I. W. Doane’s “Bible Myths and their Parallels in Other Religions” is a comprehensive exploration of the Hebrew Bible and New Testament, shedding light on their similarities with other ancient myths. The book’s unique structure, comprising forty chapters with detailed descriptions, footnotes, four appendices, and a list of authors and books quoted, is designed to equip readers with a thorough understanding of these parallels, making them feel well-equipped and knowledgeable.
Ten chapters of the book are dedicated to the Hebrew Bible, covering key events such as the creation, flood, tower of Babel, Abraham’s near sacrifice of his son Isaac, Jacob’s vision of a ladder, the exodus, the Ten Commandments, Samson, Jonah, and circumcision. The Amazon Kindle version of the book, a valuable resource for scholars and students, is readily accessible and free, making it an even more enticing resource for those interested in religious studies and ensuring they feel fortunate to have such a resource at their disposal.
The book compares Genesis 22’s story of Abraham’s near sacrifice of his son Isaac with similar events in other cultures. If readers pay close attention to this and the other comparisons, they will see that the biblical tales are not mere narratives but are written to teach proper behavior.
Some readers read the biblical event as God needing to test whether Abraham loves Him sufficiently that he would even obey God when he orders Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, the son he loves.
Doane does not discuss the philosopher Maimonides, who explains Genesis 22. In his Guide for the Perplexed 3:26, Maimonides objects that reading this story as a test is unreasonable. It is unthinkable that a merciful deity would inflict a human in this way. Additionally, we should suppose that God is all-knowing and does not need to test Abraham to discover how he would act.
Maimonides explains that the Torah’s accounts of tests or trials should be understood as personal struggles with life’s difficulties that allow sufferers to learn how to improve themselves and their surroundings from lessons learned from the experience. In essence, Genesis 22 is placed in the Bible to teach us that difficulties in life have benefits.
This rational approach to Genesis 22, where God is not involved, would see Abraham struggling with the widespread view of his era that the way to show love to God is to sacrifice what is most dear to them, usually their child. Abraham struggles with the issue for three days. (This is the interpretation of Abraham’s journey to the mountain where the sacrifice would occur. In the story, Isaac willingly accompanies his father to the mountain.) As his struggle ends, Abraham realizes that such behavior is absurd.
This understanding of Genesis 22 is far more rational and humane than the similar legends in other cultures where the child was often taken to be sacrificed is female because of the belief that women are inferior to men, the self-centered reason for the sacrifice, and the terrible treatment of the child brought to be sacrificed. It is one of the many instances in the Torah where it teaches proper behavior. Even when the Torah needed to accept the primitive notions of the Israelites when the Torah was given, ideas such as slavery, an eye for an eye, and killing an enemy, it always hinted, as Maimonides was able to see, that the Torah desires better behavior.
The following are some of the many seeming parallel myths in other cultures that T. W. Doane describes. None has a lesson such as Genesis 22.
In an ancient Hindoo saga, a king who had no son prayed to his god for a son and promised to sacrifice the boy to the god. He was granted his request. When the child grew up, the king told his son about his promise. The son ran away, bought another mam’s son, and gave him to his dad as his substitute. The god released the father from his vow when this boy was about to be sacrificed.
Two differences from Abraham’s experience are that the king, not the god, came up with the plan, and Abraham’s son is depicted as going along with the sacrifice. The king’s son was appalled at the idea that he would die to satisfy his father. The Hindoo version is harsher than the biblical one, and the king’s desire to kill his son is self-serving.
In a Phoenician saga, a king sacrificed his son to his god in exchange for the god saving him from danger, another self-serving example.
In a similar Greek account, the goddess Diana ordered a king to sacrifice Iphigenia to save his country. However, as the priest was about to strike the blow, Iphigenia disappeared, and a beautiful goat stood in her place.
In another Greek legend, King Agamemnon tried to sacrifice his beloved daughter because of one god’s demand, while another god saved the girl and substituted a stag. This drama depicts one of the many Greek conflicts between the gods.
These are only some of the many somewhat similar experiences to Abraham’s in Genesis 22. The practice was widespread in antiquity. Maimonides’s explanation of the biblical story shows how Jewry differed regarding how to worship God and how Jewry used such tales to teach proper behavior.
As his struggle ends, Abraham realizes that such behavior is absurd.
Was Abraham naive and foolish in sacrificing his own son?
He struggled with the idea that virtually all his contemporaries believed that God wants a human sacrifice. But he used his intellect and decided this idea is ridiculous.
Dear Rabbi Israel Drazin, imo, the biblical tales, as exemplified by the story of Abraham’s near sacrifice of his son Isaac, are indeed designed to impart lessons about ethical and moral behavior. These stories serve as allegories or parables through which important religious and moral principles are conveyed. The dedication, blind faith, and obedience of Abraham in this story, for instance, is seen as an ideal form of devotion to God. In addition, through the comparisons with other cultural narratives, readers can perceive the uniqueness or similarities in values and beliefs across different cultures and religions. This reinforces the universal significance and applicability of the lessons these stories are intended to teach. Best: stephen
As usual, you analysis is excllent.
The only other instance I can think of that relates to human sacrifice in the Bible is the story in Judges 11–12. How do you understand the story in Judges 11–12? According to the story, Jephthah vowed to sacrifice as a “burnt-offering” the first thing that greeted him when he returned from war. He was probably expecting a goat but his daughter greeted him. You have stated in the past that it is possible that the daughter cloistered herself in a tower for the rest of her life. However, what is the rationale that he locked her in a tower? The text mentions that she goes to the mountains to cry over virginity but then comes back to be sacrificed. It says “he did to her his vow which he had vowed” (i.e. to make a burnt-offering). Why didn’t Jephthah learn from Abraham that God does not have human sacrifices?
What bothered you also bothered the rabbis.They give various reasons for his behavior such as he could have saved his daughter by having the high priest absolve him of the oath. I did not like this interpretation. I do not believe the ability to annul oaths existed in his day. I wrote that in his day,the Israelites felt that what you promise cannot be changed. This happened also with Isaac who could not change the blessing he gave to Jacob when he wanted it to go to Esau.
I understand that you think most likely Jephthah sacrificed his daughter because he felt he could not annul his previous oath. Is that correct?
Some rabbis say the text is ambiguous. It could be that he placed her in some kind of convent where she spent her life dedicated to God. Either way, he acted in accordance with the foolish thinking of his time that one could not annul what one promised.
This is nice, however, the plain meaning of the verse, the peshat, does not imply that he put her in a nunnery. It says “he did to her his vow which he had vowed.” Jephthah promised to make a sacrifice, specifically a “burnt-offering.” Didn’t Jephthah know that God does not demand human sacrifices? This should have been enough to annul his vow.
The rabbis tried to place Jephthah in a varorable light so they said the verse was ambiguous and could mean that he secluded her for God in a kind of nunary. I agree with you that Jephthah was a fool he should have known that God does not want a human sacrifice. In fact He wants no sacrifices.
I like the rational approach that God, who is all-knowing, does not need to test Abraham to see if Abraham loves Him sufficiently. It is not how a merciful deity would act. Where does Maimonides explain Genesis 22 as Abraham’s natural trail of struggling with life’s difficulties?
Regarding child-sacrifices in ancient myths. I think in one ending of the Greek tale Odysseus saves Iphigenia and provides a deer, saying that the goddess Diana “wants the deer, not the maiden.” According to this ending, the king misinterpreted the command of the goddess Diana. This is similar and seems to have a similar moral lesson as Genesis 22. Do you agree? It seems like in the story of King Agamemnon, at least one Greek god was opposed to human or child sacrifice.
Maimonides discuses trials in life in his Guide 3:26.
Yes,dear Rabbi Israel Drazin, the biblical tales and other religious texts often contain parables and events that are meant to impart moral or ethical lessons. The comparison between the sacrifice of Isaac and similar events in other cultures speaks to a common theme of obedience, faith, and duty in religious teachings across civilizations. It demonstrates the power of faith and the importance of adhering to one’s religious commandments, even when those tasks are challenging. Moreover, by examining the behavior and responses of characters within these stories, readers can glean insights into what is considered righteous and moral behavior within that particular religious or cultural context. Best: stephen
We agre. However, I dislike the word “faith” because it is overused in non-Jewish religions to indicate blind unthinking acceptance of an idea, such as in Soren Kirkegard’s “Leap of Faith.”
I can’t help but think if Paul invented the concept of faith that it is a Jewish idea. Paul was Jewish. However, I am sure Paul wasn’t the first to come up with the idea of faith. It is almost certain that the Greeks and Romans had a similar concept.
I agree with you that he did not invent the concept of faith.But he introduced it into his version of Judaism that later became Christianity. And many Jews think it is correct even though it is not.We should notaccept something on faith but use our intelligence to decide matters.