Isaac and Jesus

Are the reported sacrificings of Isaac and of Jesus related? Are they narrative-tied? Does one of these events unfold with the other in mind? Does the sacrificing of Isaac prefigure or foreshadow Jesus’s? (Or alternatively, does the sacrificing of Jesus refer back to the sacrificing of Isaac?)

After studying these 2 scarifies I think they should be looked at. (From a web site Belief Map comes the following comparisons)

1. Both are promised-childs, miraculously conceived

In their respective accounts, both Jesus and Isaac are promised-childs, miraculously conceived gifts from God (neither mother was supposed to be able to give birth). This is relevant because few figures share this property, and it is central to both Jesus and Isaac.

2. Both are called their father’s special “only son”

In both stories, Jesus and Isaac are explicitly identified as their father’s special “one and only son.” This is relevant because few father-son relationships are described this way in the Biblical texts, and yet this unique specialness of the son to their father is central to both the story of Isaac and Jesus.

3. Both are called their father’s special “only son”

In both stories, Jesus and Isaac are explicitly identified as their father’s special “one and only son.” This is relevant because few father-son relationships are described this way in the Biblical texts, and yet this unique specialness of the son to their father is central to both the story of Isaac and Jesus.

4. Both are to be sacrificed in the same place (Moriah)

In their respective accounts, Jesus and Isaac were to be sacrificed in the same location (hills of Moriah). This is relevant because no other Biblical figures share this property, and God commanded Abraham to travel about 50 miles to sacrifice Isaac at just this location, without ever offering an explanation. (It is as if God expected something special to happen there later?)

5. Both are to be a sacrificial lamb to God (on wood)

In their respective accounts, both Jesus and Isaac were to be sacrificial lambs to God.

6. Both voluntarily submitted to their being sacrificed

In their respective accounts, both Jesus and Isaac (much stronger than Abraham) submitted to their father’s will to be sacrificed, without resisting. This is relevant because it is hardly expected in such a case, and yet is an essential and unique characteristic of how Jesus and Isaac went to die.

7. Both narratives conclude: God will provide

In both the story of Jesus and Isaac, the account ends with the message that “God will provide,” specifically he will provide sacrificial replacement so his loved ones do not. This is relevant because, while the analogue to Jesus shifts from Isaac to the ram, this was necessary to incorporate the final element: the substitionary death. The text emphasizes the ram was killed “in the place of his son.” The text really seemed to want to highlight this feature, saying they sacrificed the ram “in Isaac’s place”; the story need need to say that.

8. Both fathers anticipated their son’s resurrection

In both stories, Jesus and Isaac were expected by their fathers to be resurrected by God.

(For more info here is the link //beliefmap.org/jesus-shines/isaac-prefigures-jesus)

But we know one thing Isaac did not die, but Jesus did

Now another question comes up is how old was Isaac when this happened?

The Bible does not give a direct answer to the question of Isaac’s age when he was about to be offered as a sacrifice by his father. We therefore must conclude that neither our understanding of the passage nor our grasp of the points that God wants us to learn depend on knowing his age. However, some linguistic data are available that shed some light on the matter by pointing us in the direction of Isaac being older than we normally think, i.e., 20+.

In the first place, consider the details pertaining to chronology. Sarah gave birth to Isaac when she was 90 years old (Genesis 17:17). She would have been 92 or 93, 95 at most, when Isaac was weaned. She died at age 127 (Genesis 23:1)—when Isaac was 37 years old. Following Isaac’s birth, the events of the rest of Genesis chapter 21 (i.e., the driving out of Hagar and Ishmael, and the incident with Abimelech), as well as the events of chapter 22, all occurred during a 35-year period (approximately). Notice the expression “many days” in Genesis 21:34, as well as the phrase “after these things” in 22:1. These allusions would suggest that some time had elapsed prior to the offering of Isaac.

In the second place, the term “lad” used to refer to Isaac (21:5,12) is a flexible Hebrew term that does not necessarily refer to what we ordinarily think of—i.e., a boy. Rather, the term encompasses a wide range of meanings—from a baby (e.g., Exodus 2:6; 2 Samuel 12:16) to a young man (e.g., Absalom in 2 Samuel 14:21; 18:5). It even can refer to “servant” or “attendant” (e.g., 2 Samuel 16:1) as well as soldier/leader (1 Kings 20:14,15,17,19). Look closely at the context of the Isaac passage in 22:5 where the servants that accompanied Abraham and Isaac are referred to as “young men” (22:3,5,19). The word “servants” is precisely the same term that is used in verses 5 and 12 to refer to Isaac (cf. Gesenius, 1979, p. 555; Wigram, 1980, p. 823; Harris, et al., 1980, 2:585-586). Were the servants that accompanied Abraham 5 to 7 year olds? Or were they older?

Third, Isaac was given the task of carrying the wood for the impending sacrifice (22:6). There would have been enough wood to consume a human body when set on fire. Could a 5- to 7-year-old child carry such a burden?

Several commentators have weighed in on this question. Leupold wrote: “He may by this time have arrived at the age of some eighteen to twenty years” (1942, 1:625). Josephus stated: “Now Isaac was twenty-five years old” (1.13.2). Adam Clarke said: “[I]t is more probable that he was now about thirty-three” (1:140, emp. in orig.). Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown asserted that Isaac was “then upwards of twenty years of age” (n.d., p. 29). J. Curtis Manor described him as “a youth of sufficient strength and agility to carry a load of firewood up a mountainside” (1994, p. 103). Keil and Delitzsch affirmed that “this son had grown into a young man” (1976, 1:248). Morris added: “[T]he meaning in Isaac’s case should also be ‘young man’ ” (1976, p. 373).

We conclude that as the several lines of evidence converge, they point to Isaac being a young man—not a young boy.

(for more info see: //apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=11&article=1272)

From this we see that Isaac could have been 33 years old, same age as Jesus when he died

If we read in Genesis 22 we will see that God picked out the place where Abraham was to offer Isaac

Genesis 22:14 says – and Abraham called the name of that place Jehovahjireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount of the Lord it shall be seen.

Jehovahjireh – means God will provide and it is the only time used like this in the bible.

Some interesting facts on this. I want to add 3 more to the comparisons:

  1. Looks like Jesus and Isaac could have been offered up at the same age (33 Years old)

  2. Also it looks like they were both sacrificed in the exact same spot

  3. Both were without spot and blemish. (It was after this that Abraham sent his servant to look for a bride for Issac)

Wow what a mighty God and savior we have, God did answer Abraham’s cry of faith, God offered up His son as the ultimate sacrifice.

 

Posted by petra1000