was to offer it; and his only son was to be the victim: and, as I have shewn, that this could not relate to any thing prior, let us consider what is said upon the subject, as future, and attend to the consequence. For, if the sacrifice of the Phenicians was a type of another to come, the nature of this last will be known from the representation, by which it was prefigured. According to this, El, the supreme Deity, whose associates were the Elohim, was in process of time to have a son ; αγαπητον, well beloved; μονογενη, his only begot ten who was to be conceived, as some render it* grace, but according to my interpretation, of the fountain of light. He was to to be called Jeoud, whatever that name may relate to; and

of

:

"I cannot help thinking that Anobret is the same as Ouranus; and however it may have been by the Greeks dif ferently constructed, and represented as the name of a wo man, yet it is reducible to the same elements with Ouranus; and is from the same radix, though differently modified. I take it to have been originally Ain Ober, the fountain of light, the word being rendered variously, Aur, Aver, Aber, Ober."-Now Ouranus, Bryant had before derived in like manner, making it, the transposition of Ain Aur or Our, the fountain of light; written Our ain, and thence by the Greeks Ouranos.-Bryant's Observ. &c. pp. 295, 291.-Bochart however derives the word Anobret differently: thus,, An-oberet, i. e. ex gratiâ concipiens: which, he says, is a just appellation for Sara, the wife of Abraham.-Boch. Phal. (Opera tom. i. p. 712.).

+ The Hebrew word

Jehid, signifies unicus, solitarius,

to be offered up as a sacrifice to his father, λvTeov, by way of satisfaction, and redemption, Tpois Sapori, to atone for the sins of others, and ροις δαίμοσι, avert the just vengeance of God; αντι της παντων Fogas, to prevent universal corruption, and at the same time general ruin. And, it is farther remarkable, he was to make this grand sacrifice, βασιλικω σχηματι κεκοσμημενος, invested with the emblems of royalty.-These surely are very strong expressions; and the whole is an aggregate of circumstances highly significant, which cannot be the result of chance. All that I have requested to be allowed me in the process of this recital, is this simple supposition, that this mystical sacrifice was a type of something to come. How truly it corresponds to that, which I imagine it alludes to, I submit to the reader's judgment. I think it must necessarily be esteemed a most wonderful piece of history."-Bryant's Observations on various parts of Ancient History, p. 286–292.

A most wonderful piece of history, undoubtedly, this must be confessed to be: and a most wonderful resemblance to the one great and final sacrifice is it thus made to present to the view. One impediment, however, in the way of a full and entire assent to the conclusion of the learned writer, arises from the consideration, that if we It is the very

and is frequently applied to an only son. word used of Isaac in Gen. xxii. 2.

suppose this mystical sacrifice of the Phenicians, to have contained the typical allusion contended for, we must then admit, that among that most idolatrous and abandoned people, (as we learn from the Scripture history the people of Canaan or Phenicia were,) a more exact delineation of the great future sacrifice was handed down by tradition, than was at the same early age vouchsafed to the favoured nation of the Jews. The prophetic tradition, giving birth to the institution, had probably, Bryant observes, been preserved in the family of Esau, and so transmitted through his posterity to the people of Canaan. But was it not at least as likely that such a tradition would have been preserved in the family of Isaac, and so transmitted through his posterity to the people of the Jews? I am upon the whole therefore rather disposed to think, that this sacrifice of the Phenicians, grew out of the intended sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham, to which the circumstances of the history seem to correspond in many particulars.

First, it is remarkable, that the very name, by which God describes Isaac, when he issues his order to Abraham to offer him in sacrifice, is TT, Jehid, agreeing with the Phenician name Jeud given to the son of Kronus. Again, if Anobret has been justly explained by Bochart, as sig

*"Take now thy son, (77) thine only son." Gen. xxii. 2.

nifying "ex gratiâ concipiens," no epithet could be with greater propriety applied to Sara, the wife of Abraham; of whom the apostle says, "Through faith Sara received strength to conceive,-when she was past age." Again, that Abraham should be spoken of by the Phenicians, as a king, who reigned in those parts, is not unlikely, considering his great possessions and rank* amongst the surrounding people: and if the name assigned by the history be actually Israel, or, as the abbreviation of Israel, little doubt can then remain as to its application, there being nothing unreasonable, (notwithstanding Vossius's remark noticed in p. 383,) in supposing him called by the title of the famous Patriarch whose progenitor he was, and from whom a whole people took its If even we should suppose the true reading to be Il, as equivalent to the El of the Hebrews, and so consider him as ranked amongst the divinities of the Phenicians, as the other parts of the history undoubtedly describe Kronus to have been, there is nothing in this so very surprizing: especially when it is remembered, that Kronus is related to have been advanced from a mortal to the heavens. There is also an expression used of Abraham in Gen. xxiii. 6, which, by a slight variation of the rendering, would actually represent him as a supreme God, in perfect correspondence

name.

*See Gen. xxiii. 6, where Abraham is addressed as a king. Thou art a mighty prince among us."

1

with all that we have seen applied to Kronus. The expression I allude to is N, which is strictly rendered a prince of God, a known Hebraism for a MIGHTY prince, as it is accordingly given in the common bible, the literal English being placed in the margin. Now this might with equal accuracy, ( being a plural word) be rendered, a prince of GODs, and would accordingly by those who held a plurality of Gods, as the Canaanites did, be so rendered: and thence he would come to be considered as supreme, or chief among the gods. And accordingly we find the Elohim, described as the associates of Kronus : Σύμμαχοι Ιλε το Κρονκ Ελωειμ επεκληθησαν. (Euseb. Præp. Evang. p. 37.) But yet farther, another circumstance remains to be noticed, which seems to give confirmation to the idea, that Abraham was the Kronus of Sanchoniatho. We are told of Kronus by this writer, (Præp. Ev. p. 38.) that he was the author of the rite of circumcision. Και τα αιδοία περιτεμνεται, ταυτο ποι ησαι και τις αμ' αυτω συμμαχες καταναγκασας; Etiam pudenda sibi ipse circumcidit, sociosque omnes ad simile factum per vim adigit. This exactly corresponds to what is said of Abraham, in Gen. xvii. 27.--See Stilling. Orig. Sacr, pp. 371, 372. Shuckford's Connexion, i. pp. 326, 327, and particularly Bochart Phaleg. tom. i, pp. 711, 712.

cc 4