BEMA Episode Link: 217: Midrash — Isaac’s Bad Eyes
Episode Length: 42:40
Published Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 01:00:00 -0700
Session 6
About this episode:

Marty Solomon and Brent Billings dive into some of the midrash surrounding the story of the “binding of Isaac.” What really happened to Isaac on that mountain, and what does this have to do with Isaac’s blindness?

Discussion Video for BEMA 217

BEMA 11: Here I Am

Map of Abraham’s Servant Finding Isaac a Wife — Headwaters Christian Resources

Aleph Beta Academy

Subscribe to Aleph Beta Academy

BEMA listeners can use code friendsofbema for one month off of a monthly Premium membership.

Sefaria: A Living Library of Jewish Texts

Transcript for BEMA 217

Notes

*Note: The following notes are handwritten by me, Adam, and I reserve the right to be wrong.

BEMA Episode 217: Midrash - Isaac’s Bad Eyes

Title & Source Summary

Episode: 217 - Midrash: Isaac’s Bad Eyes Hosts: Marty Solomon and Brent Billings Focus: Genesis 22-24 (The Binding of Isaac and its aftermath)

This episode explores profound midrashic interpretations surrounding the binding of Isaac (Akedah) and its lasting impact on Isaac’s life. The discussion examines a critical textual detail: Isaac’s absence from the narrative when Abraham descends from Mount Moriah. Through Jewish interpretive tradition, the hosts explore themes of religious trauma, family dysfunction, restoration, and the long-term effects of profound spiritual experiences. The episode offers a deeply human reading of the patriarchal narratives, acknowledging both the faithfulness and the failures of biblical figures while finding hope in God’s ongoing work of redemption.

Key Takeaways

  • The biblical text indicates Isaac did not return down the mountain with Abraham after the binding, suggesting significant trauma from the experience (Genesis 22:19)
  • Two dominant streams of midrash exist: one emphasizing Isaac’s obedience and resurrection, another focusing on his trauma and separation from his father
  • Isaac lived away from home at Beer Lahai Roi after the binding, the same well associated with Hagar and Ishmael (Genesis 24:62)
  • Abraham’s faith continued even when his family appeared broken, sending for a wife for his absent son
  • Isaac’s eventual blindness (Genesis 27:1) is interpreted midrashically as both physical and spiritual - developing “ayin ra’ah” (a bad eye, or scarcity perspective) as a result of trauma
  • The narrative demonstrates that God continues working redemption in messy, imperfect human stories
  • Religious trauma is a real phenomenon that can occur even when parents are genuinely trying to follow God
  • Trust in God’s story allows for redemption without guaranteeing formulaic happy endings

Main Concepts & Theories

The Missing Isaac - Textual Evidence

The episode begins with a careful reading of Genesis 22:19: “Then Abraham returned to his servants and they set off together for Beersheba, and Abraham stayed in Beersheba.” The text explicitly mentions Abraham and his servants but is conspicuously silent about Isaac, who had been mentioned repeatedly throughout the narrative up to this point. This textual “gap” becomes the foundation for significant midrashic exploration.

Throughout Genesis 22:3-8, Isaac is mentioned by name multiple times. The repetition of “the two of them went on together” emphasizes their unity in the journey. Yet when the descent happens, Isaac simply disappears from the narrative. This is not mere literary oversight but a deliberate textual signal inviting deeper interpretation.

Two Streams of Midrash

The episode presents two primary midrashic traditions interpreting Isaac’s absence:

Stream One: Obedience and Resurrection This earlier midrashic tradition (potentially dating to the Second Temple period) suggests that Abraham actually completed the sacrifice - Isaac died and was resurrected three days later. This interpretation emphasizes Isaac’s perfect obedience, his willingness to bind himself, and his faith even greater than Abraham’s. The author of Hebrews may reference this tradition when stating Abraham “reasoned that God could even raise the dead, and so in the manner of speaking, he did receive Isaac back from death” (Hebrews 11:19). This midrash presents Isaac as a type of Christ, experiencing death and resurrection.

Stream Two: Trauma and Separation This midrash, which Marty finds more relationally compelling, suggests Isaac was so traumatized by the experience that he fled from his father and did not return home. This reading emphasizes the human, psychological reality of what occurred on Mount Moriah. Rather than idealized obedience, it acknowledges the profound disruption caused by the event. This interpretation better accounts for several subsequent textual details about Isaac’s whereabouts and family dynamics.

Sarah’s Death and Family Fragmentation

Genesis 23:1-2 records Sarah’s death at Kiriath Arba (Hebron) and states “Abraham went to mourn for Sarah and weep over her.” The language suggests Abraham was not with Sarah when she died - he had to travel to mourn her. This raises profound questions:

  • What did Abraham tell Sarah before taking Isaac to Mount Moriah?
  • Did the attempted sacrifice create such family strife that Sarah separated from Abraham?
  • Did Isaac ever see his mother again before her death?

The midrash suggests various possibilities, including that Sarah died while Abraham and Isaac were gone, or that the family was so fractured by the event that they were living separately. The text supports the reality of profound family dysfunction in the wake of the binding.

Beer Lahai Roi - Isaac’s Place of Refuge

Genesis 24:62 explicitly states: “Now Isaac had come from Beer Lahai Roi for he was living in the Negev.” This is not Abraham’s home in Beersheba - Isaac is living elsewhere. The significance of Beer Lahai Roi cannot be overstated. This was the well where Hagar encountered God after fleeing from Sarah (Genesis 16:13-14). She named it “the well of the Living One who sees me.”

The midrashic tradition even suggests Isaac went to live with Melchizedek during this period (connecting to themes developed in Hebrews). Regardless of the specific tradition, the textual evidence is clear: Isaac was not at home. He was living separately from his father, at a location associated with another person who had experienced family trauma and exile.

Abraham’s Persistent Faith

Despite the apparent fracturing of his family, Abraham sends his servant Eliezer to find a wife for Isaac (Genesis 24). This is remarkable - Abraham acts as a father for a son who is not even living at home. He has no guarantee Isaac will ever return, yet he continues to fulfill his paternal responsibilities and trust God’s promise.

This demonstrates faith not as getting everything right, but as continuing to participate in God’s story even when outcomes are uncertain and past actions have caused harm. Abraham models perseverance without the guarantee of restoration.

The Field Encounter - Divine Timing

Genesis 24:63-65 describes Isaac going “out to the field one evening to meditate” (or “muse pensively” or “relax” depending on translation - the Hebrew is uncertain). He happens to be in the right place when the caravan bringing Rebekah arrives. The text notes he had come up from Beer Lahai Roi - meaning he traveled north from his refuge toward his father’s territory.

This “chance” encounter demonstrates divine providence working through human restlessness and longing. Isaac, in his brokenness, moves toward home, and God meets him there with a gift he didn’t know was coming.

Rebekah - Agent of Restoration

When Rebekah sees Isaac approaching, she asks “Who is that man in the field?” The servant responds “He is my master” - likely with shock, since Isaac was not supposed to be there. Rebekah’s willingness to marry a man she hasn’t met, to come to a home where that man might not even be present, demonstrates her own faith and becomes part of the redemptive story.

Genesis 24:67 states: “Isaac brought her into the tent of his mother Sarah, and he married Rebekah. So she became his wife, and he loved her; and Isaac was comforted after his mother’s death.” The comfort Isaac receives is not just for Sarah’s death but for all the accumulated trauma and loss. Rebekah becomes an instrument of healing and restoration.

Ayin Ra’ah - The Bad Eye

The midrash connects Isaac’s traumatic experience to his later blindness described in Genesis 27:1: “When Isaac was old and his eyes were so weak that he could no longer see.” The tradition speaks of angels weeping as they watched Abraham prepare to sacrifice Isaac, and their tears falling into Isaac’s eyes as he lay on the altar.

These tears gave Isaac “ayin ra’ah” - a bad eye. This is not merely physical blindness but a perspective problem. In Jesus’s teaching (referenced in the Gospels), having a “good eye” (ayin tova) meant viewing the world through abundance, generosity, and seeing the best in people. A “bad eye” (ayin ra’ah) represented scarcity, suspicion, and seeing the worst.

The midrash suggests Isaac’s trauma gave him a perspective of scarcity and negativity. This helps explain his later favoritism of Esau over Jacob, his naming Jacob “deceiver,” and other relational dysfunctions. Trauma doesn’t just affect us emotionally - it shapes how we see and interpret the world around us.

Trauma and Its Ripple Effects

The episode emphasizes that trauma has consequences. Isaac’s experience doesn’t simply resolve when he returns home and marries Rebekah. The effects continue into the next generation, influencing his parenting, his relationship with his sons, and the ongoing family dynamics. This is not presented as Isaac’s moral failure but as the realistic outcome of profound psychological and spiritual wounding.

The story resists both the temptation to blame victims of trauma and the temptation to offer simplistic solutions. Instead, it acknowledges the complexity of healing, the persistence of wounds, and the messy reality of restoration that doesn’t erase all consequences.

Religious Trauma - A Contemporary Application

Marty vulnerably shares that this midrash helps him understand religious trauma - harm caused by religious practices or beliefs, often inflicted by well-meaning parents or spiritual leaders trying to faithfully follow God. Abraham appears to be following God’s explicit command, yet the experience traumatizes Isaac. This mirrors many contemporary experiences where parents’ sincere religious convictions create painful experiences for their children.

The episode offers no simple judgment of whether Abraham was “right” or “wrong.” Instead, it acknowledges the human reality: sincere faith can coexist with harm done to others. This validates the experience of those who have been wounded by religion while also showing compassion for imperfect parents trying to follow God.

Trust the Story - Non-Formulaic Hope

A recurring theme is “trust the story.” This is explicitly not presented as a formula guaranteeing that “all the Isaacs come back home.” Rather, it’s an invitation to continue participating in God’s redemptive work even when outcomes are uncertain, even when we’ve made mistakes, even when relationships are broken.

Abraham doesn’t have a guarantee that sending for a wife will bring Isaac home. He acts faithfully without certainty of results. Isaac doesn’t know the backstory of Rebekah or why he encounters her in that field. He simply experiences an unexpected gift in the midst of his wandering. The narrative demonstrates that God is always at work, but not in ways that remove human agency, guarantee specific outcomes, or erase the consequences of trauma.

Examples & Applications

Real-World Parallels to Religious Trauma

The Isaac narrative mirrors many contemporary experiences:

  • Adult children who distance themselves from parents due to traumatic church experiences
  • Individuals deconstructing harmful theological frameworks while trying to maintain faith
  • Parents grieving broken relationships with children who have left the faith tradition
  • The long-term psychological impact of spiritual abuse or toxic religious environments
The Complexity of Faithfulness

Abraham’s story challenges simplistic categories of “faithful” vs “unfaithful”:

  • He obeys what he believes is God’s command, yet causes trauma
  • He continues acting as a father even when his son is absent
  • He trusts God’s promise while living in the wreckage of family dysfunction

This reflects the reality that faithfulness is not perfection, and obedience does not guarantee we won’t harm others.

Healing as Process, Not Event

Isaac’s story demonstrates that healing is complex and ongoing:

  • He returns home but still carries his “bad eyes”
  • He experiences comfort through Rebekah but still has trauma-influenced behaviors
  • His wound affects the next generation (his relationship with Jacob and Esau)

This models realistic expectations for recovery from trauma - healing happens, but not instantaneously or completely.

Providence in Unexpected Places

Isaac “happening” to be in the field when Rebekah arrives illustrates how God works:

  • Not through removing consequences or erasing the past
  • But through unexpected encounters and unplanned moments
  • Through other people who become agents of comfort and restoration
  • In ways that respect human freedom and timing
The Danger of Assuming Perfect Examples

The episode warns against reading biblical characters as flawless models to emulate. Abraham is the father of faith, but not every action is to be imitated. The patriarchs are presented realistically - as flawed humans through whom God works despite (and sometimes through) their imperfections. This prevents both idealization of biblical figures and dismissal of their significance.

Potential Areas for Further Exploration

Deep Dive into Midrashic Method and Sources
  • What are the rules and frameworks for interpreting midrash?
  • How do we distinguish between different levels of midrashic authority?
  • What are the primary sources for these specific Isaac traditions?
  • How does midrash function differently from Western historical-critical methods?
Comparative Study of Hebrews 11 and Jewish Tradition
  • How does the author of Hebrews engage with Second Temple midrash?
  • What is the relationship between “in the manner of speaking” and resurrection midrash?
  • How does Hebrews’ presentation of faith relate to these more human readings of the patriarchs?
Psychological and Theological Integration
  • What does modern trauma theory teach us about reading biblical narratives?
  • How can we hold together God’s sovereignty and human trauma?
  • What theological frameworks allow for both divine command and human harm?
  • How do we practice faithful biblical interpretation that honors victims’ experiences?
The Geography and Archaeology of Beer Lahai Roi
  • Where exactly was this well located?
  • What was its significance in the ancient Near Eastern context?
  • Why would this location be associated with divine encounter?
  • What does archaeology tell us about the Negev in the patriarchal period?
Generational Trauma in Genesis
  • How does trauma pass from Abraham to Isaac to Jacob?
  • What patterns of dysfunction repeat across generations?
  • How does the narrative show both the persistence and the gradual healing of family wounds?
  • What role does Joseph play in breaking or continuing these patterns?
The Concept of “Ayin Tova” and “Ayin Ra’ah” in Biblical and Rabbinic Literature
  • Where else do these concepts appear in Scripture?
  • How did Jesus use this framework in his teaching?
  • What practical applications did rabbinic Judaism develop around this teaching?
  • How does perspective shape our participation in God’s work?
Sarah’s Perspective and Voice
  • What traditions exist about Sarah’s response to the binding?
  • How do we read texts where women’s perspectives are absent?
  • What can we learn about Sarah’s death and its circumstances?
  • How does the matriarchal line balance the patriarchal focus?
The Nature of Biblical Faith
  • How is biblical faith different from certainty or perfection?
  • What does it mean to be “faithful” when outcomes are unclear?
  • How do we balance trust in God with acknowledgment of harm done?
  • What is the relationship between faith and lament?

Comprehension Questions

  1. What specific textual evidence in Genesis 22:19 suggests Isaac did not return home with Abraham after the binding, and why is this detail significant for understanding the aftermath of this traumatic event?

  2. Compare and contrast the two dominant streams of midrash regarding Isaac’s absence from the narrative. How does each interpret Isaac’s experience, and what theological or relational emphases does each tradition highlight?

  3. Explain the significance of Beer Lahai Roi as Isaac’s dwelling place. What is the history of this location, and how does Isaac’s choice to live there inform our understanding of his emotional and spiritual state after the binding?

  4. What does the midrash mean by “ayin ra’ah” (bad eye) in relation to Isaac’s blindness? How does this concept connect physical disability with perspective, worldview, and the lasting effects of trauma?

  5. How does this episode’s treatment of Abraham challenge both idealization and dismissal of biblical characters? What does it mean to honor someone as a model of faith while acknowledging the harm their actions caused?

Summary

BEMA Episode 217 offers a profound exploration of the aftermath of the binding of Isaac, using Jewish midrash to illuminate textual details often overlooked in Western readings. The episode centers on a critical observation: when Abraham descends from Mount Moriah, Isaac is conspicuously absent from the narrative. This gap in the text opens space for midrashic interpretation that emphasizes the traumatic impact of the binding on Isaac himself.

Two primary midrashic streams emerge. The first emphasizes Isaac’s obedience and even suggests he was actually sacrificed and resurrected three days later, presenting him as a Christ-type figure. The second, which the hosts find more relationally compelling, suggests Isaac was so traumatized he fled from his father and lived separately at Beer Lahai Roi - the very well where Hagar encountered God in her own moment of exile and pain.

The textual evidence supports the trauma reading: Isaac is explicitly stated to be living away from home in Genesis 24:62. Sarah dies, possibly without seeing her son again. Abraham, despite the fracturing of his family, continues to act faithfully by sending for a wife for his absent son. In a moment of divine providence, Isaac encounters Rebekah in a field, receives comfort, and returns to his mother’s tent. Yet the trauma persists - the midrash connects his later blindness to “ayin ra’ah,” a bad eye or perspective of scarcity that shapes his future relationships and parenting.

The episode powerfully applies this ancient story to contemporary experiences of religious trauma. Many people have been wounded by parents, churches, or religious leaders who were sincerely trying to follow God. The narrative offers no simplistic judgments but instead acknowledges the complex reality: faithfulness and harm can coexist, trauma has lasting effects, healing is possible but not formulaic, and God continues working redemption in messy human stories.

The core invitation is to “trust the story” - not as a formula guaranteeing specific outcomes, but as a posture of continuing to participate in God’s work even when we’ve made mistakes, even when relationships are broken, even when we can’t see the whole picture. Like Abraham sending for a wife for an absent son, or Isaac wandering in a field north of Beer Lahai Roi, we act faithfully without certainty, and God meets us with unexpected gifts of grace.

Study Notes compiled from BEMA Podcast Episode 217 For more resources and episode links, visit bemadiscipleship.com

Edit | Previous | Next