Genesis 22:1 - Exposition

And it cams to pass— the alleged mythical character of the present narrative (De Wette, Bohlen) is discredited not more by express Scripture statement ( Hebrews 11:17-19 ) than by its own inherent difficulties— after —how long after may be conjectured from the circumstance that Isaac was now a grown lad, capable of undertaking a three days journey of upwards of sixty miles— these things (literally, words, of benediction, promise, trial that had gone before— that God —literally, the Elohim, i.e. neither Satan, as in 1 Chronicles 21:1 , compared with 2 Samuel 24:1 (Schelling, Stanley), nor Abraham himself, in the sense that a subjective impulse on the part of the patriarch supplied the formal basis of the subsequent transaction (Kurtz, Oehler); but the El-Olam of Genesis 21:32 , the term Elohim being employed by the historian not because Genesis 21:1-13 are Elohistic (Tuch, Bleek, Davidson,)—a hypothesis inconsistent with the internal unity of the chapter, "which is joined together like cast-iron" (Oehler), and in particular with the use of Moriah in Genesis 21:2 (Hengstenberg),—but to indicate the true origin of the after-mentioned trial, which proceeded neither from Satanic instigation nor from subjective impulse, but from God (Keil)— did tempt —not solicit to sin ( James 1:13 ), but test or prove ( Exodus 16:4 ; Deuteronomy 8:2 ; Deuteronomy 13:3 ; 2 Chronicles 32:31 ; Psalms 26:2 )— Abraham, and said unto him ,—in a dream-vision of the night (Eichhorn, Lunge), but certainly in an audible voice which previous experience enabled him to recognize— Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am. " These brief introductions of the conversation express the great tension and application of the human mind in those moments in a striking way, and serve at the same time to prepare us for the importance of the conversation" (Lange).