The binding also figures prominently in the writings of several of the more important modern
theologians, such as
Søren Kierkegaard in
Fear and Trembling and Shalom Spiegel in
The Last Trial.
Jewish communities regularly review this literature, for instance the 2009
mock trial held by more than 600 members of the University
Synagogue of
Orange County, California.
Derrida also looks at the story of the sacrifice as well as
Kierkegaard's reading in
The Gift of Death. In
Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature, the literary critic
Erich Auerbach considers the Hebrew narrative of the binding of Isaac, along with
Homer's description of
Odysseus's scar, as the two
paradigmatic models for the representation of
reality in
literature. Auerbach contrasts Homer's attention to detail and foregrounding of the spatial, historical, as well as personal contexts for events to the Bible's sparse account, in which virtually all context is kept in the background or left outside of the narrative. As Auerbach observes, this narrative strategy virtually compels readers to add their own interpretations to the text.
Redactors and narrative purpose Modern biblical critics operating under the framework of the
documentary hypothesis have ascribed the binding's narrative to the biblical source
Elohist, on the grounds that it generally uses the specific term () and parallels characteristic E compositions. On that view, the second angelic appearance to Abraham (verses 14–18), praising his obedience and blessing his offspring, is in fact a later
Jahwist interpolation to E's original account (verses 1–13, 19). This is supported by the style and composition of these verses, as well as by the use of the name
Yahweh for the deity. More recent studies question the analysis of E and J as strictly separate. Coats argues that Abraham's obedience to God's command in fact necessitates praise and blessing, which he only receives in the second angelic speech. That speech, therefore, could not have been simply inserted into E's original account. This has suggested to many that the author responsible for the interpolation of the second angelic appearance left their mark also on the original account (verses 1–13, 19). The style and composition of these verses resemble that of the second angelic speech, and Yahweh is used for the deity rather than
God. On that reading, in the original E version of the binding Abraham disobeys God's command, sacrificing the ram "instead of his son" (verse 13) on his own responsibility and without being stopped by an angel: "And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son; but Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked and beheld, behind him was a ram, caught in a thicket by his horns; and Abraham went, and took the ram, and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son" (verses 10, 13). By interpolating the first appearance of the angel, a later redactor shifted responsibility for halting the test from Abraham to the angel (verses 11–12). The second angelic appearance, in which Abraham is rewarded for his obedience (verses 14–18), became necessary due to that shift of responsibility. This analysis of the story sheds light on the connection between the binding and the story of
Sodom (Genesis 18) in which Abraham asks God whether he will destroy the city without distinguishing between the righteous and the wicked: "Far be it from you to do such a thing: Shall not the judge of all the earth do what is just?" According to this analysis, Abraham's question and conversation with God was a rebellion against him and culminates in Abraham's disobedience to God, refusing to sacrifice Isaac.
Child sacrifice Francesca Stavrakopoulou said that it is possible that the story "contains traces of a tradition in which Abraham does sacrifice Isaac".
R. E. Friedman stated that in the original E story, Abraham may have carried out the sacrifice of Isaac, but that later repugnance at the idea of a human sacrifice led the redactor of JE to add the lines in which a ram is substituted for Isaac. Likewise, Terence Fretheim wrote that "the text bears no specific mark of being a polemic against
child sacrifice". Wojciech Kosior also said that the
genealogical snippet (Genesis 22:20–24) contain a hint to an alternative reading where Abraham sacrificed Isaac, since there would be no reason to list all these descendants of Abraham's brother. Interpretations of the text have contradicted the version where a ram is sacrificed. For example,
Martin S. Bergmann stated "The
Aggadah rabbis asserted that "father Isaac was bound on the altar and reduced to ashes, and his sacrificial dust was cast on
Mount Moriah."
Margaret Barker said that "Abraham returned to
Bersheeba without Isaac" according to Genesis 22:19, a possible sign that he was indeed sacrificed. Barker also said that wall paintings in the ancient
Dura-Europos synagogue explicitly show Isaac being sacrificed, followed by his soul traveling to heaven. Similarly the German theologians and said that due to the grammatical
perfect tense used to describe Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac, he did, in fact, follow through with the action. According to Irving Greenberg the story of the binding of Isaac symbolizes the prohibition to worship God by
human sacrifices, at a time when human sacrifices were the norm worldwide.
Rite of passage It has been suggested that Genesis 22 contains an intrusion of the liturgy of a rite of passage, including mock sacrifice, as commonly found in early and preliterate societies, marking the passage from youth to adulthood. == Music ==