Divergence Between Rationalism, And The Re-Enactments Of Genesis 22

Interpretation can muddy the waters of truth and reasoning, especially when it comes to the meaning or purpose of a story. If the interpretation is taken too literal, disaster can occur. However, if it is taken far more figuratively, the motives behind an action become debatable. The comparison between faith and fanaticism is apparent and relevant but not many people are able to distinguish the two when faced with similar scenarios using similar motives and thought processes. When considering a plot such as the Binding of Isaac (Gen. 22) compared to two news articles re-enacting the same events in today's modern world, there are striking differences that reveal the divergence between true faith and blind faith.
In order to understand the re-enactments of Genesis 22, it is important to fully delve into the plot and meaning behind this story aside from taking it by verbatim and discovering a very close-call scenario. Genesis 22:1-2 establishes the main plan for the story as God "tested Abraham," and challenged him to take his only son, Isaac, on a journey to a mountain in Moriah to be sacrificed as a burnt offering. Abraham, without recorded questioning,
God had asked Abraham to prove his faith (or in this case, fear) by offering Isaac as a burnt offering. Firstly, it is highly unlikely God was calling for people to sacrifice all their children in order to prove their faiths. Secondly, God had promised Abraham that God would provide a seed (Isaac) to inherit everything (Gen.17:6,19). This would not only counteract God's promise, but now the inheritance of Abraham is halted. Thirdly, it would not make sense in the questline of God presenting Godself to humanity, Abraham would quickly question whether God was one that he would serve if God had let him kill Isaac without any purpose or providing for Abraham as God had done