What do you think?
Rate this book
Unbinding Isaac: The Significance of the Akedah for Modern Jewish Thought
Unbinding Isaac takes readers on a trek of discovery for our times into the binding of Isaac story. Nineteenth-century Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard viewed the story as teaching suspension of ethics for the sake of faith, and subsequent Jewish thinkers developed this idea as a cornerstone of their religious worldview. Aaron Koller examines and critiques Kierkegaard’s perspective—and later incarnations of it—on textual, religious, and ethical grounds. He also explores the current of criticism of Abraham in Jewish thought, from ancient poems and midrashim to contemporary Israel narratives, as well as Jewish responses to the Akedah over the generations.
Finally, bringing together these multiple strands of thought—along with modern knowledge of human sacrifice in the Phoenician world—Koller offers an original reading of the Akedah. The biblical God would like to want child sacrifice—because it is in fact a remarkable display of devotion—but more than that, he does not want child sacrifice because it would violate the child’s autonomy. Thus, the high point in the drama is not the binding of Isaac but the moment when Abraham is told to release him. The Torah does not allow child sacrifice, though by contrast, some of Israel’s neighbors viewed it as a religiously inspiring act. The binding of Isaac teaches us that an authentically religious act cannot be done through the harm of another human being.
Finally, bringing together these multiple strands of thought—along with modern knowledge of human sacrifice in the Phoenician world—Koller offers an original reading of the Akedah. The biblical God would like to want child sacrifice—because it is in fact a remarkable display of devotion—but more than that, he does not want child sacrifice because it would violate the child’s autonomy. Thus, the high point in the drama is not the binding of Isaac but the moment when Abraham is told to release him. The Torah does not allow child sacrifice, though by contrast, some of Israel’s neighbors viewed it as a religiously inspiring act. The binding of Isaac teaches us that an authentically religious act cannot be done through the harm of another human being.
282 pages, Hardcover
Published July 1, 2020
6 people are currently reading
57 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
November 21, 2020
"It is all well and good to celebrate the personal and individual faith that animates some people's lives, but a society cannot afford to allow individual's sense of religious devotion to take precedence over the welfare of others. As a society, we must allow knights of faith to ascend the mountain to be alone with God. But we must not allow them to bring Isaac along" (154).
This is a well constructed book that covers a lot of ground in a short space. The core issue is the problem of how faith and ethics relate, especially in light of actions which claim to come from religious devotion but are ethically problematic. Genesis 22 (where Abraham is called on to sacrifice Isaac; the story is known as the Akedah) is the pole around which everything here orbits but Koller's book is more about 'history-of-thought' (philosophy, theology, ethics) than it is an exercise in Biblical studies.
His central argument is essentially that claims to religious devotion cannot be allowed to condone ethically problematic actions. The binding of Isaac is the frame through which this question is explored and Koller's main target is the Kiekegaardian interpretation of this text. After setting this interpretative tradition in a wide context, Koller criticizes it on four fronts: 1) radical subjectivity 2) the erasure of Isaac from the narrative 3) the primacy of the individual over the community and 4) the modern imposition of a clash between faith and morality.
From there he moves to his own reading of Genesis 22 from which he works out the implications toward the statement quoted at the beginning of this review. There are two essential building blocks for his reading. First, he argues for an openness to the logic of child sacrifice in ancient Israel (and Israel's God). Second, he builds on Maimonides' concept of a tiered revelation in prophecy to allow for the sort of conflicted will in God that we find in ourselves (as in: I want to eat that cake...but I moreso want to be healthy). How this works in Genesis 22, is that Abraham rightly understood God's desire to have Isaac sacrificed but this was actually a lesser desire which was trumped by Abraham's recognition of a higher tier revelation whereby God's greater desire to not have Isaac sacrificed was understood.
Working from this foundation, Koller sets the narrative of Genesis 22 as hinging on the recognition of the value of the person(hood) of Isaac. This story is then, as the title of the book says, about the "unbinding of Isaac." Koller notes a distinctive valuing of "the Other" in the Jewish tradition which enables this key move in Genesis 22. Thus the "key to the Akedah is in absorbing the lesson of the latter part of the narrative - the rejection of the sacrifice of Isaac - without abandoning the former part of the narrative - the command to offer Isaac as a sacrifice" (150).
One strength of the book is that a lot of ground is covered in a relatively short space, but it is done in a way that seems to cover it adequately. I think that Koller is an admirably clear thinker and communicator. This book is a model for how to do this kind of writing.
Koller raises a significant group of questions, but especially so for my own Protestant Christian tradition. It seems he even has 'us' in mind as he tears down Kierkegaard's reading of Genesis 22: "It may be said, then, without any surprise whatsoever, that Kierkegaard's Abraham is not a Jew. The radically individualistic faith experience described by Kierkegaard, in which Abraham could not involve Sarah, much less anyone else, is foreign to most strands of Jewish thought, although it may be home in Christianity, especially Protestantism" (103-4).
Koller's explicit use of resources like Maimonides is helpful. Both because he is pulling in voices that may not get a very wide hearing and because it forces the reader to identify what they have had at hand to face the realities of Genesis 22 for themselves. I think it is appropriate to do some spring cleaning with special attention to Kierkegaardian cobwebs which may be sagging in the corners!
One issue that I think Koller's work could be helpful with is the clash between conservative religious commitments and the LGBTQ movement. Here is a place where religious commitment calls people to hold to a set of positions based on religious authority which seems to involve them in a set of ethical behaviours which appear to be unkind and discriminatory toward another group of people. I don't find Koller's conclusions ultimately satisfying, but I think this book can be utilized to resource some of the difficult discussions which this issue entails.
As I just mentioned, I have to admit that I do not find Koller's conclusions fully convincing. He builds a lot on the 'attractive logic' of child sacrifice in the ancient world. Koller deals with texts and material culture here as well but main thrust of his argument at this point seems to put too much weight on a contemporary take on how this 'attractive logic' would have functioned.
Further, Koller's reading of Genesis 22 only works with a rejection of classic Christian theism. This is mostly in how he describes the will of God in the abstract but it also comes out in the specifics about child sacrifice. So, "there is a part of the biblical God that does desire that worshippers offer their children in sacrifice. After all, God, too, is not immune to the sense of jealousy when other worshippers offer their children to other deities. And God, too, recognizes that the sheep and grain offered on a daily basis on the altars below will always be gained by self-interest. So perhaps a gift of children would be appreciated?" (125). He follows: "Child sacrifice is thus a temptation for worshipers, as well as for God. It is no wonder, then, that God tempted Abraham and told him to offer his only child as a sacrifice" (126).
Two other issues, briefly. First, the the weight of the Akedah seems to isolate it from the rest of the story of Abraham and the God of Abraham. The readings of Genesis 22 which are rejected and which are offered by Koller seem far too focused on only Genesis 22. It is not clear how Koller's reading fits in with the broader sweep in the narrative of Genesis.
Finally, Koller is forced to leave the ultimate issue of how faith and ethics relate hanging. This is surely owing to the size and difficulty of the questions but it isn't clear (at least to me) that Koller is open about what is left unresolved. He would have us place the welfare of others over our own sense of religious devotion. But on what basis do we decide 'the welfare of others'?
Perhaps we need a messenger from God like the one which stayed Abraham's knife hand? Koller likes the possibility that this messenger was actually Isaac, looking Abraham full in the face and on that basis calls us, in the face of our religious devotion, to look others likewise full on in the face. This is an important point that is well made...but we have to notice that in this frame we have no secure resource to adjudicate the competing claims for what is 'good'.
With all that said, this is an excellent book and well worth the read. I think an ideal reader will have some grounding in western tradition of philosophy and ethics but a reader without will probably be fine if they pause to look up a few bits as they go. Koller is courageous enough to have us face the troubling reality of Genesis 22 full on and shows us that this is a rich place to engage in a whole set of persistently troubling questions.
I suspect that there is a full orbed Christological reading of all this which I would find much more satisfying but it also seems that this text is going to leave all 'solutions' with some vexing questions. This is, of course, very true to life itself and it is surely part of why the Akedah has such an enduring presence as humanity sorts through issues of faith and morality. Koller's book will reward the reader who is interested in pressing further in.
This is a well constructed book that covers a lot of ground in a short space. The core issue is the problem of how faith and ethics relate, especially in light of actions which claim to come from religious devotion but are ethically problematic. Genesis 22 (where Abraham is called on to sacrifice Isaac; the story is known as the Akedah) is the pole around which everything here orbits but Koller's book is more about 'history-of-thought' (philosophy, theology, ethics) than it is an exercise in Biblical studies.
His central argument is essentially that claims to religious devotion cannot be allowed to condone ethically problematic actions. The binding of Isaac is the frame through which this question is explored and Koller's main target is the Kiekegaardian interpretation of this text. After setting this interpretative tradition in a wide context, Koller criticizes it on four fronts: 1) radical subjectivity 2) the erasure of Isaac from the narrative 3) the primacy of the individual over the community and 4) the modern imposition of a clash between faith and morality.
From there he moves to his own reading of Genesis 22 from which he works out the implications toward the statement quoted at the beginning of this review. There are two essential building blocks for his reading. First, he argues for an openness to the logic of child sacrifice in ancient Israel (and Israel's God). Second, he builds on Maimonides' concept of a tiered revelation in prophecy to allow for the sort of conflicted will in God that we find in ourselves (as in: I want to eat that cake...but I moreso want to be healthy). How this works in Genesis 22, is that Abraham rightly understood God's desire to have Isaac sacrificed but this was actually a lesser desire which was trumped by Abraham's recognition of a higher tier revelation whereby God's greater desire to not have Isaac sacrificed was understood.
Working from this foundation, Koller sets the narrative of Genesis 22 as hinging on the recognition of the value of the person(hood) of Isaac. This story is then, as the title of the book says, about the "unbinding of Isaac." Koller notes a distinctive valuing of "the Other" in the Jewish tradition which enables this key move in Genesis 22. Thus the "key to the Akedah is in absorbing the lesson of the latter part of the narrative - the rejection of the sacrifice of Isaac - without abandoning the former part of the narrative - the command to offer Isaac as a sacrifice" (150).
One strength of the book is that a lot of ground is covered in a relatively short space, but it is done in a way that seems to cover it adequately. I think that Koller is an admirably clear thinker and communicator. This book is a model for how to do this kind of writing.
Koller raises a significant group of questions, but especially so for my own Protestant Christian tradition. It seems he even has 'us' in mind as he tears down Kierkegaard's reading of Genesis 22: "It may be said, then, without any surprise whatsoever, that Kierkegaard's Abraham is not a Jew. The radically individualistic faith experience described by Kierkegaard, in which Abraham could not involve Sarah, much less anyone else, is foreign to most strands of Jewish thought, although it may be home in Christianity, especially Protestantism" (103-4).
Koller's explicit use of resources like Maimonides is helpful. Both because he is pulling in voices that may not get a very wide hearing and because it forces the reader to identify what they have had at hand to face the realities of Genesis 22 for themselves. I think it is appropriate to do some spring cleaning with special attention to Kierkegaardian cobwebs which may be sagging in the corners!
One issue that I think Koller's work could be helpful with is the clash between conservative religious commitments and the LGBTQ movement. Here is a place where religious commitment calls people to hold to a set of positions based on religious authority which seems to involve them in a set of ethical behaviours which appear to be unkind and discriminatory toward another group of people. I don't find Koller's conclusions ultimately satisfying, but I think this book can be utilized to resource some of the difficult discussions which this issue entails.
As I just mentioned, I have to admit that I do not find Koller's conclusions fully convincing. He builds a lot on the 'attractive logic' of child sacrifice in the ancient world. Koller deals with texts and material culture here as well but main thrust of his argument at this point seems to put too much weight on a contemporary take on how this 'attractive logic' would have functioned.
Further, Koller's reading of Genesis 22 only works with a rejection of classic Christian theism. This is mostly in how he describes the will of God in the abstract but it also comes out in the specifics about child sacrifice. So, "there is a part of the biblical God that does desire that worshippers offer their children in sacrifice. After all, God, too, is not immune to the sense of jealousy when other worshippers offer their children to other deities. And God, too, recognizes that the sheep and grain offered on a daily basis on the altars below will always be gained by self-interest. So perhaps a gift of children would be appreciated?" (125). He follows: "Child sacrifice is thus a temptation for worshipers, as well as for God. It is no wonder, then, that God tempted Abraham and told him to offer his only child as a sacrifice" (126).
Two other issues, briefly. First, the the weight of the Akedah seems to isolate it from the rest of the story of Abraham and the God of Abraham. The readings of Genesis 22 which are rejected and which are offered by Koller seem far too focused on only Genesis 22. It is not clear how Koller's reading fits in with the broader sweep in the narrative of Genesis.
Finally, Koller is forced to leave the ultimate issue of how faith and ethics relate hanging. This is surely owing to the size and difficulty of the questions but it isn't clear (at least to me) that Koller is open about what is left unresolved. He would have us place the welfare of others over our own sense of religious devotion. But on what basis do we decide 'the welfare of others'?
Perhaps we need a messenger from God like the one which stayed Abraham's knife hand? Koller likes the possibility that this messenger was actually Isaac, looking Abraham full in the face and on that basis calls us, in the face of our religious devotion, to look others likewise full on in the face. This is an important point that is well made...but we have to notice that in this frame we have no secure resource to adjudicate the competing claims for what is 'good'.
With all that said, this is an excellent book and well worth the read. I think an ideal reader will have some grounding in western tradition of philosophy and ethics but a reader without will probably be fine if they pause to look up a few bits as they go. Koller is courageous enough to have us face the troubling reality of Genesis 22 full on and shows us that this is a rich place to engage in a whole set of persistently troubling questions.
I suspect that there is a full orbed Christological reading of all this which I would find much more satisfying but it also seems that this text is going to leave all 'solutions' with some vexing questions. This is, of course, very true to life itself and it is surely part of why the Akedah has such an enduring presence as humanity sorts through issues of faith and morality. Koller's book will reward the reader who is interested in pressing further in.
August 12, 2020
Abraham is lifted up by Paul and in the Book of Hebrews as an exemplar of faith. In Hebrews 11, a passage that defines the nature of faith, the author explicitly points to Abraham's willingness to offer Isaac up as a sacrifice being an example of faith. Though Hebrews does suggest that Abraham went into this test with the belief that God could raise the dead, and so Abraham figuratively received Isaac back from God (Heb. 11:17-19). Modern Christian readers have had to decide what to make of this passage. Could Soren Kierkegaard have been correct, that Abraham acted by faith without any expectation that God would spare his promised heir? That interpretation has had a great influence on the Christian community. But, what about Jewish interpretations. How has this story of Abraham and Isaac been understood?
Aaron Koller has written a powerful and enlightening exposition of this story from Genesis 22. The title is important, as this refers not to the sacrifice, but the unbinding of Isaac. Koller, who is professor Near Eastern and Jewish studies at Yeshiva University, demonstrates a strong handle on biblical, historical, and philosophical dimensions of this story. Since Kierkegaard has had such a major influence on our reading of this story, he doesn't shy away from it. He explores in some depth Kierkegaard's interpretation, its possible contexts, and how Jewish interpreters have engaged it. While it has influenced some interpretations, for the most part, Jewish interpreters have rejected it as not being true to Jewish faith and understandings of God. I will admit that for the most part, I agree with the Jewish interpretation (and that as a Christian minister and theologian).
A keyword is the Hebrew "Akedah" or sacrifice. This is the term used within Judaism to describe what Abraham attempted to do. Of the passage, Koller writes that "these three hundred words have haunted readers for thousands of years" (p. xx). He notes how unadorned the story is. There is little drama or dialogue. Yet the story is powerful, even as it is horrific. Koller notes that unlike other "texts of terror," this one gets much use, being one of the readings for Rosh Hashanah, which includes people of all ages.
While we may experience this text with revulsion and terror, it has played a central role in Judaism. It has been pictured in mosaic floors in synagogues, for instance. It is invoked on fast days. But how do we interpret it? That is the task undertaken by the author. Koller engages with interpreters who approach the story from philosophical and theological vantage points. He explores questions about what the story says about God, believers, and faith itself. He also explores how this story speaks to trauma, including the many centuries of persecution. It is also an exploration of the relationship of faith to ethics since in Kierkegaard's portrayal of the story, ethics is set aside in the name of faith. As Koller writes, "Kierkegaard and others have claimed that the essence of the story, if it can be boiled down to a single lesson, is that true faith may necessitate the violation of the ethical on occasion and that the person of faith may in fact defy what she knows to be ethical for her faith, on rare but real occasions" (p. xxviii). Koller rejects such an argument, and he offers a convincing defense of his position.
Koller explores the passage in eight chapters. He begins with Jewish experiences of the Akedah, before moving on to Kierkegaard. That chapter is fascinating and illuminating. He offers a chapter in which he lifts up interpretations that parallel Kierkegaard's in the 19th century, but probably weren't influenced by him since Kierkegaard's writings weren't well known until much later. This probably reflects a common culture, that was placing an emphasis on personal faith as opposed to the universal.
While Kierkegaard likely didn't influence 19th-century interpretations, his interpretation in "Fear and Trembling" did influence 20th-century conversations within Judaism. Although not everyone followed this lead, some important interpreters embraced the leap of faith Kierkegaard spoke of, even at the cost of ethics.
These conversations provide the foundation for the deeper discussion of the story, which begins with a chapter in which Koller brings into the conversation criticism of Kierkegaard's position. This is from a Jewish perspective. One of the elements lifted up in this discussion is the "erasure of Isaac." Why does Isaac disappear from the story, and in our normal interpretations? It's all about Abraham and not Isaac. This, according to Koller is "monstrous. He draws our attention to the role Isaac plays in the story. Ultimately, he concludes in his criticism of Kierkegaard, that in Judaism ethics can't be suspended. Again, I agree with him and not Kierkegaard.
We know that the story involves child sacrifice, even if Abraham didn't succeed. Koller suggests that child sacrifice was an accepted act within ancient society, including that of Israel. If we are to offer our best, wouldn't that include one's firstborn? Again, this is a most enlightening discussion, even if it is unsettling. Koller writes that "Child sacrifice is thus a temptation for worshipers, as well as for God. It is no wonder, then, that God tempted Abraham and told him to offer his only child as a sacrifice. The question, then, is why God turned Isaac away at the last moment." (p. 126). Yes, that is the question why did God issue the command and then change things up at the last minute?
Koller uses two chapters to address the question of why, if child sacrifice is not only acceptable but desirable, did Isaac live? Why didn't Isaac die? Engaging with Maimonides, Koller attempts to show how the Akedah is rejected, but not completely, and how this was discussed in Jewish philosophical circles in the pre-modern age. The chapter on Maimonides is followed by a more explicit discussion of the ultimate rejection of child sacrifice. Koller asks why, if child sacrifice was desirable, did God change things up? "What value is so transcendent that it disallows child sacrifice?" (p. 141). To get there, Koller invites us to consider the possibility that perhaps Abraham misheard God. It's possible that God misled Abraham, even as God had done in other cases. These are unsettling issues, but important ones. So, why doesn't God want child sacrifice? The answer might be found in the question of whether a child is a possession. Was Isaac a possession that Abraham could rightfully offer up? Perhaps not.
In his conclusion, Koller notes that the idea that the ethical can be suspended in the name of faith is dangerous. Therefore, Kierkegaard was wrong in suggesting that absolute obedience is an appropriate stance for the knight of faith to take. It might sound a bit odd, but I think it is something deeply rooted in Judaism, which emphasizes the ethical. Koller writes that the lesson that can be drawn here is that "if confronted by a conflict between a divine imperative and our obligations toward other human beings, we should seek out the face of the Other. By doing so, we may be privileged to an even deeper understanding of the religious imperatives, and we may discover that these obligations and the obligations to the human Other are merely two sides of the same coin" (p. 153).
I have had the blessing of reading several recent books on matters of religion and scripture from a Jewish perspective. I must say, not only have I learned from them, but I have had my faith challenged -- in a good way. here is another excellent book that while written for a Jewish audience needs to be read carefully by a Christian audience, especially clergy who are tasked with interpreting passages like this one.
Aaron Koller has written a powerful and enlightening exposition of this story from Genesis 22. The title is important, as this refers not to the sacrifice, but the unbinding of Isaac. Koller, who is professor Near Eastern and Jewish studies at Yeshiva University, demonstrates a strong handle on biblical, historical, and philosophical dimensions of this story. Since Kierkegaard has had such a major influence on our reading of this story, he doesn't shy away from it. He explores in some depth Kierkegaard's interpretation, its possible contexts, and how Jewish interpreters have engaged it. While it has influenced some interpretations, for the most part, Jewish interpreters have rejected it as not being true to Jewish faith and understandings of God. I will admit that for the most part, I agree with the Jewish interpretation (and that as a Christian minister and theologian).
A keyword is the Hebrew "Akedah" or sacrifice. This is the term used within Judaism to describe what Abraham attempted to do. Of the passage, Koller writes that "these three hundred words have haunted readers for thousands of years" (p. xx). He notes how unadorned the story is. There is little drama or dialogue. Yet the story is powerful, even as it is horrific. Koller notes that unlike other "texts of terror," this one gets much use, being one of the readings for Rosh Hashanah, which includes people of all ages.
While we may experience this text with revulsion and terror, it has played a central role in Judaism. It has been pictured in mosaic floors in synagogues, for instance. It is invoked on fast days. But how do we interpret it? That is the task undertaken by the author. Koller engages with interpreters who approach the story from philosophical and theological vantage points. He explores questions about what the story says about God, believers, and faith itself. He also explores how this story speaks to trauma, including the many centuries of persecution. It is also an exploration of the relationship of faith to ethics since in Kierkegaard's portrayal of the story, ethics is set aside in the name of faith. As Koller writes, "Kierkegaard and others have claimed that the essence of the story, if it can be boiled down to a single lesson, is that true faith may necessitate the violation of the ethical on occasion and that the person of faith may in fact defy what she knows to be ethical for her faith, on rare but real occasions" (p. xxviii). Koller rejects such an argument, and he offers a convincing defense of his position.
Koller explores the passage in eight chapters. He begins with Jewish experiences of the Akedah, before moving on to Kierkegaard. That chapter is fascinating and illuminating. He offers a chapter in which he lifts up interpretations that parallel Kierkegaard's in the 19th century, but probably weren't influenced by him since Kierkegaard's writings weren't well known until much later. This probably reflects a common culture, that was placing an emphasis on personal faith as opposed to the universal.
While Kierkegaard likely didn't influence 19th-century interpretations, his interpretation in "Fear and Trembling" did influence 20th-century conversations within Judaism. Although not everyone followed this lead, some important interpreters embraced the leap of faith Kierkegaard spoke of, even at the cost of ethics.
These conversations provide the foundation for the deeper discussion of the story, which begins with a chapter in which Koller brings into the conversation criticism of Kierkegaard's position. This is from a Jewish perspective. One of the elements lifted up in this discussion is the "erasure of Isaac." Why does Isaac disappear from the story, and in our normal interpretations? It's all about Abraham and not Isaac. This, according to Koller is "monstrous. He draws our attention to the role Isaac plays in the story. Ultimately, he concludes in his criticism of Kierkegaard, that in Judaism ethics can't be suspended. Again, I agree with him and not Kierkegaard.
We know that the story involves child sacrifice, even if Abraham didn't succeed. Koller suggests that child sacrifice was an accepted act within ancient society, including that of Israel. If we are to offer our best, wouldn't that include one's firstborn? Again, this is a most enlightening discussion, even if it is unsettling. Koller writes that "Child sacrifice is thus a temptation for worshipers, as well as for God. It is no wonder, then, that God tempted Abraham and told him to offer his only child as a sacrifice. The question, then, is why God turned Isaac away at the last moment." (p. 126). Yes, that is the question why did God issue the command and then change things up at the last minute?
Koller uses two chapters to address the question of why, if child sacrifice is not only acceptable but desirable, did Isaac live? Why didn't Isaac die? Engaging with Maimonides, Koller attempts to show how the Akedah is rejected, but not completely, and how this was discussed in Jewish philosophical circles in the pre-modern age. The chapter on Maimonides is followed by a more explicit discussion of the ultimate rejection of child sacrifice. Koller asks why, if child sacrifice was desirable, did God change things up? "What value is so transcendent that it disallows child sacrifice?" (p. 141). To get there, Koller invites us to consider the possibility that perhaps Abraham misheard God. It's possible that God misled Abraham, even as God had done in other cases. These are unsettling issues, but important ones. So, why doesn't God want child sacrifice? The answer might be found in the question of whether a child is a possession. Was Isaac a possession that Abraham could rightfully offer up? Perhaps not.
In his conclusion, Koller notes that the idea that the ethical can be suspended in the name of faith is dangerous. Therefore, Kierkegaard was wrong in suggesting that absolute obedience is an appropriate stance for the knight of faith to take. It might sound a bit odd, but I think it is something deeply rooted in Judaism, which emphasizes the ethical. Koller writes that the lesson that can be drawn here is that "if confronted by a conflict between a divine imperative and our obligations toward other human beings, we should seek out the face of the Other. By doing so, we may be privileged to an even deeper understanding of the religious imperatives, and we may discover that these obligations and the obligations to the human Other are merely two sides of the same coin" (p. 153).
I have had the blessing of reading several recent books on matters of religion and scripture from a Jewish perspective. I must say, not only have I learned from them, but I have had my faith challenged -- in a good way. here is another excellent book that while written for a Jewish audience needs to be read carefully by a Christian audience, especially clergy who are tasked with interpreting passages like this one.
October 11, 2021
This book reviews a variety of perspectives governing the Akedah, and ultimately concludes that the most important part of the story is the ending: that God commands Abraham NOT to kill his son, and in doing so sets a precedent for the principle that (in Koller's words) "one person's religious fulfillment cannot come through harm to another."
Koller points out that in the ancient world, child sacrifice was at least somewhat normal, so God's command to sacrifice Isaac was not as astonishing as it might be to us. He also argues that divergences between the Torah and Babylonian law often support his reading; in particular, the Code of Hammurabi sometimes requires children to be harmed for their parents' torts or crimes, while the Torah treats children as autonomous individuals and thus does not.
So why is there even a command to sacrifice Isaac in the first place? Here, Koller relies on Maimonides' discussion of the levels of prophecy. Maimonides writes that not all prophecy is the same; dreams and visions seem true to the prophet, but are nevertheless less direct than the voice of God or an angel. Koller points out that this concept makes it easier to understand the apparent changes in God's will over the course of Genesis 22. Maimonides notes that the command to sacrifice Issac was in a dream (a lower level of prophecy). By contrast, the command NOT to sacrifice Issac was a higher level of prophecy; the first prophecy "was not false, but it was incomplete." In other words, God wants the love and commitment that Abraham exhibited, but does not want actual human sacrifice.
Koller points out that in the ancient world, child sacrifice was at least somewhat normal, so God's command to sacrifice Isaac was not as astonishing as it might be to us. He also argues that divergences between the Torah and Babylonian law often support his reading; in particular, the Code of Hammurabi sometimes requires children to be harmed for their parents' torts or crimes, while the Torah treats children as autonomous individuals and thus does not.
So why is there even a command to sacrifice Isaac in the first place? Here, Koller relies on Maimonides' discussion of the levels of prophecy. Maimonides writes that not all prophecy is the same; dreams and visions seem true to the prophet, but are nevertheless less direct than the voice of God or an angel. Koller points out that this concept makes it easier to understand the apparent changes in God's will over the course of Genesis 22. Maimonides notes that the command to sacrifice Issac was in a dream (a lower level of prophecy). By contrast, the command NOT to sacrifice Issac was a higher level of prophecy; the first prophecy "was not false, but it was incomplete." In other words, God wants the love and commitment that Abraham exhibited, but does not want actual human sacrifice.
August 23, 2020
Reading persuasive academic Jewish Orthodox theology is a rare pleasure. This book convincingly argues that the Existentialist Kierkegardian Solevechickian reading of the Akedah that I was taught as the "official" modern orthodox theology is both unethical and based on a poor reading of the text. Instead, using Maimonides and ibn Kaspi, Levinas and Levenson, Koller argues that 1- the akedah is a two act drama, with both parts equally important, first God desiring human sacrifice and only then rejecting it. And 2- that it is imperative to center Isaac as a coequal participant in the action. In short, God desires the sacrifice of sons, but moreso desires respecting the humanity and independence of the son as an individual.
Overall 5/5
Overall 5/5
September 13, 2020
” is one of the Ten Commandments. Yet, twice a year – during Rosh Hashanah and Shabbat Vayera – Jews read the Akedah, the binding of Isaac, which could also be called “the attempted murder of Isaac.” God tests Abraham by commanding him to sacrifice his son. Is obeying this command immoral or the ultimate sign of faith? Aaron Koller explores this question in his fascinating and complex “Unbinding Isaac: The Significance of the Akedah for Modern Jewish Thought” (The Jewish Publication Society).
See the rest of my review at https://www.thereportergroup.org/past...
See the rest of my review at https://www.thereportergroup.org/past...
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews