The standard interpretation of Abraham/Isaac, however, is that the Jewish (Biblical/Christian) God does NOT want human sacrifices...like so many of the pagan tribes practiced.
Yes, God asked Abraham to start the process (as a ‘test of Abe’s faith in God’) but ... in direct contradiftion to all those other ‘gods’ -— the one true God stopped everything before a single drop of human blood was shed.
Citing Abraham/Isaac as an indicator that God would ever want human sacrifies again is, respectfully, a patent misreading. IMHO, and without any prejudice to upholding Jesus’ sacrifice 1200+ years later.
Just my 2 cents worth. I will shut up before anyone sends the Roman Legions out to crufify me over this.
Over and Out!
“Yes, God asked Abraham to start the process (as a ‘test of Abe’s faith in God’) but ... “
Of course God doesn’t want human sacrifices. They wouldn’t accomplish anything anyway, because humans are corrupt and fallen, and sacrifices were supposed to be pure to be effective.
The point is that this is a foreshadowing of the story of Christ. Isaac, a fallen man and an unacceptable sacrifice, represents all fallen men who are destined to die to pay for our trespasses. The ram, the acceptable sacrifice which God miraculously provides as a substitute is a prefiguring of Christ, who God provided as a true substitute to take the burden of our sins.
This act directly precedes God’s blessing of Abraham and his posterity, just as Christ’s sacrifice precedes and institutes the New Covenant. To further highlight the parallel, God tells Abraham that the reason he is blessing him is:
“because thou hast done this thing, and hast not spared thy only begotten son for my sake”
Just as God will not spare his only begotten son for our sake. This is about as obvious as symbolism gets in the Bible.