The story of the (near) sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham is a distressing story, and difficult to interpret. (Genesis 22:1-20) Abraham is praised by the angel for his faithfulness. And we find resonances of this in the New Testament with the Father sacrificing the Son. A couple of things to notice. Abraham does not sacrifice Isaac. The use of Father/Son language and sacrifice in the New Testament is metaphor. God did not literally sacrifice Jesus. But by using the language of sacrifice the New Testament is making a connection that we should explore. I have been influenced by the work of a theorist named Rene Girard. His theory, put simply, is that the universal practice of human sacrifice (and animal sacrifice too) was the means by which ancient people brought unity. By blaming the scapegoat human community could be saved from the threat of fracture. We might not formally sacrifice these days, but the ‘scapegoat’ is still with us. Girard’s research led him to see that the New Testament’s use of sacrifice in regards to Jesus was a critique of the scapegoat function in society. The Gospels are written from the perspective of the victim, not those who sacrifice and scapegoat. God raises the victim as a final ‘no’ to this scapegoat function in society. In the case of Jesus the ‘sacrifice’ does bring human community and unity with God, but not as expected. The union he brings requires not a participation in scapegoating, but repentance for this most primordial of sins, and a turning to the teaching of Jesus regarding love of enemies and non-retaliation.
No comments:
Post a Comment