Skip to content
Translation
King James Version
¶ And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking.
Ask
KJV (with Strong's)
And Sarah H8283 saw H7200 the son H1121 of Hagar H1904 the Egyptian H4713, which she had born H3205 unto Abraham H85, mocking H6711.
Ask
Complete Jewish Bible
But Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom Hagar had borne to Avraham, making fun of Yitz'chak;
Ask
Berean Standard Bible
But Sarah saw that the son whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham was mocking her son,
Ask
American Standard Version
And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne unto Abraham, mocking.
Ask
World English Bible Messianic
Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, mocking.
Ask
Geneva Bible (1599)
And Sarah sawe the sonne of Hagar the Egyptian (which she had borne vnto Abraham) mocking.
Ask
Young's Literal Translation
and Sarah seeth the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she hath borne to Abraham, mocking,
Ask
See on the biblical-era map
All Genesis Sites (Canaan)
All Genesis Sites (Canaan) View full PDF
All Genesis Sites (Middle East)
All Genesis Sites (Middle East) View full PDF
The Last Migrations of Abraham
The Last Migrations of Abraham View full PDF

Map © Biblica Open Bible Maps · CC BY-SA 4.0

In the KJVVerse 523 of 31,102

Study This Verse

SUMMARY

Genesis 21:9 details Sarah's observation of Ishmael, Hagar's son, engaging in an act she perceives as mocking Isaac, the long-awaited son of promise. This pivotal moment ignites Sarah's protective instincts and deep-seated resentment, serving as the immediate catalyst for the dramatic expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael from Abraham's household, thereby bringing to a head the simmering tensions born from human impatience and divine promise.

CONTEXT

  • Literary Context: This verse immediately follows the joyous occasion of Isaac's weaning feast, a significant cultural celebration marking his transition from infancy. Isaac's birth, detailed in Genesis 21:1-7, was a miraculous fulfillment of God's covenant promise to Abraham and Sarah in their old age. The narrative highlights the stark contrast between the long-awaited son of promise and Ishmael, who was born thirteen years earlier to Hagar, Sarah's Egyptian servant, at Sarah's own insistence due to her impatience and doubt in God's timing, as recorded in Genesis 16:1-4. The presence of these two sons, one born of divine intervention and the other of human contrivance, created an inherent rivalry and strained family dynamics that were bound to erupt, and this verse marks that critical eruption point.
  • Historical & Cultural Context: In the ancient Near East, weaning was a major milestone, often celebrated with a feast, signifying the child's entry into a new stage of life and solidifying their place within the family, particularly as an heir. The concept of heirship was paramount, carrying significant social, economic, and religious implications. The practice of a barren wife giving her maidservant to her husband to bear children was a recognized custom (e.g., Nuzi tablets), but it often led to complex and contentious family structures, as seen in the rivalry between Rachel and Leah with their handmaids in Genesis 30. Ishmael, though Abraham's firstborn, was not the son of the covenant promise. Sarah's concern for Isaac's inheritance and status, coupled with the cultural understanding of the primary wife's authority, frames her strong reaction to Ishmael's perceived disrespect.
  • Key Themes: Genesis 21:9 contributes significantly to several major themes within the book of Genesis and broader biblical theology. It underscores the theme of divine promise versus human effort, as Ishmael's birth resulted from human contrivance while Isaac's was purely by divine intervention. It vividly portrays the consequences of human impatience and doubt, showing how seemingly expedient decisions can lead to long-term familial strife. The verse also introduces the theme of sibling rivalry and conflict within the covenant line, a recurring motif in Genesis (Cain and Abel, Jacob and Esau). Crucially, it highlights the preservation of the covenant line, demonstrating God's sovereign hand in protecting the lineage through which His promises would be fulfilled, even amidst human failings and discord.

EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS

Sarah's observation of Ishmael's behavior, described as "mocking," serves as the catalyst for the dramatic events that follow. This single act brings to a head the simmering tensions within Abraham's household, highlighting the inevitable clash between the son of human effort and the son of divine promise.

Key Word Analysis

  • saw (Hebrew, râʼâh', H7200): This primitive root signifies "to see," but extends beyond mere physical observation to include discernment, perception, and even experience. Sarah's "seeing" of Ishmael's action suggests not just a casual glance, but an interpretive understanding of his behavior's intent, leading her to conclude it was mocking rather than innocent play. Her perception of the act was critical in shaping her immediate and severe response.
  • son (Hebrew, bên', H1121): Derived from a root meaning "to build," this word denotes a male offspring, often implying a builder of the family name or lineage. In this context, the repeated mention of "the son of Hagar... which she had born unto Abraham" emphasizes Ishmael's direct relationship to Abraham, yet simultaneously highlights the distinct and problematic nature of his birth in contrast to Isaac, the son of promise. The presence of two "sons" from different mothers, each with a claim, albeit different, to Abraham's legacy, is central to the conflict.
  • mocking (Hebrew, tsâchaq', H6711): This versatile primitive root carries a range of meanings: "to laugh outright (in merriment or scorn)," "to sport," or "to play." While it can denote innocent amusement (as when Sarah herself "laughed" in disbelief at the idea of having a son in Genesis 18:12), in contexts of conflict, it often implies ridicule, derision, or hostile play. Sarah's immediate and severe reaction—demanding Ishmael's expulsion in Genesis 21:10—strongly suggests that Ishmael's "mocking" was not innocent child's play, but rather an act of hostility, contempt, or perhaps even a claim to Isaac's inheritance, threatening his status or well-being. The Apostle Paul's later allegorical reference to this incident as "he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit" in Galatians 4:29 reinforces the idea of Ishmael's actions being malicious or persecutory.

Verse Breakdown

  • "And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian": This clause establishes the observer (Sarah), the subject of her observation (Ishmael), and his identity through his mother (Hagar, the Egyptian). The emphasis on Hagar's ethnicity subtly underscores her foreignness within the covenant family, a distinction that becomes significant in the subsequent demand for expulsion. Sarah's "seeing" is not passive but leads directly to her decisive action.
  • "which she had born unto Abraham": This phrase explicitly states Ishmael's paternity, acknowledging his direct biological link to Abraham. This fact is crucial because it makes Abraham's subsequent decision to expel Ishmael particularly painful, as he is sending away his own flesh and blood, a son he had raised for thirteen years. It also highlights the complex family tree created by human attempts to fulfill divine promises.
  • "mocking": This single word, tsâchaq, is the catalyst for the entire ensuing drama. Its ambiguous nature allows for various interpretations, but Sarah's strong reaction, coupled with later biblical commentary, points to a hostile or persecutory intent rather than innocent play. Ishmael's action, whatever its precise form, was perceived by Sarah as a direct threat or insult to Isaac, the true heir of the promise.

Literary Devices

The narrative of Genesis 21:9 employs several significant literary devices. Foreshadowing is evident, as this verse marks the initial, overt manifestation of the deep-seated conflict between the two sons, foreshadowing not only Ishmael's eventual expulsion but also the ongoing tension between their descendants. The characters themselves serve as Symbolism: Ishmael represents the fruit of human effort and impatience, born "after the flesh," while Isaac symbolizes the miraculous fulfillment of divine promise, born "after the Spirit." This symbolic contrast is later leveraged by the Apostle Paul in his theological arguments. There is also a subtle Irony in the use of the word tsâchaq ("to laugh" or "mock"). Sarah herself had laughed in disbelief at the promise of a son, and now her son is the object of another's potentially derisive laughter, highlighting the complex and often painful interplay of human emotions and divine plans.

THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS

Genesis 21:9 serves as a profound theological narrative, illustrating the intricate interplay between human choices and divine sovereignty. Ishmael's very existence was a direct consequence of Sarah and Abraham's attempt to fulfill God's promise through their own means, rather than patiently waiting on His perfect timing. This verse powerfully demonstrates the inevitable strife and heartache that can arise from such actions, underscoring that human contrivance cannot supersede or improve upon divine design. Despite the profound human failings, jealousy, and strife depicted, God's ultimate plan and promises for Abraham's lineage through Isaac remained secure, highlighting His unwavering faithfulness and sovereignty as He works through imperfect people and challenging circumstances to achieve His perfect will. The conflict between Ishmael and Isaac also serves as a potent allegory for the ongoing spiritual battle between the "flesh" and the "Spirit."

REFLECTION AND APPLICATION

Genesis 21:9 serves as a powerful reminder of the ripple effect of our choices, demonstrating that decisions made outside of God's perfect will can have long-lasting and painful consequences for individuals and families. It underscores the destructive power of jealousy and the complexities of family dynamics, urging believers to seek God's wisdom in resolving disputes and protecting the vulnerable within their own spheres. Just as Isaac represented God's promise, we are called to protect and nurture what God has entrusted to us, discerning subtle forms of opposition or persecution that might threaten our spiritual inheritance or the purity of the gospel. This narrative challenges us to trust in God's timing and methods, rather than resorting to human shortcuts that often lead to greater complications and heartache. It also calls us to examine our own hearts for any "Ishmael" born of our impatience, and to release them into God's sovereign care, trusting Him to sort out the consequences and fulfill His promises in His way.

Questions for Reflection

  • How do I tend to respond when human efforts or plans conflict with God's clear promises or timing in my life?
  • In what ways might I be tempted to "mock" or undermine what God is doing in others' lives, perhaps out of jealousy or insecurity?
  • What "promises" or spiritual inheritances has God entrusted to me that I need to protect and nurture from subtle or overt opposition?

FAQ

What exactly was Ishmael doing when he was "mocking" Isaac?

Answer: The Hebrew word tsâchaq (צָחַח), translated as "mocking," is quite versatile and can mean "to laugh," "to play," or "to mock/scorn." While some interpretations suggest innocent child's play, the context strongly points to a more hostile or derisive action. Sarah's immediate and severe reaction, demanding Ishmael's expulsion, indicates she perceived his behavior as a serious threat or insult to Isaac. Furthermore, the Apostle Paul's interpretation in Galatians 4:29, where he states that Ishmael "persecuted" Isaac, solidifies the understanding that Ishmael's actions were not harmless but rather an act of hostility, ridicule, or a challenge to Isaac's status as the primary heir.

Why was Sarah's reaction so extreme, demanding Ishmael's expulsion?

Answer: Sarah's reaction, though seemingly harsh, stemmed from a complex confluence of factors. Primarily, it was driven by her protective instincts for Isaac, the long-awaited son of promise, through whom God's covenant with Abraham was to be established. She likely viewed Ishmael's "mocking" as a direct threat to Isaac's inheritance and well-being. Additionally, Sarah harbored long-standing jealousy and resentment towards Hagar and Ishmael, stemming from Hagar's earlier contempt for her (as seen in Genesis 16:4) and the painful reminder that Ishmael was the product of her own impatient attempt to fulfill God's promise. From a broader theological perspective, this expulsion was also part of God's sovereign plan to clearly establish the covenant line through Isaac alone, ensuring the distinctiveness and purity of the promised seed.

CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT

The conflict between Ishmael, born "after the flesh" through human effort and contrivance, and Isaac, born "after the Spirit" through divine promise and miraculous intervention, directly foreshadows the greater spiritual reality fulfilled in Christ. As the Apostle Paul powerfully articulates in Galatians 4:29, this narrative serves as a profound allegory for the ongoing tension between those who rely on human works, the law, or fleshly efforts for righteousness, and those who are truly children of God through faith in Christ Jesus. Isaac, the true and chosen heir, prefigures Christ, the ultimate promised Seed through whom all the nations of the earth would be blessed, as prophesied in Genesis 22:18. Just as Ishmael's mocking threatened Isaac's inheritance and position, so too does the "flesh"—whether manifested as legalism, self-righteousness, or worldly opposition—persecute those who live by the Spirit and are truly in Christ. Ultimately, however, God's true children, those who are united with Christ by faith, are the rightful heirs of the heavenly promises, inheriting eternal life and all the blessings of the new covenant, not through their own efforts but through the grace and righteousness of Jesus Christ, the one true Son of Promise, as declared in Romans 8:17.

Copy as

Commentary on Genesis 21 verses 9–13

The casting out of Ishmael is here considered of, and resolved on.

I. Ishmael himself gave the occasion by some affronts he gave to Isaac his little brother, some think on the day that Abraham made the feast for joy that Isaac was safely weaned, which the Jews say was not till he was three years old, others say five. Sarah herself was an eye-witness of the abuse: she saw the son of the Egyptian mocking (Gen 21:9), mocking Isaac, no doubt, for it is said, with reference to this (Gal 4:29), that he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit. Ishmael is here called the son of the Egyptian, because, as some think, the 400 years' affliction of the seed of Abraham by the Egyptians began now, and was to be dated hence, Gen 15:13. She saw him playing with Isaac, so the Septuagint, and, in play, mocking him. Ishmael was fourteen years older than Isaac; and, when children are together, the elder should be careful and tender of the younger: but it argued a very base and sordid disposition in Ishmael to be abusive to a child that was no way a match for him. Note, 1. God takes notice of what children say and do in their play, and will reckon with them if they say or do amiss, though their parents do not. 2. Mocking is a great sin, and very provoking to God. 3. There is a rooted remaining enmity in the seed of the serpent against the seed of the woman. The children of promise must expect to be mocked. This is persecution, which those that will live godly must count upon. 4. None are rejected and cast out from God but those who have first deserved it. Ishmael is continued in Abraham's family till he becomes a disturbance, grief, and scandal to it.

II. Sarah made the motion: Cast out this bond-woman, Gen 21:10. This seems to be spoken in some heat, yet it is quoted (Gal 4:30) as if it had been spoken by a spirit of prophecy; and it is the sentence passed on all hypocrites and carnal people, though they have a place and a name in the visible church. All that are born after the flesh and not born again, that rest in the law and reject the gospel promise, shall certainly be cast out. It is made to point particularly at the rejection of the unbelieving Jews, who, though they were the seed of Abraham, yet, because they submitted not to the gospel covenant, were unchurched and disfranchised: and that which, above any thing, provoked God to cast them off was their mocking and persecuting the gospel church, God's Isaac, in its infancy, Th1 2:16, Note, There are many who are familiarly conversant with the children of God in this world, and yet shall not partake with them in the inheritance of sons. Ishmael might be Isaac's play-fellow and school-fellow, yet not his fellow-heir.

III. Abraham was averse to it: The thing was very grievous in Abraham's sight, Gen 21:11. 1. It grieved him that Ishmael had given such a provocation. Note, Children ought to consider that the more their parents love them the more they are grieved at their misconduct, and particularly at their quarrels among themselves. 2. It grieved him that Sarah insisted upon such a punishment. "Might it not suffice to correct him? would nothing less serve than to expel him?" Note, Even the needful extremities which must be used with wicked and incorrigible children are very grievous to tender parents, who cannot thus afflict willingly.

IV. God determined it, Gen 21:12, Gen 21:13. We may well suppose Abraham to be greatly agitated about this matter, loth to displease Sarah, and yet loth to expel Ishmael; in this difficulty God tells him what his will is, and then he is satisfied. Note, A good man desires no more in doubtful cases than to know his duty, and what God would have him do; and, when he is clear in this, he is, or should be, easy. To make Abraham so, God sets this matter before him in a true light, and shows him, 1. That the casting out of Ishmael was necessary to the establishment of Isaac in the rights and privileges of the covenant: In Isaac shall thy seed be called. Both Christ and the church must descend from Abraham through the loins of Isaac; this is the entail of the promise upon Isaac, and is quoted by the apostle (Rom 9:7) to show that not all who come from Abraham's loins were the heirs of Abraham's covenant. Isaac, the promised son, must be the father of the promised seed; therefore, "Away with Ishmael, send him far enough, lest he corrupt the manners or attempt to invade the rights of Isaac." It will be his security to have his rival banished. The covenant seed of Abraham must be a peculiar people, a people by themselves, from the very first, distinguished, not mingled with those that were out of covenant; for this reason Ishmael must be separated. Abraham was called alone, and so must Isaac be. See Isa 51:2. It is probable that Sarah little thought of this (Joh 11:51), but God took what she said, and turned it into an oracle, as afterwards, Gen 27:10. 2. That the casting out of Ishmael should not be his ruin, Gen 21:13. He shall be a nation, because he is thy seed. We are not sure that it was his eternal ruin. It is presumption to say that all those who are left out of the external dispensation from all his mercies: those may be saved who are not thus honoured. However, we are sure it was not his temporal ruin. Though he was chased out of the church, he was not chased out of the world. I will make him a nation. Note, (1.) Nations are of God's making: he founds them, he forms them, he fixes them. (2.) Many are full of the blessings of God's providence that are strangers to the blessings of his covenant. (3.) The children of this world often fare the better, as to outward things, for their relation to the children of God.

Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers verses 9–13. Public domain.
Copy as
Origen of AlexandriaAD 253
HOMILIES ON GENESIS 7.4
Spiritually, therefore, all indeed who come to the recognition of God through faith can be called sons of Abraham; but among these some cling to God on the basis of love, others on the basis of dread and fear of future judgment. Whence also the apostle John says, “He who fears is not perfected in love, but perfect love casts out fear.” He therefore who “is perfected in love” is born of Abraham and is “a son of the free woman.” But he who keeps the commandments, not in perfect love but in dread of future torment and in fear of punishments is, indeed, also himself a son of Abraham. He too receives gifts, that is, the reward of his work (because even “he who shall give a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, shall not lose his reward”). Nevertheless he is inferior to that person who is perfected, not in slavish fear but in the freedom of love.The apostle also shows something similar when he says, “As long indeed as the heir is a child, he differs nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; but he is under tutors and governors until the time appointed by the father.” He is “a child,” therefore, who is nourished “with milk” and “is unskillful in the word of justice”; nor is he able to receive the “solid food” of the divine wisdom and knowledge of the law. He cannot “compare spiritual things with spiritual.” He cannot yet say, “But when I became a man, I put away the things of a child.” He “differs,” therefore, “nothing from a servant.”
But if “leaving the word of the first principles of Christ,” he be borne to perfection and “seek the things that are above, where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God, not the things that are on the earth” and “look not at the things which are seen but at the things which are not seen,” nor in the divine Scriptures follow “the letter which kills” but “the spirit which quickens,” from those things he will doubtless be one who does not receive “the spirit of bondage again in fear, but the spirit of adoption, whereby they cry, Abba, Father.”
Origen of AlexandriaAD 253
HOMILIES ON GENESIS 7.2
Sarah is angry because the son of the bondwoman plays with the son of the free woman, and she considers that play to be a disaster. She counsels Abraham and says, “Cast out the bondwoman and her son. For the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, Isaac.”I shall not now consider how these words ought to be understood. The apostle discussed them in this way, saying, “Tell me, you who have read the law, have you not heard the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondwoman and the other by a free woman. But he indeed who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, but he of the free woman was by promise. Which things are allegorical.” What then? Is Isaac not “born according to the flesh”? Did Sarah not bear him? Is he not circumcised? In regard to this very incident, that he played with Ishmael, did he not play in the flesh? This indeed is what is astonishing in the apostle’s understanding, that he called things “allegorical” that are quite obviously done in the flesh. His purpose is that we might learn how to treat other passages, and especially these in which the historical narrative appears to reveal nothing worthy of the divine law.
Ishmael, therefore, is born “according to the flesh,” the son of the bondwoman. But Isaac, who was “the son of the free woman,” is not born “according to the flesh” but “according to promise.” And the apostle says of these words that “Hagar engendered” a carnal people “unto bondage.” But Sarah, who was free, engendered a people which is not “according to the flesh” but has been called to freedom, by which “freedom Christ has made him free.” For Christ himself said, “If the Son shall make you free, you shall be free indeed.”
But let us see what the apostle adds to these words as he expounds them: “But as then he,” Scripture says, “who was according to the flesh, persecuted him who was according to the spirit, so also it is now.” Notice how the apostle teaches us that in all things the flesh is opposed to the spirit, whether that carnal people is opposed to this spiritual people, or even among ourselves, if someone is still carnal, he is opposed to the spiritual. For even you, if you live “according to the flesh” and direct your life “according to the flesh,” are a son of Hagar and for this reason are opposed to these who live “according to the spirit.” Or even if we inquire in ourselves, we find that “the flesh lusts against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh and these are contrary to one another,” and we find “a law in our members flighting against the law of our mind and leading us captive in the law of sin.” Do you see how great the battles of the flesh against the spirit are?
There is yet also another battle more violent perhaps than all these. These who understand the law “according to the flesh” are opposed to and persecute these who perceive it “according to the spirit.” Why? Because “the sensual man does not perceive the things that are of the spirit of God. For it is foolishness to him, and he cannot understand because it is spiritually discerned.”
Ephrem the SyrianAD 373
COMMENTARY ON GENESIS 18:1
Then the time came for Isaac to be born, and milk flowed in the breasts of the old woman. On the day of the great feast that Abraham prepared when he circumcised and weaned Isaac, Sarah noticed Ishmael playing. But Sarah also saw how much Ishmael shared the characteristics of his mother, for just as Sarah was despised in the eyes of Hagar, so too did Ishmael mock her son, and she thought, “If he acts thus to my son while I am still alive, perhaps [Abraham] will make him coheir with my son when I die and even give him two parts according to [the laws of] the firstborn.”
John ChrysostomAD 407
HOMILIES ON GENESIS 46.2
See, I ask you, dearly beloved, in this instance once again Sarah not tolerating the brashness of Ishmael and unable to put up equably with the maidservant’s son being reared with Isaac. So just as she previously wished to check Hagar’s arrogance and in her extreme irritation had her sent packing, so in this case too she wanted to nip Ishmael’s forwardness in the bud. Not bearing to see the son born of grace and of the very gift of God being reared along with that of the Egyptian maidservant, she said to Abraham, “Send away the maidservant and her son: surely the son of the maidservant will not share the inheritance with my son?” Since she realized that she herself was in fact in extreme old age, and she saw the patriarch was well on (after all, they were both advanced in years), she was afraid that in the event of their sudden passing Ishmael would, on the score of his being born of an association of the patriarch, endeavor to thrust himself into his father’s inheritance and become a sharer of it with Isaac. Hence she said, “Send away from here the maidservant and her son.” Let her learn at this stage, she is saying, that the son of the maidservant has nothing in common with my son, Isaac. It is, in fact, not fair that the slave’s son should be reared with that of the mistress, my son.
JeromeAD 420
Hebrew Questions on Genesis
(Chapter 21, Verse 9) And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she bore to Abraham, playing. What follows, with his son Isaac, is not present in the Hebrew. Therefore, this is interpreted in two ways by the Hebrews: either that she made idols out of play, according to what is written elsewhere: The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play (Exodus 32:6); or that she claimed the rights of the firstborn against Isaac, as if he were older, through play and jest. Indeed, Sara, upon hearing this, could not bear it; and this is confirmed by her own words, saying: Cast out this bondwoman and her son. For the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with my son Isaac.
BedeAD 735
Commentary on Genesis (Hexaemeron)
And when Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian playing, she said to Abraham: "Expel this slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not be heir with my son Isaac." Some manuscripts have: "The son of Hagar the Egyptian playing with her son Isaac," which does not appear in the Hebrew; but whether he was playing with Isaac or in the presence of Isaac, Sarah did not want the son of the slave woman to be a playmate to her son; she did not want him, whom the old woman had received in promise, to be unworthy of the promises and heavenly blessing by the ignoble examples or associations of a bastard; therefore the Apostle did not hesitate to call this play persecution. For one persecutes his brother not only by pursuing him with swords, hatred, or insults, but also by trying to divert him from the rectitude of his purity with playful or silly conversations; hence also the Psalmist says: "The wicked have told me fables, but not as your law, O Lord; all your commandments are truth; the wicked have persecuted me, help me" (Psalm 118:85). And he himself, because he loved the law of the Lord and the commandments of truth, tolerated the storytellers as persecutors; and therefore he implored divine help to overcome them; the Apostle, moreover, clearly shows what each of Abraham's sons typically demonstrates, writing to the Galatians: "It is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and one by the free woman; but the one by the slave woman was born according to the flesh; the one by the free woman through the promise, which things are spoken allegorically. For these are the two testaments; one indeed from Mount Sinai giving birth to bondage, which is Hagar. For Sinai is a mountain in Arabia, which corresponds to the present Jerusalem, and is in bondage with her children; but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all" (Galatians 4:22). When he says that the son of the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but the son of the free woman through the promise, he openly implies that the former was born by natural custom; the latter was given by the promise signifying grace. For Ishmael was born as men are born through the usual natural sexual intercourse; therefore it is said according to the flesh; not that these are not the blessings of God, but where it was necessary to signify the gift of God, because grace is given to men undeservedly by God's generosity; it was fitting to give a son in a way that was not owed to the workings of nature. Therefore, Isaac was not born to Abraham according to the flesh, but from the promise, not because he was not produced by flesh, but because he was received from utter despair, and unless the promising God had been present, an old man would not have dared to hope for any offspring from the old wife's womb. The Apostle, explaining this law, adds: "Now we, brothers, are children of the promise like Isaac; but as then the one born according to the flesh persecuted the one born according to the Spirit, so also now" (Galatians 4:28); he does not condemn the Old Testament as contrary to the New, lest he confirms by his authority the mad doctrine of the Manichees, God forbid; for the apostles and evangelists would not be preferred in any way over Moses and the prophets who composed the Old Testament, of whose shared grace of spirit and faith he says elsewhere: "But having the same spirit of faith, as it is written: 'I believed, therefore I spoke,' we also believe, therefore we also speak" (2 Corinthians 4:13); but he surely reproves those who understand the spiritual law carnally, who seek temporal benefits and a temporal kingdom from the Lord by observing the law, not eternal goods in heaven; he blames those who trust that the letter of the law without assisting grace is sufficient for salvation, which is characteristic of the Jews, about whom he also says: "For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God" (Romans 10:13); he rejects them and concludes that they are persecutors of the faithful, who, with the Gospel shining, and the grace of the New Testament clearly revealed by the Incarnation of the Lord throughout the world, nonetheless contend that circumcision, sacrifices, and legal ceremonies are necessary for those baptized in Christ; against whom his intention especially watched as he wrote this, as the well-considered text of this entire Epistle openly teaches, finally as he attaches to the words we have set out. But what does the Scripture say? "Cast out the slave woman and her son; for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman." So then, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman, with the freedom by which Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. Behold, I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you (Gal. 4:30). By these words, it is clearly shown that it is not the Scriptures nor the writers of the Old Testament that are to be cast out of the boundaries of the Church as if they were the slave woman and her son; but it is the carnal observance of that same Testament, after the grace and freedom of the Gospel has shone forth through Christ, that he says will cease, and faithfully fulfilled by the heirs of the New Testament in a spiritual sense. For this is how it is to be understood what the Lord says in the Gospel: "For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one jot, not one tittle, will pass from the law until all things are accomplished" (Matt. 5:18); which means that the things which the law and the prophets clearly speak of concerning the faith of the truth, or works of justice, and purification of heart, in order to see God, should always be accepted literally; but whatever was commanded to be observed carnally by a carnal people, such as circumcision itself, the offering of sacrifices, the daily cleaning from persistent leprosy, not only of men but also of houses and clothing, and countless such things, these should have been observed literally until the times of the Lord's Incarnation. But from the time when the Lord, rising from the dead, opened the minds of the disciples to understand the Scriptures, and to discern clearly the mysteries of prophecy in their full light, though these should be read in the Church on account of the authority of the prophecy, they should be observed spiritually and not carnally because of the clarity of grace; although the early Church in Jerusalem also observed many of the ceremonies of the law according to the letter, even among those who from the Gentiles were called to the faith and who were Judaizing, until the Church had spread far and wide throughout the world, and began to have priests and teachers from the Gentiles, who had no concern for Jewish observances but only delighted in listening to the apostolic and evangelical decrees with Christian simplicity; to this ecclesiastical disposition most beautifully corresponds the figure of the children of Abraham; for before Isaac was born, Abraham and Sarah rejoiced over Ishmael as their only son, as one who had not yet shown any pride or levity in mind or behavior, because before the Lord's Incarnation and the revelation of grace, even the spirituals rejoiced in the law, as the people kept that same law with sincere heart devotion according to the letter. And rightly so; for the same people did not resist grace, nor did they prefer the law to the Gospel; but faithfully followed the precepts of justice they had received. But after Isaac was born and not yet weaned, the love for Ishmael began to wane, as the parents rejoiced over the birth of Isaac, their mutual son, although they did not entertain any thoughts of expelling Ishmael and his mother yet, because, when the grace of the Gospel was already revealed, and the apostles were preaching Christ, the Church of believers rejoiced, the teachers themselves rejoiced over the promise of the kingdom of God bestowed upon them, but they did not immediately strive to reject the observance of circumcision and the sacrifices of the law as superfluous. For they knew that these were constituted by God, and could not reject them as harmful suddenly, especially since the infant Church was still tender and almost like an infant being nourished among such customs. But after Isaac was weaned, Sarah saw the son of the slave woman mocking, and decided that he must be cast out with his mother, because after the Church of the Gentiles grew strong in the faith of Christ, some came from Judea, carnal in mind, as if truly sons of the slave woman, not yet made free in the spirit of grace for Christ, teaching the brothers and saying: "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved" (Acts 15:1), which was more mocking and vanity than the truth of the Gospel; indeed, it was a significant persecution to want to reduce those who were already enjoying the gift of revealed light back into the shadows of figurative representations; hence, the grace-filled mother promptly decided through the council of the apostles that this doctrine with its advocates was to be cast out.
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as

Continue studying Genesis 21:9 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.

TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.