Azahari Hassim
The phrase “Heir to Abraham: Isaac vs. Ishmael” pertains to the biblical narrative surrounding Abraham, who is regarded as the progenitor of both Isaac and Ishmael. In the biblical account, God assures Abraham that he will have a son, leading to the birth of two sons: Isaac, born to his wife Sarah, and Ishmael, born to his servant Hagar.
The competition between Isaac and Ishmael arises from their respective positions as heirs to Abraham’s legacy. Within Jewish tradition, Isaac is recognized as the legitimate heir and the primary recipient of God’s covenant with Abraham, while Ishmael is frequently depicted as an outsider or a rejected figure.
Conversely, Islamic tradition perceives Ishmael as a fruit of Abraham, wheras Isaac is considered a divine gift given to Abraham and Sarah during their later years, due to Abraham’s obedience in leaving the infant Ishmael and his mother in the desert near the Kaaba (the house of God), as well as his willingness to sacrifice Ishmael.
I seek clarification regarding the interpretation of this argument.
In the Islamic tradition, Ishmael is regarded as a symbol of Abraham’s initial struggle and test of faith, while Isaac represents the ultimate reward for his unwavering obedience to God. The narrative of Abraham leaving infant Ishmael and his mother in the desert near the Kaaba illustrates Abraham’s trust in God’s plan, even when confronted with difficult decisions.
Abraham’s readiness to sacrifice Ishmael further underscores his complete submission to God’s will, as he was willing to relinquish the most precious thing in his life without hesitation. This act of devotion holds great significance in Islamic teachings and serves as a compelling example of faith and obedience.
As a reward for Abraham’s steadfastness and willingness to follow God’s commands — both in leaving infant Ishmael and Hagar in the desert and in his willingness to sacrifice Ishmael — God granted Abraham and Sarah a miraculous gift: the birth of Isaac in their old age.
This divine blessing signified God’s recognition of Abraham’s faith and further cemented his role as a patriarch of monotheistic faith, with both Ishmael and Isaac becoming the forebears of great nations.
This narrative highlights the interconnected themes of sacrifice, trust, and divine reward, demonstrating that true faith is met with God’s grace and fulfillment of His promises.
The Quran asserts that it rectifies the biblical narrative surrounding Abraham by confirming Ishmael as the son who carried on Abraham’s legacy in accordance with the Abrahamic covenant. Additionally, the divine selection of the ancient Israelites and their Hebrew prophets under the Sinai covenant before the advent of Islam is seen as a precursor to the coming of Muhammad, the last Prophet.
Ishmael, the son dedicated to God, and Isaac, the son of blessing for Abraham and Sarah
It is thought that Abraham abandoned Hagar and the baby Ishmael close to the Kaaba (House of God) to devote them to God as if they were His. Consequently, Muslims celebrate Eid al-Adha and Sa’i, which honors Hagar’s search for water for her child. This happened well before Isaac’s birth. How is their argument explained?
The Islamic narrative of Abraham, Hagar, and Ishmael differs significantly from the Biblical account and forms an important part of Islamic tradition and ritual. Here’s an explanation of the argument:
- Abraham’s Journey to Mecca
According to Islamic tradition, Abraham was commanded by God to take Hagar and their infant son Ishmael to Mecca. This journey was not seen as abandonment, but rather as fulfilling a divine command. Abraham left them near the location of what would later become the Kaaba, entrusting them to God’s care.
- Hagar’s Faith and the Zamzam Well
After Abraham’s departure, Hagar demonstrated remarkable faith. When their water supply was exhausted, she ran between the hills of Al-Safa and Al-Marwah seven times, desperately searching for water for her thirsty child. This act of faith resulted in the miraculous appearance of the Zamzam well, a spring of water that gushed forth near Ishmael.
- Significance in Islamic Ritual
This event is commemorated in the Islamic pilgrimage (Hajj) through the ritual of Sa’i, where pilgrims run or walk between the hills of Al-Safa and Al-Marwah seven times, reenacting Hagar’s search for water.
- The Kaaba and Mecca
Islamic tradition holds that Abraham later returned to Mecca multiple times. During one of these visits, he and Ishmael constructed the Kaaba as the first house of worship dedicated to the one true God. This established Mecca as a sacred site in Islam.
- Eid al-Adha
Eid al-Adha commemorates Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice his son (identified as Ishmael in Islamic tradition) at God’s command. This event is believed to have occurred near Mecca, further cementing the area’s religious significance.
- Timing in Relation to Isaac
In the Islamic narrative, these events occurred before Isaac’s birth. Ishmael is considered the elder son and the one whom Abraham was commanded to sacrifice.
- God’s Blessing of Isaac
Following the near sacrifice of Ishmael, God blessed Sarah and Abraham with a son named Isaac, fulfilling His promise to them and establishing Isaac as another patriarch in the Abrahamic faiths.
Ishmael: The Rightful Heir of the Abrahamic Covenant – Revisiting Biblical Circumcision and Lineage
The Abrahamic covenant stands as a foundational pillar in the sacred histories of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Central to this covenant is the rite of circumcision, instituted by God as a binding sign between Himself and Abraham’s descendants.
Traditionally, Jewish and Christian interpretations assert that Isaac, the son born to Abraham and Sarah, is the rightful heir through whom this covenant is fulfilled.
However, a careful reexamination of the biblical chronology challenges this assumption. This article argues that Ishmael, not Isaac, was the first and only son to receive the covenantal sign alongside Abraham himself—prior to Isaac’s birth—thereby establishing Ishmael as the sole and true heir of the original Abrahamic covenant. By exploring the timing, recipients, and implications of circumcision in Genesis 17 and 21, this piece invites readers to reconsider long-held views and appreciate the overlooked centrality of Ishmael in the divine covenant.
1. The Biblical Basis for Circumcision as a Covenant
The Bible establishes circumcision as the sign of the covenant between God and Abraham:
Genesis 17:9–11:
“Then God said to Abraham, ‘As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised… it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you.’”
Here, circumcision is the definitive sign of the Abrahamic covenant.
2. The Timing of Circumcision Before Isaac’s Birth
The Bible affirms that circumcision was performed before Isaac was born:
Genesis 17:23–26:
“On that very day Abraham took his son Ishmael and all those born in his household or bought with his money, every male in his household, and circumcised them, as God told him… Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised, and his son Ishmael was thirteen.”
At this critical juncture, only Abraham and Ishmael were Abraham’s natural descendants to receive the sign of the covenant. Isaac had not yet been born.
3. Ishmael as the Sole and True Heir of the Abrahamic Covenant
This sequence of events reveals that:
Circumcision is the outward and binding sign of the Abrahamic covenant.
Ishmael was the only son of Abraham present to receive this sign alongside him.
All others circumcised at that time were household members and servants—not Abraham’s direct offspring.
Therefore, Ishmael alone stands as the true and sole heir of the Abrahamic covenant, sharing this foundational covenantal sign with Abraham himself.
4. Isaac as Merely a Participant Like Other Household Members
When Isaac was born, he too was circumcised on the eighth day (Genesis 21:4). However, this circumcision occurred after the covenant was already established through Abraham and Ishmael. Like the other members of Abraham’s household, Isaac simply entered into an existing covenantal practice rather than establishing or uniquely embodying it.
In this understanding:
Isaac’s circumcision parallels that of Abraham’s other household members.
He was brought into the covenantal sign but did not share in the original covenantal enactment alongside Abraham.
Thus, Isaac is seen merely as a participant in the Abrahamic covenant, not as its unique heir.
5. Distinction from the Sinai Covenant
The Sinai covenant was revealed exclusively to the descendants of Isaac through Jacob (Israel), establishing a separate covenantal framework for the Israelites.
In contrast, the original Abrahamic covenant—established through circumcision before Isaac’s birth—finds its complete and exclusive fulfillment in Ishmael, who was the first to embody and share this sign with Abraham.
6. Challenging Traditional Jewish and Christian Views
Traditionally, Jewish and Christian interpretations place Isaac as the sole heir of the Abrahamic covenant. However, this argument radically reorients that view:
Ishmael alone shares the covenantal enactment with Abraham.
Isaac, like the other household members, enters a covenantal practice already established.
Therefore, Ishmael alone emerges as the true and rightful heir of the Abrahamic covenant.
Summary of the Articulation
Circumcision, the outward sign of the Abrahamic covenant, was first performed on Abraham and Ishmael before Isaac was born. This historical reality establishes that while Isaac and others in Abraham’s household were participants in the sign of the covenant, only Ishmael shared in the covenant’s original establishment and thus stands as its true and exclusive heir. In this perspective, Ishmael’s role transcends mere participation—he alone embodies the Abrahamic covenant in its full and foundational form.
Did Bible scholars debate Ishmael’s age when he left Abraham’s house?
Did classical Bible scholars engage in a debate regarding Ishmael’s age at the time of leaving Abraham’s house?
Yes, classical Bible scholars have indeed debated Ishmael’s age when he and his mother Hagar were sent away from Abraham’s household. The primary source of this debate stems from the biblical texts in Genesis.
According to Genesis 21, verses 8-14, the event occurred after Isaac was weaned. Since weaning typically happened around the age of three in ancient times, Ishmael would have been around 17 years old, given that he was 14 years older than Isaac. However, some interpretations of the text suggest that Ishmael is depicted as a much younger child, which has led to discussions about potential inconsistencies or symbolic interpretations within the narrative.
This debate highlights the complexities and nuances in interpreting ancient texts, where cultural, historical, and linguistic contexts play significant roles.
Some people think that Ishmael, when sent away by Abraham in the Torah, was just a young child, not a teenager, based on the phrase “and he grew” in Genesis 21, verse 20. They point out that the Hebrew word “yelid” is used for both Ishmael and baby Moses (Exodus 2, verse 6). How do they explain this argument?
The argument is articulated by pointing out the use of the Hebrew word “yelid” in both Genesis 21, verses 14 to 15, and Exodus 2, verse 6. In these verses, “yelid” is used to describe both Ishmael and infant Moses. Supporters of the argument claim that since “yelid” is used to describe Moses when he was an infant, it should also be understood to mean that Ishmael was still a young child in Genesis 21, verse 20.
Additionally, the phrase “and he grew” in Genesis 21, verse 20, is interpreted by some to imply that Ishmael was still in the process of growing and developing, suggesting a younger age. They argue that if Ishmael were already a teenager or older, it would not be necessary to mention his growth.
It should be noted, however, that interpretations of biblical texts can vary, and different scholars or readers may have different understandings of the intended meaning.
Here is how the Jewish scribe manipulated Ishmael’s story:
- The age of Ishmael at the time of his departure from Abraham’s house.
- Abraham’s son, who was offered as a sacrifice.
Reinterpreting Zechariah 12:10 through an Islamic Lens: The “Only and Firstborn Son.”
Zechariah 12, verse 10 reads:
“And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.”
Through an Islamic lens, let’s explore Zechariah 12, verse 10, where the “only” and “firstborn” may refer to Ishmael, Abraham’s intended sacrifice, causing him immense sorrow, and link this to Surah 2, verse 91 concerning the slaying of God’s prophets.
The Sacred Scriptures, both Old and New Testaments and the Qur’an, narrate profound tales of faith, sacrifice, and the unwavering will of God. Among these, the narrative of Abraham’s readiness to sacrifice his son stands as a paramount example of submission.
While Christian and Jewish traditions firmly identify this son as Isaac, an alternative perspective emerges when examining Zechariah 12, verse 10 through an Islamic lens, suggesting that the “only” and “firstborn” mourned may indeed be Ishmael, the elder son, and linking this poignant sorrow to the broader theme of the slaying of God’s prophets as mentioned in the Qur’an (Surah 2, verse 91).
From an Islamic perspective, the descriptors “only son” and “firstborn” resonate deeply with the position of Ishmael Abraham’s life at the time of the divine command for sacrifice. When Abraham received the command, Ishmael was Abraham’s sole son and indeed his firstborn, many years before Isaac’s birth.
The profound sorrow and “bitterness” described in Zechariah 12, verse 10, mirroring the grief for a singular, irreplaceable child, powerfully aligns with the immense emotional trial Abraham faced concerning Ishmael.
The narrative in the Qur’an (Surah Al-Saffat, 37, verses 102 to 107) speaks of Abraham’s vision and Ishmael’s courageous acceptance of his father’s duty, culminating not in a literal sacrifice, but in God substituting a great ram. This pivotal moment underscores the depth of the trial and the immense love and trust between father and son.
The weight of Abraham’s potential loss, had the sacrifice been carried out, would have been unimaginable. The idea that Abraham was prepared to sacrifice his only son at that time, his beloved firstborn, resonates profoundly with the language used in Zechariah. This interpretation posits that the grief envisioned in the prophecy is a reflection of this profound historical and emotional reality.
The anguish described in Zechariah 12, verse 10 – “and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced” – invites a profound contemplation within an Islamic worldview. While God in Islam is utterly transcendent, beyond physical form or suffering, the concept of “piercing” can be understood metaphorically. In the Quran, this metaphor aligns with the condemnation of those who have murdered God’s prophets, symbolically equating the rejection and killing of His messengers with an insult to God Himself.
Surah 2, verse 91 addresses this rebellion:
“And when it is said to them, ‘Believe in what Allah has revealed,’ they say, ‘We believe [only] in what was revealed to us.’ And they disbelieve in what came after it, while it is the truth confirming what is with them. Say, ‘Then why did you kill the prophets of Allah before, if you were [indeed] believers?’”
Here, the Quran rebukes the Israelites for killing the prophets, equating such acts with a direct affront to God Himself. This aligns with the language of Zechariah 12, verse 10—“they shall look upon me whom they have pierced.” In Islam, attacking God’s prophets is seen as a direct assault upon the divine mission and, by extension, a rebellion against God’s will.
Conclusion
Through an Islamic lens, Zechariah 12, verse 10’s references to “only” and “firstborn” harmonize with the identity of Ishmael as Abraham’s first son and the near-sacrificial offering. Abraham’s sorrow reflects the deep grief described in the verse.
Furthermore, the “piercing” mentioned in Zechariah 12, verse 10 finds a thematic parallel in the Quranic condemnation of those who murdered God’s prophets, illustrating that such acts of violence against the messengers of God are tantamount to defying God Himself.
ABRAHAMIC THEOLOGY 