Once more there is no mention of Sarah giving Ishmael to Abraham or Abraham adopting Ishmael. Even Abraham disobeys the circumcision covenant and Ishmael isn’t circumcised until he is 13.
*sigh* The “adoption” was at birth, baby born on the knees of the surrogate mother. There WAS no other way. And there was no covenant prior to Ishmael being 13 . . . that was when Abraham was circumcised as well.
before. I never said it wasn’t a Roman practice and I never said it was only a Jewish practice I said it was a common practice long before and after the time of Christ
Can you offer ANY support for that?
Bill is wrong it is as simple as that
I get that you feel that way. You have also ignored copious amounts of scripture and other evidence that I presented to continue to make your unfounded statements.
Gen 16:3 After Abram had lived ten years in the land of Canaan, Abram’s wife Sarai took Hagar the Egyptian, her maid, and gave her to her husband Abram as his wife.
Gen 16:4 He went in to Hagar, and she conceived; and when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress was despised in her sight.
Gen 16:5 And Sarai said to Abram, “May the wrong done me be upon you. I gave my maid into your arms, but when she saw that she had conceived, I was despised in her sight. May the LORD judge between you and me.
Mate this is all smoke and mirrors the text does not support the view that Ishmael was adopted saying I didn’t address your texts is once more a red herring I don’t have to address them as I didn’t address much of your previous statements on adoption they only detract from the real issue. Does the text support Bill Gothard’s view? I can trail back and forth through Genesis chapters 16 through 21 as often as you like and all they do is say no. However I will give you David Guzik’s Enduring Word commentary on this issue and then conclude with my own thoughts
HAGAR AND THE BIRTH OF ISHMAEL
A. Sarai gives her servant girl Hagar to Abram.
1. (Gen_16:1-2) Sarai proposes a child for Abram through Hagar.
Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. And she had an Egyptian maidservant whose name was Hagar. So Sarai said to Abram, “See now, the LORD has restrained me from bearing children. Please, go in to my maid; perhaps I shall obtain children by her.” And Abram heeded the voice of Sarai.
a. She had an Egyptian maidservant: Hagar was undoubtedly part of what Abram received during his time in Egypt (Gen_12:16).
b. Please, go in to my maid; perhaps I shall obtain children by her: Sarai encouraged Abram to take part in what was essentially a “surrogate mother” arrangement in that day. According to custom, the child would be considered to be the child of Abram and Sarai, not Abram and Hagar.
c. And Abram heeded the voice of Sarai: Sarai did something that goes against the nature of wives – to give another woman to her husband. She probably did this because she knew the promise of God (that Abram would be the father of many nations), yet she thought she was the problem with God’s promise being fulfilled. So in an effort to “help God out,” she allowed her husband make her servant pregnant.
i. Ginzberg quotes a Jewish tradition saying that before they came to live in the Promised Land, Abram and Sarai regarded their childlessness as punishment for not living in the land. But now they had been in the land for ten years, and they still had no children. Sarai probably felt it was time to do something. After all, doesn’t “God help those who help themselves”?
ii. Even though this early form of “surrogate motherhood” was common and accepted in that day, it doesn’t mean it was right. God is clearly not leading Abram and Sarai.
2. (Gen_16:3-4) Abram agrees with Sarai’s suggestion.
Then Sarai, Abram’s wife, took Hagar her maid, the Egyptian, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan. So he went in to Hagar, and she conceived. And when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress became despised in her eyes.
a. After Abram dwelt ten years in the land: It had been more than ten years since the promise was made regarding Abram’s descendants. By most accounts, ten years seems like a long time to wait for the promise of God.
i. The long waiting for the promise discouraged them and made them vulnerable to acting in the flesh. Yet, even after this, it would still be more than 13 years until the child of promise came.
ii. When we impatiently try to “help God out” in the flesh, it accomplishes nothing and may even prolong the time until the promise is fulfilled. Jacob had to live as an exile for 25 years because he thought he had to “help God out” to get his father’s blessing. Moses had to tend sheep for 40 years in the desert after he tried to “help God out” by murdering an Egyptian.
iii. It is much better to receive God’s help than to try and help Him out in the flesh. “Those who are truly zealous for God frequently reach for fruit without first dying. Unfortunately much Christian work is done in this way, and while there is conception, the child that is born can never be the heir. Christian work that is done merely through the zeal of human effort without counting the body as dead, and Sarai as good as dead, may produce great revival campaigns with but a few genuinely saved, large church memberships with many tares among the wheat.” (Barnhouse)
b. So he went in to Hagar, and she conceived: Abram was certainly in the flesh when he agreed to inseminate Hagar and not trusting in God’s ability to provide an heir through Sarai. But this wasn’t a matter of a sensual romance. According to the custom of the day, Hagar would actually sit on the lap of Sarai as Abram inseminated her, to show that the child would legally belong to Sarai, as Hagar was merely a substitute for Sarai.
i. We understand this from the similar occassion of using a servant as a surrogate mother in the case of Rachel’s giving of Bilhah to Jacob when Rachel was barren. In that context, Gen_30:3 reads: So she said, “Here is my maid Bilhah; go in to her, and she will bear a child on my knees, that I also may have children by her.”
ii. The phrase “bear a child on my knees” refers to the ancient practice of surrogate-adoption. Some believe that the phrase refers only to a symbolic placement of the child on the knees of one who adopts it. Others believe that it refers to the surrogate sitting on the lap of the adoptive mother during both insemination and birth. For example, referring to Gen_30:3 the Twentieth Century Bible Commentary says: “These words are probably intended literally, and not merely as figurative adoption.”
iii. We should not regard the idea that Hagar was inseminated and gave birth “on the knees” of Sarai as a certainty – we don’t know enough about the ancient practice, and even if it were an ancient custom it doesn’t mean that it was followed in every case. But it certainly is a reasonable possibility.
c. And she conceived: Then the worst thing from Sarai’s perspective happened – Abram succeeded in inseminating Hagar. This proved beyond all doubt the problem was in Sarai, not in Abram, and it also could make people think Hagar was “more of a woman” and more blessed than Sarai.
3. (Gen_16:5-6 a) Sarai’s anger towards Hagar.
Then Sarai said to Abram, “My wrong be upon you! I gave my maid into your embrace; and when she saw that she had conceived, I became despised in her eyes. The LORD judge between you and me.” So Abram said to Sarai, “Indeed your maid is in your hand; do to her as you please.”
a. I became despised in her eyes: Hagar’s contempt for Sarai started the problem. She couldn’t resist displaying an inappropriate haughtiness, thinking her pregnancy somehow showed her to be better than Sarai.
b. My wrong be upon you! Sarai blamed the whole situation on Abram, and for good cause. He should have acted as the spiritual leader and told his wife God was able to perform what He promised, and they didn’t need to try to “help God out” in the works of the flesh.
c. Indeed your maid is in your hand; do to her as you please: Abram seemed to make a bad situation worse by turning the situation over to Sarai and not taking care of the child he is father to. Yet, in this, he also puts his relationship with Sarai first, and that is good.
i. These terribly complicated and difficult situations often arise out of our sin. All in all, it is much easier to live life trusting in the LORD. God wants to spare us from these difficulties.
B. Hagar flees from Abram and Sarai.
1. (Gen_16:6-9) The Angel of the LORD appears to Hagar and instructs her.
And when Sarai dealt harshly with her, she fled from her presence. Now the Angel of the LORD found her by a spring of water in the wilderness, by the spring on the way to Shur. And He said, “Hagar, Sarai’s maid, where have you come from, and where are you going?” She said, “I am fleeing from the presence of my mistress Sarai.” The Angel of the LORD said to her, “Return to your mistress, and submit yourself under her hand.”
a. She fled from her presence: As Hagar escaped this difficult situation the Angel of the LORD (here, the pre-incarnate presence of Jesus) met her by a spring of water in the wilderness.
i. We can assume that this was God, in the Person of Jesus Christ, appearing to Abraham before His incarnation and birth at Bethlehem. We assume this because of God the Father it says, No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him (Joh_1:18), and no man has ever seen God in the Person of the Father (1Ti_6:16). Therefore, if God appeared to someone in human appearance in the Old Testament (and no one has seen God the Father) it makes sense the appearance is of the eternal Son, the Second Person of the Trinity, before His incarnation in Bethlehem.
b. Return to your mistress, and submit yourself under her hand: God tells Hagar to do something very difficult: go back to her terrible situation and to submit herself to Sarai. We can suppose that Hagar might get very different counseling from many counselors today.
2. (Gen_16:10-12) The promise of the Angel of the LORD to Hagar.
Then the Angel of the LORD said to her, “I will multiply your descendants exceedingly, so that they shall not be counted for multitude.” And the Angel of the LORD said to her: “Behold, you are with child, and you shall bear a son. You shall call his name Ishmael, because the LORD has heard your affliction. He shall be a wild man; his hand shall be against every man, and every man’s hand against him. And he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.”
a. I will multiply your descendants exceedingly: God has great plans for Hagar’s child. He will become a great nation. Indeed, Ishmael will become the father of all the Arabic peoples.
i. Today’s battle between Jew and Arab is nothing new. Both Jews and Arabs are descended from Abram by two half-brothers: Ishmael and the son to come later from Abram and Sarai, to be named Isaac.
ii. The entire conflict can be traced back to Abram’s decision to “help God out” in the flesh, both when he agreed to inseminate Hagar, and when he went to Egypt to begin with. The effects of our sin may reach far beyond what we ever imagined.
b. He shall be a wild man; his hand shall be against every man, and every man’s hand against him: Her child’s life will not be easy, but God will still bless and sustain him. God’s dealing with Hagar gives us hope. God sees our suffering and desires to touch our life when we suffer.
My conclusion:
Note that everything that Abraham and Sarah did in this circumstance was in the flesh and not the will of the Lord the principle and the lesson here is that the conception of Ishmael did not honour the promise given to Abraham. Abraham and Sarah tried to engineer the outcome. Hagar if anything was a victim taken advantage of. If there was an adoption in any sense it was merely symbolic. The reason for Ishmael being cast out had nothing with his unruly nature it had to do with the schism between Sarah and Hagar. That being said from the point of view of the scriptures Ishmael was cast out because he was not of the promised seed nor was he unadopted.
My point is that Bill Gothard misses the spiritual intention of the whole narrative. Bill makes some major teaching out of something that isn’t there and misses a whole opportunity to teach the true meaning of son ship that Paul refers to in his teachings in Ephesians and the others cited scriptures; Bill actually turns it on its head. Bill’s unique interpretation lacks wisdom and grace
The Calvinist 
*sigh* The “adoption” was at birth, baby born on the knees of the surrogate mother. There WAS no other way. And there was no covenant prior to Ishmael being 13 . . . that was when Abraham was circumcised as well.
Can you offer ANY support for that?
I get that you feel that way. You have also ignored copious amounts of scripture and other evidence that I presented to continue to make your unfounded statements.
Ishmael was a biological son not adopted
Gen 16:3 After Abram had lived ten years in the land of Canaan, Abram’s wife Sarai took Hagar the Egyptian, her maid, and gave her to her husband Abram as his wife.
Gen 16:4 He went in to Hagar, and she conceived; and when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress was despised in her sight.
Gen 16:5 And Sarai said to Abram, “May the wrong done me be upon you. I gave my maid into your arms, but when she saw that she had conceived, I was despised in her sight. May the LORD judge between you and me.
I feel like Winnie the Pooh: “You SAID that”.
Now, show me what a real adoption looked like among the Jews, so I can compare and contrast.
Your comment is awaiting moderation
Mate this is all smoke and mirrors the text does not support the view that Ishmael was adopted saying I didn’t address your texts is once more a red herring I don’t have to address them as I didn’t address much of your previous statements on adoption they only detract from the real issue. Does the text support Bill Gothard’s view? I can trail back and forth through Genesis chapters 16 through 21 as often as you like and all they do is say no. However I will give you David Guzik’s Enduring Word commentary on this issue and then conclude with my own thoughts
HAGAR AND THE BIRTH OF ISHMAEL
A. Sarai gives her servant girl Hagar to Abram.
1. (Gen_16:1-2) Sarai proposes a child for Abram through Hagar.
Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. And she had an Egyptian maidservant whose name was Hagar. So Sarai said to Abram, “See now, the LORD has restrained me from bearing children. Please, go in to my maid; perhaps I shall obtain children by her.” And Abram heeded the voice of Sarai.
a. She had an Egyptian maidservant: Hagar was undoubtedly part of what Abram received during his time in Egypt (Gen_12:16).
b. Please, go in to my maid; perhaps I shall obtain children by her: Sarai encouraged Abram to take part in what was essentially a “surrogate mother” arrangement in that day. According to custom, the child would be considered to be the child of Abram and Sarai, not Abram and Hagar.
c. And Abram heeded the voice of Sarai: Sarai did something that goes against the nature of wives – to give another woman to her husband. She probably did this because she knew the promise of God (that Abram would be the father of many nations), yet she thought she was the problem with God’s promise being fulfilled. So in an effort to “help God out,” she allowed her husband make her servant pregnant.
i. Ginzberg quotes a Jewish tradition saying that before they came to live in the Promised Land, Abram and Sarai regarded their childlessness as punishment for not living in the land. But now they had been in the land for ten years, and they still had no children. Sarai probably felt it was time to do something. After all, doesn’t “God help those who help themselves”?
ii. Even though this early form of “surrogate motherhood” was common and accepted in that day, it doesn’t mean it was right. God is clearly not leading Abram and Sarai.
2. (Gen_16:3-4) Abram agrees with Sarai’s suggestion.
Then Sarai, Abram’s wife, took Hagar her maid, the Egyptian, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan. So he went in to Hagar, and she conceived. And when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress became despised in her eyes.
a. After Abram dwelt ten years in the land: It had been more than ten years since the promise was made regarding Abram’s descendants. By most accounts, ten years seems like a long time to wait for the promise of God.
i. The long waiting for the promise discouraged them and made them vulnerable to acting in the flesh. Yet, even after this, it would still be more than 13 years until the child of promise came.
ii. When we impatiently try to “help God out” in the flesh, it accomplishes nothing and may even prolong the time until the promise is fulfilled. Jacob had to live as an exile for 25 years because he thought he had to “help God out” to get his father’s blessing. Moses had to tend sheep for 40 years in the desert after he tried to “help God out” by murdering an Egyptian.
iii. It is much better to receive God’s help than to try and help Him out in the flesh. “Those who are truly zealous for God frequently reach for fruit without first dying. Unfortunately much Christian work is done in this way, and while there is conception, the child that is born can never be the heir. Christian work that is done merely through the zeal of human effort without counting the body as dead, and Sarai as good as dead, may produce great revival campaigns with but a few genuinely saved, large church memberships with many tares among the wheat.” (Barnhouse)
b. So he went in to Hagar, and she conceived: Abram was certainly in the flesh when he agreed to inseminate Hagar and not trusting in God’s ability to provide an heir through Sarai. But this wasn’t a matter of a sensual romance. According to the custom of the day, Hagar would actually sit on the lap of Sarai as Abram inseminated her, to show that the child would legally belong to Sarai, as Hagar was merely a substitute for Sarai.
i. We understand this from the similar occassion of using a servant as a surrogate mother in the case of Rachel’s giving of Bilhah to Jacob when Rachel was barren. In that context, Gen_30:3 reads: So she said, “Here is my maid Bilhah; go in to her, and she will bear a child on my knees, that I also may have children by her.”
ii. The phrase “bear a child on my knees” refers to the ancient practice of surrogate-adoption. Some believe that the phrase refers only to a symbolic placement of the child on the knees of one who adopts it. Others believe that it refers to the surrogate sitting on the lap of the adoptive mother during both insemination and birth. For example, referring to Gen_30:3 the Twentieth Century Bible Commentary says: “These words are probably intended literally, and not merely as figurative adoption.”
iii. We should not regard the idea that Hagar was inseminated and gave birth “on the knees” of Sarai as a certainty – we don’t know enough about the ancient practice, and even if it were an ancient custom it doesn’t mean that it was followed in every case. But it certainly is a reasonable possibility.
c. And she conceived: Then the worst thing from Sarai’s perspective happened – Abram succeeded in inseminating Hagar. This proved beyond all doubt the problem was in Sarai, not in Abram, and it also could make people think Hagar was “more of a woman” and more blessed than Sarai.
3. (Gen_16:5-6 a) Sarai’s anger towards Hagar.
Then Sarai said to Abram, “My wrong be upon you! I gave my maid into your embrace; and when she saw that she had conceived, I became despised in her eyes. The LORD judge between you and me.” So Abram said to Sarai, “Indeed your maid is in your hand; do to her as you please.”
a. I became despised in her eyes: Hagar’s contempt for Sarai started the problem. She couldn’t resist displaying an inappropriate haughtiness, thinking her pregnancy somehow showed her to be better than Sarai.
b. My wrong be upon you! Sarai blamed the whole situation on Abram, and for good cause. He should have acted as the spiritual leader and told his wife God was able to perform what He promised, and they didn’t need to try to “help God out” in the works of the flesh.
c. Indeed your maid is in your hand; do to her as you please: Abram seemed to make a bad situation worse by turning the situation over to Sarai and not taking care of the child he is father to. Yet, in this, he also puts his relationship with Sarai first, and that is good.
i. These terribly complicated and difficult situations often arise out of our sin. All in all, it is much easier to live life trusting in the LORD. God wants to spare us from these difficulties.
B. Hagar flees from Abram and Sarai.
1. (Gen_16:6-9) The Angel of the LORD appears to Hagar and instructs her.
And when Sarai dealt harshly with her, she fled from her presence. Now the Angel of the LORD found her by a spring of water in the wilderness, by the spring on the way to Shur. And He said, “Hagar, Sarai’s maid, where have you come from, and where are you going?” She said, “I am fleeing from the presence of my mistress Sarai.” The Angel of the LORD said to her, “Return to your mistress, and submit yourself under her hand.”
a. She fled from her presence: As Hagar escaped this difficult situation the Angel of the LORD (here, the pre-incarnate presence of Jesus) met her by a spring of water in the wilderness.
i. We can assume that this was God, in the Person of Jesus Christ, appearing to Abraham before His incarnation and birth at Bethlehem. We assume this because of God the Father it says, No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him (Joh_1:18), and no man has ever seen God in the Person of the Father (1Ti_6:16). Therefore, if God appeared to someone in human appearance in the Old Testament (and no one has seen God the Father) it makes sense the appearance is of the eternal Son, the Second Person of the Trinity, before His incarnation in Bethlehem.
b. Return to your mistress, and submit yourself under her hand: God tells Hagar to do something very difficult: go back to her terrible situation and to submit herself to Sarai. We can suppose that Hagar might get very different counseling from many counselors today.
2. (Gen_16:10-12) The promise of the Angel of the LORD to Hagar.
Then the Angel of the LORD said to her, “I will multiply your descendants exceedingly, so that they shall not be counted for multitude.” And the Angel of the LORD said to her: “Behold, you are with child, and you shall bear a son. You shall call his name Ishmael, because the LORD has heard your affliction. He shall be a wild man; his hand shall be against every man, and every man’s hand against him. And he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.”
a. I will multiply your descendants exceedingly: God has great plans for Hagar’s child. He will become a great nation. Indeed, Ishmael will become the father of all the Arabic peoples.
i. Today’s battle between Jew and Arab is nothing new. Both Jews and Arabs are descended from Abram by two half-brothers: Ishmael and the son to come later from Abram and Sarai, to be named Isaac.
ii. The entire conflict can be traced back to Abram’s decision to “help God out” in the flesh, both when he agreed to inseminate Hagar, and when he went to Egypt to begin with. The effects of our sin may reach far beyond what we ever imagined.
b. He shall be a wild man; his hand shall be against every man, and every man’s hand against him: Her child’s life will not be easy, but God will still bless and sustain him. God’s dealing with Hagar gives us hope. God sees our suffering and desires to touch our life when we suffer.
My conclusion:
Note that everything that Abraham and Sarah did in this circumstance was in the flesh and not the will of the Lord the principle and the lesson here is that the conception of Ishmael did not honour the promise given to Abraham. Abraham and Sarah tried to engineer the outcome. Hagar if anything was a victim taken advantage of. If there was an adoption in any sense it was merely symbolic. The reason for Ishmael being cast out had nothing with his unruly nature it had to do with the schism between Sarah and Hagar. That being said from the point of view of the scriptures Ishmael was cast out because he was not of the promised seed nor was he unadopted.
My point is that Bill Gothard misses the spiritual intention of the whole narrative. Bill makes some major teaching out of something that isn’t there and misses a whole opportunity to teach the true meaning of son ship that Paul refers to in his teachings in Ephesians and the others cited scriptures; Bill actually turns it on its head. Bill’s unique interpretation lacks wisdom and grace