And she called the name of the Lord. Moses, I have no doubt, implies that Hagar, after she was admonished by the angel, changed her mind: and being thus subdued, retook herself to prayer; unless, perhaps, here the confession of the tongue, rather than change of mind, is denoted. I rather incline, however, to the opinion, that Hagar, who had before been of a wild and intractable temper, begins now at length to acknowledge the providence of God. Moreover, as to that which some suppose; namely, that God is called the God of vision, [1] because he appears and manifests himself to men, it is a forced interpretation. Rather let us understand that Hagar, who before had appeared to herself to be carried away by chance, through the desert; now perceives and acknowledges that human affairs are under divine government. And whoever is persuaded that he is looked upon by God, must of necessity walk as in his sight. Have I also here seen after him that seeth me? [2] Some translate this, Have I not seen after the vision?' [3] But it really is as I have rendered it. Moreover, the obscurity of the sentence has procured for us various interpretations. Some among the Hebrews say that Hagar was astonished at the sight of the angel; because she thought that God was nowhere seen but in the house of Abram. But this is frigid, and in this way the ambition of the Jews often compels them to trifle; seeing that they apply their whole study to boasting on the glory of their race. Others so understand the passage, Have I seen after my vision?' that is, so late, that during the vision I was blind? [4] According to these interpreters, the vision of Hagar was twofold: the former erroneous; since she perceived nothing celestial in the angel; but the other true, after she had been affected with a sense of the divine nature of the vision. To some it seems that a negative answer is implied; as if she would say, I did not see him departing; and then from his sudden disappearance, she collects that he must have been an angel of God. Also, on the second member of the sentence, interpreters disagree. Jerome renders it, the back parts of him that seeth me:' [5] which many refer to an obscure vision, so that the phrase is deemed metaphorical. For as we do not plainly perceive men from behind; so they are said to see the back parts of God, to whom he does not openly nor clearly manifest himself; and this opinion is commonly received. Others think that Moses used a different figure; for they take the seeing of the back parts of God, for the sense of his anger; just as his face is said to shine upon us, when he shows himself propitious and favorable. Therefore, according to them, the sense is, I thought that I had escaped, so that I should no more be obnoxious to the rod or chastening of God; but here also I perceive that he is angry with me.' So far I have briefly related the opinion of others. [6] And although I have no intention to pause for the purpose of refuting each of these expositions; I yet freely declare, that not one of these interpreters has apprehended the meaning of Moses. I willingly accept what some adduce, that Hagar wondered at the goodness of God, by whom she had been regarded even in the desert: but this, though something, is not the whole. In the first place, Hagar chides herself, because, as she had before been too blind, she even now opened her eyes too slowly and indolently to perceive God. For she aggravates the guilt of her torpor by the circumstance both of place and time. She had frequently found, by many proofs, that she was regarded by the Lord; yet becoming blind, she had despised his providence, as if, with closed eyes, she had passed by him when he presented himself before her. She now accuses herself for not having more quickly awoke when the angel appeared. The consideration of place is also of great weight, because God, who had always testified that he was present with her in the house of Abram, now pursued her as a fugitive, even into the desert. It implied, indeed, a base ingratitude on her part, to be blind to the presence of God; so that even when she knew he was looking upon her, she did not, in return, raise her eyes to behold him. But it was a still more shameful blindness, that she, being regarded by the Lord, although a wanderer and an exile, paying the just penalty of her perverseness, still would not even acknowledge him as present. We now see the point to which her self-reproach tends; Hitherto I have not sought God, nor had respect to him, except by constraint; whereas, he had before deigned to look down upon me: even now in the desert, where being afflicted with evils, I ought immediately to have roused myself, I have, according to my custom, been stupefied: nor should I ever have raised my eyes towards heaven, unless I had first been looked upon by the Lord.'

Footnotes

1 - "Deum visionis." Though Calvin regards this interpretation as forced, it must not be denied that it has the sanction of the highest literary authorities. Le Clerc, Peter Martyr, Rosenmuller, Dathe, Gesenius, Lee, Professor Bush, and many others, all regard the word r'y, (roi,) as a substantive, not as a participle, -- and consequently God is here spoken of as the God who reveals himself, not as the God who sees. -- Ed

2 - "Nonne etiam hic vidi post videntem me?" "Have I not also here looked after him who seeth me?"

3 - "Annon video, (h. e. vivo,) post videntem me, i.e., post visionem divinam, vel post visionem videntis me?" Do I not see, (that is, live,) after him who seeth me? that is, after the divine vision, or after the vision of him that seeth me. -- Junius, Piscator, etc., in Poli Syn. Ainsworth gives this version, Have I also here seen after him that seeth me?' Where stress is laid on the word here, as is done by Calvin, for the purpose of contrasting the desert with Abram's house. The opinion, also, that the term see' is equivalent to live,' is supported by high authority. The meaning of the passage would then be, Do I see, that is, live, after having beheld such a vision?' -- Ed

4 - Vatablus in Poli Syn. Perhaps the following paraphrase may bring out the sense of this obscure interpretation. We may suppose Hagar to exclaim: Have I indeed seen at last? yet, not till after the vision itself had passed away; so that when I saw it literally, I was mentally blind, and did not know what I was looking at.' -- Ed.

5 - See Vulgate.

6 - These different interpretations, with others, may be seen in Poole's Synopsis. -- Ed.

And she called the name of the Lord - She invoked (ותקרא vattikra) the name of Jehovah who spake unto her, thus: Thou God seest me! She found that the eye of a merciful God had been upon her in all her wanderings and afflictions; and her words seem to intimate that she had been seeking the Divine help and protection, for she says, Have I also (or have I not also) looked after him that seeth me? This last clause of the verse is very obscure and is rendered differently by all the versions. The general sense taken out of it is this, That Hagar was now convinced that God himself had appeared unto her, and was surprised to find that, notwithstanding this, she was still permitted to live; for it is generally supposed that if God appeared to any, they must be consumed by his glories. This is frequently alluded to in the sacred writings. As the word אחרי acharey, which we render simply after, in other places signifies the last days or after times, (see Exodus 33:23), it may probably have a similar meaning here; and indeed this makes a consistent sense: Have I here also seen the Latter Purposes or Designs of him who seeth me? An exclamation which may be referred to that discovery which God made in the preceding verse of the future state of her descendants.

And she called the name of the LORD that spake unto her, Thou God seest me: for she said, (g) Have I also here looked after him that seeth me?
(g) She rebukes her own dullness and acknowledges God's graces, who was present with her everywhere.

And she called the name of the Lord that spake unto her,.... Either she called on the name of the Lord, and prayed unto him, that he would forgive her sin and give her some fresh tokens of his love; and also gave him thanks for his gracious regards unto her, that he should look upon, and look after so mean a creature, and such a backslider as she was, and return her, and make such gracious promises to her; so the Targum of Onkelos,"she prayed in the name of the Lord;''and the Targum of Jonathan is,"and she confessed, or gave thanks before the Lord, whose Word spake unto her;''and the Jerusalem Targum takes in both prayer and praise,"and Hagar gave thanks, and prayed in the name of the Word of the Lord, who was revealed unto her:''in which may be observed the sense of the ancient synagogue, that this angel that appeared to Hagar, and talked with her, was the Word of the Lord, the eternal Logos, or Son of God: or else the sense is, that she gave the following name or epithet to the Lord, that vouchsafed to discourse with her:
thou God seest me; she perceived by experience his eye was upon her wherever she was, and saw all she did; saw all her transgressions, her contempt of her mistress, and her flight from her; saw her when she was at the fountain, and reproved and recalled her, and sent her back; saw all the workings of her heart, her repentance and sorrow for her sins; looked and smiled upon her, and gave her exceeding great and precious promises: he looked upon her, both with his eye of omniscience and providence, and with his eye of love, and grace, and mercy; yea, she was sensible that he was not only the God that saw her, but saw all things; was God omniscient, and therefore gives him this name under a thorough conviction and deep sense of his omniscience; and so Onkelos paraphrases the words,"thou art he, the God that sees all things;"
for she said, have I also here looked after him that seeth me? this she said within herself, either as blaming herself, that she should not look after God in this desolate place until now, and call upon him, and praise his name, whose eye was upon her, and had a concern for her, and care over her; and yet so ungrateful she had been as to neglect him, and not seek after him as it became her: or as wondering that here, in this wilderness, she should be favoured with the sight of God, and of his angel, whom she had seen in Abram's house; where to see him was not so strange and marvellous, but it was to have a sight of him in such a place, and under such circumstances as she was: or else as admiring that she should be alive after she had had such a vision of God, it being a notion that pretty much obtained, that none could see God and live, only his back parts were to be seen; wherefore others read the words, and they will bear such a version, "have not I also seen here the back parts of him that seeth me?" (y) so Moses did, Exodus 33:23.
(y) So Fagius.

called the name--common in ancient times to name places from circumstances; and the name given to this well was a grateful recognition of God's gracious appearance in the hour of Hagar's distress.

In the angel, Hagar recognised God manifesting Himself to her, the presence of Jehovah, and called Him, "Thou art a God of seeing; for she said, Have I also seen here after seeing?" Believing that a man must die if he saw God (Exodus 20:19; Exodus 33:20), Hagar was astonished that she had seen God and remained alive, and called Jehovah, who had spoken to her, "God of seeing," i.e., who allows Himself to be seen, because here, on the spot where this sight was granted her, after seeing she still saw, i.e., remained alive. From this occurrence the well received the name of "well of the seeing alive," i.e., at which a man saw God and remained alive. Beer-lahai-roi: according to Ewald, ראי חי is to be regarded as a composite noun, and ל as a sign of the genitive; but this explanation, in which ראי is treated as a pausal form of ראי, does not suit the form ראי with the accent upon the last syllable, which points rather to the participle ראה with the first pers. suffix. On this ground Delitzsch and others have decided in favour of the interpretation given in the Chaldee version, "Thou art a God of seeing, i.e., the all-seeing, from whose all-seeing eye the helpless and forsaken is not hidden even in the farthest corner of the desert." "Have I not even here (in the barren land of solitude) looked after Him, who saw me?" and Beer-lahai-roi, "the well of the Living One who sees me, i.e., of the omnipresent Providence." But still greater difficulties lie in the way of this view. It not only overthrows the close connection between this and the similar passages Genesis 32:31; Exodus 33:20; Judges 13:22, where the sight of God excites a fear of death, but it renders the name, which the well received from this appearance of God, an inexplicable riddle. If Hagar called the God who appeared to her ראי אל because she looked after Him whom she saw, i.e., as we must necessarily understand the word, saw not His face, but only His back; how could it ever occur to her or to any one else, to call the well Beer-lahai-roi, "well of the Living One, who sees me," instead of Beer-el-roi? Moreover, what completely overthrows this explanation, is the fact that neither in Genesis nor anywhere in the Pentateuch is God called "the Living One;" and throughout the Old Testament it is only in contrast with the dead gods of idols of the heathen, a contrast never thought of here, that the expressions חי אלהים and חי אל occur, whilst החי is never used in the Old Testament as a name of God. For these reasons we must abide by the first explanation, and change the reading ראי into ראי.
(Note: The objections to this change in the accentuation are entirely counterbalanced by the grammatical difficulty connected with the second explanation. If, for example, ראי is a participle with the 1st pers. suff., it should be written ראני (Isaiah 29:15) or ראני (Isaiah 47:10). ראי cannot mean, "who sees me," but "my seer," an expression utterly inapplicable to God, which cannot be supported by a reference to Job 7:8, for the accentuation varies there; and the derivation of ראי from ראי "eye of the seeing," for the eye which looks after me, is apparently fully warranted by the analogous expression לדה אשׁת in Jeremiah 13:21.)
With regard to the well, it is still further added that it was between Kadesh (Genesis 14:7) and Bered. Though Bered has not been discovered, Rowland believes, with good reason, that he has found the well of Hagar, which is mentioned again in Genesis 24:62; Genesis 25:11, in the spring Ain Kades, to the south of Beersheba, at the leading place of encampment of the caravans passing from Syria to Sinai, viz., Moyle, or Moilahi, or Muweilih (Robinson, Pal. i. p. 280), which the Arabs call Moilahi Hagar, and in the neighbourhood of which they point out a rock Beit Hagar. Bered must lie to the west of this.

And she called the name of the Lord that spake unto her - That is, thus she made confession of his name, Thou God seest me - This should be with her, his name for ever, and this his memorial, by which she will know him, and remember him while she lives, Thou God seest me. Thou seest my sorrow and affliction. This Hagar especially refers to: when we have brought ourselves into distress by our own folly, yet God has not forsaken us. Thou seest the sincerity of my repentance. Thou seest me, if in any instance I depart from thee. This thought should always restrain us from sin, and excite us to duty, Thou God seest me. Have I here also looked after him that seeth me? - Probably she knew not who it was that talked with her till he was departing, and then looking after him, with a reflexion like that of the two disciples, Luke 24:31-32. Here also - Not only in Abram's tent, and at his altar, but here also, in this wilderness: here, where I never expected it, where I was out of the way of my duty?