Talk:Hagar

message: Id really appreciate it if someone can change some things in the Islamic article and state that the reason why Hagar and Ishmael were taken away was because God ordered that to Abraham for certain reasons it had nothing to do with Sarah because the Quran portrays Sarah as a good wife who believed in Abraham and was rewarded with a promise that she shall live to give birth and also live to see her grandchild.Obviously god doesn't give such a reward to a wife that asks her husband to throw his other wife into a place where mankind cant live so can someone please remove any mention that Sarah had hatred towards Hagar in the Islamic section of this article,Thank you
011.071
YUSUFALI: And his wife was standing (there), and she laughed: But we gave her glad tidings of Isaac, and after him, of Jacob. 
011.072
YUSUFALI: She said: "Alas for me! shall I bear a child, seeing I am an old woman, and my husband here is an old man? That would indeed be a wonderful thing!" 
011.073
YUSUFALI: They said: "Dost thou wonder at Allah's decree? The grace of Allah and His blessings on you, o ye people of the house! for He is indeed worthy of all praise, full of all glory!" 
77.69.195.30 (talk) 18:38, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This is your own personal interpretation, nothing more. None of your quotations support what you claim. They are simply expressions of piety. You are simply rewriting the text without providing evidence beyond assertion. Paul B (talk) 16:32, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

text: I've checked the source. It's clear that Firestone summarises Ibn Abbas's version of the story, attested in many collections. She writes, "the episode begins because Sarah's jealousy of Hagar following the birth of Ishmael causes conflict and strife between the two women." (p.7) Paul B (talk) 19:20, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

text: "O our Lord! I have made some of my offspring to dwell in a valley without cultivation, by Thy Sacred House; in order, O our Lord, that they may establish regular Prayer: so fill the hearts of some among men with love towards them, and feed them with fruits: so that they may give thanks. 
this verse in the Holy Quran shows Abraham talking to god and telling him that he has left Ishmael his seed in the desert because of his command .. there is no Sarah in here what so ever Id like you to show me a good source because Ibn Abbas or any of those scholars who lived a long time ago were Philosophers who spoke with no proof or resource who was Ibn Abbas was he the Messenger of god? was he a prophet?   I JUST SHOWED YOU the word of god no offense but I think my source is 10 times more reliable than the opinion of a Philosopher that has no source 
can you show me where in the Hadiths does it say there was Hatred between Sarah and Hagar
can you show me where in the Quran does it say there was hatred between Sarah and Hagar 
you are making up your own interpretation by using the opinion of a man who used his own interpretation with no proof ... here is another proof that proves the Kindness of Sarah and patience 
011.070
YUSUFALI: But when he saw their hands went not towards the (meal), he felt some mistrust of them, and conceived a fear of them. They said: "Fear not: We have been sent against the people of Lut."
011.071
YUSUFALI: And his wife was standing (there), and she laughed: But we gave her glad tidings of Isaac, and after him, of Jacob.
011.072
YUSUFALI: She said: "Alas for me! shall I bear a child, seeing I am an old woman, and my husband here is an old man? That would indeed be a wonderful thing!"
God Gave Sarah Isaac and after him Jacob ,God promised Sarah that she shall live to see her grandson Jacob ..I don't think god would give such a reward to a women who was Jealous of Hagar and kicked her out with her innocent child 
011.073
YUSUFALI: They said: "Dost thou wonder at Allah's decree? The grace of Allah and His blessings on you, o ye people of the house! for He is indeed worthy of all praise, full of all glory!" 
God doesn't bless women who hate and have Jealousy clearly this is common sense
I don't think your source is as reliable or even near mine, My source's important and Iam saying the Word of god .. No where in the Quran does it say Sarah hated Hagar and no where in the Hadiths does it say Sarah hated Hagar ,,, Iam assuming a smart gentleman like yourself knows the entire story in the Hadiths ... and there is clearly no mention that Sarah hated Hagar in the hadiths so where did u get this from?
so the conclusion is that you are supporting an Philosophy written by some human being writer who had no divine contact or knew Mohammed and u reject the holy book of Islam and the Hadiths of Islam .. ......I think the article should be edited immediately and I Gave u Quranic proof and common sense proof that My Point is correct and Sarah was a blessed women who was praised by god and the migration of Hagar had nothing to do with Sarah if it did then please show me ... but all there is to show is the bible or some random philosophy of some unknown random human BEING who had no proof for his argument ...? 
Thank you 77.69.195.30 (talk) 14:48, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

text: You are simply repeating the same passages again, and you are insisting that your interprtation must be accepted, even though none of your quotations in fact say that there was no jealousy or conflict. Your dissmissal of Ibn Abbas in favour of your own opinion hardly seems appropriate to me, but that's beside the point. We have clear source in Firestone and she quotes the relevant Hadith passages in her footnotes as follows: "12 full narratives can be found in al-Azraqi I, 22f., and I, 279-80; al-Buk- hari IV, 372-375, and IV, 379-380; al-Tabari, History, I, 279-281, and I, 282-283; al-Tabari, Commentary XIII, 229, and XIII, 230-231; Ibn Kathir, Commentary I, 176, and I, 177, and Qisas al-anbiya' I, 223-224, and I, 227-228. Two incomplete narratives are located in Ibn Hanbal I, 253, and I, 347-8. Five fragments containing a few of the motifs can be found in Ibn Sa'd I, 50; Ibn Hanbal, I, 360, and V, 121; and al-Azraqi, I, 22, and T, 279." Paul B (talk) 14:56, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Sarah:Jealousy or Kindness?

message: The wikipedia article on Pharoah's daughter (married to King Solomon) includes a discussion of academic scholarship among egyptologists questioning that a pharoah would ever allow his daughter to marry out of the Egyptian Royal house. It seems to me that readers of this article, Hagar, would benefit from a parallel discussion here, or at least a reference to that other wikipedia entry.
24.185.8.28 (talk) 14:51, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I doubt that anyone would think it remotely likely that a pharaoh would give his daughter to become the enslaved maidservant of a Hebrew nomad's wife, but that aspect of the story is not even in the bible. It's essentially just myth. Paul B (talk) 15:15, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "that aspect of the story is not even in the bible" Paul - That aspect of the account is exactly what IS in the bible. My curiosity is what is the current scholarship and bibliography among Egyptologists, archaeologists, and biblical scholars of that aspect of the issue. Know anyone who fits the bill? 24.185.8.28 (talk) 22:26, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well perhaps you can tell me where in the Bible it says that Hagar was the daughter of the pharaoh. I can't find it in my copy. Paul B (talk) 22:33, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

text: You're correct - The earliest citation I know of for that is the Aramaic translation  of Genesis 16:1 ascribed (probably wrongly) to Yonatan ben Uziel. The central point of my query and this discussion thread still stands. I'd like to get any current scholarship or bibliography, or discussion from Egyptologists, archaeologists, or biblical scholars of those modern academic aspects of the issue, if only to flesh out and add to the wikipedia article those perspectives. My thought is that having those perspectives reflected in this article would make it more complete and informative, and would make this article's content / structure more uniform with other articles of biblical history. Know anyone who fits the bill? Thank you for your response.24.185.8.28 (talk) 01:16, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I think there is a difference between this story and that of Solomon. The bible does specifically say that he married pharaoh's daughter and it seems plausible that a king's daughter would marry another king. So in that case it is reasonable to look at what scholars would say about the likelihood of that story. But it is so wildly improbable that the pharaoh would give his daughter to be a slave that I doubt that scholars of Egyptian culture would even bother to refute it. Paul B (talk) 07:53, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: A Daughter of Pharoah

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
*Oppose, no clear evidence of primary topic.  Powers T 15:56, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: To date, I have not found one accurate image of Hagar and Ishmael. Not one picture depicts her as coming from Egyptian heritage, and not one picture of Ishmael depicts him as a 14 year old teenaged boy during their exile from Abraham's settlement! In almost every picture, Hagar looks a white englishwoman, and Ishmael is either depicted as a baby or at most 10 years old! Jasonasosa (talk) 15:18, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And your point is? Moreschi (talk) 22:16, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

text: Well I don't know why you use a bust which is, just a generic classical face, for the main image. There's nothing "English" about most images, the artists just used models from their own community. It was only in the 19th century that painters tried to recreate accurate ethnicity, in line with the 'scientific' attitudes of the era. For Renaissance artists these stories were universal truths. Ethnography of race was not relevant. If you want attempts at ethnic authenticity I suggest you look at images painted after 1850. Paul B (talk) 22:10, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hagar and Ishmael Images 

message: There's an essay with 80 footnotes that may be of use. 
http://bibleproject.blogspot.com/2004/01/hagar-victim-or-villain-three.html
"Hagar, victim or villain? Three sixteenth-century views"
JOHN L. THOMPSON Fuller Theological Seminary Pasadena, CA 91182 
Copyright Catholic Biblical Association of America Apr 1997 
BrainyBabe (talk) 17:22, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  another source 

message: A picture of Hagar "File:Abraham_renvoyant_Agar.jpg" was recently added, barely wearing clothes. After my second removal, an editor forwarded me to Wikipedia:NOT_CENSORED stating {It isn't "offensive" at all except in your imagination}! Obviously, this image pushes the author's POV of being a sex-slave like many claim. It's a personal POV and shouldn't be on this article. It's also not respectful as she's a biblical figure, wife of one of the greatest prophets, and mother of a great nation (according to the Bible). Any opinions?! AdvertAdam  talk 10:58, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The image is an eighteenth century engraving, typical of the time. The fact that you evidently know nothing about art history is depressing enough, but the point is that this image represents the range of ways she has been depicted. It is not a "personal POV" in any meaningful sense. I guess all images are personal POVs in one sense, but this one happens to be typcial of its era, and to represent a "POV" if you like of a time and place. In fact WP:npov requires that a range of different POVs be included. In fact your grandiose vision of her is just one POV among others.  Paul B (talk) 11:07, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well... first of all, why don't all arts have a naked boob if you say this is their era. It is a strictly pushing of point of view and you know that, as Hagar couldn't be confirmed neither a slave and neither a wife because of different translations. Therefore, Wikipedia can't take one side of the story, even tho Abraham's main page say a wife. Anyways, you know that artists haven't drew Sarah with naked boobs even once! And how can my grandiose be my POV if the Bible says that God took care of her and her son, making out of them a great nation. Does the Bible have a POV too. Be realistic, and don't demonstrate policies your way. AdvertAdam  talk 11:22, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No it is not "pushing" a POV any more than other images are "pushing" different POVs. PoV "pushing" generally means trying to promote one point of view at the expense of others, not including a point of view as opposed to trying to censor it completely. It is you who are POV pushing by censoring a POV, or rather a visual tradition linked to one. You say "you know that artists haven't drew Sarah with naked boobs even once!" I don't know, but obviously they did depict Hagar! Because we have an image showing just that. There are many others ,     Paul B (talk) 11:34, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: A POV is something abnormal, and having a figure without clothes is hinting to something. You know that the reason behind that is considering Hagar as a sex-slave, which was never proven. Do you consider it normal to have Abraham, or Jesus, or Mary naked? Would it be logical that I get a bunch of naked pics and add it to their articles? And no, I haven't seen any pics of Sarah naked, all what you bring is still Hagar. They're both wifes of Abraham, according to the Bible. Do you have any reasons to prefer that pic overthis? They're both on the same topic. AdvertAdam  talk 12:11, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: A POV is a "point of view", not "something abnormal". Please read WP:NPOV. You are trying to argue that a certain position can't be represented because you believe it is wrong. That is WP:TRUTH. All points of view are represented, including the negative opinions about Hagar found among Jewish and Christian writers. That's part of providing a rounded view. And nakedness does not imply being a sex slave. The story states that she was given to Abraham because she was young and presumed to be fertile, while Sarah was old. That's true irrespective of whether she was a wife or a concubine or something in between. I object to censorship. And I don't see why a full range of images should not be included. Eroticised images of the body of Hagar are part of the visual tradition whether you like it or not. Paul B (talk) 12:20, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: When someone does something abnormal, means that there's an intention behind it. You said that there's no intention or POV and it's all "part of the visual tradition", then why is it only used on her? Of course you realize that most pics of Hagar are naked, and there is none for the Virgin Mary when she was young. Who has the authority to pick which one to put, if they both have the same meaning: full clothes like every other Biblic figure, or naked for no reason (as you said it's not POV). You already said it's not a POV, then why do you object on the pic I sent you? It's not about right or wrong, it's about favoring a character over another with no reason. Favoring a naked pic than clothes on only one character is a choice you made, weather you admit it or not. AdvertAdam  talk 13:56, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Adam, you are not making any sense. There is nothing abnormal. All artists have "intentions" behind their images. That's part of their meaning, and part of the history of the representation of a person. Hagar is often depicted in a mildly erotic way because of her role in the story. The Virgin Mary is almost never depicted naked. That's a difference that exists in the history of art. It is not for us to argue about whether it should or should not exist. It does. Also, there are many pictures in the article. What we need is a range of images representing the full variety of ways she is represented. This is the only one displaying any mildly erotic component. Paul B (talk) 14:25, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  A biblical figure with naked boobs? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Hagar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081113015839/http://www.ou.org/torah/ti/5763/chayeisara63.htm to http://www.ou.org/torah/ti/5763/chayeisara63.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://hsf.bgu.ac.il/hagar/issues/1_1_2000/1120001.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:08, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hagar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110219231154/http://www.finrrage.org/pdf_files/RepTech%20General/Lord_Hath_Restrained-Me-from_Bearing.pdf to http://www.finrrage.org/pdf_files/RepTech%20General/Lord_Hath_Restrained-Me-from_Bearing.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:00, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I added slave to... She was an Egyptian slave/handmaid of Sarai (Sarah). 2601:580:4:5DD8:91FD:3E7D:5790:2776 (talk) 13:45, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hagar was an Egyptian slave/handmaid of Sarah  

message: I can find no evidence for the genealogy entry: "Genealogists say Hagar was the Daughter of King Salitis / Shalik The first Hyksos king". The entry links to a genealogy testing site, but it makes no sense that someone got the genealogy information (outside of what the Bible says) for an obscure individual who lived about 4000 years ago and has no known grave site. --Sacr1fyce (talk) 18:56, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hagar Genealogy 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:24, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion