Expert: Mrs. Priscilla Lyons - 8/29/2006

Question
Mrs lyons - and thank you for taking my question. I have been reading up on Islam and while I do not intend to convert - they do bring up some interesting points that I cant seem to counter against when reading the bible. My main stumbling block regards Issac and Ishmael. I will quote a mulsim website that talks about this - it seems to me that they are right about the following and I was hoping you could provide some insight:

    Analysis of Differences Between the Quran and the Bible regarding Ishmael

Is reconciliation of these differences possible? Let’s focus on the last difference, namely did this incident take place before or after Isaac’s birth?

If we were to accept the Biblical version, we would encounter a number of inconsistencies and contradictions.

It is abundantly clear from the story in Gen. 21:14-19 that Ishmael was a little baby at the time. Following is the documentation of this statement:

According to Gen. 16:16 Abraham was 86 years old when Ishmael was born. And according to Gen. 21:5 Abraham was one hundred years old when Isaac was born. It follows that Ishmael was already fourteen years old when his younger brother Isaac was born.

According to Gen. 21:14-19, the incident took place after Isaac was weaned. Biblical scholars tell us that “the child was weaned about the age of three”.

It follows that when Hagar and Ishmael were taken away Ishmael was a full grown teenager seventeen years old.

The profile of Ishmael in Gen. 21:14-19, however, is that of a small baby and not of a teenager. Why?

First: According to The Interpreter’s Bible, the original Hebrew for Gen. 21:14 was “... and put the child upon her shoulder”. The same reading is rendered in the Revised Standard Edition of the Bible.

How would a mother carry a seventeen year old teenager “upon her shoulder”? Certainly he was strong enough to carry his mother! Ishmael must have been a baby!

Second: In Gen. 21:15 we are told that Hagar “cast” the child under one of the shrubs, Again, according to this Biblical text Ishmael must have been a baby and not a teenager.

Third: In Gen. 21:16 we are told that Hagar sat away so that she may not see the death of the child before her own eyes. Is that a profile of a husky seventeen year old teenager who probably was capable of being worried about his mother dying before his eyes? Or is it obviously a profile of a small helpless baby or at most a small child?

Fourth: According to Gen. 21:17, the angels told Hagar “arise, lift up the lad”. Is a seventeen year old young man a proper object to be “lifted up” by a woman? Or is that a reference to a small child or a baby?

Fifth: In Gen. 21:19, we are told that Hagar went to fill the bottle with water “and give the lad a drink”. One would expect a strong young man of seventeen to go and bring water to his mother instead.

The above analysis leads to the inevitable conclusion that while the Bible contains some truths as explained earlier, there is also evidence of human additions, deletions, and interpolations which only a subsequent authentic revelation (The Qur’an) could clear. The Islamic version of the story is fully consistent and coherent from A to Z; Ishmael was a baby and Isaac was not born yet when this incident took place. This coherence and consistency are confirmed by centuries-old traditions and even actual locations in Makkah (Mecca) where Hagar and Ishmael settled. This clearly implies that the real reason behind their settlement in Arabia (Paran) was not the dictation, jealousy, ego or sense of racial superiority on the part of Sarah. It was rather God’s plan; pure and simple.

It may be relevant to indicate that this issue is not the only instance of inconsistency in respect to Ishmael’s story. The Interpreter’s Bible compares the story of Hagar and Ishmael in Gen. 21:14-19 with that in an earlier chapter (Gen. 16:1-16) and concludes “the inclusion in Genesis of both stories so nearly alike and yet sufficiently different to be inconsistent, is one of many instances of the reluctance of the compilers to sacrifice any of the traditions which has become established in Israel”.


So Reverand you can see how I would be confused. I want my Christian faith to remain intact - but cant ignore the obvious inconsistancy of the biblical story that the muslims have pointed out - any help you can give me would be greatly appreciated. thankyou


Answer
Dear Pete,
   Thanks for writing.  I would be very cautious about accepting the "Interpreter's Bible" for the obvious reason that an interpretation is adding to God's Word and claiming the status of God's Word.  My interpretation is not God's Word, so it does not have the authority of the Word of God.  Please continue to ask God to guide you as you read His Word and read the opinions of others, such as myself.                 
   Hagar's fleeing Sarai's hardness in Genesis 16 when she was pregnant with Ishmael, shows a pattern of discord caused by the sin that produced Ishmael, which ultimately led to the separation in Genesis 21.  Polygamy has never been God's plan for families. (The pain Rachel and Leah endured reiterates this point)
   The "documentation" you mention assumes Ishmael's size, strength, and health, but all that we can verify from God's Word is that Ishmael was 17 years old.  Abraham put bread and a bottle of water (not Ishmael) on Hagar's shoulder.  I trust the translators of the King James Bible more than most translators, especially those of the Wescott and Hort tradition.  
   In 1851, Hort and Westcott started the Ghost Society .  Hort and Westcott were committed Communists. They hated America and democracy. (Arthur Hort, The Life and Letters of Fenton John Antony Hort, Vol I (New York: Macmillan and Company, 1896), p.104. , pp. 458-459)
   We don't know Ishmael's physical condition when he left nor when the water was gone.  We might assume that "cast" means she bodily picked up Ishmael and threw him under a shrub because he was half dead, but I wouldn't bet on that.  
   Only true Christianity offers the perfect life of Jesus in place of our sinful self, so we can fellowship with a perfect God forever.  Every other belief requires human effort to attain some unknown quantity of goodness, but God cannot allow even one tiny sin into heaven or else it will be ruined by death (separation from the Source of Life) just like what happened to Adam and Eve.
   True salvation can only be had by voluntarily entrusting ones life to God through the payment for sin that Jesus Christ made.  It can't be forced by the sword or by jihad, even if Muslims or the Crusaders had true salvation.
   The truth does not need to be defended by violence.  Sometimes it takes violence to rescue those enslaved by tyrants like Hitler and Suddam Hussein, but that violence only gives temporary physical life to those rescued--not eternal salvation.
   The Muslim anti-Semitic aim to exterminate Israel ought to put anyone on guard, since in the Bible God is considered the God of Israel as much or more so than He is considered the God of Christians.
   Purported "inconsistencies" of the Bible are a smoke screen to keep you from seeing the truth of God's Word.  C.S. Lewis set out to disprove the Bible, but instead, became convinced of its truth.  He wrote "Mere Christianity" that might be helpful for you.  Josh McDowell also researched with the intention of disproving the Bible, but changed his mind also.  His "Evidence That Demands a Verdict" historical evidences for the Christian faith, might be another resource for you.
   I pray that you allow God's love to draw you close to Him.
   Sincerely,
   Priscilla