The introduction of a study of the Bible as though it were a literature opens grand vistas for the Christian visionary. We should pray that Bible figures be subjected to the same sort of character study as might be done in a literature class. And surely no figure of the Bible is more deserving of such attention than the father of all three of the faiths of the Arabian peninsula. Here I present a suggestion as to how Abraham might be approached in such a class in a way which leads to greater moral discernment and critical thinking on the part of the students.

Without the eyes of faith and at first glance Abraham certainly comes across as an evil man who is willing to sacrifice his innocent son to comply with what he takes to be the command of God. Concerning this charge the class should examine him in the context of the evidence which is given to us via the two testaments making up the Bible.

First, however, three points need to be made. Abraham lives in an era of miracles. Therefore when he believes in a miracle, we don’t have to acknowledge miracles (for that is precluded in our secular class), but merely that he is allow to know that as a fact, in the same way that he knew for a fact that he was standing on a fixed earth. Secondly, within the context of the Bible it is to be assumed that Abraham knew good and evil as well as we do and indeed as well as God does (Genesis 3:22). Finally we will assume that no man can tell by looking that he is dealing with God, for Satan can appear as “an angel of light.”

Here are the relevant facts from the two testaments (and the students might, as a homework assignment, be required to verify these): Abraham has experienced a miracle in the birth of Isaac and knows for a fact that Isaac will bear children; and Isaac has not sired any children at the time of the sacrifice. Abraham hears the command of sacrifice and does not argue on behalf of his precious Isaac as he argued for the evil people of Sodom. Abraham tells the servants that both he and Isaac will return after the sacrifice (and we know Abraham is no liar, for he never lied, although in the moment of a most severe test of faith he resorted to telling a half-truth). God himself has declared Abraham a righteous man. Isaac refuses to go along with sacrifice and has to be bound. Abraham knew that God could raise anyone from the dead.

A defense argument might go like this: Abraham does not have to know what God intends to do, indeed he does not even need to know that the voice was that of God. He knows full well that nothing and no one can thwart the promise of God. It is easy to assume that Abraham must be acting for the sake of his son. He can easily reason that God wants his son to have an experience which will give him the most precious gift that could be imagined for a beloved child, i.e., utter fearlessness with regard to death. It would be a peace, passing all understanding, conferred upon Isaac through experience that with Abraham had to begin with faith. In this regard Abraham is like a loving parent who forces his child to undergo a painful, traumatic but safe surgery involving some unconsciousness and which leads quickly to the greatest health. Accordingly Abraham must not only be declared innocent of wrong-doing, he deserves great praise, and emulation of his spirit as parent. [The fact the sacrifice was aborted is immaterial to the defense argument; perhaps a willing victim was necessary.] The students then might discuss the reasonableness of this defense, much as a jury would do.

Now ideally, since we have gone so far, we should avail ourselves of the law’s permission to incorporate other, relevant texts. Then we can draw in the Koran with its additional and quite different evidence concerning this Abraham, and the student can see what sort of defense might be as plausible in the Muslim case.

There are a multitude of such cases, provocative to the mind of the high school student. For example, when Jesus breaks the universally understood law of God as revealed by Moses, in order to do a good deed immediately (John 5), does he establish a principle that any follower may disregard any interpretation of a scriptural law if it keeps him from an act which in his sincere understanding is a loving act?

All in all I think the legislature’s approach to Bible instruction, if it includes this sort of character study, can be extremely rewarding to the students and indeed to all of us