This communication examines alternative interpretations of the Binding of Isaac (עקדת יצחק) narrative in Genesis through linguistic analysis and biblical hermeneutics. The author proposes that wordplay and linguistic ambiguity serve as pivotal interpretive mechanisms in understanding divine commands and oracles throughout Genesis. The methodology employs close textual analysis of Hebrew root words, particularly focusing on the dual meaning of העלהו לעולה, which can be interpreted either as "take him up for a burnt offering" or "send him up as a burnt offering." The study argues that God's commands in Genesis are intentionally ambiguous rather than contradictory, allowing for flexibility in divine execution while maintaining consistency with previous promises. The analysis extends to other biblical instances, including the oracle concerning Jacob and Esau (רב יעבוד צעיר) and Moses' wordplay in Deuteronomy. The research concludes that Abraham's faith is demonstrated through his willingness to accept the most demanding interpretation of divine ambiguity as the default position, while linguistic uncertainty provides a framework for understanding apparent contradictions in biblical narratives. This interpretation suggests that divine communication operates through deliberate semantic flexibility rather than explicit contradiction of previous commitments.