Fulfillment and Divisions

New believers are often blessed with early promises fulfilled. Even when some promises, long prayed for, come to pass, there is still that uncertain future. This is especially pronounced with the blessing of children. As we come to Genesis 21:1-34, we may observe that no one felt weight of the future more than Abraham and Sarah. At long last, they saw proof that their place in God’s story was all true, but then their minds and hearts start racing forward. What about this and that? Never mind that God had just put the finishing touches on a miracle. But we are slow learners.

• God confirms many promises to us in this lifetime.

• God calls us to make divisions in the ecclesial sphere.

• God calls us to make divisions in the civil sphere.

Doctrine. A maturing faith is strengthened by temporal fulfillments and tested by necessary divisions.

God confirms many promises to us in this lifetime.

Such confirmation fits the flow of how Abraham and Sarah are being used in Genesis 12 onward. The Bible treats this man as the “father” of those who have faith. One of the things that means is that he is a type—in the sense of an example—and one of the main ways he is an example is in how his faith matures, even by its failures. So this confirmation of God’s promises to believers fits that typology. Something about this is a norm. God confirms many promises to us in this lifetime specifically so that we become more and more familiar with God in three ways that we can see here: His presence, His power, and His desire to do good to us.

First, God’s PRESENCE draws nearer in the promise fulfilled. Note the same words used in fulfillment as in the promise, the language of presence. Back then, He said, “At the appointed time I will return to you, about this time next year, and Sarah shall have a son” (18:14). Now, ‘The LORD visited Sarah as he had said, and the LORD did to Sarah as he had promised’ (v. 1). When God gives to us, …

Second, God’s POWER is manifest in the promise fulfilled. That is more obvious here. It is a miracle, after all! Abraham’s age is highlighted twice—‘Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age’ (v. 2) and perhaps to both of their ages when ‘she said, ‘Who would have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse children? Yet I have borne him a son in his old age’ (v. 7). In his commentary, Waltke focuses on the plural for “children” here, suggesting that Sarah finally got such a big picture that “she is looking beyond Isaac to his offspring who are destined to bless the earth.”1

Third, God’s DESIRE TO DO GOOD TO US is manifest in the promise fulfilled. Recall that the name ‘Isaac’ means laughter in Hebrew, and we see that Sarah is well aware that now she laughed the laugh of joy rather than disbelief, saying, ‘God has made laughter for me; everyone who hears will laugh over me’ (v. 6). In fact, the Hebrew word is mentioned five times in this section, three times for his name (יִצְחָק) and the other two for the literal action (צָחַק).

God calls us to make divisions in the ecclesial sphere.

The key verse here is,

“And the child grew and was weaned. And Abraham made a great feast on the day that Isaac was weaned.2 But Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, laughing” (vv. 8-9).

Sarah has been said to have a sinful motivation, but she also saw something that we usually miss. Now I am not saying that she saw everything I am about to mention, but hold that thought, as you consider these five truths about this division in their home—which, remember, is the infant church.

This division is founded upon the eternal decree of God. As Paul said: “not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but ‘Through Isaac shall your offspring be named’” (Rom. 9:6). Notice the text itself using the same language Sarah herself uses: ‘the son of Hagar the Egyptian’ (v. 9), making this division the theme here—in Romans 9 language, elect versus reprobate.

This division reflects the invincible outworking of two cities.3 Again, Scripture interprets Scripture. Paul says to things of note here when he refers to the Sarah-Hagar account allegorically (Gal. 4:23-31). The first is that the two women represented covenants, or ways of relating to God (vv. 25-27), and the second is that this spelled two different kinds of offspring: children of the flesh and children of promise (vv. 23, 28).

This division explains all hostilities and controversies. Remember the beginning? “I will put enmity” (Gen. 3:15)—between what? Just one immediate seed? Just one ultimate seed? Or is it not all in each seed? Paul describes what Ishmael did as that he “persecuted him” (Gal. 4:29). That suggests that this “laughing” (v. 9) was not some one-time occurrence or isolated attitude. This was a pronounced mockery that Sarah rightly discerned would have a trajectory toward more violent expressions. Remember God’s own words concerning Ishmael:

“He shall be a wild donkey of a man, his hand against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he shall dwell over against all his kinsmen” (16:12).

Leaving aside how one could separate that prophecy about Ishmael’s offspring from Ishmael himself in his own lifetime—theoretically, in a scenario where Ishmael later repented, it would be appropriate for him to come back into the house, and it would be sinful for Sarah to keep him out. However, given the objective persecution of the child of promise—and the evil influence the older could have on the younger—there is this necessary division.

This division wields a divine sword with a human hand. Note that what Sarah demanded, God first decreed.

“So she said to Abraham, ‘Cast out this slave woman with her son, for the son of this slave woman shall not be heir with my son Isaac.’ And the thing was very displeasing to Abraham on account of his son. But God said to Abraham, ‘Be not displeased because of the boy and because of your slave woman. Whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you, for through Isaac shall your offspring be named” (vv. 10-12).

What she may have meant for evil, if indeed she had a sinful motive, God meant and moved toward His good division. Christ came with a sword to divide in the Incarnation (Mat. 10:34)—that is, in His human nature—and it is the same when He returns with a sword in Revelation 19:15. So, Paul said to the Corinthians, “There must be divisions among you, in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized” (1 Cor. 11:19).

This division strikes the church first because it is the beachhead of Christ’s kingdom. As Peter said, “it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God” (1 Pet. 4:17). The church cannot speak with one voice in the world when it is a two-headed monster. A church is chaos is a church in retreat. Yet after the church gets its house in order, then that right dividing line can extend out from the ecclesial sphere to the civil sphere.

God calls us to make divisions in the civil sphere.

We run into Abimelech again, and things are very different between these two men now. Again, Abraham typifies the church to come, and will prefigure here five things that start to happen when the church gets its house in order, namely:

1. It commands respect, 2. It can give rebuke, 3. It can form society, 4. It can teach what things mean, and 5. It can live long in the land.

When the church gets its house in order, it commands respect. What does Abimelech say to him?

“God is with you in all that you do. Now therefore swear to me here by God that you will not deal falsely with me or with my descendants or with my posterity, but as I have dealt kindly with you, so you will deal with me and with the land where you have sojourned” (vv. 22-23).

Abraham combines this stature with charity: ‘And Abraham said, ‘I will swear’ (v. 24). But more interesting is this pagan’s concession to one, true God standing over both Abraham and himself— ‘God is with you in all that you do … swear to me here by God’ (vv. 22, 23).

When the church gets its house in order, it can give rebuke. ‘Abraham reproved Abimelech about a well of water that Abimelech’s servants had seized’ (v. 25). One commentator suggests that Abraham was “testing” this man, almost as if he were flexing his new social muscles. I think it is as simple as this well of water was important for water, and there was a real flesh and blood dispute. As Lot had said, “brothers, do not act so wickedly” (19:7), so Abraham was able to say, perhaps under friendlier terms—“You shall not steal” (Ex. 20:15).

When the church gets its house in order, it can form society. We can do this when we are valuable to society. Notice the resource element: ‘So Abraham took sheep and oxen and gave them to Abimelech, and the two men made a covenant’ (v. 27). That’s the second thing to notice about this “social shape,” that there is a voluntary agreement. Now the word “covenant” is being used between man and man.

“Therefore that place was called Beersheba, because there both of them swore an oath. So they made a covenant at Beersheba. Then Abimelech and Phicol the commander of his army rose up and returned to the land of the Philistines” (vv. 31-32).

Commentators note that since the word for “seven” (שֶׁבַע) and “oath” (שָׁבַע) are similar in Hebrew, Beersheba could mean either “well of seven” or “well of the oath,” and while the logic of the text concerns an oath, the seven lambs were the sign of the oath. Perhaps it is both. At any rate, this place would eventually form the southernmost border of Israel.

When the church gets its house in order, it can teach what things mean. The two men are said to make the covenant together, but Abraham is clearly the superior here. He initiates the giving of the sign and its meaning is simply accepted:

“Abraham set seven ewe lambs of the flock apart. And Abimelech said to Abraham, ‘What is the meaning of these seven ewe lambs that you have set apart?’ He said, “These seven ewe lambs you will take from my hand, that this may be a witness for me that I dug this well” (vv. 28-30)

Establishing a witness, in whatever form it takes, marks the difference between an open, honest society and a violent mob.

When the church gets its house in order, it can live long in the land. First, ‘Abraham planted a tamarisk tree in Beersheba and called there on the name of the LORD, the Everlasting God’ (v. 33). Waltke comments that this planting “probably serves as a landmark of God’s grace, a pledge that Abraham will stay in the land.”4 ‘And Abraham sojourned many days in the land of the Philistines’ (v. 34). Contrary to what today’s Radical Two Kingdom view teaches, the holy society started by God with Abraham and the church—in distinction to the common society started by God with Noah and the whole human race—is indeed drawing dividing lines and giving shape to the civil sphere; not simply content to draw lines on Sunday and then rest comfortably within the boundaries that Babylon draws.

Practical Use of the Doctrine

Use 1. Exhortation. As we let Scripture interpret Scripture,

“Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. But just as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now. But what does the Scripture say? ‘Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman’” (Gal. 4:28-30).

If I asked the average Evangelical to give me the classic New Testament passages on church discipline or even excommunication, typically two passages come right to the surface—Matthew 18:15-18 and 1 Corinthians 5. Rarely do we hear (at least in the same breath) Galatians 1:8-9 together with 4:28-30. Part of the difficulty might be following Paul’s typology. The Judaizers were a group; Ishmael was an individual. The Judaizers brought a false gospel; Ishmael brought a form of abuse. Paul was bringing together these ideas, so that some false teachings say and do what this mocking was starting to say and do—You’re not going to inherit. You’re not going to make it. You’re not included. What Paul is saying is that, “That needs to go. And if it means dividing from people who will not stop communicating that—those people need to go.”

Use 2. Consolation. Just as God provided for Hagar (and indirectly Ishmael) back in Chapter 16, so He provides again, as Ishmael now a much older boy.5 Consider the relationship between heeding God’s call to make this division and trusting God with everyone’s souls. Think of the excommunication commanded by the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 5, because it is really the same in substance.

“you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord” (1 Cor. 5:5).

Are we wiser or more loving than God?

Once again God reassures Abraham and Hagar about Ishmael. How much? Was he saved in the end? I have no idea. But the Bible makes the point twice now to show God’s love for this estranged son, who, on the one hand, had to go, but on the other, was not out of God’s hands.

__________________________

1. Waltke, Genesis: A Commentary, 293.

2. Other texts giving clues as to the age of having been weaned are 1 Samuel 1:22, 24 and 2 Maccabees 7:27.

3. Augustine wrote, “Then in a little while the bond maid was cast out of the house with her son; and, according to the apostle, these two women signify the old and new covenants—Sarah representing that of the Jerusalem which is above, that is, the city of God” (City of God, XVI.31).

4. Waltke, Genesis: A Commentary, 300.

5. Age 16 is the approximation of the ESV Study Bible (86), based on addition of the details in 16:16; 21:5, 8.