This paper examines Søren Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling as a framework for understanding the nature and virtue of Abrahamic faith. It explores why Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his son Isaac represents a form of faith that transcends logic and human comprehension. The paper analyzes two key Kierkegaardian concepts — the knight of infinite resignation and the knight of faith — contrasting the mere "surrogate" of resignation with the true leap of the absurd that defines genuine faith. Through close reading of primary quotations, the paper argues that Abraham's unwavering devotion to God's will, even in the face of seemingly contradictory divine promises, constitutes an ideal of piety that believers should aspire to emulate.
There are several aspects of Abrahamic faith that are admirable and worthy of commendation. Author Søren Kierkegaard details many of these notions in his manuscript Fear and Trembling, which is a fairly exhaustive analysis of Abraham's actions, hypothetical possibilities of courses of action he could have taken, and interpretations of both. One of the principal characteristics of Abrahamic faith that renders it so virtuous — to the point of being almost ineffable — is its incomprehensible nature. This quality is particularly striking when compared to the zeitgeist in which Kierkegaard originally composed the text, as well as when measured against the thoughts and sentiments of the contemporary age.
When one considers that one of the defining traits of faith is that it is primarily illogical, unreasonable, and in many cases inexplicable, it becomes apparent that although the extent of Abrahamic faith is largely incomprehensible to those of us in modern times, this degree of faith is certainly worthy of pursuit and an ideal that believers in a higher power should strive to achieve. Kierkegaard demonstrates this fact throughout Fear and Trembling by sufficiently proving that Abraham's actions are worthy of considerable esteem.
The basic premise around which Kierkegaard's book revolves — and which is central to understanding the lofty regard for Abrahamic faith — is that a fidelity as profound as that which Abraham displayed for God is well beyond the understanding of posterity. Abraham was willing to journey to the mountains to sacrifice his firstborn son, Isaac, simply because God told him to do so. Abraham did not question God's will or even understand it himself; he simply acquiesced to it because he had consecrated his existence in accord with God and was willing to do anything to live a life of assent that expressed his belief in the power and benign intentions of this higher power.
Had Abraham known more details about this particular task — such as God's intentions behind it, or why Abraham was charged with this specific assignment — the undertaking would have been rooted more in logic and less in faith itself. Yet one of the defining attributes of faith is that it is illogical and somewhat the antithesis of reason. Faith requires people to place as much belief as they can in something (or someone) they have never seen, never heard, and have no demonstrable proof of, and to adhere to it in the best of times and in the worst. God's command for Abraham to take the life of his firstborn must have seemed like one of the worst of times in which to exercise faith. Yet Abraham's faith did not falter once as he set about fulfilling this command.
The very circumstances in which Abraham had sired Isaac, and the role that both of them were to play for posterity, is largely responsible for the incomprehensible nature of the faith Abraham actuated in virtually ignoring both of those roles as he faithfully followed God's command. The following quotation indicates that it was these particular circumstances that made Abraham's intended sacrifice well beyond the norm and rendered it unthinkable:
"He said nothing to Sarah, nothing to Eleazar. Indeed who could understand him? Had not the temptation by its very nature exacted of him an oath of silence? My hearer, there was many a father who believed that with his son he lost everything that was dearest to him in the world, that he was deprived of every hope for the future, but yet there was none that was the child of promise in the sense that Isaac was for Abraham" (Kierkegaard).
This quotation directly alludes to the incomprehensible nature of Abraham's faith in his willingness to sacrifice his son, underscored by the fact that he told no one about God's bidding in this matter. There was consequently no one who could "understand" Abraham's actions in attempting to fulfill this command. What makes this demand truly incomprehensible is that Abraham had been promised by God to be the father of a great nation on earth. Furthermore, God had told him that Isaac would play an influential part in building this great nation, and that both father and son would be revered by posterity for what they would produce. Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac would seemingly terminate all of these hopes — hopes that represented everything Abraham had lived for up until this time. These future expectations were the burden encompassed by God's command, and it is the "promise" that Isaac represented that Abraham's act of sacrifice would destroy. These unusual circumstances, and Abraham's faithful adherence to God's order to forsake them by killing his child, are what make his willingness to do so an extreme expression of the most admirable quality of faith in the divine.
In demonstrating that Abraham is worthy of ineffable admiration due to the faith he displayed in his trial, Kierkegaard also references a fairly powerful notion known as a movement of infinite resignation. Those who are able to summon and partake of such movements are considered knights of infinite resignation, and include most common tragic heroes as they appear in works of drama or in real life. It is significant, however, that the author details this type of knight — a person willing to concede everything, to effectively resign himself to an unhappy fate and renounce all that he possesses — only to emphasize that what Abraham was, and what he did in carrying out the instructions to sacrifice Isaac, was considerably more than, and well beyond comparison with, the mindset of those who would have carried out these instructions solely through resignation. The following quotation, in which Kierkegaard uses himself as an example of a knight of resignation, demonstrates the limited nature of such resolve and indicates that it is easily summoned and is not akin to faith:
"The very instant I mounted the horse I would have said to myself, 'Now all is lost. God requires Isaac, I sacrifice him, and with him my joy.' Perhaps one will be foolish enough to believe my prodigious resignation was far more ideal and poetic than Abraham's narrow-mindedness. And yet this is the greatest falsehood, for my prodigious resignation was the surrogate for faith. In that case I would not have loved Isaac as Abraham loved" (Kierkegaard).
What this quotation demonstrates is that those who partake in movements of infinite resignation are able to perform the same deeds as those who are moved by faith — such as Abraham — yet the act carries immensely less significance. One renounces everything when moved by infinite resignation ("all is lost"), even one's faith. Kierkegaard therefore describes such resignation as a mere "surrogate" or substitute for faith, which means that such a person would not have actually loved Isaac to the degree that Abraham had. A person acting from resignation would have effectively renounced his love for his child along with everything else that was renounced. So although such a person would have been able to go through with the act of sacrificing Isaac much as Abraham was prepared to do, the meaning — which is a testament to supreme faith — would have been lost entirely in the act.
"True faith persists even in the most absurd circumstances"
"Word choice distinguishes religious duty from mere killing"
"Knowing Abraham's story does not reproduce his faith"
When one pauses to consider the varying movements of resignation and faith and the quality of the absurd that the latter possesses, it becomes apparent that Kierkegaard neither exaggerated the incomprehensible nature of Abrahamic faith nor the level of admiration it deserves. Although people may not fully understand such faith, it remains a level of conviction in the will of God that they should aspire to.
You’re 60% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.