took place, that conjunction was called desire. Such was the beginning of the formation of all things. But the Spirit itself acknowledged no formation. From this conjunction of the Spirit was formed mot, which some call mud; others, a corruption of watery mixture, and of this came the seed of all creatures and the generation of the universe. There were certain animals, which had no sense, called Zophasemin, that is, the contemplators of heaven, being formed alike in the shape of an egg: and the mud, the sun, and the moon, the stars and the greater constellations, shone forth." Cudworth thinks that Sanchoniathon here teaches the same doctrine with Thales, who was a Phenician by extraction, and held that water was the first principle of all corporeal things, which were made out of water. It is probable that this was the opinion of the Phenician writer, as he asserts that the Spirit itself acknowledged no formation, that is, was uncreated.

The turbid chaos, involved in darkness, of which Sanchoniathon here speaks, bears a striking resemblance to the Mosaic account, "The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep." Bochart observes that the word used by the translator of Sanchoniathon to express the obscurity of the chaos, is originally from the Hebrew word ereb, evening. When it is said "that the Spirit was affected with love towards its own principles, and that this was the beginning of the formation of all things," it is scarcely conceivable that there is not an allusion to the Mosaic account: "And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters;" for, says Mr. Jamieson, “The Hebrew word rahhaph, implies the idea of love, as it expresses the incubation of a female bird." By the "Zoph asemin," some understand angels, and others, the heavenly bodies, which many of the heathens supposed to be intelligent, and therefore adored as deities. Grotius observes that Sanchoniathon, after the example of Moses, has made light prior to the sun; and that the mot of the former is merely the abyss or deep mentioned by the latter.

This system of the universe is evidently far less consistent with reason than the Mosaic account. It represents, it is true, the spirit of dark air as uncreated, but it, at the same time represents it as material, and thus by it eternity and infinity are ascribed to matter. It also lacks that simplicity which characterizes the Mosaic narrative, and which is no inconsiderable proof of its superior antiquity. The account of Sanchoniathon is so allegorical that there is reason to suspect this is not the first state in which the doctrine appeared. It is true that men in early stages of society use figurative expressions; but their language is simple, and it is used by them, not to obscure

the thought, but to give it the greater energy. But when the very ideas in which a doctrine is communicated are figurative and emblematical, in this there is evidence of a more advanced state of society; and the inference is either that the doctrine has been derived from others, or that although formerly known to all, it has become obscure through length of time, and that the more learned wish to keep it concealed from the vulgar. And it is worthy of remark, that the farther we go back in examining the opinions of any people, we have the greater evidence of their ascribing almost every great effect immediately to the first cause; for it is not until men have for some time addicted themselves to philosophical pursuits, that they give much attention to secondary causes.

It

may further be added that Sanchoniathon must have borrowed his account from the Mosaic narrative, for he acknowledges his obligations, in the compilation of his history, to Jerombaal, whom he calls priest of the God Iao; that thereby JEHOVAH is meant, is evident from the fact that Diodorus says, that "Moses among the Jews ascribed his laws to the God who is called Iao." From the resemblance of his cosmogony to the Mosaic account of the creation, as well as from the fact just stated, it has been supposed that the person referred to by the Phenician historian, under the name of Jerombaal, was Gideon, who was also called Jerubaal, as may be seen by consulting the book of Judges. The only difficulty is that Sanchoniathon calls him a priest, whereas Gideon was not of the tribe of Levi. But the heathen might consider him a priest, because he not only set up an ephod in his own city, to which all Israel resorted, but formerly, at the express command of God, had offered sacrifice.

There is a striking resemblance between the Phenician and the Egyptian account of the creation. According to the latter, "When the universe first coalesced, heaven and earth were of one form, their nature being blended together. But afterwards, the air began to have a constant motion, its fiery particles flew to the upper region; and hence proceeded the rapid circular motion of the sun and other stars. The muddy and turbid matter, after being incorporated with the humid, subsided in one place by its own weight. Thus the sea was formed of the watery parts; and the earth of the more solid. The humid matter being fecundated by the heat of the sun, all kinds of creatures were produced." Although no mention is made in this account, of an efficient cause, yet there is no inconsiderable agreement with the Mosaic narrative, both as to matter and order. Here we

of the earth; the mud, deep or abyss; the light, then the heavenly bodies; the separation of the heavens, sea and earth, and then the formation of living creatures.

The same coincidence is observable in the writings of other heathens. And their accounts of the chaos are attributed by themselves to tradition, which, according to some of them, is ascribed to a divine revelation. This idea seems to be conveyed by Plato, for he acknowledges that the hints which he and others had concerning the origin of all things, proceeded at first from a sacred fountain. For in his Timæus he says, "It is proper that I who speak, and that you who hear, should remember that we possess human nature only, and that therefore we can merely look for some probable fable or tradition. Nor is it lawful for us to inquire farther." It is also worthy of remark, that the heathen had some knowledge of the fact that all things were created by the word of God, agreeably to the Mosaic narrative, for Plato called the Creator of the world, the Word, or reason. Turtullian, addressing the heathen of his days, says, "Your wise men were of opinion, that the Word and Wisdom, which they called Logos, framed the world." Zeno says, that this Word was the author of order. To the same purpose the philosopher and poet Epicharmus, "From the Logos, or reason of God, the reason of man is derived." The language quoted by some ancient writers from the songs ascribed to Orpheus, is very remarkable: "I call to witness that voice of the Parent, which he first uttered when he founded the universe by his counsels."

Mr. Jamieson, in his sacred history, says that "Sanchoniathon, the Phenician historian, calls the first human pair Protogonus and Aeon. These, indeed, are only the Greek words, which Philo-Biblius, who translated Sanchoniathon's history from the Phenician, uses to express the meaning of the names given them in the original. But it is generally admitted, that by these are meant Adam and Eve, as Protogonus signifies first produced, and Aeon, life. The latter bears a near resemblance to Eve, both in sense and sound; for Havah, in Hebrew, signifies life, or living."

The same author also says, that "The ancient heathen represented the first man as partaking of both sexes. They therefore called him by a term which literally signifies man-woman. This evidently alludes to what we have in Scripture. But it will readily occur to every reasonable person, that the scriptural doctrine of the woman being formed immediately by divine power out of a part of the substance of the man, has far more intrinsic evidence of having been the ori

ginal doctrine, than that of one person possessing both sexes, and thus having a natural power of individual procreation, a power to which there is nothing analogous in nature."

One of the most striking confirmations of the Mosaic narrative of the creation, is to be found in the division of time into weeks. This has obtained equally among the Hebrews, the Egyptians, the Chinese, the Greeks and the Romans, and the barbarous tribes which peopled the northern states. Many of these nations had little or no intercourse with each other, and were wholly unknown to the Jews. This division was even accompanied with a special regard to the seventh day. Hesiod called it the seventh holyday, because among the Gentiles this was a day of solemn worship set apart for religious offices. It is observed by Lampudius, of Severus the emperor, that he used to go to the capitol, and frequent the temples on that day. Yea, the very term sabbath was used by some of them. Thus Suetonius says, "Diogenes, the grammarian, used to hold disputations at Rhodes on the sabbaths." And from Lucian, we learn, that the seventh day was a festival, and a play-day for shool boys. From these and several other instances which are to be found in Clemens Alexandrinus and Eusebius, it might be proved that the more solemn services of religion among the Gentiles, and their cessations from work, were on the seventh day of the week.

Pray, whence came this common division of time? there is nothing in the revolutions of nature to mark out this arrangement. The revolutions of the moon round the earth, and of the earth round the sun, might have originated the division of time, into months and years, but what could originate this division into weeks? Time was divided into days by the succession of light and darkness, or rather of darkness and light, (for this was the original order; it was so of necessity, since light is a positive effect of creative power, and various ancient nations put the night before the day, in their mode of computation, as do the Jews). But weeks are mere arbitrary arrangements. We see no reason why the week might not have been as conveniently composed of five, or nine days, as of seven. Can the prevalence of this opinion then in distant countries, and among nations who had little or no communication with each other, be explained upon any other ground than that of some remote tradition, which was never lost among the nations; and which must have been common among mankind before their dispersion? And can we find any satisfactory origin of this tradition except that which is suggested in

it." It is easy to understand how the institution of a sabbath at the beginning, to commemorate the accomplishment of the work of creation in six days, should originate this division; and this being admitted, it is easy to perceive how the practice should remain through habit, even when the knowledge of its origin had been lost. But it is altogether inconceivable how, without such common origin, a practice so arbitrary could have been either introduced, or practiced. So that this division of time into weeks constitutes a convincing proof that the families of the earth must have proceeded from one common progenitor; that they originally worshiped the one true and living God, and that their religion was the same with that stated in the writings of Moses. Wherever the claims of the Scriptures are maintained, this division of time comes in to their aid. The doctrine of a weekly sabbath is both commended and supported by this arrangement; and the goodness as well as the wisdom of God in the general aspect of his government upon mankind, is illustrated and proved. The very traditions of revelation, obscure and imperfect as they are, are thus shown to be valuable memorials of Divine mercy; and to sustain an important relation to the general development of his plan for bringing back the world to its original allegiance and happiness.

SECTION II.

INFIDELS object to the credibility of the writings of the Old Testament on account of the relation of the fall of man given by Moses. Mr. Paine on this subject says, "If Genesis be the oldest book in the world, and, consequently, the oldest and first written book of the Bible; and if the extraordinary things related in it, such as the creation of the world in six days, the tree of life, and of good and evil, the story of Eve and the talking serpent, the fall of man, and his being turned out of Paradise, were facts, or even believed by the Jews to be facts, they would be referred to as fundamental matters, and that very frequently, in the books of the Bible, that were written by various authors afterwards: whereas there is not a book, chapter, or verse of the Bible, from the time Moses is said to have written the book of Genesis, to the book of Malachi, the last book in the Bible, including a space of more than a thousand years, in which there is any mention made of these things, or any of them, nor are they so much as alluded to."

"The extraordinary things" stated by Mr. Paine above, are men