10 Questions Biblical Literalists Cannot Honestly Answer

[The Grand Nudger]

I think we all know the story.  God trolls Abe, hard, and Abe's all like "doy doy doy" -but ofc the story itself isn't even remotely the interesting part - or what we were discussing...so?  

Actually, yes, the OP specifically mentions Abraham in the write-up for that question. Abraham was not required to sacrifice his child.

Oh stop, ofc he was, lol.  The success condition for this test was that he go "doy doy doy!" and grab the knife. To pretend that this was anyuthing other than an explicit and divinely imposed requirement is puerile.  I'm sure Abe and Isaac both were super relived that god is a major troll - but that doesn't change what was required of Abraham....which is the entire point of the narrative. 

Maybe that's the disconnect..you think that anybody is asking you about the story.  No one cares.  People wonder how modern day believers..purportedly better people™, reconcile their own faiths -today- with the character and commands portrayed in said story.  We've seen how you do so, you ponder slitting your kids throat. More power to you, at least here you can claim some sort of pyrrhic victory over the OP. Turns out you can answer that question, in the affirmative. Another example of that fine christian morality we always hear about, I guess.

Since that seems pretty cut and dry, I'm fine with moving on to this newest evasion.  As I already mentioned..when a person orders a hit in our country, we charge them with a crime regardless of whether any murder is accomplished.  It seems that the character of god fails to meet such uncontroversial standards.  Further, what compels you, to turn to this....as a defense of either your own hypothetical complicity or the narrative complicity of both god and abe?  Why would you want to mention it at all..since it can only worsen the assessment of either (or any) party's actions? Two would-be murderes, one the lord of creation(lol), who fail to accomplish the murder they had conspired to commit. Today, we'd consider both to be grade A idiots. The only person in the room we might consider even sillier...is anyone who mounted a "but, they didn't end up getting the little bastard" defense..........

Suppose you took god seriously, as Abe did, and bound up your son..in order to kill him at the appointed time and place....because maybe you'd do that, according to you. If god, as in the story, trolls you last minute...you will still be charged with a crime.  There is no version of this narrative, or your own hypothetical complicity, that isn't a textbook example of conspiracy to commit murder, and attempted murder.