Abraham acts like a man who has been chosen; he acts with the assurance that he is superior to others and that he has Yahweh's favor. In fact, he boldly intercedes when Yahweh informs him that He plans to destroy Sodom, and Sodom is briefly spared as a result of Abraham's righteousness. What Abraham's story makes clear is that Old Testament righteousness cannot be defined or explained by modern definitions of morality. On the contrary, Old Testament morality came down to a single major issue: whether one would submit to the will of Yahweh. If so, then one was considered moral. As a result, even when the authors do not show overt approval of the patriarchs' actions, they do not show any type of condemnation of those actions. In fact, even when the authors do not justify the patriarchs' actions, they at least pass along the justifications that the patriarchs give for those actions....
In fact, it is important to the development of Judaism that the authors did not overtly justify the patriarchs' actions; their acceptance was unimportant, what was important was Yahweh's reaction to those actions. As ancient Jews, the authors would have been aware that their approval or disapproval of the patriarchs' actions would have been disrespectful to Yahweh. They had no right to question Yahweh's choice of Abraham as the founder of Judaism, Yahweh's tacit approval of Abraham's deceptions or his treatment of Hagar and Ishmael, or Yahweh's demand that Abraham sacrifice Isaac. In fact, that the authors show such a non-judgmental attitude towards Abraham's behavior demonstrates that they understood the large-scale implication of Abraham's story, which was that the Jews were Yahweh's chosen people and that they would be rewarded as long as they remained obedient to Yahweh.
