Abstract
Most readers of the Old Testament know the matriarchs Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, and Leah along with their counterpart patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob). But fewer know the other matriarch, Hagar, the Egyptian, wife of Abraham and mother of Ishmael. If they know her, they often have negative misconceptions about Hagar and Ishmael. But when one reads the stories of Hagar in Genesis 16 and 21 carefully and without modern prejudices, one discovers that Genesis portrays neither Hagar nor Ishmael negatively. In fact, Hagar is exceptional among the matriarchs in that she is actually a Mother Patriarch, being promised multiplied seed (just like the patriarchs Abraham and Isaac) and providing for Ishmael’s future as a patriarch would. Her son, Ishmael, mirrors Isaac in numerous ways and, like Jacob, he is the father of twelve princes. Hagar, the ultimate “other” as an Egyptian, is also the ultimate mother. She should be accorded her place as the mother of a nation and, indeed, a patriarch in her own right.
Most readers of the Old Testament know the matriarchs Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, and Leah along with their counterpart patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob). But fewer know the other matriarch, Hagar, the Egyptian, wife of Abraham and mother of Ishmael. If they know her, they often have negative misconceptions about Hagar and Ishmael. They assume, for example, that Hagar willingly slept with Abraham, essentially stealing him from Sarah. 1 They condemn her “contempt” for Sarah as evil, 2 presume that Ishmael’s laughter at Isaac in Gen 21:9 was more than just laughter, and conclude that Hagar and her son deserved to be cast into the wilderness. 3 They cast a xenophobic eye on Ishmael and his descendants, associating them (in a negative way) with Arabs and Muslims and tracing the modern conflict between Muslims and Jews back to the story of Hagar. 4
But when one reads the stories of Hagar in Genesis 16 and 21 carefully and without modern prejudices, one discovers that Genesis portrays neither Hagar nor Ishmael negatively. On the contrary, the writers of Genesis focus on both mother and son as empathetic characters, as the following analysis will demonstrate. Hagar is exceptional among the matriarchs. I call her a “Mother Patriarch,” because God promises her multiplied seed (Gen 16:10), a promise given elsewhere only to patriarchs. Hagar is “other” first because she is the only major matriarch who is a non-Hebrew. But I also call her the “Other Patriarch” because, as we will see, her story parallels Abraham’s in numerous ways. Hagar even performs roles that ordinarily a patriarch would have performed, such as giving a place its name (Gen 16) and providing her son a wife (Gen 21). 5 Hagar is, therefore, the “Mother Patriarch” and “Other Patriarch.” She should be accorded her place as the progenitor of a nation and, indeed, should be viewed as a patriarch in her own right.
Genesis 16
Sarai’s plan (Gen 16:1–6)
Hagar’s story begins after God’s pronouncement to Abram in Gen 15:4–5 that he would father a son and his descendants would be innumerable as the stars. The scene shifts in chapter 16 to the problem with that promise. Sarai’s barrenness, first mentioned in Gen 11:30, is reiterated in the first verse of the chapter: “And Sarai, Abram’s wife, had not given birth for him” (Gen 16:1). 6 Sarai’s solution to the problem appears in the next phrase: “And she had an Egyptian slave, 7 and her name was Hagar.” The narrator introduces Hagar by name, but neither Sarai nor Abram refer to Hagar by her name in Genesis 16 or 21. Although the actual meaning of Hagar’s name is unclear, 8 it sounds like the word hagger, “the stranger” or “the outsider,” 9 a fitting designation, since she is treated like an outsider throughout her story. Abram and Sarai likely acquired Hagar when they went to Egypt in Gen 12:10–20. Genesis 12:16 states that Pharaoh gave Abram both male and female slaves as part of the bride price for Sarai. In Genesis 16, Sarai sees her slave as a way to remedy her barrenness: “Look, now, the LORD has prevented me from bearing. Go into my slave, now. Perhaps I will be built from her” (Gen 16:2).
In the Old Testament, infertility was considered primarily a woman’s problem. 10 Only a few Old Testament texts attribute childlessness to the impotence of a man. For example, Gen 20:17 suggests that God prevented Abimelech from having sex with Sarah as she was Abraham’s wife. 11 In 2 Kgs 4:14, the age of the Shunammite’s husband seems to be, in part, why she had no children. 12 The Hebrews believed God opened or closed women’s wombs (Gen 16:2; 20:18; 29:31; 30:2, 22; 1 Sam 1:5), and in cases of barrenness the usual practice was for the husband to obtain a second wife 13 in order to produce children. It was legal for Sarai to suggest that Abram take her slave as a wife. 14 Many interpreters argue that the slave’s offspring would be adopted by the barren woman as her own child (or at least become her property). 15 This seems to be the case when Rachel and Leah’s slaves bear children (see Gen 30:1–21). 16 Other interpreters think, however, that the purpose of surrogacy was not so that the barren woman could adopt the child as her own, but so that the slave’s pregnancy would stimulate the fertility of the barren woman. 17 This may be what Sarai meant when she said in Gen 16:2, “Perhaps I will be built from her,” viewing Hagar as a means to build up her own status compromised by sterility. “Built” may have a double meaning based on word play. It comes from the root bānāh, which sounds similar to bēn, meaning “son.” 18 Alter suggests that Sarah was saying, “Perhaps I will be ‘sonned’ from her.” 19 Hagar had no choice in this matter. She was a slave; she could not say no. She was a womb to be used for Sarai and Abram’s purposes. Neither Abram nor Sarai ever spoke directly to Hagar, but Abram listened (vayyišma‛) to Sarai’s voice, foreshadowing Ishmael’s name (yišmā‛ē’l). 20
The narrator tells us that Sarai gave Hagar to Abram as a wife after Abram had been in the land of Canaan for ten years (16:3), which would make him eighty-five years old when he “went into Hagar and she conceived” (16:4). This act is told without elaboration, but for Hagar it was a forced coupling. Once she knew she had conceived, however, she viewed her mistress differently: “Her mistress was trivial in her eyes” (16:4). The word translated “trivial” (qālal) means “to be light” or “slight.” 21 In other words, when Hagar looked at Sarai, she viewed her mistress as inconsequential. Why? Hagar most likely realized that her status changed once she became pregnant with the patriarch’s firstborn. 22 She knew that if she bore a son, he would be the firstborn male, which meant that he would receive a double portion of the father’s inheritance and carry on the family name. More importantly, he would be free, never a slave like his mother. Hagar also knew that she possessed the fertility denied to Sarai, allowing her to give Abram what he most desired: an heir.
One of the major themes of this story (and Gen 21) is introduced here with the phrase “in her eyes.” The theme of seeing (emphasized with words like “eyes” and “seeing”) is significant because Hagar’s encounters with God revolve around God seeing Hagar and Hagar seeing God. 23
Sarai was incensed by Hagar’s haughtiness and hurled her anger at Abram: “May the violence done to me be upon you! I myself gave my slave into your embrace, 24 and she saw that she conceived, so I am trivial in her eyes. May the LORD judge between me and you!” (Gen 16:5). Readers are often surprised at Sarai’s vehemence; after all, this was her idea. But Abram acquiesced all the same, expressing absolutely no concern for Hagar or for the baby: “Look, your slave is in your hand. Do to her whatever seems good in your eyes” (v 6). Abram relinquished his patriarchal obligations by taking no responsibility for either of his wives or for his own child.
“So Sarai afflicted [Hagar] and she fled from her presence” (Gen 16:6). In response to Abram’s flippant dismissal, Sarai acted. Most English translations soften the wording here. For example, the NRSV renders it “dealt harshly” (see also NASB, ESV, KJV), and the NIV and HCSB use “mistreated.” But the Hebrew word ‘ānāh is a cruel verb, especially when it is in the intensive stem as it is here. 25 It means “afflict” or “humble,” and when men are the subjects and women the objects, it can mean “rape.” It is the same word that is used of the Egyptian masters afflicting the Hebrew slaves in Exod 1:11–12. Sarai did not just mistreat Hagar; she humbled and afflicted her, likely beating her (see 16:9). Ironically, Sarai had claimed that she was the victim of violence. But the real violence was done to Hagar. Wenham notes that the word “fled” (bārach) is often used of people fleeing from those who are trying to kill them. Perhaps Hagar feared for her own life and the child’s life when she fled.
Hagar’s divine encounter in the wilderness (Gen 16:7–14)
“And the messenger of the LORD 26 found her at the spring of the waters in the wilderness at the spring on the way to Shur” (Gen 16: 7). In a surprising turn of events, Hagar, an Egyptian slave, encountered the messenger of the LORD, the God of her oppressors. She is the first person in the Bible to be visited by the messenger of the LORD. 27 She was in the wilderness near a spring on the way to Shur, which is in the southern region of the Negev. 28 This suggests that Hagar might have been trying to make her way back to Egypt. Again, the text subtly focuses on the key theme of seeing and being seen. The word for “spring” (‘ên) is literally “eye,” and the word Shur comes from a root meaning “behold” or “regard.” 29
In the first exchange between the messenger of the LORD and Hagar, the messenger addressed Hagar as “Sarai’s slave”—an ominous salutation. He asked her where she came from and where she was going. Hagar responded only to the first question: “From the presence of my mistress, Sarai, I am fleeing.” Perhaps she did not know exactly where she was going, but the messenger told her: “Go back to your mistress and be afflicted beneath her hand” (Gen 16:9). The command is shocking and harsh, especially in light of Deut 23:16–17 (NRSV): “Slaves who have escaped to you from their owners shall not be given back to them. They shall reside with you, in your midst, in any place they choose in any one of your towns, wherever they please; you shall not oppress them.” 30 The same God who later freed the Hebrew slaves in Exodus commanded the Egyptian slave to return and submit to her Hebrew masters. As Trible says, “Without doubt, these two imperatives, return and submit to suffering, bring a divine word of terror to an abused, yet courageous, woman.” 31
Nevertheless, we must hear the command to return and submit in the context of the three promises the LORD also gave to Hagar. First, the messenger of the LORD said, “I will greatly multiply your seed so that it cannot be counted because it is so many” (Gen 16:10). The wording exactly parallels the promises of multiplied seed given to the patriarchs, Abraham and Isaac (Gen 15:5; 17:2; 22:17; 26:4, 24). 32 Hagar is the only matriarch to receive the patriarchal promise of multiplied seed, and she is the only matriarch who received divine messages from the angel of the LORD. 33 Additionally, what is so striking about this promise is that it was given to a non-Hebrew female. 34 Hagar, the Egyptian—the other—would be the progenitor of a nation.
Second, the messenger of the LORD told Hagar, “Look, you yourself have conceived and you will bear a son. And you will call his name Ishmael because the LORD has heard your affliction” (Gen 16:11). Hagar learned that her baby was a boy, and she was given a prenatal name for him: yišmā’ē’l. Because the LORD had heard (šema‛) her affliction, she would name the boy accordingly. Ishmael means God (’ēl) hears (yišma‛). Abraham was likewise given a prenatal name for Isaac after the old patriarch laughed at God’s promise of a son through Sarah. In response, God told Abraham to name his son Isaac (yitschāq), which means “laughter” (Gen 17:15–19).
Third, the messenger of the LORD informed Hagar what kind of man her boy would become (Gen 16:12). When English readers read this verse, they tend to interpret it negatively because many English translations make it sound like a curse rather than a promise.
35
For example, the NRSV says
He shall be a wild ass of a man, with his hand against everyone, and everyone’s hand against him; and he shall live at odds with all his kin.
36
The problem with such translations is that the wording of the verse contains imagery that can be understood positively, and the prepositions rendered “against” and “at odds with” are ambiguous at best. The first phrase, “He shall be a wild ass of a man” sounds like an insult to modern readers. But we need to hear these words within their cultural context. Hagar’s son will be a pere’, which is usually translated “wild ass.” This translation is misleading, because when we hear the word “ass” we equate it with the domesticated donkey and derive connotations like stubbornness and stupidity from the word. But the Hebrew word does not refer to a domesticated donkey. It refers to the onager, which is a wild animal that has never been domesticated. 37 Thus, when Hagar was told that her son would be an onager, she heard a wondrous promise: her son would be free, indomitable, and strong. Perhaps a better way to communicate this in English is to translate pere’ as “wild stallion.”
The second phrase, “His hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand against him” (NRSV) also sounds negative. This view depends on how one translates the preposition be in this context. Usually the preposition be means “in,” “by,” “on,” or “with.” 38 It can also mean “against.” 39 Just because the preposition can mean “against,” however, does not mean we must translate it that way here. We can just as easily argue for a translation such as, “his hand will be with everyone and everyone’s hand will be with him,” or “his hand will be upon everyone and everyone’s hand will be upon him.” Both of these renderings could be understood positively in the sense that Ishmael would be an equal power 40 alongside everyone else. Indeed, it is possible to understand the phrase to mean that Ishmael would cooperate with his brothers. 41 Regardless, unlike his mother (16:6), Ishmael would never be afflicted under another person’s hand.
The translation of the third phrase, rendered “and he shall live at odds with his kin” in the NRSV, also revolves around a preposition. The phrase, translated literally, is “on, upon, or over (‘al) the faces/presence (penê) of his brothers he shall dwell (yiškōn).” Though the ‘al preposition often means “against,” 42 in this context translating ‘al negatively makes no sense because of the verb šākēn. This verb means to dwell in peace and security, to abide. 43 It contains no hint of animosity. The alternative way of translating the phrase (as indicated in the footnotes of the NRSV, ESV, NASB, HCSB, and NIV) makes much more sense: “before his brothers he will dwell” or “to the east of his brothers he will dwell.” Whereas Hagar fled from before Sarai’s face/presence (16:6), Ishmael will dwell peacefully before the face/presence of his brothers; he will never flee from anyone.
Thus, if we translate this verse without imposing negativity upon it we hear a promise:
And he himself will be a wild-stallion-man. His hand with everyone, and the hand of everyone with him. And before the presence of all his brothers he will dwell securely.
That Hagar took this third statement as a promise and not as a curse is evident in how she responded: “And she called the name of the LORD, the one speaking to her, ‘You are El Roi!’” The unique name she bestowed upon God means, “You are the God who sees me.” 44 Hagar realized that, perhaps for the first time since she was enslaved, someone actually saw her as a human being, a person worthy to be noticed. Neither Sarai nor Abram viewed Hagar as human. She was merely a womb for their use. But the God Hagar met in the wilderness actually called her by name, saw her, knew of her affliction, and sought to work something extraordinary out of it. In response, Hagar did something extraordinary: she named God. She is the only person in the Bible to give God a name. 45
Exactly what Hagar said after naming God is unclear in the Hebrew. 46 A literal rendering, “Have I also thus far seen after one seeing me?” makes little sense. The garbled Hebrew could be due to problems in copying the text over time, or it may reflect Hagar’s agitation after encountering God. The Hebrew can be smoothed out to mean, “Have I seen God and lived?” which would parallel what other biblical characters say after encountering God (Exod 20:19; Judg 6:22–23; 13:22–23). But such emendation destroys the emphasis on seeing and being seen that is in the Hebrew. Perhaps, “Have I not gone on seeing 47 after being seen [by God]?” is a good compromise.
The narrator states that the place where Hagar met God was named Beer-lachai-roi, which means “The Well of the Living One Who Sees Me” 48 (v 14). Although the text does not explicitly state that Hagar named the place, the place was named after her experience there. Only the patriarchs and Hagar have places named after or by them. 49 The exact location of Beer-lachai-roi between Kadesh and Bered is unknown, though it is in the southern regions of Canaan. Just as the Hebrews, fleeing from their Egyptian slavery, traveled to the wilderness of Shur where God provided water for them (Exod 15:22–27), Hagar, fleeing from slavery to Hebrew masters, found a well of water that was named after her encounter. In fact, several interpreters point out numerous parallels between Hagar’s wilderness experiences and those of the Israelites in Exodus. 50
The birth of Ishmael (Gen 16:15–16)
Hagar obeyed the LORD’s command to return to Sarai and Abram, and submitted to whatever abuse Sarai dealt out in order that her son might be free. When Abram was eighty-six years old, Hagar bore his firstborn son, Ishmael (Gen 16:15–16). Sarai is completely absent from the birth, and she did not claim Ishmael as an adopted son. Nevertheless, Abram clearly believed that Ishmael was the fulfillment of God’s promise in Gen 15:4–5 since Ishmael was an heir of his own flesh.
When God told Abraham in Gen 17:15–16 that he would have a child with Sarah in fulfillment of the promise, Abraham fell on his face and laughed incredulously (17:17). He begged God to let Ishmael “live before your face” (17:18), a statement that clearly indicates Abraham viewed Ishmael as his full heir. Abraham’s disbelief that Sarah could produce a child is even more obvious in Genesis 18. Abraham apparently did not tell Sarah about the promised child because she was surprised with joy when she overheard the angel reiterating the promise (18:12). The LORD rebuked Abraham for failing to believe, asking him, “Why did Sarah laugh?” and “Is anything too wonderful for God?” (18:13–14).
Genesis 21:1–21
Birth of Isaac (Gen 21:1–7)
The birth of Isaac sets in motion the circumstances that lead to Hagar and Ishmael’s expulsion. The narrator portrays the birth as the fulfillment of God’s promise to Abraham in Gen 17:15–21. After Isaac’s birth, Abraham circumcised the boy on the eighth day (21:4), just as he had circumcised Ishmael, his firstborn son, when he was thirteen (Gen 17:23). Abram was one hundred when Isaac was born (21:5). Sarah exclaimed, “God made laughter (tsechaq) for me! Everyone who hears (kol-haššōmēa’) will laugh (yitschaq) with me!” (21:6). Ironically, the only person who explicitly laughs about Isaac is Ishmael (yišmā‛ē’l, “God hears”) (21:9).
At the weaning party (Gen 21:8–9)
The story moves quickly ahead to Isaac’s weaning. Women in ancient times nursed until their children were between three to five years old. 51 So when the narrator says that the child grew and was weaned, we know that several years had passed. To celebrate, Abraham threw a great party.
But then Ishmael did something that changed the course of his life and Hagar’s. “And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, laughing” (metsachēq) (21:9). Earlier, Sarah had said that “everyone who hears (haššōmēa‛) will laugh with me” (21:6), but when Ishmael (yišmā‘ē’l) laughed, Sarah became furious. Exactly why is unclear, but, as Heard notes, “many Christian interpreters from Paul to the present have chosen to see the worst in Ishmael, usually out of a felt need to justify Sarah’s insistence on Ishmael’s expulsion.”
52
If Ishmael was merely laughing (as Sarah previously said people ought to do, 21:6), it seems odd that Sarah would view his laughter as a threat to Isaac. Thus, one approach suggests that Ishmael was actually laughing at Isaac. The Septuagint (Greek Old Testament) adds the phrase “with her son, Isaac,” which lends some credibility to the idea that Ishmael was laughing at or with Isaac when Sarah saw them, perhaps in some way mocking the little boy (cf. Gen 19:14; Gal. 3:29).
53
Another interpretation claims that Ishmael was doing something much more insidious. In Gen 26:8, Abimelech looked out his window and saw Isaac metsachēq Rebekah (the same word as 21:9). Abimelech knew from this act that they were husband and wife. Based on the context, some English translations render the word metsachēq here as “fondling” or “caressing” (NRSV, NASB, NIV, HCSB).
54
If the sexual connotation in Gen 26:8 is imposed on Gen 21:9, Ishmael arguably could be molesting Isaac, thereby justifying Sarah’s harsh reaction.
55
Such an interpretation, however, places too much weight on the slim possibility that the Hebrew word refers to a sexual act in either 21:9 or 26:8, when it normally means laughing or even playing. Robert Alter offers a much more plausible reading:
Mocking laughter would surely suffice to trigger her outrage. Given the fact, moreover, that she is concerned lest Ishmael encroach on her son’s inheritance, and given the inscription of her son’s name in this crucial verb, we may also be invited to construe it as “Isaacing-it”—that is, Sarah sees Ishmael presuming to play the role of Isaac, child of laughter, presuming to be the legitimate heir.
56
Regardless of what angered her, Sarah used the occasion as an opportunity to rid herself of Hagar and Ishmael.
The expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael (Gen 21:10–14a)
Sarah said to Abraham, “Drive out this slave woman and her son, for the son of this slave woman will not inherit with my son, with Isaac” (Gen 21:10). The word gāraš means to drive out and/or to dispossess (i.e., disinherit) another person. 57 Sarah wanted Hagar and Ishmael to be sent away, and she wanted to deprive Ishmael of any inheritance. The fact that she refused to identify Hagar and Ishmael by name demonstrates her disdain for both of them. In order to disinherit Ishmael legally, however, Sarah and Abraham had to grant Hagar and her son freedom. 58
Christian readers, perhaps influenced by Paul’s allegory of Hagar and Sarah in Gal 4:21–31, often assume that Abraham did not love Ishmael and was happy to send both Hagar and her son away. That is not how the writer of Genesis portrays this scene: “But the thing was very evil in Abraham’s eyes on account of his son” (21:11). Whereas Abram acquiesced to Sarai in Gen 16:6 and told Sarai to “do whatever seems good in your eyes,” here Abraham views Sarah’s demand as “very evil.” Abraham did not want to send Ishmael away because, in spite of Isaac’s birth, Abraham still viewed Ishmael as his firstborn son, and he genuinely loved him.
59
The only reason Abraham sent Ishmael and Hagar away was because God compelled him to do so and promised that Ishmael would become a great nation:
But God said to Abraham, “Do not let it be evil in your eyes on account of the boy and on account of your slave woman. Everything that Sarah says to you, you will listen to her voice. For in Isaac your seed will be proclaimed. But I will also establish the son of the slave woman for a nation because he is your seed.” (21:12–13)
Abraham obeyed, enacting what could be considered his first sacrifice of a son (the second, is, of course, Isaac in Gen 22). 60 He got up early in the morning, gave Hagar water and food, and sent her away. The Hebrew word “sent her” (wayšallechehā) implies divorce. 61 The abruptness of this scene and Abraham’s silence are heartbreaking. Abraham barely provides for Hagar and Ishmael, giving them only one skin of water and some food for the journey. 62 As far as we know, Abraham never saw Hagar or his son, Ishmael, again, and once again he relinquished his patriarchal obligations.
Hagar’s second encounter in the wilderness (Gen 21:14b–19)
Hagar found herself in the wilderness, this time wandering aimlessly with her son (21:14b). When the water in the water-skin dried up, she withered with despair. She cast her son beneath one of the bushes, and she sat alone because she did not want to watch her child die. The circumstances were dire; Ishmael was near death from thirst. Some readers condemn Hagar for distancing herself from her son at this critical juncture, assuming that she abandoned Ishmael. But the narrator provides this detail for two reasons. First, it presages Ishmael’s future vocation as an archer (21:20) by stating that Hagar sat about the distance of a bowshot away (she did not abandon him). Second, it shows how grief-stricken Hagar was; she could not bear to watch her son die. According to the Hebrew text, Hagar lifted up her voice and wept, but the Septuagint says, “and the child lifted up his voice and wept” (16:16). Although the Greek version makes sense, given the fact that God responds to the child’s voice in verse 17, changing the wording to accord with the Greek version strips Hagar of her very real grief. 63
God responded to Hagar after hearing the boy crying: “And the messenger of God called to Hagar from the heavens” (21:17). This divine cry from the heavens anticipates a similar cry to Abraham from the heavens in Gen 22:11. In both cases, God intervenes to save Abraham’s sons from imminent death. 64 God asked, “What’s wrong, Hagar? Do not be afraid! For God has heard the boy’s voice where he is. Get up. Lift up the boy and take hold of his hand in yours, for I will establish him as a great nation” (21:17–18). God’s command to Hagar, “Do not be afraid!” echoes the same command given to Abram in Gen 15:1. The statement “for God has heard” (kî-šāma‛ ’elōhîm) is another play on Ishmael’s name. Furthermore, the command for Hagar to get up, lift up the boy, and take hold of his hand, anticipates a similar command to Abraham in Gen 22:12. Although God had told Abraham that Ishmael would be a great nation twice (Gen 17:20; 21:13), this was the first time Hagar heard the promise for herself. Once again, seeing is a major theme in this passage. God opened Hagar’s eyes so that she saw a well filled with water. She immediately refilled her water-skin and gave the boy a drink. Thus, God saved Hagar and her son a second time.
One interpretive problem related to the story of Hagar and Ishmael must be addressed at this juncture. The chronology of events in Genesis would suggest that Ishmael, who was thirteen when he was circumcised (Gen 17:25) and fourteen when Isaac was born, 65 was between sixteen and nineteen years old when the weaning party took place. This is problematic because Ishmael is described as a “boy” (na‛ar) and as a “child” (yeled) in Genesis 21. In addition, Hagar casts him under a bush when she runs out of water (21:15), and God responds to the voice of the boy as though he were an infant, crying (21:17). One possibility is that Genesis 21 is an alternative story about Ishmael’s origins written by a different author and placed awkwardly at this location in Genesis. 66 Another possibility is that the infantilizing terms are simply terms of endearment used by the narrator to emphasize both Abraham and Hagar’s suffering over the boy’s expulsion and near death. 67 Or, more likely, this narrative portrays Ishmael as a young boy in order to more closely parallel his near demise while in the care of his mother with Isaac’s near death at the hands of his father in Genesis 22. In other words, the narrator wants us to see the two stories mirroring one another (with important differences; see Table 1).
Hagar, Abraham, and Their Sons’ Imminent Deaths: A Comparison of Genesis 21 and Genesis 22 68
Obviously, many striking similarities exist between the two stories, which is why the editor chose to put them side-by-side. Both the matriarch (Hagar) and the patriarch (Abraham) confronted the real possibility of a son’s death, and in both cases the messenger from heaven intervened to save the child’s life and promised the child a great future. But the contrasts are important as well. Unlike Abraham, Hagar had no intention of killing her son. Rather, she despaired over the possibility of his death (21:16). Whereas Abraham showed no emotion whatsoever as he took Isaac to the mountain, Hagar cried out and wept over her son (21:16). Unlike Abraham, Hagar immediately took care of her son’s needs, giving him water from the well (21:19). Abraham offered the ram as a sacrifice in the place of his son (22:13), but the narrator says nothing about him untying Isaac or comforting him. In fact, the text states that Abraham and his two servants returned to Beer Sheba but omits any mention of Isaac returning with them (22:19). 69 It seems obvious that Hagar was a much better mother to Ishmael than Abraham was a father to Isaac.
Hagar’s son grows up (Gen 21:20–21)
The narrator states, “God was with the boy,” indicating that God showed Ishmael favor (cf. Gen 26:3, 24; 39:3; 1 Sam 3:19) and took care of him, just as God promised. Ishmael grew up, dwelled in the wilderness of Paran (located south of Beer Sheba where Isaac will dwell), 70 became an archer, and married an Egyptian wife Hagar found for him (21:20–21). Just as Abraham later found a wife for Isaac (Gen 24), Hagar found a wife for Ishmael, once again playing a patriarchal role.
The next time Ishmael is mentioned is when he and Isaac bury Abraham together (Gen 25:9). They are presented as two brothers harboring no animosity towards one another. Later, Gen 25:12–18 lists Ishmael’s descendants. Hagar is featured in this genealogical notice as Ishmael’s mother (25:12), and this is her last appearance in the text. Notably, Ishmael is the father of twelve princes (25:16), just as Isaac’s son, Jacob, fathered twelve sons (Gen 35:22b–26). In virtually every way (see Table 2), Ishmael is paralleled with Isaac, indicating that both of Abraham’s sons were blessed and beloved by God. It should be emphasized that, in Genesis, neither Ishmael nor his descendants are portrayed negatively nor are they hostile toward Abraham’s descendants. 71
Parallels between Ishmael and Isaac.
More significant for the purpose of this article is how Hagar and Abraham are mirrored throughout their stories, suggesting that Hagar should be viewed on the same level as Abraham, as a patriarch. I have listed these parallels in Table 3 following the order of Hagar’s story.
Parallels between Hagar and Abraham 72
Conclusion
The significance of these parallels is that Hagar is a patriarch in her own right, mirrored against Abraham (and the other patriarchs) rather than Sarah (and the other matriarchs). Hagar overshadows Sarah in many ways. She encounters God in the wilderness twice (Gen 16:7–14; 21:14–19), whereas Sarah never has a personal, revelatory encounter with God. 74 God gives Hagar the patriarchal blessing of multiplied seed (16:10), whereas Sarah never receives any promises firsthand and the promises given to Abram/Abraham revolve around his seed, not hers (Gen 15:5; 22:17). Hagar names God (Gen 16:13), and the place is named after her encounter (16:14). Sarah never speaks to God 75 and no place is named after her. Hagar plays a central role in saving her son’s life (Gen 21:15–19). Sarah is absent when Abraham takes Isaac to the mountain to be sacrificed (Gen 22). The only way Sarah overshadows Hagar is that her son, Isaac, is the one through whom Abraham’s seed is proclaimed (Gen 21:12). But this is not due to Sarah’s courage or resourcefulness; she has to appeal to Abraham in order to ensure that Isaac prevails (Gen 21:10). Even then, Abraham expels Hagar and Ishmael only because God forces him to do so (21:11–12), not because of Sarah. Hagar, in contrast, secures her son’s future by obeying God’s commands in Genesis 16 and 21.
On the other hand, Hagar is often paralleled with Abraham, which is unusual and striking. The messenger of the LORD speaks to her directly (Gen 16:8–12; 21:17–18) just as the messenger speaks to Abraham (Gen 22:11–12, 15–18). Hagar (Gen 16:10), like Abraham (Gen 15:5; 22:17), is promised multiplied seed, a promise no other woman receives. Hagar and Abraham are given names for their sons prior to birth (Gen 16:11; Gen 17:19). Places are named after Hagar and Abraham’s encounters with God (Gen 16:14; 22:14). Both Hagar and Abraham experience the near death of their sons (Gen 21:16; Gen 22:11). Hagar, like Abraham, is told that Ishmael will become a great nation (Gen 21:18; 17:20; 21:13). She, like Abraham, procures a wife for her son (Gen 21:21; Gen 24).
Therefore, Hagar plays several unique and powerful roles in the book of Genesis. As the one who births Ishmael, she is the mother of a nation. As the only matriarch promised multiplied seed, she is the Mother Patriarch. As an Egyptian, she is the ultimate other—an outsider, stranger, and a slave. Finally, as the only matriarch who mirrors the patriarchs in her encounters with God and in her actions, Hagar is the Other Patriarch.