time-the bow ;* and as in the East the mother usually takes the principal direction in the marriage of her son, Hagar,† agreeably to this custom, procured, as soon as Ishmael became of the proper age, a wife for him out of Egypt, her native land. What farther concerns this outcast son of Abraham, I have already related, when treating of the history of the Arabs; and will therefore return to Abraham.

What concerns the quarrels between the servants of Abraham and those of Abimelech, in regard to the use of certain wells, I have already related, and therefore now pass it over, without any further notice.

In regard to the earliest years of Isaac, we find no information in Genesis; but Josephus supplies us with what is there wanting, by telling us that the child endeared himself to his parents by the exercise of every virtue, by discharging his duties towards them, and by zealously worshipping Jehovah. But to show the obedience of Abraham to the command of the God he worshipped, the author of Genesis gives an account of the patriarch's readiness to sacrifice even his beloved son. This was, according to the Jewish Rabbis, the tenth trials of Abraham's faith and obedience, and took place in the following manner:

One day Jehovah spoke to Abraham and said, "Take now thy son, thine only son, whom thou lovest, Isaac, and go into the land of Moriah, and offer him there for a burnt-offering upon one of the mountains which I shall tell thee." Abraham obeys promptly, and sets forth with his unsuspecting son, to fulfil the bidding of the Deity. The journey lasted more than two days; but the Patriarch does not appear, during the whole time, to have faltered in his purpose. On the third day Abraham, with his two servants and Isaac, arrived within a distant view of the place which was appointed for the inhuman act; and it proved to be the same Mount

Gen. xxi. 20, "He became an archer."

+ The Mohammedans, in consequence of her being the mother of Ishmael, treat her name and memory with much respect. They allege-what in a limited sense is true-that she was the legal wife and not the concubine of Abraham; and that Ishmael, by his seniority, had a great advantage over Isaac, which, say they, is evident by the difference of their inheritances; Arabia, which fell to the share of Ishmael, being a much more extensive and rich country than the land of Canaan. They believe that Hagar died at Mecca, and was buried within the outer enclosure of the temple of the Kaabah. D'Herbelat Biblioth Orient. There is a Jewish tradition which contains the somewhat fabulous account that Hagar was the daughter of Pharaoh, by a concubine, and that the king, seeing the wonders which were wrought on account of Sarah, said, "It is better that my daughter should be a handmaid in this household, than a mistress in another," and therefore gave her to Sarah. Targum Ionath and Jarchi, in Gen. xvi. 17; Bereshith Rabba; Pirke Eliezer, c. 26.

Ant., book i., ch. 3.

§ 1. In quitting his native country, Chaldea; 2, his flight to Egypt from famine in Canaan; 3, the first seizure of Sarah in Egypt; 4, the war for the rescue of Lot; 5, his taking Hagar to gratify Sarah, (this seems, indeed, an easy trial); 6, his circumcision; 7, the second seizure of Sarah in Gerar; 8, the expulsion of Ishmael; 9, the expulsion of Hagar; 10, the sacrifice of Isaac.-Hales.

Moriah on which, in future ages, Solomon built a temple to Jehovah. But ere they arrived at this place, Abraham alighted from his ass, and unwilling, as it seems, that the servants should be present at this cruel sacrifice, ordered them to remain there with the animal, while he and Isaac went yonder to worship. Then, taking the wood and laying it upon Isaac, and holding the vessel containing the fire, and a knife, in his own hand, he and his son proceeded on their way. But while they were thus walking by each other's side, it occurred to Isaac to make the very natural inquiry, "My father, behold the fire and the wood; but where is the lamb for a burnt-offering?" To this Abraham returned an answer, as it appears, indicating the most complete confidence in the paternal care of Providence, "The Almighty will provide himself a lamb for a burnt-offering, my son."*

After having interchanged these words, it is related in Genesist that Abraham and his son proceeded to the appointed place, that the patriarch built an altar there, properly disposed the wood upon it, bound Isaac, and "laid him on the altar upon the wood." It has been supposed by several writers, that it is to be understood, as Josephus relates, that Abraham had first explained to Isaac that he himself was the victim which the Almighty desired, and that Isaac had been convinced of their duty to obey the Deity, and consequently, without the least resistance, permitted

* The celebrated Jewish philosopher Philo, gives us the following narrative of this event: "Nascitur illi sapienti-Abrahamo-ex uxore filius legitimus, dilectus, unicus, elegantissimo corpore, animo optimo; jam enim maturioris ætatis dabat specimen, ut à parente non tam ob naturalem affectum, quam ob probatos mores vehementer deligeretur. Huic repente oraculum insperatum redditur, ut mactaret filium in quodam editissimo tumulo, qui trium dierum itinere aberat. Ille quamvis majore quàm dici potest teneretur filii desiderio, nec colorom mutavis nec animum flexit, sed constantissime perstitit in eadem sententia; quippe qui amore Dei subactus, fortiter vincebat omnes cognationis affectus, et omnia nomina: et cum nemine domesticorum communicato oraculo, duos è tam numeroso famulicio, natu maximos, filique fidissimos assumpsit, quasi sacra ex more facturus, atque ita quartus profectus est cum filio, cumque locum destinatum procul conspexisset tanquam e specula, famulis ibi manere jussis, ignem simul atque ligna ferenda dedit filio, æquum censens, ut ipsa victima deportaret res quas postulabat sacrificium, levissimam sarcinam. Nihil enim est pietate guavius, nihil magis industrium, ibi pari gradu, unoque consensu celeriter peracto qua proximum erat /itinere, cujus finis erat sanctitas, ad montem oraculo indicatum perveniunt, pater lapides congerit, ut aram construat; tam filius videns cætera parata sacrificio, nullum vero animal, versus at patrem, Ecce ignis, inquit, et ligna pater! sed ubi victima ? Hic alius arcani consilii sibi conscious, effusa menti caligine, ad hæc verba turbatus et lacrymans aperuesset propositum, affectum continere not volens. At ille nihil mutatus vel corpore vel animo, constanti vultu, ratione constantiore, ad interrogationem respondet. Fili, inquit, Deus sibi providebit de victima; et si nihil præsto sit, quod te fortasse facit anxium. The difference between this narrative and that given in Genesis, is not essential, and consists in this. Philo says that Abraham took two servants with him, as if he was to sacrifice as usual; that he gave to Isaac to bear the fire, together with the wood; and that Abraham himself carried the stones of which the altar was to be made; and for the rest dwells somewhat more upon the expressions of Abraham's countenance and upon his sentiments.

Chap. xxii. 8, 9.

+ Antiq. book i. chap. 13.

himself to be laid on the altar, and to be bound, and that he would not through fear be induced to shrink at the moment when the fatal blow was to be given. In support of this opinion, it has been adduced as impossible. for the old man to compel the strong youth at the age of twenty-five years as Josephus tells us he was-to have unwillingly been sacrificed in the manner as described in Genesis. This reasoning carries with it much force, but the whole narrative in Genesis conveys the impression, that Isaac had not then attained an age corresponding with that of twentyfive of our years.

When all was in due order, it is farther related that Abraham stretched forth his hand and took the fatal knife with which he intended to consummate the sacrifice of his son. But the trial-as inconsiderate men have called it was at an end. What a folly to think that the omniscient Deity should need to put man to the test, on purpose to know how he would act! It is not to try, but to teach man to become worthy of success, by hoping for the paternal care of Providence and by his own exertions, when, while discharging his duty, he finds himself sometimes surrounded with difficulties and dangers insurmountable to the human eye. The intention of the father to take the life of his beloved son, was on a sudden checked by the voice-as we are told-of a heavenly messenger, that cried: "Abraham! Abraham! lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou anything unto him: for now I know that thou fearest the Almighty, seeing that thou hast not withheld thy son, thy only son, from Me." What do these words convey, but the idea that until then the Deity did not know the sentiments of Abraham, or how he would act in this trying moment? But as this is in contradiction of one of the attributes of God, I do not think that any one will have the presumption to deny that the last passage contains a palpable error, committed either in the original, or since crept into the version of Genesis which has come down to us.

Abraham had scarcely received this welcome command, when lifting up his eyes and looking around, it is said that he saw behind him a ram entangled by the horns in a thicket, and recognizing in this animal the victim Jehovah had provided for the burnt-offering, he hastened to offer him in the place of his son Isaac; and in memory of this event-probably in allusion to his ambiguous answer to the question of Isaac, as well as to its most happy accomplishment-he gave to the place the name of Jehovah-Jireh*-The Supreme God will provide.

I have before observed that there are those who say that Jehovah ought to be pronounced Yahouh; and Doctor Hales considers Jahoh to be probably more nearly the true reading of this name of the Deity, which, in accordance with the belief of the Jews, was so awful as to be not lawful to pronounce. But," says Dr. Hales, "the true pronunciation had been fortunately preserved in several of the heathen classics, according to the pronunciation of

The account given in Genesis of the intended sacrifice of Isaac, has been generally viewed by the Jews as a description of what actually took place, and the same opinion has been entertained by the majority of Christians. There have, however, been some who have considered this account as founded upon some real fact, but highly embellished by the Hebrew poet; while others again have regarded it as a mere allegory, designed to impress on the minds of the Israelites the duty of cheerful obedience to whatever Jehovah might please to command; and consequently, as the Deity generally spoke through the priesthood, to pay implicit obedience to these his delegates.

The custom of parents in sacrificing on extraordinary occasions their children to the divinities they worshipped-as the most valuable and precious offering in their power, and, consequently, supposed to be the most acceptable and meritorious-was very probably known to Abraham, because this human sacrifice is mentioned by several ancient writers, and even by Moses, as having been performed by many of the most ancient nations. The celebrated Philo, however, adduces strong arguments to prove how meritorious it was in Abraham to be willing to sacrifice his only beloved son, for none of those earthly purposes which had induced persons among other people to offer their own children, but solely in obedience to the divine command.* But though Philo is so far right, a

those foreigners who had early intercourse with the Israelites, and afterward with the Jews. Thus the Clusian Oracle, (founded after the Trojan war), in answer to the inquiry, 'Which of the gods is he to be reckoned who is called IA?' uttered a remarkable response, preserved by Macrobius, of which this is part:

φράζει τον παντων ύπατον Θεον εμμεν ΙΑΩ.

Learn that the God supreme of all is I A O.'"

* Philo begins with opposing those who would not acknowledge this act of Abraham as deserving of so much admiration as the Jews awarded to him, and then proceeds to show in what the real merit of Abraham consisted. I give his words in the Latin version, as probably more acceptable than a translation to the learned reader:

"Verum maliciosis calumniatoribus nostra damnare potius quam laudare solitis hoc imperatum non videbitur tam magnum et mirificum quam nobis videtur. Ajunt enim et alios multos suis affectibus devinctos, et amantes liberorum, immolandos exhibuisse filios, vel pro incolumitate patriæ vel ut averterent bella, siccitates, inundationes, pestilentias, alios item domesticæ quantumvis falsæ religionis gratia. Græcorum certe clarissimos, non solum privatos cives, sed et reges, non magna ratione ex se natorum habita, his mactatis maximas delevisse hostium copias primo impetu, sociorum vero servasse maximos exercitus. Barbaras quoque gentes per multas ætates litasse mactatis filiis, cujus sceleris etiam sacrosanctum Mosem meminisse, dum accusans eos ut polutos ait, filios et filias diis suis adolent. Indorum quoque gymnosophistas et hodie sub initium senectutis morbi longi et incurabilis, prius quam invalescat, accenso rogo, se ipsos exurere, quamvis possent at tempus fortasse diuturnum resistere. Imò et mulierculas eorum defunctis maritis in rogos eorum cum gladio se mittere, atque ita vivas concremari cum adamatis cadaveribus. Harum, inquiunt, merito mireris audaciam, quæ mortem contemnunt tantopere, ut ad eam tanquam ad immortalitatem cursu contendant. Istum vero laudare quorsum attinet, quasi novum, aliquod facinus aggressum, quod non semel fando auditum est de privatis civibus, de regibus, de integris gentibus.

Christian may be justified in the remark, that had Abraham been fully enlightened as to what was acceptable to the Deity, he would instantly have objected, that what he was bidden to do was in contradiction to that law the Creator himself had written on the human heart, and he would at once have perceived that it was not allowable for him to accomplish the unnatural deed.

After this twelve years passed away, during which we know only that Abraham was informed of the prosperous circumstances of his brother

Ad hanc invidorum insectationem sic respondeo. Qui liberos mactant, partim ex more id faciunt, ut fertur de nonnullis barbaris, partim quia magna mala et adversus humanum opem contumacia à suis civitatibus aliter arcere nequeunt. Ex his quidam inviti suos exhibent, coacti à potentioribus. Alii compulsi metu hominum, alii cupidine gloriæ famæque, in presens gloriæ, famæ vero ad posteros. Ergo qui ex more mactant, nihil magnum videntur facere. Nam inveterata censuetudo plerumque tantum potest, quantum natura, ita ut gravissima quæque reddat toleratu facilia; omni terrore semoto. Qui vero cedunt timori, laudem nullam merentur. Laudantur enim facta voluntaria, involuntaria referuntur ad necessitatem rerum aut casuum aut temporum. Quod si quis amore gloriæ vel filium prodit vel filiam, vituperio magis quam laude dignus est, morte charissimorum parans sibi honorem, quem etiamsi antea habuisset pro incolumitate filiorum abjicere debuerat. Proinde considerandum est, an ille aliqua modo dicta necessitate coactus sit mactare filium, vel more, vel honore, vel timore. Mos certe immolandi liberos nec Babylone, nec in Mesopo

tamia, nec à Chaldeis receptus est, apud quos educatus magnam vitæ partem cum eis exigit, ne quis putet præ assuetudine leviorem visam mali ejus imaginationem. Sed neque metus ullus imminebat ab hominibus neque oraculi jussum quisquam norat alius. Nulla publica præmebat calamitas, cui morte probatissimmi filii remedium quæreret. At laudis apud vulgum paranda cupidine ad hoc facinus concitatus est. At quæ laus captabatur in solicitudine, ubi nemo erat applausurus, data opera Longe à tergo relictis etiam duobis famulis, ne se coram testibus ostentare videretur? Quapropter obturato infreni ore moderentur accusatores, suam invidiam, nec lacerent honesta vita defunctos, quos potius predicare deberent cum aliis. Siquidem apud omnes qui recte sapiunt nihil honestius habetur, mihil optabilius, quam Deo parere, quod hic in primis studuit, ita ut nullum unquam mandatum negligeret, quantumvis refertum molestiis et ignominiis, atque etiam laboribus ac doloribus. Quam obrem et id quod oraculo jussus est de filio, fortiter constanterque pertutit. Deinde cum nulla consuetudo esset in ea regione sicut fortasse apud quosdam, immolandi liberos, ipse primus autor futurus erat novi et inusitati exempli, quod mihi videtur nemo laturus fuisse, etiamsi ferreum aut adamantinum haberet animum. Cum natura enim ut quidam pugnare est difficile; pater erat factus unici hujus legitimi filii, quem mox singulari amore prosequebatur, supra modum vulgaris benevolentiæ, imò etiam fama celebrata; aderat et aliud vehemens amoris incitamentum, quod in senecta ei puer natus fuerat. Siquidem e numeroso sebole unum quempiam offerre Deo, tanquam liberorum primitias, nihil mirandum fuerit, cum præsto sit e superstitibus haud mediocre solatium, et doloris ob mactatum concepti remidium. Cum vero unicus dilectus offertur, res est sermone nullo explicabilis, nullum respectum habens consuetudinis domesticæ, sed tota prona at pietatis officium, eximia sane, et vix cuiquam alteri tentata. Nam alii tametsi pro salute patriarum aut exercituum concedunt suos mactandos, tamen aut domi manent interea, aut procul absistunt ab altaribus; aut si contingat eos sacris interesse, avertunt oculos ne spectare quidem sustinentes vel alienum necis ministerium. Hic vero tanquam sacerdos, ipse pater amantissimus aggreditur mactationem egregii filii, quem fortassis etiam sacrifico ritu membratim concisurus erat adolendum altaris ignibus; adeo caverat ne pietate erga filium distraheretur a pietate Deo debita, et totum quantus erat animum sanctari devoverat, parum curans cognatum sanguinem. Quid horum quæ diximus cum cæteris commune est ? quid non eximium, quod nulla possit æquari facundia? Ut merito quodvis ingenium non malum nec invidum obstupefaciat immensæ pietatis miraculo, vel uno ex multis, nedum confertis omnibus; satis enim est vel unius cuilibet reputatio ad expriendam parvam quandam imaginem ingentis animi quamvis nullum sapientis opus est exiguum."-Philonis Judæi Liber de Abrahamo.