What does the Bible say about being or using a surrogate mother?

Though Abram was a man of faith, Sarai his wife had not borne children, and she weakened his faith by making a mere fleshly suggestion that he should use Sarai's bondmaid, Hagar, by whom to bear a child for Sarai (v. 2). Abram's experience with the Lord in Genesis 15 ought to have strengthened him to realize that God's promise was sure even though they had had to wait so long for its fulfillment. As to the fulfilling of the promise, Abram did not have to resort to a means, not only merely human, but morally wrong. But he listened to the voice of Sarai rather than undividedly listening to the voice of God.

Sarai should surely have realized that a child born in this way would not be hers at all. Sarai could never be attached to the child in the same way that his mother would be. In fact, her giving her maid to Abram is expressed in verse 3 as giving her to Abram “as his wife.” Therefore the child could not possibly belong to Sarai. Hagar knew this, and when she had conceived she despised Sarai because Hagar had achieved what Sarai could not. What could Sarai do now? She becomes so distressed that she blames Abram for her dilemma: “My wrong be upon you” (v. 15). How much better it would have been if she had accepted the blame for her own mistake and humbled herself before the Lord to ask His forgiveness.

In blaming Abram for the situation that arose after Hagar's conception, Sarai asks that the Lord should judge between her and Abram, no doubt because she felt that Hagar was virtually robbing her of her husband. Abram did not remind her that the whole matter was her suggestion, but he made it clear to her that he had no intention of considering Hagar his wife. He tells Sarai that Hagar is her maid and she may do with her as she pleases. Sarai took advantage of this permission from Abram, and made life hard for Hagar, as countless numbers of employers have kept their employees in virtual misery by their cruel oppression. Understandably, Hagar became a runaway, not knowing where she was going, but going anyway.

David proclaimed, "Lo, children are an heritage of Jehovah: and the fruit of the womb is his reward." Ps. 127:3. Women in the East had a great desire for children, as may be seen by Sarah, Rachel, and Leah giving their handmaids to their husbands that they might have children by them, and this ever characterised the women of Israel afterwards.

This is God's institution: He said it was not good that man should be alone, and He provided a suitable help for Adam in the person of Eve. Adam said, "This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman (isha), because she was taken out of Man (ish). Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." Gen. 2:23-24. This declaration of union was confirmed by the Lord, who, in quoting the above, added, "Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." Matt. 19:5-6; Mark 10:7-9. It is confirmed also by being taken as a type of the sacred union of the Lord with the church: "We are members of his body, of his flesh and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church." Eph. 5:30-32.

All this shows that God's institution of marriage was the union of one man and one woman, the two and only two, becoming one. What is more than this is not of God, but is of human lust. This order was first broken through by Lamech, the sixth from Adam, who had two wives. Long after this instances are recorded of wives, on account of their great desire for children, giving their maid servants to their husbands: an act that would now be judged as most unnatural in a wife. Sarai gave her Egyptian handmaid to Abram 'to be his wife' (the same word for 'wife' being used for both Sarai and Hagar), and God said He would make of Ishmael a great nation. Jacob's two wives gave their handmaids to their husband, and thus he had four wives. God reckoned the twelve sons of these four women equally as sons of Jacob, and they became the heads of the twelve tribes. It might have been thought that God would not have blessed the issue of these unions, but He did: there is no record of any law having been given on this subject.

"And when Rachel saw that she bore Jacob no children, Rachel envied her sister; and she said to Jacob, Give me children, or else I die. And Jacob's anger was kindled against Rachel; and he said, [Am] I in God's stead, who hath withheld from thee the fruit of the womb? And she said, Behold, my maid Bilhah; go in to her, that she may bear on my knees, and I may also be built up by her. And she gave him Bilhah her bondmaid as wife; and Jacob went in to her. And Bilhah conceived and bore Jacob a son. And Rachel said, God hath judged me, and also heard my voice, and given me a son: therefore she called his name Dan (Judge). And Bilhah Rachel's bondmaid again conceived and bore Jacob a second son. And Rachel said, Wrestlings of God have I wrestled with my sister, and have prevailed; and she called his name Naphtali (my Wrestling). When Leah saw that she had ceased to bear, she took Zilpah her bondmaid, and gave her to Jacob as wife. And Zilpah Leah's bondmaid bore Jacob a son. And Leah said, What fortune! and she called his name Gad (Fortune). And Zilpah Leah's bondmaid bore Jacob a second son. And Leah said, With my happiness; for the daughters will call me happy! and she called his name Asher (Happy)" (Gen. 30:1-13).

One understands too well, too sadly, why Rachel should view her own childlessness and her sister rich in children with chagrin. Self wrought and blinded her to her sister's lack of Jacob's heart of which she had the monopoly. It was envy, that base feeling which cannot endure another, even a sister's, having what she had not; and this broke out in unreasonable and impious repining to her husband, as if her barrenness were his fault. No wonder that his anger resented her unworthy state in his rejoinder, Am I in God's stead Who has withheld from thee the fruit of the womb? But he yielded to her proposal, and takes Bilhah that she might obtain children by her maid. Had not honoured Sarah done the like? Yes, but through Ishmael its fruit did it not issue in the expulsion of both Hagar and her son? Was this encouraging? How different from Hannah the sorrowful under Peninnah's provocations, or even the high-priest's misjudgment! She broke out into no unseemly murmurs against her husband, but wept and prayed and vowed to Jehovah, and was heard of the God of Israel.

Then we too often resort to a humanly conceived substitution, as Rachel did in verse 3. Sarah had done the same in giving Abraham her handmaid by whom to have a child. Rachel ought to have known that this did not work out as Sarah planned, but she thought, as Sarah, that the children of Bilhah, her handmaid, would be hers. When a boy was born (vv. 5-6), Rachel said that God had given her a son, and she named him Dan, meaning “judge.” Bilhah also had a second son whom Rachel named Naphthali, meaning “my wrestling,” because of Rachel's wrestling with her sister Leah. All of this struggle is a picture of the struggle of Romans 7, which only stirs up the evil passions of our hearts, rather than subduing them, as we attempt to do. At first sight it may be that people would not discern any spiritual significance of a history like this, and might wonder why the Lord has gone to such pains to record all the details of this. But all scripture is of vital consequence to every believer.

When Leah had no more children, she resorted to the same tactics as Rachel had, giving her maid Zilpah to Jacob, by whom he had a son, Leah naming him Gad, then another whom she named Asher (vv. 9-13). Gad means “a troop” and Asher means “happy.” Thus we find human support (a troop), and seek to make ourselves happy as we are, without attaining the state we desire, but Leah is not satisfied with this. For as soon as Reuben brings her mandrakes she sees the possibility of having another son. Rachel tried to obtain some with the same purpose, but Leah answered her sharply (v. 15). She knew Rachel's purpose. Thus neither of them was actually content: the struggle continues.

The standards that prevailed in patriarchal times as to matrimonial relationships were much below those established in the light of Christianity. In those days no law had been given, and when it was given through Moses it did not express the perfect thought of God as the Lord Himself said in Matthew 19:8. This accounts for the action in this matter of both Sarai and Abram. What they did was done without any sense of wrong. The promise of a seed had been given to Abram: Sarai was barren, and this was just an attempt to secure its fulfilment after the flesh. We have to learn that everything achieved after the flesh ends in failure and trouble.

The trouble started before Ishmael was born, as soon as the bondwoman effectively took the place of the freewoman. The bondwoman then despised the freewoman, just as later the child of the former persecuted the child of the latter. The immediate result was that the freewoman asserted her place and dealt hardly with the other so that she fled.

The custom among the Israelites of sometimes taking a second wife was not always based on motives of the lower nature; in many cases it was the desire for children, denied to the first wife. This was the probable reason for Elkanah's double marriage. But "from the beginning it was not so" (Matt. 19:5-8). The institution of marriage originally contemplated but a single companion for man; and plural marriages. appear never to have worked well in practice, as witness the humiliating discord in Abraham's family over the inferior Hagar; in Jacob's, the bitter jealousies between the two' sisters, Rachel and Leah. Here, too, it breeds strife and vexation of spirit shameful to behold. What otherwise might have presented an ideal Hebrew home is marred by the bitter provokings of the elated Peninnah, and the consequent sorrow of her barren rival.

These were a class of inferior wives: they were at times personal servants given by wives to their husbands from their great desire for children, who then accounted the children of the servant as their own, as it was with Rachel and Leah. Such cases may have been comparatively rare, and would in no way account for the prevalence of men having concubines. Deut. 21:11 gives the root of it: a man saw a beautiful woman and lusted after her. God seems to have simply allowed it: as the Lord said about their easy way of writing a bill of divorcement: Moses permitted it 'because of the hardness of your hearts.' When God spoke of Israel having a king, one of the things forbidden to him was that of multiplying wives, lest his heart be turned away. Deut. 17:17. This alas, was the very fall of Solomon, who had 700 wives and 300 concubines, and they did turn away his heart. 1 Kings 11:3. In the Canticles we read of 60 queens and 80 concubines and virgins without number; but there was one, a choice one, the only one of her mother, that excelled them all — the bride of the song. Cant. 6:8-9. Est. 2:14 and Dan. 5:2 show that concubinage was a custom also among the heathen. Christianity disallows such evil, and recognises the relationship as established of God, and hence the sanctity of the marriage tie in those whom God joins together.

Here we find unbelief casting its dark shadow across the spirit of Abraham, and again turning him aside, for a season, from the path of simple, happy confidence in God. "And Sarai said to Abram, Behold the Lord has restrained me from bearing." These words bespeak the usual impatience of unbelief; and Abraham should have treated them accordingly, and waited patiently on the Lord for the accomplishment of His gracious promise. The poor heart naturally prefers anything to the attitude of waiting. It will turn to any expedient — any scheme — any resource, rather than be kept in that posture. It is one thing to believe a promise, at the first, and quite another thing to wait quietly for the accomplishment thereof. We can see this distinction constantly, exemplified in a child. If I promise my child anything, he has no idea of doubting my word; but yet, I can detect the greatest possible restlessness and impatience in reference to the time and manner of accomplishment. And cannot the wisest sage find a true mirror in which to see himself reflected, in the conduct of a child? Truly so. Abraham exhibits faith, in Gen. 15 and yet he fails in patience, in Gen. 16. Hence the force and beauty of the apostle's word, in Hebrews 6, "followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises." God makes a promise, faith believes it; hope anticipates it; patience waits quietly for it.

Faith does not reject earthly blessings when God gives them; but when one seeks to forestall God's time, it always brings sorrow. God will perform His promise surely, but in His own way and time. Nature was impatient, and could not wait. Unbelief made Sarai say that she was not included in the promise. (Gen. 16:2.) Failure in this instance seems greater in Sarai than in Abram. Nevertheless he, like Adam, listened to his wife, instead of trusting God. Ishmael is born. Sarai becomes envious, Hagar presuming. Household dissension is the result. And such is always the case where the head of the house forgets his responsibility to God.