Πίστει προσενήνοχεν Ἀβραὰμ τὸν Ἰσαὰκ πειραζόμενος καὶ τὸν μονογενῆ προσέφερεν, ὁ τὰς ἐπαγγελίας ἀναδεξάμενος…
I’m struck by the fact that the author chose the perfect tense here instead of the aorist which would be usual for historical narrative, and I’ve been wondering how best to capture his choice of tense when translating this into English. I believe that it has to do with the grammatical aspect of the perfect tense, which the Cambridge Grammar says “presents an action as a state resulting from a preceding completed action or signifies that the effects of the completed action are somehow still relevant” (CGCG 33.6). So I interpret προσενήνοχεν as meaning Abraham because of his actions (i.e. taking Isaac up the mountain, tying him up and raising a knife to kill him) was “in the state of having (i.e. in effect had already) offered” his son, even though he hadn’t done so in actuality.
So perhaps one might try capturing this in translation by saying, “By faith Abraham when he was tested by God was ready to offer Isaac, even his only offspring whom he had been promised…” where the phrase “was ready to offer” conveys the present sense of “being ready at that moment.” This also aligns IMO with CGCG 33.35 note 1 which says, “The perfect indicative is a present tense, referring to the moment of speaking.”)
Does this make sense?