The child grew and was weaned. Abraham made a great feast on the day that Isaac was weaned.
Parallel Translations
-
The child grew and was weaned. Abraham made a great feast on the day that Isaac was weaned.
-
And the child grew, and was weaned: and Abraham made a great feast the same day that Isaac was weaned.
-
And the child grew, and was weaned. And Abraham made a great feast on the day that Isaac was weaned.
Examined in Scripture Analysis
Contradictions (1)
Questions where the Bible appears to say two different things, with the passages on each side set together.
Cross-references (13)
Passages linked to Genesis 21:8 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- 1 Samuel 1:22 But Hannah didn’t go up, for she said to her husband, “Not until the child is weaned; then I will bring him, that he may appear before Yahweh, and stay there forever.”
- Hosea 1:8 Now when she had weaned Lo-Ruhamah, she conceived, and bore a son.
- Genesis 19:3 He urged them greatly, and they came in with him, and entered into his house. He made them a feast, and baked unleavened bread, and they ate.
- Genesis 26:30 He made them a feast, and they ate and drank.
- Genesis 29:22 Laban gathered together all the men of the place, and made a feast.
- Genesis 40:20 On the third day, which was Pharaoh’s birthday, he made a feast for all his servants, and he lifted up the head of the chief cup bearer and the head of the chief baker among his servants.
- 2 Samuel 3:20 So Abner came to David to Hebron, and twenty men with him. David made Abner and the men who were with him a feast.
- 1 Kings 3:15 Solomon awoke; and behold, it was a dream. Then he came to Jerusalem, and stood before the ark of Yahweh’s covenant, and offered up burnt offerings, offered peace offerings, and made a feast for all his servants.
- Psalms 131:2 Surely I have stilled and quieted my soul, like a weaned child with his mother, like a weaned child is my soul within me.
- Judges 14:10 His father went down to the woman; and Samson made a feast there, for the young men used to do so.
- Judges 14:12 Samson said to them, “Let me tell you a riddle now. If you can tell me the answer within the seven days of the feast, and find it out, then I will give you thirty linen garments and thirty changes of clothing;
- 1 Samuel 25:36 Abigail came to Nabal; and behold, he held a feast in his house, like the feast of a king. Nabal’s heart was merry within him, for he was very drunk. Therefore she told him nothing until the morning light.
- Esther 1:3 in the third year of his reign, he made a feast for all his princes and his servants; the power of Persia and Media, the nobles and princes of the provinces, being before him.
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (15 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain 8. And the child grew, and was weaned. Moses…
8. And the child grew, and was weaned. Moses now begins to relate the manner in which Ishmael was rejected from the family of Abraham, in order that Isaac alone might hold the place of the lawful son and heir. It seems, indeed, at first sight, something frivolous, that Sarah, being angry about a mere nothing, should have stirred up strife in the family. But Paul teaches, that a sublime mystery is here proposed to us, concerning the perpetual state of the Church. (Galatians 4:21.) And, truly, if we attentively consider the persons mentioned, we shall regard it as no trivial affair, that the father of all the faithful is divinely commanded to eject his firstborn son; that Ishmael, although a partaker of the same circumcision, becomes so transformed into a strange nations as to be no more reckoned among the blessed seed; that, in appearance, the body of the Church is so rent asunder, that only one-half of it remains; that Sarah, in expelling the son of her handmaid from the house, claims the entire inheritance for Isaac alone. Wherefore, if due attention be applied in the reading of this history, the very mystery of which Paul treats, spontaneously presents itself.
And Abraham made a great feast. It is asked, why he did not rather make it on the day of Isaac’s birth, or circumcision? The subtile reasoning of Augustine, that the day of Isaac’s weaning was celebrated, in order that we may learn, from his example, no more to be children in understandings is too constrained. What others say, has no greater consistency; namely, that Abraham took a day which was not then in common use, in order that he might not imitate the manners of the Gentiles. Indeed, it is very possible, that he may also have celebrated the birthday of his son, with honor and joy. But special mention is made of this feast, for another reason; namely, that then, the mocking of Ishmael was discovered. For I do not assent to the conjecture of those who think that a new history is here begun; and that Sarah daily contended with this annoyance, until, at length, she purged the house by the ejection of the impious mocker. It is indeed probable, that, on other days also, Ishmael had been elated by similar petulance; yet I do not doubt but Moses expressly declares that his contempt was manifested towards Sarah, at that solemn assembly, and that from that time, it was publicly proclaimed. Now Moses does not speak disparagingly of the pleasures of that feast, but rather takes their lawfulness for granted. For it is not his design to prohibit holy men from inviting their friends, to a common participation of enjoyment, so that they, jointly giving thanks to God, may feast with greater hilarity than usual. Temperance and sobriety are indeed always to be observed; and care must be taken, both that the provision itself be frugal, and the guests moderate. I would only say, that God does not deal so austerely with us, as not to allow us, sometimes, to entertain our friends liberally; as when nuptials are to be celebrated, or when children are born to us. Abraham, therefore, made a great feast, that is, an extraordinary one; because he was not accustomed thus sumptuously to furnish his table every day; yet this was an abundance which by no means degenerated into luxury. Besides, while he was thus liberal in entertaining his friends according to his power, he also had sufficient for unknown guests, as we have seen before.
John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain Gen 21:8 And the child grew, and was weaned:…
Gen 21:8 And the child grew, and was weaned: and Abraham made a great feast the [same] day that Isaac was weaned.
Ver. 8. And Abraham made a great feast.] A laudable custom, saith Cajetan, that the beginning of the eating of the firstborn should be celebrated with a feast. St Augustine observeth here, that this solemnity at the weaning of Isaac, was a type of our spiritual regeneration: at, and after which, the faithful keep a continual feast, {a} "Let us keep the festivity, {εωρταζωμεν 1Co 5:7} or holy day," saith Paul, that "feast of fat things full of marrow; of wines on the lees well refined," {Isa 25:6} proceeding from milk to stronger meat, {Heb 5:12} and being to the world, as a weaned child. His mouth doth not water after homely provisions, that hath lately tasted of delicate sustenance.
Read full note →
{a} Aνηρ αγαθος πασαν ημεραν εορτην ηγειται - Diog. ap. Plutarch.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain It doth not appear how old Isaac was, because…
It doth not appear how old Isaac was, because the time for the weaning of children is very various, according to the differing tempers and necessities of children, or inclination of parents; and in those times, when men’s lives were longer than now they are, proportionably the time was longer ere children were weaned.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian,....…
And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian,.... That is, Ishmael, who is not expressed by name, but described by being a son of Hagar, a servant of Sarah's, and an Egyptian woman; all which seems to be observed by way of slight, both to Hagar and her son:
which she had born unto Abraham; not unto Sarah, as she proposed to herself, when she gave her maid to Abraham, Gen 16:2. This son of Abraham she saw
Read full note →
mocking; either at the entertainment made at the weaning of Isaac; or rather at Isaac himself, laughing at his name, and treating him with contempt as his younger brother, and boasting that he was the firstborn, and that the inheritance belonged to him; and threatening what he would do to him, should he hereafter offer to dispute it with him, under pretence of the promise of God that he should be Abraham's heir, and at which promise also he may be supposed to mock: and that this contention was about the inheritance seems plain from the words of Sarah in Gen 21:10; and in it Ishmael might not only rise to high words, but come to blows, and beat his brother; for it is observed the word used sometimes so signifies, Sa2 2:14; wherefore the apostle might truly call it a persecution, Gal 4:29; and as even cruel mockings are, Heb 11:35. As for the various senses the Jewish commentators put upon this, there does not seem to be any foundation for them, as that Ishmael was committing idolatry, and endeavouring to draw his brother into it; or was talking in an indecent and lascivious manner, in order to corrupt his mind; or that he was intending and attempting to take away his life, by shooting an arrow at him, and pretending it was but in jest and in play; See Gill on Gal 4:29.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Verse 8. The child grew and was weaned] [-----Anglo-Saxon-----].…
Verse 8. The child grew and was weaned] [-----Anglo-Saxon-----]. Anglo-Saxon VERSION. Now the child waxed and became weaned. We have the verb to wean from the Anglo-Saxon [A.S.] awendan, to convert, transfer, turn from one thing to another, which is the exact import of the Hebrew word גמל gamal in the text. Hence [A.S.] wenan, to wean, to turn the child from the breast to receive another kind of ailment. And hence, probably, the word WEAN, a young child, which is still in use in the northern parts of Great Britain and Ireland, and which from its etymology seems to signify a child taken from the breast; surely not from the Scotch wee-ane, a little one, much less from the German wenig, little, as Dr. Johnson and others would derive it. At what time children were weaned among the ancients, is a disputed point. St. Jerome says there were two opinions on this subject. Some hold that children were always weaned at five years of age; others, that they were not weaned till they were twelve. From the speech of the mother to her son, 2Mac 7:27, it seems likely that among the Jews they were weaned when three years old: O my son, have pity upon me that bare thee nine months in my womb, and gave thee SUCK THREE YEARS, and nourished thee and brought thee up. And this is farther strengthened by 2Ch 31:16, where Hezekiah, in making provision for the Levites and priests, includes the children from three years old and upwards; which is a presumptive proof that previously to this age they were wholly dependent on the mother for their nourishment. Samuel appears to have been brought to the sanctuary when he was just weaned, and then he was capable of ministering before the Lord, 1Sa 1:22-28; and this certainly could not be before he was three years of age. The term among the Mohammedans is fixed by the Koran, chap. xxxi. 14, at two years of age.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain Weaned. St. Jerome says when he was five years…
Weaned. St. Jerome says when he was five years old, though some said twelve. The age of men being prolonged, their infancy continued longer. One of the Machabees suckled her child three years, 2 Machabees vii. 27. (2 Paralipomenon xxxi. 16.) (Calmet) --- Feast. The life of the child being now considered in less danger. From the time of conception till this place, the husband kept at a distance from his wife. (Clement of Alexandria, strom. iii.) Samuel’s mother made a feast or present when she weaned him, 1 Kings i. 24. (Menochius)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain the child grew, and was weaned--children are suckled longer…
the child grew, and was weaned--children are suckled longer in the East than in the Occident--boys usually for two or three years.
Abraham made a great feast, &c.--In Eastern countries this is always a season of domestic festivity, and the newly weaned child is formally brought, in presence of the assembled relatives and friends, to partake of some simple viands. Isaac, attired in the symbolic robe, the badge of birthright, was then admitted heir of the tribe [ROSENMULLER].
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain 8. The child… was weaned — At what age…
8. The child… was weaned — At what age we are not told; perhaps not until he was three years old. Comp. 2Ma_7:27; Josephus, Ant., 2; 9, 6; 1Sa_1:22, note.
A great feast — Such an event would naturally be made an occasion of festive joy.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 8. was weaned] Weaning was often, in the East,…
8. was weaned] Weaning was often, in the East, deferred until as late as the child’s third or fourth year; see 1Sa_1:24. It is still regarded as the occasion for a family rejoicing.
8–21 (E). The Expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael
Read full note →
A narrative from E which forms a parallel to that in chap. 16. (J).
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain (8) The child grew, and was weaned.—According to tradition,…
(8) The child grew, and was weaned.—According to tradition, Isaac was two years old when weaned. Three years is the age mentioned in 2Ch_31:16, 2Ma_7:27; and Samuel was old enough at his weaning to be left at the tabernacle with Eli (1Sa_1:24). In Persia and India it is still the custom to celebrate the weaning of a child by an entertainment.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain And the child grew, kaiqh toon (LXX): imitated by…
And the child grew, kaiqh toon (LXX): imitated by Luke concerning Christ: toon huxane (Luk_2:40) and was weaned. The verb gamal originally signifies to do good to any one, to do completely; hence to finish, or make completely ready, as an infant; hence to wean, since either at that time the period of infancy is regarded as complete, or the child s independent existence is then fully reached. The time of weaning is commonly believed to have been at the end of the second or third year. (cf. 1Sa_1:22-24; 2Ch_31:16 RAPC 2Ma 7:27; Josephus, "Ant.," 2:9, 6) And Abraham made a great feast the same day that Isaac was weaned. Literally, in the day of the weaning of Isaac; probably, therefore, when Isaac was three years old and Ishmael seventeen. "It is still customary in the East to have a festive gathering at the time a child is weaned. Among the Hindoos, when the time for weaning has come, the event is accompanied with feasting and religious ceremonies, during which rice is formally presented to the child" ("Bible Manners and Customs," by Rev. J. A. Freeman, M.A., "Homiletical Quarterly," vol. 1. p. 78; cf. Roberts" "Oriental Illustrations," p. 24).
Vers. 8-21.
Read full note →
The separation of the bondwoman"s so, from the promised seed.
It was necessary that this should take place for the accomplishment of the Divine plan. Human conduct is employed, as in so many other cases, as the instrument or occasion. There was mockery or unbelief in Ishmael. It was not personal merely, but a mockery of Jehovah and of his Church. Sarah saw it. The mother"s keen affections were sharpened to detect the scorn of her joy. Abraham and Sarah were both severely tried. Their lack of faith must yield fruit of sorrow. The separation was pain to the father, but it was part of the gracious work of God for Isaac. Abraham was being prepared by such discipline for his great climax of trial. There is beautiful tenderness and simplicity in Abraham"s conduct (Ver. 14). It is
1. Entire obedience.
2. Kind and gentle consideration for Sarah and Hagar.
3. Strong faith; he committed her to God according to his word.
4. The master and the servant at the door of the house in the early morning; the master himself placing the bottle of water on the bondwoman"s shoulder as a sign of continued affinity. God commands separations. In obedience to him they may involve severe struggle with self. Should still be carried out with as little wounding of human affections as possible. R.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain Cast out this bondwoman and her son
Gen_21:8-13
Cast out this bondwoman and her son
Read full note →
The allegory of Isaac and Ishmael
I.
CONTRASTED AS TO THEIR ORIGIN. IN CONTRASTED AS TO THEIR POSITION IN THE HOUSEHOLD.
1. As to the liberty enjoyed.
2. As to the security of their positions. (T. H. Leale.)
Isaac and Ishmael separated
It only needs a glance beneath the surface to see that the future course of these two great branches of the Abrahamic blood was destined to be so divergent, that their currents could no longer mingle with advantage to either.
1. So far as Ishmael was concerned, the archer and huntsman whose home was to be the desert, with his bow for his best inheritance, it was well that he should be early trained to the hardships of a nomadic chieftain. For his own comfort, he could not be too soon compelled to forego all idle dreams of one day succeeding to his fathers estate. Too soon he could not be withdrawn from the presence of a brother whose priority would only inflame his envy. It was the kindest thing for the youth to send him away from his fathers tents. Let it be remembered that he was not sent away from his fathers God. The mercies of God are not limited to the area of His covenant.
2. For Isaacs sake, on the other hand, it was scarcely less advisable to cast out the bondmaids son. His yielding disposition was ill fitted to withstand the influence or endure the hostility of his older and more impetuous brother. Besides, the people of the covenant needed to be from the outset a separated people, kept clear of Gentile alliances. Ishmaels mother was a pagan slave; out of her Egyptian home he married a pagan wife. From all such close contact with heathendom it was requisite to guard the selected family through which a purer faith was to be transmitted.
3. Perhaps we may add a further consideration. No single home can long hold with safety the child of nature and the child of grace. This early family history was meant to be full of significance for the Church of God. And it had to be made clear that in Gods spiritual family circle, or within their eternal home, no place can be found for such as are His only after the flesh, bearing on their body, indeed, the seal of His covenant, yet not born again of His Holy Spirit. (J. O. Dykes, D. D.)
Isaac and Ishmael
I. THE BIRTH OF ISAAC.
Observe on this event--
1. That God has a fixed time for fulfilling his word (see 5:2.)
2. When the time comes he is always found faithful.
3. The birth of Isaac connects itself with a blessing imparted to his parents. Each renewed his or her youth.
II. THE CONTEST BETWEEN THE BROTHERS.
1. That which is carnal always hates and despises that which is spiritual.
2. The world seems to be much stronger than the children of promise.
3. But, in the end, Isaac prevails over Ishmael.
III. THE EPISODE. Hagar means fugitive. First, she fled from Egypt, of which country she was a native; then, from her mistress (see ch. 16); and now from her master and husband. Ishmael means God heareth. God heard Abrahams prayer for him (Gen_17:18); and now he hears Hagues cry. (The Congregational Pulpit.)
Abraham and the promised seed
1. In particular we see first that the blessings of the Abrahamic covenant, in their full and ultimate significance, are precisely identical with those of the Gospel. The Church began in Abrahams household--as Paul has emphatically put it, the Gospel was preached before unto him, and so if the initiatory rite of that covenant, which was not a mere national thing, but included in it spiritual blessings for all the nations of the earth, could be administered to infants we need have no scruple about the baptism of infants. In Abrahams case, an adult circumcision, as the Apostle affirms, was a seal of the righteousness of his faith. That is to say, faith was necessary to his circumcision, and yet he was commanded to circumcise Isaac upon the eighth day when it was impossible that Isaac could have faith. Why, then, though faith be required of an adult for his baptism, may we not baptize the infant of a believer, just as Abraham circumcised Isaac, being eight days old?
2. Again, the view which I have brought out concerning the promised seed, sets vividly before us the ultimate number of the saved. Abraham was to be the father of many nations, and to have a seed as the dust of the earth, or as the stars of heaven innumerable--and that, as we have seen, refers not to the Jewish nations, but to the seed of believers.
3. Finally, we have brought out into distinct relief by this view of the promised seed, the character of the saved. Abraham is the father of all them that believe, but this faith is inseparably connected with a spiritual birth-a birth resulting not from the operation of natural causes, but from the agency of the Holy Ghost. Now see how plainly that is foreshadowed tin the birth of Isaac as contrasted with that of Ishmael. Ishmaels birth was of the flesh, but that of Isaac was in fulfilment of promise. It was really supernatural, it was a divine gift; and one great reason for the long delay was just that this might be made apparent. Isaac thus stands for those who are born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
Let me conclude by giving in plainest language what I judge to be for us now the spiritual truths suggested by this old history.
1. In the first place, the Deliverer for whom Abraham looked, whose actual coming in the future was made sure to him by the birth of Isaac, and whose day he saw afar off and was glad, has appeared among men. By a yet more striking miracle than that which issued in the birth of Isaac, The Word who was God was made flesh and dwelt among us.
2. Secondly, we learn from this old history, that in connection with the exercise of this faith, we must be supernaturally born, in order to enjoy the full blessings of salvation.
3. Finally, there is no inheritance without spiritual sonship. Ishmael who was born of the flesh, was cast out. Isaac who was born of the promise was the heir--the promised land belongs to the promised seed. If children, then heirs. (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)
Separation of the seed born after the flesh from the seed that is by promise
Beyond all question, the thing here done is felt, at first sight, on all hands to be harsh; and the manner of doing it perhaps even harsher still. Now, it is not necessary to acquit Sarah of all personal vindictiveness, or to consider her as acting from the best and hightest motives, merely because God commanded Abraham to hearken unto her voice. This may be only another instance of evil overruled for good.
I. Thus, in the first place, LET THE ACTUAL OFFENCE OF ISHMAEL, Now no longer a child, but a lad of at least some fourteen years of age, be fairly understood and estimated. The apostle Paul represents it in a strong light--He that was born after the flesh, persecuted him that was born after theSpirit --and he points to it as the type and model of the cruel envy with which the children of promise are in every age pursued (Gal_4:28-29.) It may have been little more than an act of self-defence on the part of Sarah, when she seized the first opportunity of overt injury or insult, to put an end to a competition of rights that threatened consequences so disastrous.
II. Again, secondly, it is to be remembered THAT THE COMPETITION IN QUESTION ADMITTED OF NO COMPROMISE; and that, whatever might be her motives, Sarah did, in point of fact, stand with God in the controversy.
III. Nor, in the third place, is it to be overlooked that the severity of the measure resorted to is apt to be greatly EXAGGERATED IF IT IS LOOKED AT IN THE LIGHT OF THE SOCIAL USAGES AND SOCIAL ARRANGEMENTS OF MODERN DOMESTIC LIFE. It was no unusual step for the head of a household in these primitive times, to make an early separation between the heir, who was to be retained at home in the chief settlement of the tribe, and other members of the family, who must be sent to push their way elsewhere. Nor are the wanderers sent away to a far country. They are to tarry for farther orders on the very borders of the place where Abraham himself is dwelling. The wilderness of Beer-sheba is almost at his very door; and long ere the bread and water they take with them are consumed, it may be expected that Abraham will be in circumstances to communicate with them more fully as to what they are to do. By some mistake or mischance, however, it unfortunately happened otherwise. Unforseen delay occured; and the wanderers were reduced to straits. Were a conjecture here warranted, it might be surmised as not improbable that the impatience of disappointed ambition may have tended to precipitate, as well as to aggravate, the crisis.
IV. Once more, in the fourth place, a presumptive proof, at least, of THE PATRIARCHS CONTINUED INTEREST IN ISHMAEL, and continued care for his accommodation, is to be found in the account given of his interview with Abimelech, king of Gerar (Gen_21:25-26). If it was a well that had belonged to Ishmael especially if it was the well which God caused Hagar in her distress to see, and around which, probably, her son formed his earliest settlement, Abimelechs ignorance and Abrahams anxiety are simply and naturally explained. (R. S. Candlish, D. D.)
The destinies of Ishmael
Cast out this bondwoman and her son (Gen_21:10). These were harsh words; it was hard for one so young to have all blighted; it was grievous in Abrahams sight to witness the bitter fate of his eldest born. And yet was it not the most blessed destiny that could happen to the boy? The hot blood of the Egyptian mother which coursed through his veins could not have been kept in check in the domestic circle among vassals and dependants; he was sent to measure himself with men, to cat out his own way in the world, to learn independence, resolution, energy; and it is for this reason that to this very day his dependants are so sharply stamped with all the individuality of their founder. In them are exhibited the characteristics of Abraham and Hagar, the marvellous devoutness of the one with the fierce passions of the other, and together with these the iron will, the dignified calmness of self dependence wrought out by circumstances in the character of Ishmael. And how often is it that in this way the darkest day is the beginning of the brightest life. Reverses, difficulties, trials, are often amongst Gods best blessings. From the loss of property is brought out very often the latent energies of character, a power to suffer and to act which in the querulous being without a wish ungratified you would have scarcely said had existed at all. The man compelled to labour gains energy, strength of character, the development of all that is within him. Can you call that loss? The richest resources are not from without, but from within. (F. W. Robertson, M. A.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain Gen_21:8. And the child grew, and was weaned.] The…
CRITICAL NOTES.—
Gen_21:8. And the child grew, and was weaned.] The weaning was often delayed till three years, or more, after birth (2Ma_7:27). Samuel was not weaned till he was old enough to be left with Eli, when he would, probably, be more than three years old. Made a great feast. The occasion is still celebrated in the East as a family feast, to which friends are invited. The child partakes of it with the rest, as it is regarded as his introduction to the customary fare of the country.
Read full note →
Gen_21:9. Mocking.] From the same root as the name Isaac, i.e., laughter. The word cannot here be understood in an innocent sense. It was a bitter, sarcastic laugh. St. Paul fastens upon it the character of persecution (Gal_4:29).
Gen_21:12. In Isaac shall thy seed be called.] Heb. In Isaac shall seed (posterity) be called to thee. Explained by the Apostle (Rom_9:7-8). The whole history is allegorised (Gal_4:20-22).
Gen_21:13. Make a nation.] A renewal of the promise made in Gen_16:10; Gen_17:20. Because he is thy seed. “It seemed to be a specialty of Abraham’s descendants to multiply into nations; the very fact of descent from him is alleged as a reason why Ishmael should become one.” (Alford.)
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Gen_21:8-13
THE EXPULSION OF ISHMAEL
This portion of the history, though it staggers our natural judgment, is that very incident of which the most emphatic use is made in other parts of Scripture for the purposes of the spiritual life.
Beyond all question the thing here done is felt, at first sight, on all hands to be harsh, and the manner of doing it even harsher still. Surely never was slight offence more spitefully avenged! An unmannerly boy vents some ill-timed and ill-judged jest, and his mother, as well as himself, must be cast helpless on the wide world on account of it! This looks like the very wantonness of female jealousy and passion. No wonder that the patriarch needed a Divine communication to make him recognise in his irritated partner’s unrelenting demand the very mind and will of God Himself. (Gen_21:12-13.) It is not necessary to acquit Sarah of all personal vindictiveness, or to consider her as acting from the best and highest motives, merely because God commanded Abraham to hearken unto her voice. This may be only another instance of evil overruled for good. It is true the Apostle Paul still more directly and immediately ascribes Divine authority to the suggestion of Sarah, when he formally quotes her words as a portion of the inspired record and revelation of the Divine decree. (Gal_4:30.) Even this, however, may imply nothing more than what is said in the Gospel of a most remarkable utterance concerning the death of Jesus. (St. Joh_11:49-52.) The high priest consulted but the dictates of a worldly policy, yet he gave forth what turned out to be an oracular Divine prediction. And it may have been with equal unconsciousness of its being a heaven-directed and heaven-inspired voice, that Sarah, yielding to her own impetuous temper, called for the removal of a rival out of the way of her own son’s succession and title to the inheritance. There are certain circumstances which we should take into account, not for the vindication of Sarah’s character and conduct, but for the better understanding of the Divine procedure.
I. Let the actual offence of Ishmael be fairly understood and estimated. He was now no longer a child, but a lad of some fourteen years of age. St. Paul represents his conduct in a strong light: “He that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit,” and he points to it as the type and model of the cruel envy with which the “children of promise” are in every age pursued. (Gal_4:28-29.) And our Lord Himself, when, with an evident reference to the expulsion of Ishmael, He speaks of “the servant not abiding in the house for ever, but the son abiding ever,” goes on to add—identifying the unbelieving Jews with the servant, or the bondmaid’s son, and taking to Himself the position of the real son, the true Isaac—“Ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.” (Joh_8:37.) “Ye seek to kill me.” Is there no allusion here to violence threatened against Isaac on the part of Ishmael and Hagar? Is not this the actual parallel intended between their treatment of the child of promise and the treatment Jesus met with at the hands of the Jews—the treatment which His followers also meet with at the hands of the unbelieving world? From the history itself, it is plain that Ishmael’s mocking had a deeper meaning than a mere wild and wanton jest. That it had respect to the birthright is evident, both from Sarah’s reasoning and from the Lord’s. She assigns, as the cause of her anxiety to have Ishmael cast out, her apprehension lest he should claim a joint-interest with Isaac in the inheritance. And the Lord sanctions her proposal on this very ground, when He says to Abraham, “In Isaac shall thy seed be called.”
II. The competition in question admitted of no compromise. Whatever might have been her motives, Sarah did, in point of fact, stand with God in the controversy. She believed God, when, in accordance not more with her own natural feelings than with the known will of God, she determined to resist every attempt to interfere with the prerogative of the child of promise. For it was with Isaac, and with his seed after him—that seed being no other than the Messiah Himself—that God had expressly said He would establish His covenant for an everlasting covenant. And the determination of Sarah might be the more decided if she saw any indication of hesitancy in the mind of even the patriarch himself. For Abraham may have been swayed by his affection for his first-born child, as well as Sarah by her fondness for the son of her old age. In point of fact, Abraham felt great reluctance to give up his hope of Ishmael being his heir and successor in the covenant. Before the birth of Isaac, he clung to that hope with great tenacity, and pleaded hard on behalf of Ishmael that he might have the birthright blessing (ch. Gen_17:18). And even after Isaac was born, he seems stilt to have a leaning towards his old partiality for Ishmael. Even after he has got the child of promise bodily in his arms, his faith sometimes wavers. He can scarcely persuade himself to hazard all on so precarious a risk as the puny life of an infant who has so strangely come, and may as strangely pass away. He would fain keep Ishmael still in reserve, and not altogether lose his hold of that other line of descent. This is rendered extremely probable by the pains which the Lord takes to remove the last scruples of lingering unbelief, to reconcile him to the destiny of Ishmael.
III. The severity of the measure resorted to is apt to be greatly exaggerated if it is looked at in the light of the social usages of modern domestic life. It was usual, in those primitive times, for the head of a household to make an early separation between the heir, who was to be retained at home, and the other members of the family, who must be sent to push their way elsewhere. Abraham himself adopted this course on other occasions as well as the present with reference to his other sons whom he had besides Ishmael (ch. Gen_25:5-6). The presumption, therefore, is warranted that Abraham meant to deal on the same terms with Ishmael when he and his mother were cast out, and that this is intended to be indicated in the brief description subsequently given of his manner of disposing of his children generally.—(Candlish.)
THE DESTINIES OF ISHMAEL
At the weaning of Isaac there was a feast. Hagar and her son heard the merriment, and it was gall to their wounded spirits; it looked like intentional insult, for Ishmael had been the heir presumptive, but now, by the birth of Isaac, had become a mere slave and dependant; and the son of Hagar mocked at the joy in which he could not partake. Wherefore Sarah said unto Abraham, “Cast out this bondwoman and her son.” These were harsh words: it was hard for one so young to have all blighted; it was grievous in Abraham’s sight to witness the bitter fate of his eldest born. And yet was it not the most blessed destiny that could happen to the boy? The hot blood of the Egyptian mother, which coursed through his veins, could not have been kept in check in the domestic circle among vassals and dependants; he was sent to measure himself with men, to cut out his own way in the world, to learn independence, resolution, energy; and it is for this reason that to this very day his descendants are so sharply stamped with all the individuality of their founder. In them are exhibited the characteristics of Abraham and Hagar, the marvellous devoutness of the one with the fierce passions of the other, and together with these the iron will, the dignified calmness of self dependence wrought out by circumstances in the character of Ishmael.—(Robertson.)
THE ALLEGORY OF ISAAC AND ISHMAEL
We have the authority of St. Paul for giving this history an allegorical interpretation. (Gal_4:22-24.) It is, without doubt, a real history, recording the thoughts and actions of living men; but it is capable of being treated as an allegory. Moreover, it requires such a treatment. The facts themselves have a spiritual meaning. Ishmael and Isaac, Mount Sinai and Mount Zion, Jerusalem which now is, and Jerusalem which is above, are all of them contrasted in antagonistic pairs, as representing principles essentially distinct. Hagar “answereth to that Jerusalem which now is,” and Sarah to that “Jerusalem which is above, and which is the mother of us all.” These things correspond, each to each. In the fact that Abraham had a twofold seed—one after the flesh, and the other by promise, we have the germ of the Gospel—the essential characteristics of the legal and evangelical dispensations. The history of God’s chosen people was under His distinct and special control, and was so ordered and governed as to be a fitting vehicle for the conveyance of spiritual lessons. We shall understand how this history teaches the difference between the genius of the Law and the Gospel, if we make a contrast between these two sons of Abraham.
I. Contrasted as to their origin. Ishmael was born after the ordinary manner. There was nothing more remarkable about his birth than about that of any other child. But Isaac came by a miraculous birth. His superior position and spiritual significance is, however, not derived from the fact that he was born of Sarah (though in a miraculous manner), but rather from the fact that he was “the child of promise.” His parents could have no doubt that he was a special gift from God—an accomplishment of the word of Him who spoke from heaven. These two sons represent two different societies—the world, and the Church. One is from beneath—arises here in the ordinary course of things; the other is from above, not derived from any earthly society, but “being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.” (1Pe_1:23.) This gifted society—the Church—holds fellowship with the unseen world, and owns a heavenly citizenship. The birth from above distinguishes the children of this world from the children of light.
II. Contrasted as to their position in the household. The relative positions of Ishmael and Isaac in the household were essentially different, and that in two respects.
1. As to the liberty enjoyed. Ishmael, being born of a bond-servant, had no natural right to freedom. Such is the position of man under the legal covenant. He is in a state of bondage, and though he may strive to please God and to keep the Law, he is like a slave working towards freedom, and not as one who works with the inspiring thoughts of a man already free. He feels the yoke. However willing to rise to the highest ideal of duty, he is oppressed with a sense of failure. (Rom_7:7-25.) This covenant “gendereth to bondage,” exacts high service under severe penalties, which conditions the natural man is not able to fulfil. The case is still more hopeless when a man gains some spiritual insight, and sees “how exceedingly broad are God’s commandments.” Isaac, on the other hand, was in the house as a free-born son. Liberty was his birthright. More than this, he was “born not after the flesh,” but “by promise.” He was placed by the Divine will under the new covenant. So, under the Gospel, believers are in the house of God not as bond, but as free. They have not to work for liberty. They are free already, and work cheerfully from a sense of their freedom.
2. As to the security of their positions. Ishmael had no permanent standing in the house. The dark spot of slavery was upon him, and he only held the blessings of his home on sufferance. Isaac, as a free-born son, abides in the house for ever. The promise of God gave him more than a double security. It gave him absolute security. No earthly power could rob him of his high privilege. Under the Law the position of men is, at best, precarious. They can only abide in the house on sufferance. Their title is forfeited by disobedience and shortcomings in duty. If they fail to fulfil the conditions imposed, their position is gone. We know in what all this must issue for sinful man striving to maintain a place in the household of God by means of the Law, and without that assistance and sense of security which the Divine grace can alone impart. It must issue in his expulsion. But Isaac’s position is ours, under the Gospel. We are in the house as fully approved. Our place is secured in perpetuity by the Divine promise. We have the “glorious liberty of the sons of God.” Such is our heritage under the law of grace. Ishmael’s condition, though it fitly serves the purpose of the allegory, may be also regarded as affording a ground of hope to us sinful men. We are all born in slavery, and can only obtain freedom by a special grace. Ishmael might have retained the privilege of remaining in Abraham’s family. He might have partaken of Isaac’s birthright, if, instead of persecuting, he had stooped to “kiss the son.” If, instead of standing upon his own right, he had been willing to take the benefits of Isaac’s title, he, too, would have continued to enjoy the glorious inheritance. Even if the stain on our birth be ever so black, and our natural prospects ever so gloomy, if we are willing to abandon our ground of confidence, and to receive the free gifts of grace, we are accepted. The grand lesson is, to renounce all confidence in the flesh—to trust no privileges or works (Php_3:7; Php_3:9), but by faith freely to receive our share in the heritage of God’s first-born Son.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES
Gen_21:8. St. Augustine observeth here, that this solemnity at the weaning of Isaac was a type of our spiritual regeneration; at, and after which, the faithful keep a continual feast. “Let us keep the festivity” (1Co_5:7), or holy day, saith Paul, that “feast of fat things, full of marrow; of wines on the lees well refined” (Isa_25:6), proceeding from milk to stronger meat (Heb_5:12), and being to the world as a weaned child. His mouth doth not water after homely provisions, that hath lately tasted of delicate sustenance.—(Trapp.)
It is probable that Abraham gathered his friends and servants around him at this feast. The “prophet” would not be likely to miss such an opportunity of discoursing upon God’s special favour to himself, and exhorting his company to trust in God, and to the praise of His name. They were all interested in those gifts of the Divine goodness imparted to this distinguished man, in whose seed all the families of the earth were to be blessed.
There can be no true religion amongst mankind without fellowship, and the joyful recognition of God’s blessings. There must be an element of joy and gladness which swallows up the sense of sorrow and sin. The Christian religion has its feasts, for it is glad tidings of great joy.
Gen_21:9. Now is recorded the casting out of Ishmael—the son of a human expedient. This was—
1. To make the whole hope depend upon the son specially given by God.
2. To separate this hostile element from the Covenant family. Though this was in the plan of God, yet there was to be an occasion for it, and that was the wilful mocking of Isaac by Ishmael.—(Jacobus.)
Ishmael despised this child, and ridiculed the idea that he should be the origin of a great history charged with so much importance to mankind. This persecution was prompted by unbelief, envy, and pride. Thus God’s way of deliverance—His salvation—cannot be appreciated by those who are inwardly separated from the household of faith.
Persecution arises from that inward hostility which must ever be between natural and spiritual men.
St. Paul says that Ishmael persecuted Isaac (Gal_4:29), and he is here designated the “son of Hagar the Egyptian,” to intimate that, the predicted four hundred years’ affliction of Abraham’s seed by the Egyptians commenced at this time in the insults and taunts of Ishmael, the son of an Egyptian woman.—(Bush.)
Gen_21:10. The facts have an underlying sense, namely, that there are two dispensations represented by Hagar and Sarah—the Law and the Gospel, and two classes of sons in the visible Church, as there are these two in the family of Abraham—the one of the legal spirit, the other of the Gospel; the one after the flesh, the other after the spirit; the former persecuting and opposing the latter. But the separation must be made, as is here done, in Abraham’s house. The son of the bondwoman—the Ishmael—the children of bondage, of the Judaizing, legal spirit—must be cast out as not allowed to inherit along with the son of the freewoman. They who are in bondage to the righteousness of the law, do thus scorn and persecute those who are of the free spirit of the Gospel. They cannot live in the same house.
(1) The same great idea runs through all the history of the Church, and pervades all the Scripture and all God’s dealings.
(2) We see the unity of the Bible and of the Church.—(Jacobus.)
Gen_21:11. He who is singled out as an example of faith to all ages, is also, throughout the whole course of his history, an example of tender human feeling.
The conflict of human duties is often a sore trial to the saints of God.
Gen_21:12. God enjoins this as reasonable, on the ground that in Isaac was his seed to be called. This means not only that Isaac was to be called his seed, but in Isaac, as the progenitor, was included the seed of Abraham in the highest and utmost sense of the phrase. From him the holy seed was to spring that was to be the agent in eventually bringing the whole race again under the covenant of Noah in that higher form which it assumes in the New Testament.—(Murphy.)
God overrules the stormy passions of human nature to bring about His own large purposes of good.
We must not refuse to join in doing what God commands, however contrary it may be to our natural feelings, nor on account of the suspicious motives of some with whom we are called to act.—(Fuller.)
The history of God’s chosen people leads the way up to that One Name which alone brings salvation.
The wife, then, is to be hearkened to when she speaks reason. Samson’s mother had more faith than her husband (Jdg_13:23); and Priscilla is sometimes set before Aquila. Paul’s hearers at Philippi were only women at first (Act_16:13.) And St. Peter tells Christian wives that they may win their husbands to Christ by their “chaste conversation, coupled with fear” (1Pe_3:1). “The Scripture” is said to “say” what Sarah here saith (Gal_4:30).—(Trapp.)
Gen_21:13. Abraham is comforted in his stern duty by the renewal of the old promises concerning Ishmael (Gen_17:20).
Those who are shut out from God’s external dispensations are not, therefore, cut off from His mercy. God has His own designs to fulfil in assigning to men a particular place in human history, but no appointment of this kind is intended as a bar to their individual salvation.
The peculiar blessing was all on the side of Isaac, as being the child by whom the promise should be fulfilled. But the question is, whether there is anything to be deduced from Scripture against the salvability of the offspring of Hagar. The blessings promised to her are principally of a temporal nature (Gen_16:10; Gen_17:20; Gen_21:20); but such blessings would have been the greatest curses on the horrible supposition, that all his descendants had been excluded from the possibility of obtaining eternal happiness. As to the character which is given of Ishmael and his posterity (Gen_16:12), whilst it forms a prophetic description of the character and manners of the Turks and Arabians, it determines nothing whatever against their salvability. Such as they are, they will be judged according to their means of knowledge. The inhabitant of the desert will not be judged for his want of civilisation, nor will the child, who has been educated in the errors of Mahometanism, be punished for his want of Christian baptism. It should be remembered that the death of Ishmael is mentioned in Scripture with all the circumstances of that of a pious patriarch (Gen_25:17-18.—(Grinfield.)
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 The child grew and ... Isaac was weaned
The child grew and ... Isaac was weaned
"Wean" here is a polite way of saying the child was finished with breast feeding. AT: "Isaac grew, and when he no longer needed his mother's milk, Abraham had a large feast" (See: Euphemism)
Read full note →
the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham
The name of Hagar's son can be stated explicitly. AT: "Ishmael, the son of Hagar the Egyptian and Abraham" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
mocking
It can be stated explicitly that he was jeering or laughing at Isaac. AT: "laughing at Isaac" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
translationWords
Abraham
feast
Isaac
Sarah
Hagar
Egypt
mock
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 21:8-21 God used the incident of Ishmael’s mocking Isaac…
21:8-21 God used the incident of Ishmael’s mocking Isaac to separate Ishmael and Hagar from the family and the child of promise. They would constantly threaten the promised descendant if they remained with the family.
21:8-9 The feast for Isaac’s weaning probably occurred when he was three and Ishmael was about seventeen years old (16:16). Sarah saw Ishmael making fun of her son, Isaac: The verb metsakheq (“making fun of”) is related to the word for “laughter”; this theme (21:6) is given a sour twist by Ishmael’s mockery.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.