Hagar and Ishmael in Genesis: Exclusion, Ethics, and Meaning

Introduction

There is little doubt that the Old Testament in the Christian Bible is of vital significance, especially concerning the individual narratives in Genesis. These stories have been cherished from a young age. Even though these narratives hold great importance in a Christian's life, they also pose some critical issues, particularly in the current social context of the twenty-first century.¹ One such issue is found in the narrative of Hagar, the handmaid in Abraham's household who bore him his first son, Ishmael.

This essay offers a critical assessment of that issue, focusing on the exclusion of Hagar and Ishmael from Abraham's narrative and their expulsion from the homestead after Sarah — Abraham's wife — realized she was expecting a child. The analysis proceeds by first posing some honest and ethical questions, then applying Augustine's hermeneutic of charity, creating a conversation from that framework, and finally responding to the text against its historical and cultural background.

Questions Arising from the Narrative

For many people, Scripture is holy, and examining characters or questioning God's actions in its stories is considered taboo. However, the Hebrew Scriptures as presented in the Bible are both the national history of the Hebrew people and a profound religious account of those people's experiences with God — who, according to both the Quran and the Bible, is understood to be the God of both Christians and Muslims.²

The Old Testament accounts do not always measure up to the ideals of the real world, and in twenty-first century society, to the ideals of good neighborliness and common humanity. In the context of Hagar's narrative and how she and her son were treated within Abraham's household, the reader is compelled to ask: what are the injustices that Hagar and Ishmael experienced at the hands of Sarah? And more specifically, what does "terror" mean in this context?

From Genesis 16 to 21, from Hagar's standpoint, there is what today's reader would recognize as a profound injustice. Hagar was used, and her rights were violated in a deliberately dehumanizing manner. With Sarah's permission, Abraham went into her with the intention of fathering a child. The text, however, never gives the reader Hagar's opinion — nor any indication of whether she consented. In any sexual relationship, both parties must be adults and must freely consent. This raises a pointed question: did Hagar consent to the sexual relationship with Abraham? And does the absence of that consent constitute sexual molestation by a master of his servant?

Up to this point in the narrative, Abraham's life had been guided by the voice of God. It was God who had instructed him to leave his birthplace — Ur — and journey to a land where God would establish him and make him a father of many nations, Canaan. God had spoken explicitly about the promise of making him the father of nations. It is therefore striking that, in this particular instance, God's voice is absent. This raises further questions: why is the voice of God missing in the matter of Hagar and Ishmael? Why did Abraham not seek God's counsel on the matter? And why did God allow Sarah and Abraham to send away his firstborn child, Ishmael, born of Hagar?

Throughout history, men have treasured their firstborn children, and especially their firstborn sons. Ishmael was Abraham's first son. According to the covenant with God, Abraham was to circumcise every male in his household; for newborn boys, this rite was to be performed on the eighth day. Yet throughout the narrative, there is no explicit indication that Ishmael was circumcised. This raises yet another question: did Abraham truly love his child? Did the fact that the child was not born of his lawfully wedded wife — Sarah — diminish his paternal love for Ishmael? Equally significant is the absence of any record of God communicating with Abraham specifically about this child, which invites the question: what was God's view on Abraham fathering a child through Sarah's handmaid?

Extending Charity: Augustine's Hermeneutic Applied

Augustine's hermeneutic of charity requires that any attempt to understand a text be undertaken with openness to a plurality of possible interpretations.³ With this principle in mind, several non-judgmental readings of the Hagar and Ishmael narrative become possible.

First, Sarah was already aware of God's promise to Abraham at this point in the story. She knew that for the promise to be fulfilled, Abraham needed a son. However, nowhere in the original promise had it been specified that she would be the mother of Abraham's children. Not wanting to stand in the way of God's blessing on her aging husband, and in an act of apparent selflessness, she gave her handmaid Hagar to Abraham so that he might sire a child through her.

As for Abraham, even though he was aware of God's promise, he did not object to or question Sarah's proposal. Abraham and Sarah had journeyed together from Ur and had shared many experiences, including the episode in Egypt where he asked her to present herself as his sister (Genesis 12:10–20) and a similar incident with King Abimelech (Genesis 20:1–16). His childlessness with Sarah was clearly a source of deep pain for her. On this reading, Abraham's silence and compliance can be understood as a desire not to wound his wife further; since the plan was her way of trying to remedy a painful situation, he went along rather than deepen her suffering.

The same desire to protect his wife may explain Abraham's later decision. When Sarah reported that Hagar, now the mother of Abraham's son, was despising her, Abraham faced a conflict between his obligations as a father and his love for Sarah. On a charitable reading, sending Hagar and Ishmael away was, from Abraham's perspective, the only way to restore peace to the household. Painful as it was, he may have seen it as an act of care for his family.

Finally, from a social and legal standpoint, Hagar's position as a slave in Abraham's household meant that she had virtually no agency. As will be discussed in the following section, the Code of Hammurabi and the ancient Nuzi laws governed the use of slave women as surrogates. By the function of her social position, Hagar had little practical choice. On this reading, her expulsion — however unjust by modern standards — operated within the accepted norms of the ancient world, and her departure, while harsh, was framed within those constraints.

Conclusion

The narrative of Hagar and Ishmael in Genesis 16 and 21 raises profound ethical, theological, and personal questions that extend far beyond their ancient context. By posing honest questions about consent, divine silence, and paternal responsibility; by applying Augustine's hermeneutic of charity to the key figures' actions; and by situating the story within the legal frameworks of Hammurabi and Nuzi, it becomes possible to engage the narrative with both critical rigor and interpretive generosity. The typological symbolism embedded in the story — pointing from the child of the slave to the child of promise, and ultimately to Christ — gives the narrative a theological depth that resonates across the whole of Scripture. On a personal level, the story of a woman cast aside, surviving in the desert through divine intervention, speaks powerfully to those who have experienced marginalization, abandonment, and the sustaining grace of God. God's care for Hagar and Ishmael is a reminder that no person, however excluded by human structures, lies beyond the reach of divine providence.

Bibliography

Clewis, Robert. "Augustine's Hermeneutics." Auslegung: A Journal of Philosophy 24, no. 1 (2001): 65–87.

Gunkel, H. "The Two Accounts of Hagar. (Genesis XVI. and XXI., 8–21.)." The Monist 10, no. 3 (1900): 321–42.

Noble, John Travis. "Let Ishmael Live Before You!" Finding a Place for Hagar's Son in the Priestly Tradition. Diss. 2013.

Okoye, James C. "Sarah and Hagar: Genesis 16 and 21." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 32, no. 2 (2007): 163–175.

Wimbush, Vincent L. "Reading Texts as Reading Ourselves: A Chapter in the History of African American Biblical Interpretation." In Fernando Segovia and Mary Ann Tolbert (eds.), Reading from This Place. I. Social Location and Biblical Interpretation in the United States. Augsburg: Fortress Press, 1993, pp. 95–108.