Abraham, Isaac and PTSD

The Genesis authors’ lack of understanding of PTSD and its effects on Isaac after the near sacrifice

In the book of Genesis, chapter 22, the story is told of God commanding Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac as a test of faith. Abraham is said to have bound Isaac to an altar and was about to sacrifice him when an angel appeared, stopping him and providing a ram instead as a substitute. The story then focusses on Abraham’s relief and goes on to recount further dealings between Abraham and his God.

It is striking that the authors of Genesis seem to show no awareness of the severe psychological trauma and PTSD that Isaac would likely have experienced. Having been bound by his father and brought to the verge of being killed, only to be spared at the last minute, would have left deep emotional scars. The terror, helplessness, and betrayal Isaac would have felt in that moment cannot be overstated.

Imagine being a young boy, trusting your father to keep you safe, only to have him bind you and raise a knife to sacrifice you. The levels of fear, disorientation, and feelings of utter abandonment would be overwhelming. This would be compounded by the fact that it was your own father, someone you should have been able to completely trust, who was doing this to you.

The PTSD symptoms Isaac probably suffered from would have been severe. He may have had nightmares replaying the event, flashbacks transporting him back to that terrifying moment on the altar. Certain sights and sounds may have triggered memories of the sacrifice, causing anxiety, hypervigilance, or even full-blown panic attacks. Avoidance behaviours would be common, such as avoiding places or people that reminded him of the event. An exaggerated startle response is also likely.

But the psychological impact goes even deeper. Isaac’s sense of safety in the world would have been irrevocably shattered. A deep mistrust of his father’s God and of Abraham would be inevitable after such a searing betrayal. How could he ever trust this so-called ‘God’s’ goodness or his father’s love after this? What kind of God would demand child sacrifice, even as a test? What kind of father would be willing to follow such a command?

The book of Genesis glosses over Isaac’s suffering entirely, only concerning itself with Abraham’s end of the story. No care is shown for the boy’s well-being or any aftermath. This lack of empathy or understanding of vicarious trauma reflects the time period it was written in. PTSD as a diagnosable condition did not exist until the 1970s. The ancient Israelites seem to have given little thought to the child’s experience in this story.

This is further evidence that much of the Bible was written by people, not inspired by God. A divine author would have had the omniscience to understand the full effects of such trauma. He would have Abraham have a care for his son’s feelings and psyche and never command this event. But the authors’ myopic focus on Abraham’s devotion to God and complete lack of regard for Isaac’s experiences are a distinctly human trait.

The binding of Isaac is often praised as Abraham’s greatest act of faith. But under scrutiny, the story reveals more about the callousness of those who wrote it down than the virtues of its characters. It’s a bleak window into the values and worldview of Iron Age people – a world where child sacrifice is seen as the ultimate display of devotion, not the unforgivable abuse it truly is. In this light, it’s hard to see the story as reflecting the goodness of God, as it is often interpreted today.

Isaac’s pain and trauma are simply collateral damage, an inconvenient detail to the central message about Abraham’s devotion. This is unconscionable, and reflects a stunted moral understanding. Any God who would demand such a thing, and any father who would comply, are fundamentally broken. We cannot continue to laud this as the pinnacle of piety. The authors of this story simply do not have the emotional intelligence to understand the full impact of what they are portraying.

In the end, the Binding of Isaac is a tragedy, not a triumph. It’s an ugly reflection of a world with no concept of the damage of abuse or the permanence of trauma. We have grown beyond this bleak worldview and should stop praising it as holy writ. The Bible authors’ lack of empathy for Isaac is a stark reminder of the book’s human failings and the harm it can cause when taken as divine truth. We must learn to see such stories for the archaic and cruel things they are.