Is it RACIST to deny that Hagar was the Legitimate Wife of Abraham ?

Question

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. -- GENESIS 16:3

So Hagar bore Abram a son; and Abram called the name of HIS SON, whom Hagar bore, ISHMAEL. - GENESIS 16:15

Deu 21:15 If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated:
Deu 21:16 Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn:
Deu 21:17 But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a DOUBLE portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the FIRSTBORN is his.

Answer 1

To ask that question (Is it RACIST to deny that Hagar was the Legitimate Wife of Abraham ?), in my mind, would almost equate to asking why there was a concerted effort, centuries back, to begin portraying Jesus as some long-haired Caucasian, despite the very Bible, itself, giving an almost diametrically-opposite physical description, that included skin-tone & hair consistency?
You do know that Hagar, being an Egyptian, was a woman of color?
George W. Bush, as most "Christians", is a convenient Christian---as long as his "god" condones every manner of evil that he may execute, rewards him with earthly riches, is more a co-hort/co-conspirator, than a standard to aspire toward, and, looks like someone who could have been a family-member of his, they walk around in a self-satisfied false reality, thinking that all is right with the world.
And, in a lot of ways, he/they're right, too---the "god", that they worship DOES reward them abundantly. Only, the "god" they worship is, in no way, THE GOD, of the Holy Bible.
They promote laws/policies that harm the least amongst us; they are untrustworthy, less than truthful, unrepentant (under any circumstances), racists (they really DON'T like Black people! Kanye West didn't say anything that we didn't already know. Don't kill the messenger,...), warmongers (men crying "peace", when there is no peace), and, hate-mongers.
And, yet, they call themselves Christians, all the while they go about being the very embodiment of anti-Christian.
Do you REALLY wonder that they would deny the very truth, despite all credible evidence to the contrary?

Answer 2

No. But racism isn't the point. Birthright is. Sometimes it's good to keep reading, not just stop with the Scriptures we prefer, but the whole. What did God do in regards to Sarai, who was incapable of having children? He came to Abraham 13 years after Ishmael's birth to announce that Sarai, whom Abraham would henceforth call Sarah, would bear him a son. Abraham was 99, Sarah was 100. God then made it clear in Genesis 17 that the son from Sarah herself would be the one that God would confirm His covenant with. So I guess the real question is this. Can God do whatever He wants to do when it comes to the birthright? He also did it with Esau and Jacob. Cain set the trend for rejected firstborn, killing his brother. Esau sold his birthright. Abraham got impatient with God, and listened to Sarai, (who regretted the decision soon after), taking Hagar as his wife, producing Ishmael. God chooses the chosen, not man.

Answer 3

It isn't racist but it is ignorant.

Abraham had 2 legitimate wives. Bible recognises Ishmael as Abraham's son but it focuses on Isaac. Why? Because the Jews as the descendants of Isaac didn't want to hear much about Ishmael. And you know they have altered the Old Testament the way it suits them. That's why they didn't accept Mohammad as their prophet. They knew a prophet is going to emerge in Arabia but they thought it would be a Jew. When it came to be an Arab, most of them refused to accept him.

Christians...well, they took their scriptures from the Jews and the rest they added after the death of Jesus.

Answer 4

Maybe there is better word than "Hated" as the best translation from its original word. Racism is quite far in those era but discrimination may apply as in the status of those who have more rights and priveleges among the children of legitimate wife and the concubine (concubine was also with permit from the wife).
Hagar's son Ysmael was legitimate in the eyes of their tribe's law and even in the laws of God. However, since God made a promise to Abraham and Sarah that their son will be coming both from their blood and not just Abraham to another woman, they have to wait for the fulfillment of that promise.
It was Sarah who requested Abraham to sleep with Hagar because she thought that at her age of 90 it was impossible for her conceive. What went wrong with Sarah was to get jealous now that she found out she can also conceive and give birth. Her jealousy was not about her love for Abraham but on Abraham's choice of who will be his favorite son later on. The words written in Deuteronomy was not known yet in the time of Abraham. Racism and discrimination cannot be an issue there but on recognition for rights and priveleges whom Abraham might give the favor..

Answer 5

Let me guess... you're a Muslim?

If this is the case, then why do you accept the Jewish Torah (remember, jews are descendants of Isaac, not Ishmael) as God's "First Holy Book"?

Keep in mind that Deuteronomy was written by Moses in the desert about 700-800 years after the Isaac/Ishmael debacle.

Answer 6

It's not that Hagar was Abrahams wife, it's that the angel appeared to Sara and told her that her and abraham were oing to have many kids. And sara believed she was too old, so she sent HAgar into the room with abraham,

then kicked the pregnant housekeeper out after she was impregnated, because the angel re-appeared and told her that she did wrong.

Answer 7

No, I don't think the Egyptians and the Jews belong to different races, so it could be NATIONALISTIC, but not RACIST. There must be a word for religion-based discrimination, which may apply here, but I cannot think of the word. There must be a word for class-based discrimination as well, but I also cannot find the word. Finally, this denial could be based on the fact that he had a wife already, that would be ... MONOGAMIC may be?

So, it depends on what ground one deny the legitimacy of Hagar.
1. One may think that she was not legitimate, because he already had a wife.
2. One may think that she was not legitimate, because she was of low class.
3. One may think that she was not legitimate, because she was of different religion.
4. One may think that she was not legitimate because she was of different nationality.

None of the above is RACIST.

Answer 8

She wasn't his spouse. Sarah 'gave her unto him' while she concept she could not conceive. yet, that develop into not, by far, his purely no-no. in fact, Sarah develop into his a million/2-sister so he lied to the two a Pharaoh and a king that she develop into purely his sister and married her off to them. of direction, he did different Biblical no-no's yet i don't experience like typing that plenty. :-)

Answer 9

Hagar is a cartoon character, and a brand of ill-fitting slacks.