which was the reason for the practise way back in the day...

what if the story was written as... abraham has sat up praying to ten days and nights. He's been fasting too. And praying. And currently he's a little unhinged. He tells his wife that he'd heard God tell him to kill his son, and he goes out to do it... within twenty minutes all the neighbours know, and are hanging round the garden, watching. He has to go through with it now...

but, da dah! God booms- what u doing, soft lad! put down that big knife!

lol

 

[post-abrahamic]

Only the Gnostics had the guts to go against Yahweh. There's a movie one can rent called "The Rapture" with Mimi Rogers and David Duchuvny..whatever starring in it. The movie shows the Abrahamic madness in modern light as it also shows the Gnostic position refusing to obey a sick and twisted God no matter what.

 

[paul]

But there's a little something more in this story than Abraham being told to kill his son.

Abraham had already been told by God his son would have children.
He knew his son would live to have children, this was promised by God.

His faith was not in being willing to kill his son at God's command.
But in his belief that he would rise again or maybe not die.

In this story it is not that a voice in his head told him, it was God who had already performed a miraculous promise with the birth of this son Isaac.

It's hard for us to imagine, God talking with us in such a way, completeing such a miraculous promise in our lives.
Promising us our son will have children, and then asking us to sacrifice our son.
Abraham had nothing to fear of losing his son, that would be a lack of faith, his faith was he beleived he wouldn't lose his son.

He did show complete devotion in giving more than his own self but his beloved child.
For he put not the faith of his own life, but that of his beloved son.

And not in that he would die, but that he would live.

 

[Muslimwoman]

Defending the faith? We must sound like a bunch of paranoid, cynical pessimists with a persecution complex so big we don't even know when to start discussing our differences. I aspire to convince you otherwise!!!

Hi Saltmeister, I am here to help you defend the faith (not sure which one but for the sake of argument (or war) any one will do for now). So about .......did you hear that, they are coming to get me, no really they are.....aaarrrrrrgggggh

Sorry couldn't resist . The Abrahmic faiths - wow look at that, all our faiths are built upon the original scriptures given to the Jews, so the story of Abraham is important to us all.

Paul excellent job of explaining. Simple and straight to the point - wish I could do that.

IMHO one of the problems is that people try to read scriptures as you would a novel, it simply doesn't work that way.

 

[Saltmeister]

But its our reptillian mind which wants more more more ...for me me me ... even though we should know better

What do we think we're doing? The world's running out of oil and we hop on aeroplanes to go on these overseas holidays just to see the world, as opposed to just visiting one's family and friends. The overseas, non-family reunion holiday is starting to get a bit over-rated nowadays.

And then, back at home. The cars!!!! Arrrgggghhhhh. Build more railway tracks!!! More buses. Go completely public transport. Have a computerised car pooling service. More taxis. Less personally owned cars. Organise to have yourself transported to a destination of your choice.

Railways might be best. Have tracks going diagonally as well as horizontally (longitudinally) and vertically (latitudinally). How about digging a massive undersea trans-ocean transport system that is not hindered by ship-water-drag dynamics? An undersea railway? Could we build a massive bridge that stretches across oceans?

Hey.....the world is running out of oil. What else could we do to maintain rapid long-distance transport? Ships are slow. Should we build more hydrofoils?

Another possibility is to build lots of blimps.

 

[post-abrahamic]

Abraham's insanity skates again..

Guess I'll go renew my membership in BPOE, Blimps for Peace On Earth. You can't fly blimps with people in them over war zones so the more blimps in the air, the less war.

Oh, and Saltmeister? You know about the solar blimps? Made with transparent plastic skin and black solar panel flooring--the sunshine makes the trapped air heat up and lift the blimp while the solar panels supply electricity to the electric motors to propel the airship.

 

[bananabrain]

spoken like a true believer defending the faith.

Only the Gnostics had the guts to go against Yahweh.

look, mate, there are two possibilities here:

1. you are genuinely interested in dialogue and open to learning
2. you are just here to tell everyone how evil the "abrahamic religions" are (viz your comment about a "sick and twisted god" and "madness") and how much cleverer the gnostics are.

if it's 1. then i am sure we'll get on once we've got past the initial prickliness.

if it's 2. then frankly you're no different from someone who turns up here to tell me i'm going to hell because i'm not a christian, or a muslim, or that you are a new prophet and we should all believe in you instead, or that all religion is stupid and anyone who believes in a "sky pixie" is a deluded moron.

all i am saying is that people who come to criticise are not the same as people who come to genuinely learn and find stuff out. people who arrive with fixed ideas and closed minds and an agenda to bash one religion or group of religions are a) boring and b) completely missing the point of the site. now i appreciate that you find the aqedah a challenging text, but there is a difference between saying:

1. this is a tough text, i don't understand it, how do other people understand it, does it mean X or Y or what?

and saying:

2. see this text? the guy in it is a nutter, a sadistic psycho child abuser and his god is a maniac and we should all see that as a pattern.

one is an open question and the other is a statement which is designed as an attack. you must understand, however, that dialogue is not facilitated by rhetorical questions, but by genuine, open-minded enquiry. put it this way, i already know what you think, so what point is there for me to talk to you if you're not prepared to actually engage with other peoples' points of view?

personally, I find it difficult to accept that a) any kind of God worth worshipping would test a man this way, and take things so far he would expect a man to choose such a miserable God over his own son,

but what i am saying is that at the time this wouldn't have been an unusual thing to ask, rather it would have been the norm and actually, the radical thing is to say "you know, i'm not going to actually have you kill your son like you expect - religion's not going to be about that any more".

and b) that we are so quick to hold up these "examples of great faith" when today, in our time, we would view such behaviours as symptoms of some kind of psychotic disorder...

i agree - that's kind of the point, that these texts are not meant to be verbatim psychological case histories of literal, linear events, but pieces of sacred history. by the same token, a couple of hundred years ago you might have really admired a man who went out and claimed new land for his country, or who killed hordes of enemies in battle, whereas nowadays both of these behaviours are rightly regarded as reprehensible. it is perfectly fine for G!D to ask something like this in a sacred text (and always has been) but it is not alright for a man to take it upon himself to do something like this because he hears voices. the two cases are not comparable and any similarity is solely based upon the most superficial and tendentious comparisons. it would be like comparing the book of joshua to lord of the rings - the fact that both are books describe righteous wars and include acts of treachery does not mean we can compare the protagonists or the issues described.

by the same token, even abraham himself argued with G!D in trying to get sodom and gomorrah off the hook and later biblical figures commonly tried to avoid their fate or challenge the Divine Will. in fact, the sages of the talmud at least once told G!D to sod off and let them make up their own minds. (BT bava metzia 59b) the question that i would ask is, what is it about the aqedah that makes it possible for someone to agree to it? under what circumstances would someone not only go along with it, but rejoice in doing so? what, therefore, is the Text trying to teach us? to simply dismiss it as a barbaric act of cruelty is to resolutely refuse to delve beyond the superficial.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[Caimanson]

It's hard for us to imagine, God talking with us in such a way, completeing such a miraculous promise in our lives.
Promising us our son will have children, and then asking us to sacrifice our son.
Abraham had nothing to fear of losing his son, that would be a lack of faith, his faith was he beleived he wouldn't lose his son.

He did show complete devotion in giving more than his own self but his beloved child.
For he put not the faith of his own life, but that of his beloved son.

And not in that he would die, but that he would live.

That reminds that there is a very thin line between genuine faith and self deception. Think of those religious fanatics that refused medical treatment for their children believing that god would heal. Those children are now dead.

Fair enough if abraham wasn't crazy. Still makes me fear how these kind of stories are potentially interpreted, so that religious devotion is put before common sense and respect for human beings.

 

[post-abrahamic]

I fully agree. If we continue to never question the morality of these ancients who gave us our Abrahamic religious traditions and also, never forget, the history of Abrahamic religionists in action, then we will never learn to go past these ancient minds to arrive at what God's been pointing us towards all along--humanity, i.e., becoming truly humane beings.

 

[paul]

That reminds that there is a very thin line between genuine faith and self deception. Think of those religious fanatics that refused medical treatment for their children believing that god would heal. Those children are now dead.

These are very very few, and as you say are fanatics.
It's not religion that causes fanatics, i know of many protestors, for animals rights even human rights.
There was this group of animal rights who even went as far as to dig up the body of someones relative who was involved in testing on animals.
I know some religious people can be to to an extent fanatic in their beleifs.
But so are protestors, and even any movement.
Whether humanists, human rights, animals rights.

I think there is a problem with religious followers, in an ignorance of their religion, and self interperatation.
I can only speak of the Christian religion, for it is the only one i have a little knowledge of.
But what i understand is it leads man in love and righteousness, and healing and inner peace.

Self interperatation is to put our ideas onto things and the whole world does this with everything.
But true religion it interperates itself, and proves itself, it awakens our hearts and minds, it unfolds spiritual mysteries, it nourishes the hunger of the soul.

There are men and women throughout history, whom miracles have been performed through, whom have reached the heights of pure love.
We have to have the humility to recognize there are greater people than us who have walked this earth, who have had greater knowledge and lived by greater love.

Todays world is self evident, although everyone are all to eager to shout their own knowledge.
This world to a great extent lacks true spiritual knowledge, fails to live by deep love.
Passes the buck, the responsibilty from our own selves.

We can all find God, and He is found when the very source of love and righteousness is sought.
This love takes devotion, worship, to be raised to the height as our God, and faith in Him as the cure, the meaning, the very nourishment of life for all.

Fair enough if abraham wasn't crazy. Still makes me fear how these kind of stories are potentially interpreted, so that religious devotion is put before common sense and respect for human beings.

You talk of common sense use yours.
You can't place fanaticsim on religion.
What you see from biblical stories and Christian history, is people have tried medical treatment for their children, spent all their money on medical bills and after have been miraculously healed.

But what you talk of are very few, that it cannot be attributed to religion, only in a false self interperating understanding.

There are many cults, not based on Abrahamic literature.

You talk of self deception, you only have to look at the world.

What we find is the norm of the world is full of self deception.
And in many cases it has taken religion to wake people up.

 

[Saltmeister]

That reminds that there is a very thin line between genuine faith and self deception. Think of those religious fanatics that refused medical treatment for their children believing that god would heal. Those children are now dead.

Fair enough if abraham wasn't crazy. Still makes me fear how these kind of stories are potentially interpreted, so that religious devotion is put before common sense and respect for human beings.

Today, if you wanted your son healed of an illness, you either take him to a doctor, specialist or to the hospital.

Of course, it seems like a cop out for religious people, often, to not try and believe in miracles as a "possibility" in the near or immediate future, either through faith or some religious leader -- that maybe, just around the corner there's some guru who can perform miracles -- or maybe you could be a guru yourself?

The reality is, we can't just summon God out of the blue to just perform some miraculous event just to prove that we are "one of God's people," that we have special favour.

That reality is boring. We want to be heroes of some grand story, the ones to witness the great monumentally miraculous events, just to prove to ourselves and others that we are God's people, because we don't want someone else taking that status......or maybe we're jealous, or feel we're missing out......on that "God's people" status.

One of the Ten Commandments is "Thou shalt not covet." Do not desire your neighbour's house, wife, flock of sheep or donkeys.

So when someone refuses medical treatment that is freely and legally available, they are actually breaking one of the Ten Commandments -- they are covetting the notion (and status) of being one of the faithful. It is when we think we can be like the people in the Tanakh/OT, people of great faith who never stopped believing and trusting that God would somehow heal a loved one. We think that refusal of medical treatment is what makes us holy -- yes it's a "holier than thou" concept.

But they forget that this is a time when medical technology was insufficient and inadequate. There was nothing anyone could do, except if a miracle happened. But today, the technology is there. There is an alternative.

Asking for a miracle is supposed to be a last resort.....it should not be done for entertainment purposes.

 

[Saltmeister]

I fully agree. If we continue to never question the morality of these ancients who gave us our Abrahamic religious traditions and also, never forget, the history of Abrahamic religionists in action, then we will never learn to go past these ancient minds to arrive at what God's been pointing us towards all along--humanity, i.e., becoming truly humane beings.

Hi post-abrahamic,

I don't think it would be correct to assume it hasn't been questioned. I would of course, not encourage such acts in 21st century. But this event, I believe should be judged from the reality Abraham was in at the time, not the "reality" we have today. And yes, once again, I see reality as subjective. The universe we live in is not one big reality, but a trillion little ones, with each individual living in their own reality.

I would also be reluctant to classify behaviours as "psychotic" just because they are not what we would normally do in 21st-century society. As people living in 21st-century society we make rules concerning what is "normal" or "abnormal." Anything "abnormal" is seen as "corrupt" or "diseased" and not functioning normally. A mind is seen as not functioning normally if it doesn't conform to the rules we make, in the 21st-century, of what constitutes a mindset that is normal.

However, the word "psychotic" describes a mind that is no longer functioning as a human mind should function, and has nothing to do with what a culture defines as "normal." The human mind, when functioning normally, is supposed to be able to reason rationally. In that state it is able to see and appreciate all of the possibilities and consequences of actions and behaviour. A rational mind is often an open mind. When we're psychotic, the ability to think rationally and open-mindedly has been severely damaged by something -- there is somehow something that serves to restrict or confine one's thoughts, to the point where we can't fully appreciate the meaning of life and what is happening around us.

I don't believe that behaviours and actions by themselves can be judged right away as "psychotic." I believe you can only determine that after you have spoken to that person. That's because you have to find out whether or not they're thinking rationally. Are they open minded? Stubborn? Can they justify their actions? Do they fully appreciate the meaning of life, what is happening around them what they are doing? What words do they use?

Rationality has to do with sophistication. Two countries, A and B, go to war. Any diplomacy? Any rules of engagement? Declaration of war? No, none. They just fight. Another pair of countries, C and D, go to war. There is a diplomatic exchange, ideology, politics and rules of engagement are discussed. The two countries cannot agree and declare war. There is violence in both cases. C and D were obviously more rational even though in the end they chose violence. Violence does not equal psychosis and irrationality. The violence itself was rationalised and justified.

I reckon if Abraham had a good explanation and justification for what he did, and if he could demonstrate that he was reasonable and rational-minded then I think it would also be reasonable to assume he wasn't psychotic.

With regards to what paul said:

I think paul has a point in what he said before, about Abraham having been promised that his son would be the father of a great nation, and this being a test of Abraham's trust.

With regards to the relationship Abraham had with God, this wasn't part of an established religious practice. Yes, it was for other religions, but between Abraham and God this was a very personal request.

It would normally have been a religious ritual, but this wasn't a ritual. It was not something to be "practiced." It was a test, a personal request designed to determine whether Abraham trusted God.

I think it's also important to note that Isaac wasn't born naturally. He was born miraculously. Under normal circumstances, Isaac would not have been born. If Isaac had been born naturally, Abraham would have been fully responsible for Isaac's ultimate destiny and God would not have had any right to request that he be "sacrificed."

But Isaac was a gift from God. Although Isaac belonged to Abraham, having been given to him by God, it was God's gift to Abraham. Isaac was God's way of honouring the relationship he had with Abraham. It was God's responsibility to look after his gift, Isaac, to Abraham. Isaac was both Abraham's and God's responsibility. No Isaac, no relationship.

This was personal; a person's trust was being tested. God was being very sentimental.

 

[Caimanson]

Todays world is self evident, although everyone are all to eager to shout their own knowledge.
This world to a great extent lacks true spiritual knowledge, fails to live by deep love.
Passes the buck, the responsibilty from our own selves.

We can all find God, and He is found when the very source of love and righteousness is sought.
This love takes devotion, worship, to be raised to the height as our God, and faith in Him as the cure, the meaning, the very nourishment of life for all.

You talk of common sense use yours.
You can't place fanaticsim on religion.
What you see from biblical stories and Christian history, is people have tried medical treatment for their children, spent all their money on medical bills and after have been miraculously healed.

But what you talk of are very few, that it cannot be attributed to religion, only in a false self interperating understanding.

There are many cults, not based on Abrahamic literature.

You talk of self deception, you only have to look at the world.

What we find is the norm of the world is full of self deception.
And in many cases it has taken religion to wake people up.

Paul,

What I am trying to say, is that it can be difficult to tell between the voice of god and our ego.
I follow my ego too often, unenlightened perhaps, but I can't help it.
But it becomes very dangerous when I confuse my ego with the voice of god, because it adds an undeserved infallibility and too much importance to the self-serving utterings of a flawed ego.
It doesn't have to be about killing a child, there are many subtle ways in which you can hurt yourself and others.

Your point about the illusion of this world is a very valid one, perhaps the most difficult one to tackle.

 

[paul]

Paul,

What I am trying to say, is that it can be difficult to tell between the voice of god and our ego.
I follow my ego too often, unenlightened perhaps, but I can't help it.
But it becomes very dangerous when I confuse my ego with the voice of god, because it adds an undeserved infallibility and too much importance to the self-serving utterings of a flawed ego.
It doesn't have to be about killing a child, there are many subtle ways in which you can hurt yourself and others.

Your point about the illusion of this world is a very valid one, perhaps the most difficult one to tackle.

I totally agree with you.

I just think people are all too quick to criticise religion today.
Trying to find fault, and in doing so push away it's benefits.

And the sad thing, i think it holds the cure to all our problems, but to listen to the voice of God, is one thing, to follow it yet another.

What i can say in truth is help this God forsaking world Lord, we truly need you.

What can we say about the voice of God and our egos?

I find the witness of Saints can be a very inspiring one.
As with the bible sometimes there are things we don't understand, and i think it's best to put them aside, devour what we can at the time, and suprisingly they become evident at a later time when we're not trying so hard to understand.

I think when we try hard to understand things we are not ready to understand is when we force a false interperatation.

I think the voice of God, is so humbling, we have to humble ourselves to truly hear it, in that may be how we distinguish it from our ego.

We have to examine ourselves not others.
I think when we realize our own faults and weaknesses we can have more understanding with others.

But not always have we been in the same positions as others, but their testimonies can touch our hearts for in hearing them, and identifying with them we can have greater compassion and even understanding.

But i think even there can lay a danger for us, for we can realize our human weaknesses and say we're only human and give up the battle.

We are human and not without sin, but without prayer, and continually relying on our God we can all too easily sink under the power of sin.

There is a battle to be fought, and it's daily, continously, and we have to humbly submit to our God, to bring realization to our minds, love to our hearts, and the strength to walk in it.

Maybe the self deception is much to do with our own pride/ego.
I find religion, can be about self realization.
If we exalt ourselves to know all, to be wise, to be good and have little faults we deceive our own selves and also those who we would lead astray in our pride.

Saint John Chrysostom said of our need to pray:
to prevail with Him; to be made intimate with Him, by continuance in supplication; to be humbled; to be reminded of thy sins.

 

[Muslimwoman]

I just think people are all too quick to criticise religion today. Trying to find fault, and in doing so push away it's benefits.

And the sad thing, i think it holds the cure to all our problems, but to listen to the voice of God, is one thing, to follow it yet another.

Very well said Paul. The challenge is not knowing our scripture, it is living that scripture in our daily lives.

 

[paul]

Very well said Paul. The challenge is not knowing our scripture, it is living that scripture in our daily lives.

Amen.

It is living the love, the scripture is there to guide us in.

 

[omner]

I think one of the things that is hard for people of faith to accept is that today we are by and large much better people than the people of legend in whichever scripture we may accept as our own. I don't see Abraham as insane by the standards of his time but he would be considered insane today. He was living in a world in which human sacrifice occurred frequently. God demanded he sacrifice because that was what was a test of faith for many of the other gods of the time. But in stopping Abraham and allowing the sacrifice of an animal instead, there was a new standard of morality set -- human sacrifice is not required by _this_ God, but rather the devotion to God to do whatever is asked.

Today many of the things that were introduced as advances in morals, diet, etc, in biblical times, are either accepted as commonplace, or something we in modern societies have completely gone past in social and ethical development. I think a lot of it is just that we are so much better educated today, and we communicate much more with a wider sphere of our neighbors from around the world and have become more tolerant due to this. Not all the world I know, but just by virtue of being literate and on the internet we are more educated and socially aware than a lot of other people in the world.

I would guess a lot of people will disagree with me on this but it's what I think. Actually probably not my original idea, I remember a rabbi saying much the same on a PBS documentary I saw many years ago -- that we are just much better people today than the people of biblical times, etc.

 

[Cyris Ali]

In order for Abraham to be considered insane, peace be upon him, one would have to exclude God from the equation, thereby neutralizing the point of the story entirely.

One must also consider that people sacrifice sons and daughters every day to bloody wars in the name of God. Give birth to them, knowing full well that this may be their fate one day. And they do it willingly. Without question.

Is this insane? Is this cruel and abusive?
Or is this just ...life in the big city?