Northern Kentucky's Evening Interdenominational Community Bible Study Text of Presentation, Lesson 12, Gen 20-21 Click Here for Lesson 12 Photos Click Here to return to GENESIS Home Page

Genesis 20:1-21:34
Political and Family Crises: Consequences of Unbelief

Last week God finally added a timetable to his promise that Sarah will have a son (18:10), and He brought judgment on the evil cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Abraham watched dense smoke rise where Sodom and Gomorrah had been; he knew what had happened. The bible doesn’t say if Abraham knew God allowed his nephew Lot and two daughters to escape . . . but for some reason Abraham decides to leave Hebron and move to Gerar, about 35 miles east in the area now called the Gaza strip.

The story in chapter 20 is that Abraham and Sarah again claim to be brother-and-sister, and the local king takes Sarah into his harem. (As with pharaoh of Egypt, the king’s name is not used – only his title: Abimelech.) This is more than a crisis! If Sarah is to have a son within a year to fulfill God’s promise to Abraham, it must be perfectly clear that Abraham is the only possible father!

Some scholars claim this is just a restatement by a different author of the story in chapter 12 when Abraham was in Egypt – but the details are so different they must be two stories. Hence for a 2nd time, Sarah is taken into the harem of a local king – but protected by God while bad things happen to the king. And when the facts come out, Sarah is returned to Abraham – with a large ransom to placate Abraham’s God.

Conventional wisdom does not deal kindly with Abraham here. Some say Abimelech’s straightforwardness makes him look good in comparison with Abraham. That may be true . . . but God does not join in the condemnation – in fact God praises Abraham as a “prophet” who can intercede on behalf of the pagan king. There may be more to the story than the bible tells us, and if there is a way to justify Abraham’s actions, it would be based on his explanation to Abimelech (after he is caught in this subterfuge):

“There is . . . no fear of God in this place, and (you would) kill me because of my wife. . . . (Sarah) is my sister, the daughter of my father though not of my mother; and she became my wife. And when God caused me to wander from my father’s household, I said to her, ‘This is how you can show your love to me: Everywhere we go, say of me, "He is my brother"’” (20:11-13).

Abraham is in a godless culture where, as an itinerant caravan merchant, he is forever an alien, never owning property or attaining the status for which his wealth should entitle him . . . where adultery is considerd a “crime,” but not murder – so the rich and powerful feel free to kill a woman’s husband to acquire his wife “legally”! . . . where a king has the right to forcibly take an unattached alien woman into his harem. Only is such a godless culture can Abimelech claim innocence with a straight face!

Abraham thought out this plan well in advance by to allow him to survive in such a godless culture. God’s promises to Abraham all revolve around offspring not yet born – which cannot be born if Abraham is dead. Hence Abraham tells a half truth for self-preservation in this godless culture . . . and trusts God to protect him. If we condemn Abraham 4000 years later for not telling the truth and trusting God’s protection, we must explain why God doesn’t condemn him – so, indeed, there may be more to the story.

If, based on 18:17-19, God is continuing to teach Abraham about His ways, this story seems appropriate after the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Then the issue was: will God “kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike?” (18:25); this time the issue is: “Will (God) destroy (the) innocent?” (20:4). The answer to both questions is “no.”

We also learn something else very important in chapter 20: God’s revelation is not restricted to Abraham; God speaks to the pagan Abimelech. YHWH is everyone’s God; Abraham is just God’s chosen vehicle through whom He will reveal Himself to mankind.

Lastly, this is the first time the word “prophet” (20:7) appears in the bible . . . applied to Abraham in the contest of “forthtelling” (not “foretelling”). Abraham is a prophet because he knows the ways of God, and can pray to God on Abimelech’s behalf – just as he interceded in chapter 18 on behalf of Sodom and Gomorrah. As the bible will spell out later: only believers can pray to God and expect to be heard (cf John 9:31).

The story ends thus:

Then Abimelech brought sheep and cattle and male and female slaves and gave them to Abraham, and he returned Sarah his wife to him. And Abimelech said, "My land is before you; live wherever you like." To Sarah he said, "I am giving your brother a thousand shekels of silver. This is to cover the offence against you before all who are with you; you are completely vindicated." Then Abraham prayed to God, and God healed Abimelech, his wife and his slave girls so they could have children again, for the LORD had closed up every womb in Abimelech’s household because of Abraham’s wife Sarah (Gen 20:14-18).

Abraham the prophet prays on behalf of Abimelech, and God heals his people. Then the king allows Abraham to live anywhere in his territory . . . a promise that is expanded by a treaty in the next chapter.

Moving into chapter 21 . . . the long-awaited pregnancy of Sarah occurs – and the even-more-long-awaited birth of Isaac. The Septuagint translates 21:1 thus: “And the Lord visited Sarah” (21:1 LXXE). No modern translation finds the verb “visit” appropriate, but the Hebrew is used for God’s coming to bless or judge . . . so “visit” seems to fit – and fulfills God’s promise He will “return” a year after the Sodom and Gomorrah destruction and Sarah will have a son (18:14). Although 21:2 reads “Sarah became pregnant,” as discussed before, this does not necessarily mean Sarah’s pregnancy happens after the Abimelech incident.

Nevertheless . . . it seems God visits Sarah – just as He visits Mary, the mother of Jesus. And whereas Sarah has previously been on the sidelines while God speaks to Abraham, this time Sarah is the focus. And though her comments lack the theology of Mary’s “Magnificat” – they include the same wonder and awe at God’s miracle of a baby born under impossible conditions.

“God has brought me laughter, and everyone who hears about this will laugh with me. . . . Who would have said . . . Sarah would nurse children? Yet I have borne (Abraham) a son in his old age” (Gen 21:6-7)

Isaac is born when Abraham is 100 and Sarah is 90 – 25 years after God’s first promise! Imagine waiting 25 years for a promise of offspring . . . a man of lesser faith would have given up long ago!

To keep God’s covenant, Abraham circumcises Isaac on the 8th day (21:4). Then the bible blithely skips over 3 or more years, and records that Abraham holds a great feast when Isaac is weaned (21:8). The bible doesn’t record such a feast for Ishmael . . . it’s hard to miss the fact that Isaac is the special child of God’s 25-year promise to an elderly couple, born as a miracle to a woman long past menopause; by contrast, Ishmael is born to a young slave surrogate mother and rejected by the wife even before his birth.

Imagine the effect on Ishmael. For 13 years he was Abraham’s heir. Then a new favorite is born and weaned, and Ishmael is pushed aside. It’s understandable why he “mocks” – or ridicules – the young Isaac at this great feast . . . and in light of past history, it’s no surprise this greatly offends Sarah: Ishmael’s mere presence probably offends Sarah . . . it’s offensive that the son of her rejected slave woman is legally entitled to a share of Abraham’s inheritance (even though Isaac will receive the double portion due the first born). Sarah demands that Abraham “drive out” Hagar and Ishmael (21:10 NAS) “for that slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with my son Isaac” (21:10). The verb she uses is also the verb used to divorce a wife – the only grounds she has for insisting Abraham “illegally” disinherit Ishmael.

Abraham is “greatly distressed” by Sarah’s ultimatum; not only is it “illegal” in their culture, but he surely has built a strong emotional tie with his first son. It was mentioned before that the Code of Hammurapi gave the wife the right to decide disputes with a slave woman/surrogate mother – but this is more than settling a dispute. Abraham alone can make the decree to divorce/drive out – and he does this with great reluctance . . . agreeing to Sarah’s demand only after God tells him it’s all right (21:12-13) – and again Abraham trusts God.

This is an example of the right thing being done for the wrong reasons. Sarah is being unreasonable; but God’s promise to Abraham – the land, the offspring, the blessing – does not involve Ishmael, but Isaac. Ishmael doesn’t belong; he must go. Yet although he loses his share of Abraham’s property, he is blessed in separation from Abraham: he will become a great nation (21:13, 18).

Abraham supplies Hagar and Ishmael with food and water and sends them away early in the morning – presumably to travel in the cool of the day. When Hagar ran away earlier, she seemed to know where she was going – but neither she nor her teenage son seem to have a clue this time. Like the “house slaves” in Gone with the Wind, unable to cope in the outside world, they seem to wander aimlessly until their water runs out . . . then prepare to die. Once again a theophany of God appears to Hagar to save the day: “God opened her eyes and she saw a well of water” (21:19); perhaps God clouded their perceptions to emphasize that He is with them, and will guide them.

The chapter which began describing Isaac’s birth and growth, now switches to describing Ishmael’s growth. God is indeed with him (21:20), and he grows up in the Desert of Paran – a barren, foreboding place south of Beersheba and the Negev. He becomes an archer – and probably a good one, with food so scarce in Paran. The Egyptian Hagar procures a wife for Ishamel from among her “own kind,” and from this union the Arab race is descended, as detailed in chapter 25.

Chapter 21 concludes with a treaty between Abraham and Abimelech, some time after Abimelech gave Abraham permission to live in the king’s territory (20:14). Scholars debate the time and the point of the dialogue. Is Abimelech’s request to “swear . . . before God that you will not deal falsely with me” (21:23) a treaty formality – or a challenge based on Abraham’s earlier “white lie” (20:12)? Is the exchange of gifts also treaty formality – or does it have greater significance? The one thing that seems clear is Abimelech’s statement to Abraham: “God is with you in everything you do” (21:22). Has Abraham has now gained considerable strength and influence, and/or does Abimelech just remember the earlier incident? In any case, Abimelech wishes to avoid conflict with this man of God, and Abraham wishes to practice his trade in peace in a land where is an alien.

The issue is control of water rights, focusing on a dispute over a well in Beersheba – which Abraham claims he dug, but Abimelech’s men have seized. The treaty resolves the issue: Abraham gives Abimelech 7 ewe lambs, and Abimelech accepts Abraham’s word he is the one who dug the well.

Now with a guarantee of peace in the “kingdom” of Abimelech, Abraham plants a tamarisk tree near the well. The web site shows a well uncovered in excavations of Beersheba – with a tamarisk tree nearby – which is widely believed to be this well.

Reference to Abimelech as a Philistine (21:32, 34) has been thought an anachronism, but it may imply settlement of the Gaza Strip as part of an Aegean migration at the time of Abraham – and there is archaeological evidence for such a migration.

We will break for 3 weeks for Christmas holidays, then resume Jan 10 with the famous story of Abraham’s near-sacrifice of Isaac, the son of the promise.