So God was with the lad; and he grew and dwelt in the wilderness, and became an archer. He dwelt in the Wilderness of Paran; and his mother took a wife for him from the land of Egypt. (Gen 21,20-21)

A person moves through life on a trajectory that is determined by his or her strongest character traits. We can imagine them physically as forces that impact an object and make it move in a certain direction, or, more poetically, as strings that pull a person somewhere, often without him being directly aware of it. Since these are features of his own nature, it seems quite natural to him that his path turns wherever he is drawn.

Once a man comes to know God, many things change. New standards will be set above what he naturally inclines to.  "New forces" or, if you like, "new strings" are involved. From that  moment on, choices are made between the old and the new, sometimes in  the form of hard-fought struggles over who is with whom.

We don't  know much about the practical life of Ishmael and Hagar beyond the above two sentences, except perhaps that Scripture later states that Ishmael grew into a nation. But one cannot help but notice a striking difference in the way life decisions are made in case of Ishmael or  Isaac. What efforts were later made to make sure that Isaac finds the right woman who was not to be from the surrounding nations. After all, it is primarily the women who determine the inner disposition of the family. Moreover, they often brought a form of godliness from their original tribe. Therefore, Abraham gave the choice of a wife for Isaac entirely to God and asked Him for a miraculous act. Scripture describes this in detail in Gen 25.

Ishmael was violent in character, and  became an archer. They lived in Paran near Egypt, so his mother gave him a woman from the area, for that was her nation. Not that these choices were in themselves a sin. However, the trajectories of Ishmael´ and Isaac´s lives and that of their descendants diverged more and more over time as other forces, other "strings" were at work. Abraham no longer wanted  to make only natural choices. He wanted to involve his God in them. He desired that Isaac would later also take up his spiritual heritage, his faith in a unique God and the path that Abraham walked in God's presence.  Therefore, he urgently dealt with God in making decisions  about Isaac's life (which, as Gen 25 shows, was quite a struggle) and did not let things run their course.

If there is anything to be learned from Abraham's life, it is in this regard.

And it came to pass at that time that Abimelech and Phichol, the commander of his army, spoke to Abraham, saying, “God is with you in all that you do". (Gen 21,22)

Abimelech did not know a personal God. One who would speak to him and have a relationship with him, one who would demand not only sacrifice, but obedience, coupled with a search for the highest possible way. With the gods he knew, "devotion to the brand" and sacrifice were enough. So he could not understand at all how Abraham approached his God and experienced the pursuit of Him. Abimelech knew nothing like that.

He therefore understood Abraham's religion only in this ver pragmatical light. Yes, God was indeed with Abraham in all that he did, but if we know something about the pursuit of Him, then unlike Abimelech, we will have to insert here "finally". God is finally with you in everything you do, Abraham. After all the years that you have been learning to follow him, which has not always been easy for you, sometimes you have strayed from the path and had to seek it again.

Abimelech understood that the gods could bless a man, make him prosper, but he did not understand that with the Lord of Abraham there exist two kind of blessing: a blessing bestowed and a blessing acquired. The bestowed is that which one receives freely from above, completely without merit. Parents give good gifts to their children, those that go the good way and those that often cause wrinkles on their foreheads. God likewise "lets his sun shine on the good and the bad" (Mt 5:45), or, referring to God's children, blesses them because of their sonship. This does not necessarily mean, however, that they are always choosing the best possible path in life.

I will use the analogy of a farmer who gives his children what they need from his abundant harvest. That is the blessing bestowed. But when the farmer considers that the time has come to pass on his farm to the heir, then it is not enough for the potential heir to meet the single criterion of being his child. He must be willing to learn from the farmer, to deny himself, to work and to know how to do things, or he will bring the whole farm and all its people to collapse. He who is willing to enter such a school and be taught by his father will then be able to enjoy gifts far greater than he would have had as a mere son, and he will be able to bless others from them.

This is an acquired blessing. It comes when God can say to a man, "Now I know I can trust you."

And it came to pass at that time that Abimelech and Phichol, the commander of his army, spoke to Abraham, saying, “God is with you in all that you do". (Gen 21,22)

Abimelech first had a conflict with Abraham when he rebuked him for the way he had treated him (out of fear, Abraham concealed that Sarah was his wife, and when Abimelech took her into his harem, God scared him with a death threat if he has sex with her). From the above verse, we can better understand why Abraham was afraid at the time: "...and Phichol, the captain of his army." Abimelech was practically just a tribal leader of Gerar, but he also had his own army with a certain command structure, so it was not just a few people. When Abraham came to reside in their territory, he was clearly in the minority and acted accordingly in fear, but we've covered that before.

So, after God's intervention, Abimelech was afraid to harm Abraham, but his attitude towards him was certainly not entirely friendly. Rather, it could be described as "respect from a proper distance." But that is precisely why his observation that "God is with you, Abraham, in all that you do" is so valuable. If Abimelech had been his friend, he would have inclined to say only positive things to him and to view reality in a somewhat distorted way, as is usually the case with friends. At those we like we excuse a lot of things. But when a person who doesn't love us says something positive about us, then we can be sure it's true. So the Council of Constance senselessly condemned John Hus for heresies, but could not deny him (as it stated) that he lived a very virtuous life. Surely there can be no doubt about this, if even his enemies acknowledged it! 

Abimelech's observation that God is with Abraham "in all things" demonstrates the extent of the greatness of God's blessing upon this man of God. Abimelech understood only that part of it which was outwardly visible, and could therefore reach the minds of the Gentiles. In other words, he measured God's favor by earthly success. He clearly seems not to have any idea of that far more precious part which is found in the inner man, when he is filled with a living relationship with God.

As for Abraham, I personally conclude that after his long road on the path of discipleship, this inner part was already much more important for him and far more valued.

So God was with the lad; and he grew and dwelt in the wilderness, and became an archer. (Gen 21,20)

It is not easy for us to understand that God often blesses things that are not of His will. Even things that He would not approve of. I don't mean ones that are directed against Him, or that are straight out of hell in nature. But He will bless many decisions, actions, activities that He did not initiate, did not intend, simply because they were carried out by His own people on earth.

Scripture tells us that "God was with the boy." What does that mean? Nothing more and nothing less than that God's hand protected him to grow up. Back then a human life hung by a thread, and the circumstances in which its thread might be broken by sickness or violence were many more than today. Ishmael was not a worshiper of God and a bearer of His blessings on earth in the sense that Isaac later was. We do not know if he believed in the God of Abraham (and did not abandon faith in Him after he was cast out by Abraham). If he did, we have no idea if and how his faith manifested itself. So we know that "God was with the boy", but we no longer know whether "the boy was with God". Rather, we can believe that Ishmael's faith merged with the religion of the surrounding tribes, resulting in yet another of the many mixtures of true faith and pagan superstition that have filled the earth from time immemorial.  

To be blessed like Ishmael is certainly good. But it is a blessing that ends with its recipient, does him good, but is not enough to continue to bless the earth through him. Ishmael was not thinking of anything like this, and his restless nature certainly wasn't up to it. He had become a hunter, the head of the tribe, and the people around certainly had respect of him, perhaps even fear. But we can't really imagine him being a light to others in their quest for God, as Abraham was. How often we are concerned only with God blessing us, simply to make us well. Yes, it's good when that happens. It's a time to enjoy, to rejoice. But if we don't want to stop here and want to move on, we need to get from Ishmael to Isaac in our thinking. To not just want to be comfortable (albeit with God), but to seek which thing is sovereignly God's so that we can enter into it and become a blessing to this earth. 

This river of blessing flows from a source we do not possess. So the only way to take from its fullness and give forth is to enter into it.

And the water in the skin was used up, and she placed the boy under one of the shrubs. Then she went and sat down across from him at a distance of about a bowshot; for she said to herself, “Let me not see the death of the boy.” So she sat opposite him, and lifted her voice and wept. ... Then God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water. (Gen 21,15-16.19)

For the second time Hagar is on her way from her masters. The first time she fled of her own free will, now she is banished. And each time, God's messengers stop her on her way and rescue her. The first time, they sent her back because the little child would have perished otherwise. Now they help her find water, without which she will soon die in the desert. 

Was Hagar the reason God and his angels have her in their sights and will not let her fall in her most difficult moments? Did she have such a personal relationship with Him that God guided her with His hand much more than other people? It doesn't seem so. God is clearly not coming for her sake, but for Ishmael's sake. And one might say, not for Ishmael, who was not in God's original plan, but for Abraham. So great is God's respect for his friend, so seriously does he take him, with his pros and his faults, that God will take care of his son, just because he is Abraham's.

In the moments of crisis, we are much like Hagar. We are weighed down by a difficult situation, our minds so preoccupied with an insurmountable problem that we no longer see what God is offering us and what is often so close at hand. We need to tear the veil from our eyes, and suddenly everything is different.

Jesus once said to pay attention to how we hear. But on the journey of discipleship, how we see is equally important. So often we need "ointment to rub on our eyes to see"! (Rev 3:18) 

Not only to see the truth, but often also the hope.

But God said to Abraham, "Do not let it be displeasing in your sight because of the lad or because of your bondwoman. Whatever Sarah has said to you, listen to her voice; for in Isaac your seed shall be called. Yet I will also make a nation of the son of the bondwoman, because he is your seed." So Abraham rose early in the morning, and took bread and a skin of water; and putting it on her shoulder, he gave it and the boy to Hagar, and sent her away. Then she departed and wandered in the Wilderness of Beersheba. (Gen 21,12-14)

When we read about such treatment of people, we think it corresponds more to an effort to get them out of the way forever than dealing with one's own son. After all, Abraham was, as we know from earlier, "very rich." He could easily have furnished Hagar and Ishmael with provisions on several camels, and placed his servants at his command for escort and protection, and yet he does not seem to have done anything that would have saved them with certainty from perishing.

Such a proceeding was contrary to the custom of the time. He might therefore have counted on the fact that if Hagar and Ishmael eventually found refuge with the surrounding tribes, it would not make him popular with them (to put it mildly). What kind of man drives his own son into the desert? Abraham enjoyed respectability with the neighboring tribes, not only because of the supernatural intervention of his God with Abimelech, but generally by the way he conducted himself among them, keeping his farm, keeping the agreements he made, etc. If, after much deliberation, he decided to take such a drastic step, there must have been something fundamental behind it.

Ishmael must have been perhaps 15-16 years old at this point. For we know that he was 13 years older than Isaac, who had just been weaned, which was common only after a few years. (This is also why I choose the text correction "he put it on her shoulders" instead of "he put the child on her shoulders" in the quoted text.) Ishmael was by this time already physically mature and apparently capable of anything. 

Abraham eventually gave in to Sarah's insistence, but apparently it wasn't just because she drove him to do so. We know that he was very distressed about it; he was about to do something he didn't quite want to. Sarah's request was so strange to him that he eventually sought God on the matter. 

From all this we may conclude that the reason for the situation, namely, Ishmael's action towards Isaac, was indeed extremely serious, and his jealousy towards the child obviously dangerous. Peaceful coexistence was unfortunately out of possibility here. Ishmael had to go away.

But God said to him, “Do not be so distressed about the boy and your slave woman. Listen to whatever Sarah tells you, because it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned. I will make the son of the slave into a nation also, because he is your offspring.” (Gen 21,12-13)

We saw last time how Abraham "was greatly troubled..." in the previous verse. But what about God? Didn't he have far more reason to be troubled about what had happened? After all, His plan for the world had been greatly complicated because of Ishmael, and for millennia now, much more divine intervention would be needed to ensure that Isaac's divine seed would survive the hatred of his descendants. And how should God even view Abraham, his friend, and this failure of his? Isn't it time for him to get properly scolded, too? He finally sees himself what his actions have led to. Wouldn't now be a good time to do that?

We here reflect and draw conclusions about Abraham because we want to understand the patterns of the spiritual path, to learn lessons for our own lives. But it is not easy for us to see the truth and at the same time to have a heart of grace for those who fail in the face of it. For many would say to Abraham right now the opposite of what God said, namely, "be distressed!"

But God was not now teaching Abraham a lesson. We know that Abraham did not hear God's voice for twelve years after Ishmael was born. This was not a punishment, but rather the result of the separation Abraham had chosen. Then he had to claw his way back. He did, and he climbed higher than he had ever been before. Therefore, God now does not reproach Abraham, but covers the guilt. And He even gives him another promise to alleviate his self-inflicted suffering: 'I will make a nation even of Ishmael...'.

How immense is the grace of God!

...and she (Sarah) said to Abraham, “Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with my son Isaac.” The matter distressed Abraham greatly because it concerned his son. 12 But God said to him, “Do not be so distressed about the boy and your slave woman. Listen to whatever Sarah tells you... (Gen 21,10-12)

Abraham was distressed over the escalated situation. Actually, no, he was "greatly agonised." For a hundred year old man, such trauma can be truly devastating - deciding to get rid of his own child... He was beginning to understand why it was necessary. The world then was vastly different from ours, and it was not uncommon to resolve fundamental disagreements violently. But though he understood it in his head, his heart agonized over it.

I wonder if he remembered reading some blog post once about the wisdom of not taking the lower road and not begetting Ishmael while waiting for Isaac? He remembered, and he didn't need to be reminded. He saw the reality clearly for himself: the original plan involved three people, each of whom was to benefit from it.

Sarah would no longer feel shame at being barren.

Hagar would go from being one of many whores to almost a princess. No other handmaid had such privileges and such close access to Abraham's family. How jealously the other handmaids looked upon her as she walked through the camp from then on nursing the child, the master's son!

And Abraham, of course, would get what he wanted most in life.

No, there was no need to be reminded: all three of them were now very, very unhappy. Beside Abraham's torn heart, there was Sarah, at first overwhelmed with joy for her own son, then increasingly gloomy with fear for his life and safety. Whenever she met Ishmael and Hagar in the camp, her jealous feelings only increased: they must be gone, can't Abraham see it? Why hadn't he done something long ago? And finally Hagar: she felt as bitter as a queen deprived of the throne on which she had sat for twelve beautiful years. Now her life would be turned upside down, she would be banished to loneliness and worry. What will become of her? And all because of her, that damned woman of Abraham!

All three of them were worried - not three, actually four: after all, Ishmael will lose his world, his family and his own father at the age of thirteen. They say God will take care of him, so he won't perish, but what awaits him - and what will he grow up to be?

Not four, in fact millions of future people have been affected by this move... But we would go too far beyond where any of the protagonists of these events have seen at this point. They had now had enough of the immediate torment they were experiencing. They wondered, why does the world have to be so cruel? And is God... really good?

But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now. (Gal 4,29)

We do not find it surprising that Isaac was threatened by Ishmael and not the other way around. After all, at that time Isaac was a small child and Ishmael a teenage boy. But when we consider their later lives, though we don't have much mention of them, it is obvious that the same trend would have continued here. We have only fleeting mentions of Isaac's character, but it is clear from these that he was a gentle man, who, while experiencing God's great blessing, suffered oppression (we are reminded of his disputes with the Philistines, in which it was he who was in the right, but who yielded). On the other hand, the prophecy speaks of Ishmael's fierce, conflicted nature ("He shall be a wild man; his hand shall be against every man, and every man’s hand against him." 16:12). If he had not been sent far to the east, it would naturally have been he who would have attacked, not Isaac.

And so it has always been in this world. The seed of God experiences blessings from heaven, but oppression on earth. From people in the neighborhood, from the state, from members of other religions, from Christians who have not surrendered to God. The spirit of this world finds a way to vent its anger on God's dear people because they do not belong to it and it has no power over them.

And so it has been from the beginning. The first murder was committed by the strong brother Cain, kneading the earth with his plough, on his brother Abel, a bit dreamer who accompanied the sheep in the pasture and often slept with them. Abel's name means "vapor," and characterizes their race, their fragility and vulnerability.

Isaacs, the blessed seed of our age, may have many faults, but one they must not commit: to cause oppression to others, to persecute them. Should they do so, not only will their entire message be lost, but its very core will be irrevocably changed. They may unwittingly move from being the bride to being the harlot without noticing it. "After beginning by means of the Spirit, are you now trying to finish by means of the flesh?" (Gal. 3:3) The history of the Church is proof of this.

For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a divine promise. These things are being taken figuratively: The women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. ... Now you, brothers and sisters, like Isaac, are children of promise. (Gal 4,22-26.28)

When we think of the sons of Abraham, it is good to realize that they are a picture of spiritual realities that are in contrast as two modes of spiritual life. In the first, man, literally "flesh," his strength and ability, plays a role. Man is supposed to do things, and God should accept them. 

The second mode is the total reliance on God, because the man knows that he can do nothing that is worth anything to God. Only what comes from Him, what is born from above, is of eternal value. Thus the eternal life itself is born in man - without our merit, as a gift from heaven.

But whenever set the two sons in contrast, it must also be emphasized that both bore some measure of the likeness of Abraham - Ishmael was no foreign outcast! It seems puzzling (as it was for Abraham) that they should be separated, that in the end only one was allowed to remain and the other had to go.

Apart from the very practical danger to Isaac, that we have already mentioned, Ishmael and Isaac here represent exactly those incompatible spiritual realities. Like their mothers, they reflect two covenants, but only one of which rests not on the efforts of man (by the power of "the flesh") but on the power of God Himself from above, and is therefore eternal.

What is remarkable about the whole thing is that Paul (seen by some as a great legalist) divides the two covenants according to the degree of inner freedom! The old covenant, which like Ishmael no doubt also bears the marks of God the Father, leads ultimately to bondage. Not intentionally, but because of man's inability to truly fulfill it. Because he lacks the power to live by it, commands are created, systems of regulations that grip the soul and regulate the whole of life. Man strives in vain for something with which only his mind is in harmony, but not his nature. Outwardly he may agree with the morality of the Law, but inward is out of harmony with it.

"But the future Jerusalem is free, and this is our mother." It is only Jesus, the promised Isaac, born into freedom, who sets his followers free and brings them to the heights of life from God, by the transformation of the inward man through the working of the power of the Holy Spirit.f course, if they have truly known him and not departed from him on their journey, like the Galatians.