Question:  How could Abraham favor his Second-Born and Yet Be Called “Faithful”?

 Answer prepared by Gaylon West

www.BibleStudyLessons.net

The question as given:

 

3. First Born: Deut. 21:15 - Abraham did not favor his first-born, Ishmael, but the 2^nd born, Isaac; yet Abraham is called the father of the faithful today. (Questioner added, "I thought it was in the Bible but I haven't found the scripture yet.")

 

“FATHER OF THOSE WHO ARE OF FAITH”

 

Romans 4:16; Galatians 3:7; Galatians 3:14, 29.

The thought is found in these passages.

 

Romans 4:16 “Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all”(NKJV)

Galatians 3:7 “Therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham.”

Galatians 3:14 “that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. 29 And if ye [be] Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”

 

Abraham is indeed the “father of those who are of the faith of Abraham”. Romans 10:17 “Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God”; James 2:21 “Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?” He did what God told him to do. If we do what God tells us to then Abraham is our father. Our faith is revealed in the gospel (Romans 1:16).

 

FACTS OF THE INSTANCE OF ISHMAEL

 

Galatians 4: 29-31 '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. Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? "Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman."

So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free.'

 

Genesis 21: 9-10 'And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, scoffing. Therefore she said to Abraham, "Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, namely with Isaac."' (NKJV) 

 

LAW OF THE CIVIL GOVERNMENT

Romans 13: 1 "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.1 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good."  

We know that the apostles taught that we are subject to civil government today (Romans 13) as long as it doesn't conflict with God's Law (Acts 5:29). Under the Law of Moses, initially the Israelites were under both civil and religious directives in the theocracy of the kingdom of God. These directives are called "the customs which Moses delivered us" (Acts 6:14). "Customs" according to Strong is "G1485 ethos (eth'-os) n. 1. a usage (prescribed by habit or law)." This word is used in Acts 6:14, 16:21; 21:21; 16:3; 28:17. The Gentiles were not under the Law of Moses but were under natural (Phusis^G5449) law (Romans 2:14). Having said this, we go back further in time prior to the Law of Moses. This is the time of Noah and Abraham.

Let's remember that Abraham was not under the Law of Moses or the First Covenant given through Moses. God's special instructions were direct. Hence, Abraham was not subject to Deuteronomy 21 because it had not been given yet. If we assume that civil governments in Patriarchal times were God's ministers even as they are today in customs in which God has not specifically spoken, then the following would be relevant.

 

Abraham had been subject to Babylonian law (customs of Ur vicinity) and later Hurrian law (Haran area). Although Abraham would have been in Canaan at this time, the influence of the past customs would have governed his (and his wife's) thinking in the absence of a direct command of God. However, it should be pointed out that just because God had not specifically told him not to take Hagar does not mean that he should have acted on human manners as if it were the right thing to do. The point is, if God had specifically ruled on this matter, then it would have preceded in rank the social one. The following will show that what he did was what his previous neighbors were doing. And once Abraham did take Hagar and she conceived, he treated her according to custom (law) until she violated the law herself; he did follow their law in the banishment of Hagar and her son in accordance with the customs and consequently disinherited Ishmael. I would add that in addition to the Mesopotamian law God spoke directly to Abraham on this matter lest he hesitated to meet out the judgment.

     Among archaeological discoveries having significant bearing upon our knowledge of Old Testament cultural backgrounds, especially that of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, is the recovery of the culture of the ancient Hurrians. The Hurrians, a non-Semitic people, migrated as early as 2400 B.C. from the region south of the Caucasus Mountains into northeastern Mesopotamia. They spread across northern and central Mesopotamia, including what was formerly the Kingdom of Mitanni. Among their cities was Haran, in which Abraham's family lived before he migrated westward to Canaan (Genesis 11:31-12:5). The Hurrians' central-most city, Nuzi, was close to Haran.

   It was at Nuzi that archaeological research (from 1925-1931) uncovered some 20,000 clay tablets from various family archives dating from the time of Abraham and written in the Babylonian language.

   One custom illuminated by the Nuzi documents is that of inheritance practices.** Hurrian law provided two significant options for a man whose wife could provide him no natural born son (as with Abraham, Genesis 11:30). He could legally adopt a son or he could have a son by a slave woman (in this case Hagar) according to Hurrian law.

 

    The female slave, Hagar, raised to the status of a second-class wife, was no longer under the direct authority of the barren wife, but under the authority of the husband. Any children, however, produced by the slave wife, would legally belong to the first-class barren wife. The first-born son Ishmael would become the heir IF Sarah did not bear a child.

     Hurrian law provided that in either case should the physical condition of the barren first-class wife change and she bear her husband a son after the birth of a slave son, such a son would receive the first-born son status, superseding the slave-born son. This is what happened in the case with Isaac.

     A further condition in Hurrian law prohibited a second-class slave-wife [Hagar] from placing herself above or even on the same level with a first-class wife. If she should do so, the first-class wife Sarah could appeal to her husband for legal justice, demanding that the slave-wife be punished and returned to slave status, once again coming under the direct authority of the first-class wife. In Hagar's case the punishment was banishment.

** HAMMURABI'S CODE (authoritative at the time of Abraham during the “Old” Babylonian Empire. Abraham's original home was in Ur of the Chaldees (Hammurabi's territory). By the way, the Amraphel that Abraham fought with is identified with Hammurabi of Shinar. Even the name is determined by some to be a variation of spelling for that king.

    “Matters concerning inheritance are carefully dealt with (sections 162 ff). The dowry of a wife belongs, after her death, to her children “(section 162). “Presents made during the lifetime are not reckoned in the dividing of the inheritance (section 165), apart from the outlay which a father has to make in the case of each of his sons, the chief portion of which is the money for a wife” (section 166). “Children borne from different mothers share the paternal inheritance equally (section 167).”

Select another question? Question #1: Why Did God Allow Polygamy? Question #2:  How Could Solomon Perform His Marital Duties to His Wives? ? Question #4:  Does God Allow Polygamy After the Law?