WHAT DID ISHMAEL DO TO ISAAC? (GENESIS 21:9)

If you read this passage, you will see that it describes a party commemorating the fact that Isaac, then about 3 years old, has now been weaned. However, his half-brother Ishmael (about 16 years old at the time) does something that is observed by Sarah, and she becomes incensed. Sometimes the most simple question of Bible interpretation can be the hardest to answer. In this case, the causes for the difficulty are five-fold: textual uncertainties, unclear word definition, lack of detail in the narrative, variety of rabbinical interpretations, and unusual NT application of the text. As Hamilton states, “It has long been a source of curiosity as to what Ishmael was actually doing.”

    1. One of the first things needed before interpreting a biblical text is so see how sure scholars are of the wording in the original. This brings up the whole subject of textual criticism, which I have discussed briefly in my post entitled “Introduction to Textual Criticism.” On occasion, the early manuscripts will differ somewhat in the way they read due to accidental or purposeful altering of the original text. A convenient way of knowing whether this has happened in any passage you are studying is to use a good study Bible that lists these textual variations in footnotes. In the case of Genesis 21:9 there are two versions that differ from one another significantly depending on whether you are looking at a Hebrew, Greek, or Latin manuscript. The Hebrew is missing the words “with her son Isaac.” Most English translators have decided to include these words, but KJV and NIV have left them out. Depending on which option one chooses, a slightly different interpretation will result.

    2. Of course, we would love to have more detail provided in the Bible regarding the nature of Ishmael's actions that appeared to be so bad to Sarah that she demanded of Abraham that he throw Ishmael and his mother out of the house. However, no such details are provided. Therefore, one additional cause for differences in understanding by Bible scholars comes from how they view Sarah's response. Was it reasonable or vindictive in nature? Many modern scholars and even one ancient source seem to hold more to the latter opinion (listed below) while the ancient rabbis went out of their way to ascribing horrible actions to Ishmael in order to remove all blame from Sarah (see #5).

Skinner: “It is the spectacle of the two young children playing together, innocent of social distinction, that excites Sarah's maternal jealousy and prompts her cruel demands.”

In a similar vein, the apocryphal book Jubilees (17:4) explains that Sarah got jealous on behalf of her son when she noted that Abraham was rejoicing when he saw Ishmael so happy. 

“Sarah's anger is prompted only by the impropriety of her child associating with a child from a lower class.” (von Rad)

Hamilton says that perhaps “Sarah was riled by Ishmael's enjoying himself and playing happily on an occasion when the spotlight should be exclusively on her son.” Or, he suggests that maybe in light of Genesis 16:12 and 21:20, Ishmael was performing some athletic feats which drew the attention away from Isaac.

    3. The next problem arises from trying to exactly define the word variously translated as “playing with” (JB, RSV, NRSV, TEV), “mocking” (KJV, NIV), “teasing” (Living Bible), or “laughing at” (NEB). The word definitely means “mocked” when it occurs in Exodus 32:6 and Judges 16:25 (Wenham), but appears to have sexual connotations in passages such as Genesis 26:8; 39:14, 17, as many commentators have pointed out.

Carr says that “playing with” literally means “making [him] laugh,” as a reference to the meaning of Isaac's name: “he laughs.” But that certainly doesn't explain why Sarah should have been so upset.

In Genesis 21:10, Sarah expresses her fear that her son will have to share the inheritance with Ishmael. But that alone is certainly not the complete motive for her demand to Abraham at that particular occasion since she knew of that possibility all along.

Kline: “Ishmael was making a laughing-stock of the royal family...”

Whitcomb: “Ishmael gave vent to his jealousy of 'the child of promise' by 'mocking' him.”

Hamilton: “Perhaps she sees Ishmael doing something to make himself like Isaac, setting his sights on a familial position equal to that of Isaac.”

Wenham mentions several possibilities for explaining Ishmael's actions before concluding: “More likely is the view that Ishmael was making fun of Isaac's status or the circumstances of his birth.”

    4. Turning to the NT, Paul in Galatians 4 recaps the story of Ishmael and Isaac and actually states in v. 29 that Ishmael “persecuted” his half-brother, which appears to be a harsher action than the OT text would indicate. However, Ribberbos explains it as follows: “the word persecuted...means not so much a threat to life as one to the freedom and security. It was so that Ishmael persecuted Isaac. He did not leave Isaac in peace, grudged him his priorities, his privileges.” Other commentators on Galatians weigh in on the issue as follows:

Schultz: Ishmael was causing family strife (v. 10) – but it doesn't say in what way – by his actions or by his mere existence.”

Merrill: “He may have been making fun of the toddler as he tried his first baby steps. Sarah saw no humor in it, however...”

Stott: “Ishmael ridiculed his little half-brother Isaac. We do not know the details of what happened...Nevertheless, it is clear that Isaac was the object of Ishmael's scorn and derision.”

Bruce: “Biblical substantiation for the statement [by Paul] that Ishmael persecuted Isaac is not forthcoming.”

    5. And finally, many scholars feel that Paul's interpretation of Genesis 21:9 might have been colored by the one of the prevailing rabbinical theories concerning Ishmael's actions that was circulating at the time and reflected in later Jewish writings on the subject.

Several modern commentators recap some of the Jewish legends and interpretations of Ishmael's actions. Note that all of them are a bit over the top, unfounded in any solid fact, and seem designed purposely to draw all criticism away from Sarah and Abraham. That is pretty typical of most rabbinical commentary, which tends to be rather fanciful and highly biased in favor of the biblical “heroes,” in contrast to the OT texts upon which the comments are based.

Based on the possible sexual connotations attached to the Hebrew word for “laughed/mocked/played,” there were suggestions that Ishmael was caught either doing something highly inappropriate to the child Isaac or to himself.

One source says that Ishmael began shooting arrows dangerously close to Isaac, perhaps with the goal of actually hitting him. Or he began to offer a locust as an offering to a pagan god on Isaac's behalf. Or he began bragging that the inheritance was rightly his since he had undergone circumcision willingly unlike Isaac who had no choice in the matter.

Some of the above explanations appear to prove nothing more than the inventive imagination of their creators. The fact is that we will never know exactly what happened on that occasion, at least on this side of the grave.