Is it racist when Christians say that Ishmael is not a true son of Abraham ?

Question

Is this racism the foundation of most of the problems in the middle east ?

Is the Christian denial of Ishmaels status necessary for them to maintain a superiority complex ?

How difficult could it have been for early Bible writers to add verses in the Old Testament that exclude Ishmael from the covenant ?

.

1-----After Abraham 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

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

In The Interpreters Bible, we read the following commentary on Deutronomy 21:15-17 :
“However, the law of the first born had ancient sanction, and so long as it was accepted justice demanded that mere favoritism not be allowed to deprive the eldest son of his rights.” (Vol 2 p. 461 Emphasis added)

The fallacy of Ishmael’s inferior status owing to his mother’s “inferior” social status is not only contrary to the Judaic Law (e.g. Deut. 21:15-17) , it is contrary to moral , humanitarian and universal nature of God’s revelation cherished by any believer in Him.


….

Answer 1

We are talking about people that believe in a god that was once pleased with animal blood sacrifices and then needed the blood of Christ to wash sins......what more can you say....don't ask them to make sense

Answer 2

Ishmael *is* excluded from the Covenant. God promised Abraham a son, and that the son would be his wife's (his wife was really old at the time - I think in her 90's or so). Abraham went ahead and knocked up Hagar anyway, and she gave birth to Ishmael. In short, Ishmael is not the son God promised Abraham. God then proceeds to banish both Hagar and her child to the wilderness. Later, Abraham's wife gives birth to Isaac, whom God recognizes as Abraham's *true* son.

It's all in Genesis. It has nothing to do with race, it's just the way it was written. Now, granted, some people might twist it in order to make race an issue, but methinks they may be trying too hard.

Answer 3

You asked:
"Is it racist when Christians say that Ishmael is not a true son of Abraham ?"
It is not accurate to say so.

That's why I like the Bible. Ishmael was Sarah's attempt to help her husband out with an heir. Except God didn't need any help. But Sarah was a rather doubtful person towards God, and Abraham wasn't going to turn down a chance to feel young again, and so they made Ishmael with Hagar's help.

Ishmael is a true son of Abraham, but not the child of promise. Ishmael was the son of a bondwoman.

And as Paul explains:
Galatians 4:23
But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.

Answer 4

It is not the case of just racism, but the case of clear denial of Holy Bible as well.
Denial of True Holy Book is denial of The God Almighty.


Genesis 16:1-3, 15,16 (New International Version)

1 Now Sarai, Abram's wife, had borne him no children. But she had an Egyptian maidservant named Hagar;
2 so she said to Abram, "The LORD has kept me from having children. Go, sleep with my maidservant; perhaps I can build a family through her."
Abram agreed to what Sarai said.
3 So after Abram had been living in Canaan ten years, Sarai his wife took her Egyptian maidservant Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife.

15 So Hagar bore Abram a son, and Abram gave the name Ishmael to the son she had borne.
16 Abram was eighty-six years old when Hagar bore him Ishmael.


(Gen. 21:5)
“Hagar (Hajirah) bore Abraham a son, and he named him Ishmael. Abraham was eighty six years old at the time.” (Gen. 16:15-16) “Abraham was hundred years old when Isaac (Ishaq) was born”. (Gen. 21:5)

Son of a man is son of a man, twisting facts of Holy book by calling son of flash or to other son of promice are just terminologies but can not change facts.


Think wisely !

Peace.

Answer 5

It isn't racism.

However, Ishmael is a son of Abraham by blood, but isn't a son of Abraham by faith.

Since you have done your study I assume you read later in Genesis what Abraham choose (through God's assurance) for His son Ishmael (that he was sent into the desert), and how God blessed Ishmael into a large nation.

If your last question refutes this by saying the OT writers could have fabricated all this, then why are we discussing this question? Maybe Ishmael or Abraham or . . . . is a figment of a writer's imagination. (I, for one, just don't believe that's true.)

Answer 6

Please take the time to read Galatians 4. Ishmael was born as a result of Abraham and Sarah deciding to take matters into their own hands and have a child by Hagar . Ishmael was not the son who was promised to them by God. Isaac was the son whom God promised them. Ishmael represents bondage, as he was the son of Hagar who was Sarah's bondservant, and was the result of "works", or man going ahead with his plans and not waiting on the promises of God.

The problems in the middle east are and always have been about "who" is the rightful heir to the land, Ishmael's or Isaac's descendants.

Answer 7

The fact that Ishmael was not a "true" son of Abraham is evident from the fact that Abraham had Ishmael by sleeping with a slave girl instead of his wife.

It was a weakness on the part of Abraham that he did not trust that God could give him a son through his rightful wife.

Answer 8

Ishmael was a son of Abraham but he was not the one with whom God had his main intentions about the future; ' ... but God said, “No, but Sarah your wife will bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; and I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him (Genesis 17;19).

Answer 9

Ishmael was a son of the flesh.

Issac was a son of promise.

Answer 10

It's not racist; it's a BELIEF, and an opinion; it has nothing to do with any "race" but with Ishmael's status (not his parentage, by the way). Deal with it.