Did Abraham kill Isaac and other tales of infanticide in religion

Consider appealing to the masses. It would be necessary to make their actions fall under the category of righteous retribution. For instance, even though Jesus saved a woman for being stoned to death for adultery, the Catholic Church and other churches were notorious for publicly burning "witches" at the stake. We can be certain Jesus would not have approved. Imposing their will in such a way would serve to stifle dissent much like the martyrs in the coliseums of Rome. Were they really witches or was there another reason the leaders of the church wanted them dead? It would also provide the mental excuse the masses desire to rid feelings of guilt and cowardice for not acting against the church. Everyone loves to think of themselves as being the ones who would resist the rise of the Third Reich, stand against tyranny and so forth. If that were true of everyone it wouldn't have happened.

When appealing to the oligarchy it would be necessary to make their actions appear to be in the royalty's best interest. One way to do this is to insert the belief of royal blood. Give the oligarchy a sense of being different because of their blood line. In that way, doing things in the interest of the future generations of their families would be appealing without trying to get them to believe in reincarnation. A little inbreeding might be helpful if you didn't want their offspring to be too smart as well. In that way they would be assisted in their own returning lifetimes. It is interesting the National Socialist movement started out with the blaming of Kaiser Wilhelm and the nobility of losing WWI and by the time they took over that blame had inexplicably been shifted to the Jews.

It is also necessary to appeal the arrogance of the royalty, letting them believe they are actually the ones in charge. All this would make any atrocities committed were to the benefit of the "blood lines" ( bloods line beliefs are just dogma) and a rightful social order.

In both instances we are talking about social engineering. Creating a society that is easily controlled in the future.

Except with most multi-god mythologies, the gods weren't actually trying to control humans. Sure they picked sides in human conflicts... sure they periodically punished humans for their behavior (though typically regardless of whether or not the behavior was good or bad)...sure they liked to have humans worship them.... etc... But they didn't actually try to control humans.

To the contrary, the Abrahamic god is supposed to be all powerful and his focus is to control human behavior by way of religious dogma to the effect that if you do what he likes you go to heaven, if you do what he doesn't like you go to hell.

So, with the Abrahamic god the number of those being controlled is not an issue >>> as an all powerful god he can easily do literally anything he wants.

The idea of controlling both sides only becomes problematic when it becomes obvious to humans (any given human) that god is actually behind all the evil, pain and suffering in the world, since he is controlling all aspects of the situation.

back then, the people probably limited education worshiping idols and statues. it would naturally for them, to programmed by priests and rabbis, to follow any words from any books that was presented to them with easy. they believed in something, only they had to represented that their idea of god, what they felt and observed back then. like in morning, sun raise and in the evening, it was sunset.

they weren't intelligence back then, understand the mechanical methods how there was only 24 hours in a day.

They were a bunch of filthy little monkeys back in those days so I'm quite surprised they all managed to spread out around the world, turn white and make it this far!

And before anyone scolds me - The Bible says we all stem from Adam & Eve and Adam & Eve were sure as s*** not a pair or trailer-park honkies .....despite depictions in childrens' literature.

LOL

Controlling both sides of the equation. Here's a couple of links that may interest you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deva_(Hinduism)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daeva

“Americans can always be trusted to do the right thing, once all other possibilities have been exhausted.”

-Winston Churchill

The evolution of the Bible is an interesting story. There are a lot of bibles versions out there:

https://www.bible.com/versions

Note there are 61 in this list of different ones in English. This list is not complete. There are many Orthodox, Coptic, Syriac versions as well and an Ethiopian one. Add to that the non canonical texts and Christian writings discovered in the Library of Alexandria, the Dead Sea Scrolls and other archeological sites and stashes and wow.
Here's a great article on controversial books that were included in the bible from Grunge.com

https://www.grunge.com/182424/the-most-controversial-books-that-were-included-in-the-bible/

The book of Hebrews probably is the most controversial.

I think a lot of people feel that way. Personally I like the Song of Solomon.

I like the song of o'vay.

people said to me," o'vay, you are trying to sing a song again! "

LOL. That's why I try only to sing in the shower, my dog howling masks my singing to anyone in earshot.