# SDMB weekly Bible Study (SDMBWBS)-Week 13 Genesis 20-22 **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [November 11, 2013, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-weekly-bible-study-sdmbwbs-week-13-genesis-20-22/673637 "2013-11-11T13:20:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2013, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-weekly-bible-study-sdmbwbs-week-13-genesis-20-22/673637/41 "2013-11-17T22:56:56Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > The ruling that I’ve got is that we’re fine to go ahead, but we’ll add the copyright notice. The NIV’s own policy is So, I’m going to backtrack and add the copyright info in the old threads, and we should be OK. Most bible translations, after all, want people quoting them. So we’ve got both “scholarly commentary” and their own requirements to bolster this direction. We’re not quoting a full chapter, nor as much as 500 verses, in any one thread; and, assuming we get plenty commentary, we’re OK with the 25% as well. I assume you meant “full book,” as we do quote full chapters. And that makes perfect sense to me. Just watch out for those short books, especially Obadiah, Philemon, 2 and 3 John, and Jude, which are all only one chapter long. But those are going to be a while away. * * * Anyways, as for the idea that Abraham is showing faith–it has less to do with Isaac and more to do with having left his country to parts unknown based on what God told them, IMO. But, yes, Hebrews specifically states that Abraham was showing faith by sacrificing Isaac–it even says that Abraham must’ve reasoned that God would [resurrect him if necessary](http://biblehub.com/hebrews/11-19.htm). The idea is that Abraham trusted God so much that he didn’t need to question him. And, yes, as Dex says, that was a new way of looking at the situation. That’s pretty much the point of Hebrews, to convince Jewish people (or believers) that the (Pauline) Christian way of looking at things is supported by the stories in the Old Testament. ---
**Author:** ![cmkeller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmkeller/32/118_2.png) [@cmkeller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmkeller)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2013, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-weekly-bible-study-sdmbwbs-week-13-genesis-20-22/673637/42 "2013-11-18T01:59:40Z")
davidw: > [@](#): > > Yet God says in verse 13 that he will make Ishmael into a nation because he is Abraham’s offspring. He happens to incidentally be Abraham’s offspring, but he isn’t “called” such in G-d’s eyes. G-d refers to Ishmael in the verse as “the son of the maid.” CK Dexter Haven: > [@](#): > > In verse 6, it is unlikely that he carried fire for three days; some translate as “firestone.” The traditional translation is that it referred to flint, for starting the fire. > [@](#): > > The word for knife used here is an unusual one; there may be some word play, with knife ma’akhelet and the rescuing angel mal’akh. The root of “ma’akhelet” is “akhal”, to eat, a knife being a utensil for preparing food (or, in turning a live animal into food). I’m not sure how you can consider it unusual, since this is only word for “knife” used in scripture. The word “Sakin,” which is modern Hebrew for “knife”, is first seen in the Talmud. TonySinclair: > [@](#): > > There’s a glaring problem with this second version, even if you ignore the very obvious similarities with the first and third, namely it’s completely out of place chronologically. Sarah is 90 years old. Although some people were still being depicted as longer than normal, Chapter 18 tells us (KJV), “Now Abraham and Sarah were old and well stricken in age…,” with Sarah so far past the age of childbearing that she can laugh, rather than cry, when the angel predicts that she will finally have a son. > > Yet this story says she’s such a hot babe that the king wants her for his harem the minute he lays eyes on her, with no indication that he finds it odd that she’s unmarried, which implies that she looks like a teenager. No contradiction. On the outside, she looked youthful. On the inside, she was aged. Baker: > [@](#): > > This translation seems to recognize that Isaac was not an “only” son, but he was the one closest to Abraham’s heart. What kind of a spin do you feel that puts on this story? The interesting thing is, the Midrash actually says the opposite. Isaac is that way in G-d’s eyes, but not at all such in Abraham’s. According to the Midrash, that verse is actually a dialog between G-d and Abraham: G-d: Take your son. Abraham: I have two sons. G-d: Your _only_ son. Abraham: Each is an only son to his mother. G-d: The one you love. Abraham: I love them both. G-d: Isaac. ---
**Author:** ![stpauler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@stpauler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stpauler)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2013, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-weekly-bible-study-sdmbwbs-week-13-genesis-20-22/673637/43 "2013-11-18T19:32:35Z")
[New thread Genesis 23-24](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=16857894#post16857894) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-weekly-bible-study-sdmbwbs-week-13-genesis-20-22/673637.md?page=2)