Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm having some difficulty understanding the incident of the Akaida. God tested Avraham by commanding him to take his son as a human sacrifice to see if he would obey even this (Genesis 22). However, I am confused by this. Isn't it considered objectively very bad to kill one's son, no matter how much they believe that God wants them to do that? It seems one should expect that objective morals always overrule what someone believes to be commands from God since it could be that they are wrong or mistaken, and in Avraham's case, shouldn't he have been tipped off the the possibility that God wouldn't want him to do that by virtue of the fact that it was a human sacrifice?

share|improve this question
1  
closely related: judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/20672/… –  Charles Koppelman Jun 2 '13 at 3:32
1  
Your second paragraph seems full of multiple questions which are not related to the first question. –  Double AA Jun 2 '13 at 3:45
    
Who said we have to follow objective morals? –  Double AA Jun 2 '13 at 3:45
    
@DoubleAA the fact that they are objective morals would mean that any moral person should follow them. If you have an reason or source to doubt this, perhaps you should be more detailed than a rhetorical "who said". –  Aaliyah Jun 2 '13 at 19:11
    
@Aaliyah Ok, Who said we should be moral people? –  Double AA Jun 2 '13 at 19:20
show 8 more comments

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.