Page 130 - Eclipse of God

On the Suspension of the Ethical 103

of infinity.” But Kierkegaard here takes for granted something
that cannot be taken for granted even in the world of Abraham,
much less in ours. He does not take into consideration the fact
that the problematics of the decision of faith is preceded by
the problematics of the hearing itself. Who is it whose voice
one hears? For Kierkegaard it is self- evident because of the
Christian tradition in which he grew up that he who demands
the sacrifice is none other than God. But for the Bible, at least
for the Old Testament, it is not without further question self-
evident. Indeed a certain “instigation” to a forbidden action
is even ascribed in one place to God (2 Samuel 24:1) and in
another to Satan (1 Chronicles 21:1).
Abraham, to be sure, could not confuse with another the
voice which once bade him leave his homeland and which
he at that time recognized as the voice of God without the
speaker saying to him who he was. And God did indeed
“tempt” him. Through the extremest demand He drew forth
the innermost readiness to sacrifice out of the depths of Abra-
ham’s being, and He allowed this readiness to grow to the full
intention to act. He thus made it possible for Abraham’s rela-
tion to Him, God, to become wholly real. But then, when no
further hindrance stood between the intention and the deed,
He contented Himself with Abraham’s fulfilled readiness and
prevented the action.
It can happen, however, that a sinful man is uncertain
whether he does not have to sacrifice his (perhaps also very
beloved) son to God for his sins (Micah 6:7). For Moloch
imitates the voice of God. In contrast to this, God Himself
demands of this as of every man (not of Abraham, His cho-
sen one, but of you and me) nothing more than justice and
love, and that he “walk humbly” with Him, with God (Micah
6:8)— in other words, not much more than the fundamental
ethical.