Sarai and Abram tried to obtain the heir God had promised them by resorting to a culturally acceptable custom of their day even though it involved a failure to trust God. This fleshly act created serious complications for Abram and his household that included Hagar fleeing into the wilderness. Nevertheless God proved faithful to His promises and responded to Hagar's cries for help. He provided for her needs and promised her many descendants through Ishmael since he was Abram's son.
"The account of Sarah's plan to have a son has not only been connected with the list of nations in chapter 15, but also appears to have been intentionally shaped with reference to the account of the Fall in Genesis 3. Each of the main verbs (wayyiqtolforms) and key expressions in 16:2-3 finds a parallel in Genesis 3."496
The writer continued to focus increasing attention on the problem of an heir. Sarai had born Abram no children (v. 1). She therefore suggested a plan to obtain an heir from his own body (15:4). It looked as if everything would work out well until a conflict developed between Sarai and Hagar (v. 4). This conflict grew into a major crisis when Hagar fled the encampment pregnant with Abram's unborn child (v. 6). Yahweh intervened again to resolve the crisis (v. 7). He instructed Hagar to return to Sarai (v. 9). Thus Hagar bore Ishmael in Abram's house, but later God revealed that he would not be the heir.
Using a concubine (v. 2) was a method of providing an heir in the case of a childless marriage apart from adoption.497
"It was a serious matter for a man to be childless in the ancient world, for it left him without an heir. But it was even more calamitous for a woman: to have a great brood of children was the mark of success as a wife; to have none was ignominious failure. So throughout the ancient East polygamy was resorted to as a means of obviating childlessness. But wealthier wives preferred the practice of surrogate motherhood, whereby they allowed their husbands to go in to' . . . their maids, a euphemism for sexual intercourse (cf. 6:4; 30:3; 38:8, 9; 39:14). The mistress could then feel that her maid's child was her own and exert some control over it in a way that she could not if her husband simply took a second wife."498
The people in Abram's culture regarded a concubine as a secondary wife with some, but not all, of the rights and privileges of the primary wife.499
". . . one Nuzi tablet reads: Kelim-ninu has been given in marriage to Shennima. . . . If Kelim-ninu does not bear children, Kelim-ninu shall acquire a woman of the land of Lulu (i.e., a slave girl) as wife for Shennima.'"500
Not only was using a concubine an option, but in Hurrian culture husbands sometimes required that if their wife could not bear children she had to provide a concubine for her husband.501
". . . any child of the bond-slave would necessarily belong to the mistress, not the mother."502
This custom helps explain why Abram was willing to be a part of Sarai's plan that seems so unusual to us.
Did Sarai mean that she would obtain children through Hagar by adopting them as her own or by becoming fertile herself as a result of Hagar's childbearing (v. 2)? Most interpreters have taken the first position, but some have preferred the second.503The basis of the second view is the not infrequent phenomenon of a woman who has had trouble conceiving becoming pregnant after she has adopted a child.
Though using a concubine was a custom of the day it was never God's desire (2:24; Matt. 19:4-5). This episode ended in total disaster for everyone involved. Hagar lost her home, Sarai her maid, and Abram his second wife and his child by Hagar.
"A thousand volumes written against polygamy would not lead to a clearer fuller conviction of the evils of that practice than the story under review."504
Sarai tried to precipitate the will of God by seizing the initiative from God, as Eve had done (3:17). She and Abram chose fleshly means of obtaining the promised heir rather than waiting for God in faith. They let their culture guide them rather than God.
"It's a shame that she [Sarai] hadn't comprehended the fact that her infertility could be used by the Lord to put her in a place of dependence on Him so that fruit could be born in her life."505
"The prophetic description of Ishmael as a wild ass of a man' [v. 12] (RSV) is rather intriguing. The animal referred to is the wild and untamable onager, which roams the desert at will. This figure of speech depicts very accurately the freedom-loving Bedouin moving across vast stretches of land."506
The Lord named Ishmael (v. 11), whose name means "God hears,"and Hagar named the Lord (v. 13) "the One who sees."These two names constitute a major revelation of God: He hears and He sees.507
Abram and Sarai's action proved to be a source of much difficulty for everyone involved. God, however, took care of and blessed Ishmael even though he was the fruit of Abram's presumption. This is another occasion when Abram did not trust God as he should have (cf. 12:10-20).
"Both Hagar and Mary [the mother of Jesus] stand as examples of women who obediently accepted God's word and thereby brought blessing to descendants too many to count."508
Paul wrote that this story contains (not is) an allegory (Gal. 4:24). Hagar represents the Mosaic Covenant, and Ishmael is its fruit (slaves). Sarai is the Abrahamic Covenant, and Isaac is its fruit (free sons). Children of the flesh persecute children of the promise (Gal. 4:29).
Resorting to fleshly means rather than waiting for God to provide what He has promised always creates problems. This story also shows that human failure does not frustrate God's plans ultimately.
"If we have made mistakes which have led us into sin, the primary condition of restoration is complete submission to the will of God, whatever that may involve."509
When in great distress, people should pray because God is aware of their needs and will fulfill His promises to them.
