Faith and ethical judgment › The story cannot be reduced to its ending

The biblical narrative supplies the framework: Abraham is commanded to offer Isaac, travels to the place of sacrifice, and is stopped before killing him. Johannes asks the reader to attend to the journey and the ordeal, rather than let knowledge of the outcome make Abraham's conduct seem easy or safe.

On his account, Abraham loves Isaac. Without that love there would be no sacrifice of what he cherishes, and the example would lose its force. A father indifferent to his child would not become Abraham simply by performing a similar outward act. The relation to Isaac is essential to the problem.

Johannes also insists that Abraham believes he will receive Isaac. He does not picture Abraham as having exchanged every hope in this life for compensation only in another. The tension is that Abraham is willing to give up the son he loves while trusting in the promise attached to that same son. Looking back from the rescue can conceal the difficulty of holding both together before the outcome is known.

That treatment distinguishes the book from a lesson about taking a calculated risk. Abraham does not have a reassuring probability estimate. Nor is the story offered as a case in which a bad action becomes acceptable merely because it happens to end well. The question concerns the character of the commitment during the ordeal.