suavojr, Good observations from a 10 year old--Children can be so clear-thinking..
And the Genesis 22 account? While I was struggling with the problem of the god of love in the OT, I knew that words were important. And that the words of Genesis 22 were peculiar.
I had as my personal background 1) a Latin teacher in high school that made us discover words derived from latin. This made me mindful of clues and odd turns in language, communication and the evolution of word meaning. 2)because I ended up living in a less "civilized" manner and sometimes living and worshipping with people who had ideas of God as rough as Abraham, I had to wonder how ideas of God grew among people--I asked the brothers during my inquisition 'Who invents words, brothers?" "We humans do". "So how does God talk to us about ways that are higher than our ways?" Also: "Do you know how God "spoke" to Abraham?"
I will not defend the existence of god, but it is true that the scholarship allowing for a variance on the horrific Abraham/Isaac account is sound.
What I sent to the Society was reasoned and researched. (I have the full exchange of letters on an old thread on JWN). Though they found nothing objectionable in it, even concurred with the points. But ultimately, though there was every good reason not to interpret God as a freaky sadist, they would not allow for anything less than a twisted God. I pointed out that there was more reason to embrace ambiguity than the certainty they had chosen.
And to the charge from the local brothers that I had my own interpretation I pointed out that, no, their insistence on ignoring a word in all ways foreign to blood and blade--THAT was an interpretation. "Do not go beyond the things written" only applied to the WTBTS writings--not the bible. They were comfortable with their hideous interpretation for children.
It took 3 months for the Corporation to deal with me. I was to be quiet and lump it.
They LOVE the monster they've created.