distinguish this sacrifice from all others. Since, in fact, the sacrifice of Isaac, though it took place in Canaan, had no more to do in intention, in spirit, in motive, in the object and in the subject of it, with the passing of children through fire to Moloch or to Adrammelech, than with the Irish La Baal tejnne, or with the broiling of human hearts on the altar of Huitzilopochtli and Tezcatlipuk.1

For, first, even Dr. Stanley admits that this practice of human sacrifices "laid deep in the heart of Canaanitish nations,"showed itself "if not then, at least in after ages." Abraham, therefore, did not follow the example of others, but he set it to them a very different thing indeed, since his sacrifice of Isaac is the first of the kind on record; and the sacrifice of Iphigenia (such as it was); of a man yearly to Chiun or Saturn in Phonicia and at Rhodes; to Aphrodite in Cyprus; to Bacchus at Chios and in Tenedos; to the sun at Heliopolis; to Mars at Lacedæmon; to Saturn at Carthage; to Jupiter at Megalopolis, in Arcadia; of a boy to Wadd in Arabia, and other such, are all of later date than that of Isaac.2

And secondly, not only was Abraham not a Canaanite, and thus not only could he not have much in common with the thirst for human blood laid deep in the heart of the Canaanites, but, according to Dr. Stanley's own showing, he was on the best of terms with them, bound to them by a "wide, all-embracing worship," of which, he also tells us, human sacrifices formed as yet no essential rite. How then could "this almost irrepressible tendency of the burning zeal of a primitive race" be "the trial which presented itself to Abraham ?" especially when, as we know, these same human sacrifices which these Canaanites may have copied from him, were among the abominations that brought "the iniquity of the Amorite to the full," that made those nations accursed, and doomed them to utter destruction?

But I will hope that Dr. Stanley is less to blame than those he takes as guides, for thus "darkening counsel by words without knowledge," as regards the most awful and the most touching type in the Old dispensation; a type so plain, so solemn, as

1 Help's Conq. of Amer. vol. ii. p. 335, sq.

2 Euseb. Præp. Ev. p. 155–163; id. Theophan. Syr. Lib. ii. 54, sq.

M

to make us pause ere we even speak of it, while we look on this bright picture of faith unfeigned and of obedience on Abraham's part of mercy, of pity, and of love towards us on the part of the FATHER, Who wrought out the sacrifice, and of the SoN, Who gave Himself up for it on our behalf when He was stretched on the wood of the Cross laid on this earth, His Altar. I therefore pass by the Rabbis as either not to the purpose or absurd, and by the voice of the Church in all ages as unanimous on this point, only to say that even Mahomedan writers mention this sacrifice of Isaac as one of the three things

الله ابراهيم بها فقيل هي هجرته عن وطنه والختان وذبح ابنه -through which Gon did prove the faith of Abra " وقيل غير ذلك

ہو

البلا المبين

And

is

ان

ham; that is, his flight from his native land, circumcision, and
the sacrifice of his son; though others say differently."
Mahomet himself says of it,2" Verily, this
was for him a trial no one could mistake.3 Wherefore we have
left for him among the posterities, 'Peace on him!' 'Peace on
Abraham!' Thus do we reward them that do well."

XIX. Dr. Stanley then brings us to what he thinks was the scene of the sacrifice :

"It was not the place which Jewish tradition has selected on Mount Moriah at Jerusalem; still less that which Christian tradition shows, even to the thicket in which the ram was caught hard by the Church of the Holy Sepulchre; still less that which Mussulman tradition indicates on Mount Arafat at Mecca. Rather we must look to that ancient sanctuary of which I have spoken, the natural altar on the summit of Mount Gerizim. On that spot, at that time the holiest in Palestine, the crisis was to take place. One, two, three days' journey from 'the land of the Philistines' in the distance the high crest of the mountain appears," &c. p. 49.

The Dean seems very certain of what he asserts; but, firstwhere the land of Moriah' might be we know not. A. Ezra 1.c., Abarbanel, R. S. Jarchi 1.c., Midrash Rabbah,5 wherein the

1 Abu'lf. Hist. A. I. p. 22.

2 Sur. xxxvii. 107.

3 Almost in the words of S. Ambrose: "Denique Deus probatos sibi tentat. Et sanctum Abraham probavit ante et sic tentavit, ne si ante tentaret quam probasset, gravaret." De Abrah. Lib. i. t. iv. p. 184.

4 Comm. in Pent. fol. 61, verso.

5 Fol. 61, sq.

opinion of many Rabbis is found, all concur in applying the term 'Moriah' either to the hill mentioned in 2 Chron. iii. 1, on which the Temple was built, or in rendering by vision,' in allusion to GOD appearing there to Abraham.1 Although nothing is said of the sacrifice of Isaac either in the Samaritan Chronicle, the Samaritan Hymns and Letters published by Gesenius and by Cellarius, yet it is well known that the Samaritans apply Gen. xxii. 2 to Mount Gerizim.2

Secondly-the claim the Samaritans put in for Mount Gerizim to be Mount Moriah dates, as we have seen, only from after the captivity.3 "However this may be," continues Michaelis, "the Samaritans were not at enmity with the Jews before the building of the Temple on Mount Gerizim, and until then they would have common interests and common worship." But, after the Temple was built by Alexander's leave on Mount Gerizim, on the site of the small place of worship that existed there before that time, the Samaritans of Sichem arrogated to their city the title of the Holy Place,'

in op

But could never come from The Targ. Onkelos and Targ. J. B. Uzziel and Hieros. render it, 'land of worship;' LXX. els Thu yŵv Tùy úчnλhí; Pesch. and Saadias Lio? i, 'into the land of the Amorites;' Samar. mg·ax2; 'in terram visionis,' Vulg.: so that interpreters are far from being agreed either on the meaning of the term or on the site of the mountain.

2 Gesen. De indole Pentat. Sam. p. 33.

3 "Judæi," says J. D. Michaelis (Supplem. ad Lex. Heb. p. 1553) "montem Moriam pro loco immolationis Isaaci destinato habuerunt; ac nisi fallor et Samaritani. Adscribo versionem Chaldaicam Chronicorum: in monte Moria, in loco, ubi coluit et adoravit Abraham nomen Domini: Iste locus est terra cultus, ubi coluerunt Jehovam omnes generationes, ibi quoque oblaturus erat Abrahamus filium suum in holocaustum, liberavit vero eum verbum Domini, et oblatus est aries loco ejus: ibi oravit Jacob, cum aufugeret ab Esavo fratre, ibi denique adparuit angelus Domini Davidi. Hæc aut traditio aut sententia si vera ac certa, aliquid sane faceret ad litem Samaritanorum et Judæorum de loco cultus divini Deo placente, de qua mira tradit Josephus, Ant. xiii. 3, 4, in jure Mosaico, §. 188, exposita, deliberata, dubitata."

انته طوائف من اليهود وصلوا به وصاروا And according to Makrizi •

crowds of Jews " يحجون الى هيكله في الاعياد ويقربون قرابينهم فيه

came to it to pray there; they made pilgrimages to the temple on Mount Gerizim, and offered their sacrifices in it." (De Sacy, Chrest. Ar. vol. i. 112 and 301, sq.)

position to Jerusalem; and afterwards they connected Mount Gerizim with Abraham and with his sacrifice.1

The Samaritans called Mount Gerizim not only 'Blessed Mountain,' as we have seen, but also

البركات جبل

the Mountain of جبل الغرايد the Mountain of Blessings

the Commandments;22 V97, the Hill of Eternity;' 29 'Beth-el;' and in one of their letters to this country3 the Samaritans call it The Mountain of Inheritance,' where the presence of the Divine Majesty dwells; the great and chosen place, which God did choose; the Gate of Heaven.5 All this is on a par with the story already told, of Mount Gerizim not having been even wetted by the waters of the Flood; and other like absurdities, for which there is not the slightest foundation,

XX. Thirdly-according to Arabic writers, Isaac never was sacrificed "on Mount Arafat at Mecca," as Dr. Stanley says. Abu'l-feda tells us that "after Hagar's death at Mecca, GoD commanded Abraham to sacrifice unto Him his son; one is doubtful whether it was Isaac or Ishmael, but God redeemed him with a ram. Those who think it was Isaac who was offered in sacrifice place the spot in Syria at two miles

علي ميلين من -or leagues from Elia, which is Jera) ايليا وهي بيت المقدس

salem. Those, however, who think it was Ishmaele

say the sacrifice took place at Mecca. And ذلك كان بمكة

Masudi,7 after telling of the dismissal of Hagar, goes on to say

1 As we find from Asclepiodorus, who, speaking of Marinus, a philosopher, native of Neapolis πρὸς ὄρει-τῷ ̓Αργαρίζω καλουμένῳ near to the mountain called ' Argarizus,” is called by Damascius δυσσεβὴς καὶ βλασφημῶν, ' impious and blasphemous,' for adding that he saw on that mountain a temple Aids ὑψίστου of Jupiter Most High ᾧ καθιέρωτο ̓́Αβραμος ὁ τῶν πάλαι ἑβραίων póyovos, to whom Abraham, the father of the ancient Hebrews, was devoted (as priest); and he adds: ús avròs éλeyev d Mapîvos, "as Marinus himself relates." (Damasc. ap. Phot. Bibl. p. 1055, ed. Roter.) This same Marinus, at first a Samaritan, afterwards combated the Samaritan opinions, åre eis kaivotoμίαν ἀπὸ τῆς ̓Αβράμου θυσίας, ἀποῤῥνεῖσαν, as being innovations from the sacrifice of Abraham."

2 This, however, is said also of Mount Sinai in the Samaritan hymns.

3 Epistolæ Samar. ad Job. Ludolph. Ciza. 1688, p. 1, 6, &c.

4 Deut. iv. 20, sq.

5 Juynb. Comm. in Chron. Samar. p. 242.

6 Hist. A. I. p. 22.

7 Moroudj ez-zahab. vol. i. p. 87.

that "God commanded Abraham to sacrifice his son, whom God did redeem with a precious victim. The sacrifice of Abraham has given rise to different opinions: some say it was Isaac, others that it was Ishmael. If the command was given to Abraham at Mina, then Ishmael was sacrificed, l ud

for Isaac never entered the Hedjaz; but if لم تدخل الحجاز

the command came in Syria, then it was Isaac, aw will

”.for Ishmael never entered Syria لم يدخل الشام

XXI. Fourthly-Dr. Stanley pretends to fix the distance from "the land of the Philistines" to Mount Gerizim, by "one, two, three days' journey." But he must, first of all, fix where this land was; whether it was the land of the Philistines during their first or second settlements, and whereabouts in that land Abraham was, that he should take three days to go to Mount Gerizim. For unless we know the starting point, we shall find some difficulty in measuring the distance. We read that, after Abimelech and Phichol had made their covenant with Abraham at Beersheba, Abimelech and his captain "returned into the land of the Philistines,"2 i.e., to Gerar, his kingdom,3 between Kadesh and Shur, further south than Beersheba. If so, then, Beersheba could hardly be in 'Gerar,' where Abraham dwelt at first; yet, for all that, still in the 'land of the Philistines.' If, therefore, Abraham started from Beersheba for Mount Gerizim, he could not reach it in three days of Eastern travel, he on his ass, and Isaac and his two young men5 on foot.

As I did not travel for statistics, I never timed myself when once on the march, which lasted every day, except Sundays, from 3 or 4 to 9 or 10 A.M., and from 3 or 4 to 7 or 8 P.M.; I therefore borrow from Dr. Robinson's Itinerary6 the following distances:

Eliezer, who was then fifty-five years old, and Ishmael; according to tra

dition.

6 Res. vol. iii. pp. 66, 67, 81.