Genesis 22:2 Meaning – Abraham’s Mirror
Genesis 22:2 The meaning is much different than you might think. The correct understanding is quite complex because of various translation issues. Follow this very carefully to get the true meaning of Genesis 22:2. God was not commanding Abraham to kill. And please note that this page is an example of the use of the Biblical Mirror Principle in scripture. See that page for how it works.
“And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt (H5254) Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am. And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.” (Gen 22:1-2)
For those who believe God does not kill or endorse killing, much less child sacrifice, this passage is a problem. However, it would also be a problem for those who believe otherwise because the Bible equates killing with doing evil:
“And he saith unto them, Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? to save life, or to kill? But they held their peace.” (Mark 3:4)
The verse equates killing with doing evil and God does not do evil.
Genesis 22:2 Meaning of “Tempt”
The first clue that something else is involved with the passage in Genesis is that the original word (“nacah,” H5254), translated “tempt” in verse one, more often has the meaning of to prove or test, rather than to tempt as in to entice to do evil.
This can be seen in other verses using “nacah:”
“So he consented to them in this matter, and proved (“nacah”) them ten days.” (Dan 1:14)
“And David girded his sword upon his armour, and he assayed to go; for he had not proved (“nacah”) it. And David said unto Saul, I cannot go with these; for I have not proved (“nacah”) them. And David put them off him.” (1 Sam 17:39)
So, this suggests that God did not mean to tempt Abraham to do evil and, by implication, did not tell him to kill but was testing or proving him to get him to see something about himself.
Genesis 22:2 Meaning – God Does Endorse Child Sacrifice
That God did not approve of such sacrifices, especially those involving children, is shown further by these verses:
“They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind:” (Jer 19:5)
“And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.” (Jer 32:35)
This page shows that God did not want sacrifices: https://characterofgod.org/sacrifices-definition/
And this page lists many verses in support of that: https://characterofgod.org/sacrifices-not-desired/
Genesis 22:2 Meaning – the Septuagint
But there is another problem. “Tempt” in Genesis 22:1 in the LXX (the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament) is “peirazo” (G3985), the same word as in James 1:13 which clearly has the meaning of to do evil:
“Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted (G3985) of God: for God cannot be tempted (G3985) with evil, neither tempteth he any man:” (James 1:13)
James is saying that God cannot be tempted with and does not tempt with evil. That the LXX for Genesis 22:1 uses a Greek word referring to tempting with evil suggests that, in Abraham’s case, God was tempting him with evil.
Yet, the Hebrew word used in Genesis 22:1 clearly can mean to test or prove and James 1:13 says that God does not tempt any man to do evil.
Genesis 22:2 Meaning of Key Words is Incorrect
The solution lies in the translators of the LXX (the Greek Septuagint) who understood that God did command Abraham to sacrifice – kill and burn – his son and thus used a Greek word consistent with that. Remember, while the original word of God is inspired, the translators and the many Bible versions are not. The translators clearly did not have an appreciation for the non-violent character of God. Nor did Abraham who, remember, came from Ur of Chaldea where sacrificing children to appease deity was an accepted practise.
The evidence for this is some seldom-considered translation issues giving further evidence that God was not commanding Abraham to slay his son.
“And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him (“alah,” H5927) there for a burnt offering (“olah,” H5930) upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.” (Gen 22:2)
Let’s look more closely at the meaning of words involved.
“Offer him”
H5927 עָלָה ‘alah aw-law’
a primitive root; v;
AV-(come, etc … ) up 676, offer 67, come 22, bring 18, ascend 15, go 12, chew 9, offering 8, light 6, increase 4, burn 3, depart 3, put 3, spring 2, raised 2, arose 2, break 2, exalted 2, misc 33; 889
1c) (Hiphil)
1c1) to bring up, cause to ascend or climb, cause to go up
1c2) to bring up, bring against, take away
1c3) to bring up, draw up, train
1c4) to cause to ascend
1c5) to rouse, stir up (mentally)
1c6) to offer, bring up (of gifts)
1c7) to exalt
1c8) to cause to ascend, offer
The word “offer” contains the following meanings in Brown, Driver and Briggs Dictionary:
To bring up, cause to ascend or climb, cause to go up, to bring up, bring against, take away, to bring up, draw up, train, to cause to ascend, to rouse, stir up (mentally), to offer, bring up (of gifts), to exalt, to cause to ascend, offer – Hiphil form of H5927
Some examples of the use of “alah”:
“But there went up (H5927) a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.” (Gen 2:6)
“And Abram went up (H5927) out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the south.” (Gen 13:1)
It is quite natural to use words such as “to go up” or “to ascend” when speaking of going up a mountain. So, it could have been translated:
“…Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and bring him up there …”
Here is the Young’s Literal Translation:
“And He saith, ‘Take, I pray thee, thy son, thine only one, whom thou hast loved, even Isaac, and go for thyself unto the land of Moriah, and cause him to ascend there for a burnt-offering on one of the mountains of which I speak unto thee.’” (Gen 22:2, YLT)
The other term of importance is “burnt offering.”
Burnt offering (Online Bible)
H5930 עֹלָה ‘olah o-law’ or
עולה ‘owlah o-law’
feminine active participle of H5927; n f;
AV-burnt offering 264, burnt sacrifice 21, ascent 1, go up 1; 289
1) whole burnt offering
2) ascent, stairway, steps
Strong’s Concordance:
H5930: Feminine active participle of H5927; a step or (collectively stairs, as ascending); usually a holocaust (as going up in smoke): – ascent, burnt offering (sacrifice), go up to. See also H5766.
Here are verses where “olah” is translated as ascend, go up:
“And the meat of his table, and the sitting of his servants, and the attendance of his ministers, and their apparel, and his cupbearers, and his ascent (H5930) by which he went up unto the house of the LORD; there was no more spirit in her.” (1 Kings 10:5)
“And there were seven steps to go up (H5930) to it, and the arches thereof were before them: and it had palm trees, one on this side, and another on that side, upon the posts thereof.” (Eze 40:26)
Genesis 22:2, then, could have been translated:
“Then He said, Take now your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and ascend there and go up on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.” (Gen 22:2, modified)
Because of Abraham’s misunderstanding and what he did, the translators would naturally have understood it the same way. Unless we study deeply for ourselves, we end up taking the translators’ position. There is great value in personal study taking into account the principles of God’s character.
If God wanted Abraham to slay his son, He could have raised Isaac from the dead. Since God stopped Abraham from the act, He obviously did not intend for him to do it. If God did not want him to do it, yet gave him that instruction, it would essentially be a lie or God changing His mind. It would be tempting Abraham to do evil and it would be against God’s character. Clearly, something else was going on.
Genesis 22:2 Meaning – Could God Have Had a Different Intent?
So, why would God have instructed Abraham to do this – knowing Abraham could misunderstand? Could it be that God was, in effect, holding a mirror to Abraham’s thinking to teach him (and us) something important?
The mirror principle is often used in the Bible to show people the sin in their hearts that they might be led to repentance. To understand more about the mirror principle in scripture, here are two videos:
https://youtu.be/xy0wsO3yBvM – Mirror Part 1
https://youtu.be/GyrxMmeA3-Q – Mirror Part 2
This story could have been a mirror on multiple levels:
To Abraham (and Isaac, and Jacob)

Abraham, who was familiar with the concept of sacrificing a child to appease a god, could easily have reasoned that this was a case of his God asking this of him. We have shown above that God would not do such a thing. Rather, God was asking Abraham to bring his son up the mountain to worship and to offer (as in to dedicate) his son. However, God knowing that Abraham could misinterpret the directions, used the occasion to teach Abraham that He did not require sacrifices as appeasement. It seems that Abraham learned the lesson.
Of course, Abraham did sacrifice the ram that was caught in the thicket (“by his horns,” as in a crown of thorns – Gen 22:13) and this pointed forward to the “offering” that God would provide in His only-begotten Son.
It is interesting and significant that there is no record in scripture of Abraham offering sacrifices after this event on Mount Moriah. There is also no record of His son Isaac ever offering sacrifices. Even for Jacob, the next generation, there is no record of him offering animal sacrifices. He did, on a number of occasions set up stone pillars in significant locations and would pour oil on them and name them as memorials of events of which he was particularly thankful. (Genesis 28:18-19, 31:45-47, 35:14-15). In Genesis 46:1, he did offer sacrifices but they were not specified as animal sacrifices and were likely thank offerings in reaction to the news that his son Joseph was still alive.
It was only at the time of the Exodus (after considerable exposure to Egyptian influence) that the Bible again mentions animal sacrifices.
To Translators
When original words have multiple meanings, the translators have to go by their understanding to choose what they believe is the correct meaning. Such decisions reflect back to the translators what is in their hearts/minds. It turns out, in scripture, that one’s concept of the character of God is involved in very many such decisions. Bible translators, centuries after the Bible was originally written, had plenty of opportunity to be influenced by popular understanding.
A good example of such a word is “wrath” (Hebrew “aph”). Read an explanation at: https://characterofgod.org/wrath-anger-definition/
To Us
Could this story work as a mirror to us? If we think and speak of this story and sacrifices in general as God requiring appeasement that He might forgive sins, we reinforce such thinking in our own minds. However, with prayer and proper investigation we can come closer to understanding the truth.
It is important to study deeply, compare scripture with scripture and keep before us the big principles, especially the core principle that God is love. Are we willing to dig deeply to find the pearls?
Do we put God first?
“He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.” (Matt 10:37)
We could add this: He that loves his traditional understanding of the Bible including word meanings handed down from others more than me is not worthy of me.
Return to the Home Page
December 19, 2024 @ 7:01 am
You mention that they didn’t offer animal sacrifices until after they had been exposed to Egyptian culture, implying that this is the source of the practice.
This seems at odds with Gods detailed instructions regarding animal sacrifice – He specifies everything from what kind of animal, the condition of the animal, the way to slay it, which parts to burn and what to dip or scatter the blood upon (including toes, thumbs and ears).
If the practice of animal sacrifice was initiated by the Israelites, why does God not instruct them to abandon it (as in other places He commands them to not be like the nations around them). It seems a bit convoluted to suggest otherwise.
I am familiar with the problems of Penal Substitution theory, as well as the Wrath paradigm – ideas we can trace to Anselm and (who else?) our friend Augustine (who seems at the root of all manner of heresy).
Anyway, just wondering about the question around the practice of animal sacrifice billed as Israel’s idea in light of Gods very detailed instructions and even His institution of the Priestly Class of Levites whose main occupation is administrating said sacrifices.
December 28, 2024 @ 4:31 pm
Hi Laura
I wrote that it was only after the Exodus that the Bible mentions animal sacrifices. And the Egyptians certainly did offer animal and even human sacrifices.
God’s detailed instructions were to Israel after the Exodus. And so, God actually initiated them but “why?” is the question. It was because the Israelites needed them in the sense that they could not grasp that God would forgive them (actually had already forgiven them) unless they perceived that justice had been done; a price had been paid. It is quite obvious that God did give all the instructions for sacrifices but He also said in several places in the Bible that He never desired them – they were only given out of necessity.
Ray
December 19, 2024 @ 1:11 pm
Thank you brother Ray.
To many this has been a troublesome case. But you have shown quite clearly through diligent and inquiring study, helped by the truth that God is indeed love, that challenging scriptures which might otherwise point to a killing God, with close prayerful investigation, don’t.
December 21, 2024 @ 4:13 am
Excellent!! Once and for scripturally and sound reveals that God does not test with evil, but that He is the life giving God and only ever God, only good.!
December 22, 2024 @ 9:00 am
Thank you Ray, my friend!
Oh how His ways are SOO much higher than ours!! He has been so maligned, that lies seem like obvious truth.
But God will allow his poor suffering humanity to even understand Him as a tyrant- until study & His Spirit- and the most glorious object lesson of all- the pure life & sacrifice of His only begotten Son- can enlighten us to beautiful Truth.
What faith people have to believe He is a genocidal killer and at the same time believe that He is Love and love Him anyway and trust Him to save them! This is a great faith!
I believe that part of the reason that Humanity was created so quickly after the fall of Lucifer was that we could stand as an impartial jury to vindicate the Character of God, because it is the Father Himself that is on trial in the great controversy.
Well, by evidence and experience with both the enemy and the Father this jury member acquits Him of all charges right now. I do not need to see what becomes of the Lost in the future to make my decision. He is fully acquitted by me right now!
What a blessed privilege to be selected as a jury member for the Source of all in the universe!
May God continue to use me ( & you!) to help other “jury members” in “our deliberations”!
December 22, 2024 @ 9:12 am
Thank you, Susan. I fully agree.