The Second Argument to prove the Cana ancan Original of the Hebrew Tongue is deduced from hence, That though the Sacred Writers exprefly tell us, that feveral of the neighbouring Nations were of a Language dif ferent from the Hebrews, yet there is not the least thing like this faid of the Canaanites : Wę have already taken notice that this was fre quently obferved of the Chaldeans. The People of Egypt are called Lahez, Pfalm 114. 1. that is to lay Barbarous; befides there was an Interpreter between Jofeph, who pretended himself to be an Egyptian, and his Brethren, see Gen. 42. 23. likewife Pfal.81.6. In the mean time, though the Hebrews maintained such frequent Correfpondences with the Canaanites, and transaded fo much Business with them from Ahrabam down to Joshua, yet we find not the leaft mention of an Interpreter paffing between them.

The Third Argument arifes from the very use of the Interpreter whom Jofeph employed; for if only Jacob's Family fpoke Hebrew, How was it poflible for Jofeph to get an Interpreter ? He could have no other but fome Fugitive Servant, who would have foon known both Jofeph and his Brethren.

The Fourth is by Bachart, derived from the Remainders of the Phonician Tongue, which in the fecond Book of his Canaan, he amply demonftrates to be purely Hebrew,

We fhall add a Fifth, which proceeds from the manifeft Footsteps of Paganism, that are cafily

C

4

eafily to be traced in this Language. For fince Tongues are Images of the Sentiments of our Mind, and are form'd and modell'd according to the Opinion of thofe People that use them; it cannot otherwife happen, but that the common Speech of any Country, muft derive a great Tincture from the received Opinions of the Inhabitants. Thus learned Criticks have observed, that the Arabians have more than five hundred names for a Lyon, more than a thoufand for a Sword, two hundred at least for a Serpent, and fourfcore for Honey. The reason of it is, because the Arabians use frequently to talk of these things, fince their Country is fo pefter'd with Lyons and Serpents, is inhabited by a Warlike People, and abounds in Honey. 'Tis an eafie matter to obferve both in the Greek and Latin Tongues, though we were deftitute of all other Arguments, which are indeed innumerable, that the Greeks and Latins were of Opinion, that the Gods beheld the Actions of Mankind, and were Faithful Witnesses of the Truth, from those frequent Forms of Swearing, which they used fo everlastingly in all their Converfations.

I will not give my self the Trouble to confirm a Truth, which is fupported by so many Examples, not to mention the Custom of all the Modern Languages, but come immediately to the Point. The Hebrew Tongue which flourished, and was for fome time cultivated by the Canaanites, a People who had ftrange Notions

of

of the Divinity, and were infected with Polytheism, retain'd several visible Footsteps of those Errors,even after it became the Mother-Tongue of the Hebrews, who had quite different Sentiments. The Phenicians not only believed a Plurality of Gods, but ranked feveral Men in the number of their Deities (as Eufebius tells us Præp. Evang. 1. 1. c. 6.) and therefore more frequently made ufe of the word Elohim, which is of the Plural Number, than the Singular Eloha God, which we fee ftill continued in the Hebrew Language, though they maintain'd the contrary Opinion, and were always zealous Affertors of one God. Hence it comes to pafs, that sometimes they joyn a Verb in the Singular Number to it, pursuant to their own Notions of the Unity of God; and fometimes in the Plural, after the manner of their Neighbours, though they only meant one God by it, fee Gen. 1. 1. Chap. 20. 13. and our (e) Annota tions on those places. 'Tis alfo obfervable, that the fame word Elohim does not only fignifie the Supream God, but likewife Angels and Magiftrates. The reason of which is plain, Be

() Monfieur le Clerk is of opinion, that the Hebrews spoke the fame Language with the Inhabitants of Palaftine,an Idolatrous People, fo they borrowed this Fashion of speaking Artinês, i. e. in the Plural Number of God from them, though pursuant to their own Opinion, of the Unity of God, they attributed only a Singular Signification to a Plural word. Therefore 'tis not to be wonder'd at, that fometimes they joyn'd a fingular Verb to the word Elohim, as Gen. I. I. as having a greater regard to the Sense of the word, than the Number of it; and at other times ratione numeri babita, add a plural Verb to it, as Gen. 20, 13.

cause

cause the Phenicians did not observe a sufficient diftinction between God, Angels and Magiftrates, fince several Men were reputed as Gods by them. For otherwife if this Language had been invented, and cultivated by a People free from Idolatry, as the Hebrews afterwards were, they had neither communicated a name belonging to the Divine Nature to Creatures, nor had they used it plurally in their ordinary Dif courfes. 'Tis certain we have nothing like this in any of the Modern European Languages, may not in the Arabick of the Mahometans, who profefs themselves like the Europeans, to be invincible Adverfaries to Polytheism.

Every one knows that the Hebrews inveterately hated that Opinion, which fuppofes the Divinity to be a pomoques, i. e. refembling the Humane Nature; neither is it to be imagined, that these People, who were the Worshippers of one invifible eternal God, if they had had the inventing of their own Language, would have in their common Talk fo much favoured the abovementioned Opinion, from which we fee moft Chriftians now-a-days carefully abftain for the fame reafon. But the Holy Scri ptures afford us an infinite number of Examples of this "Ar8pwwanales; and Salom. Glaffius, a most induftrious and learned Writer, bestows the longest Chapter of his Sacred Rhetorick, which is the Seventh, Tract. 1. in enumerating them: And true it is, that mention is made of God's Soul, Face, Eyes, Ears, Nose, Mouth, Neck,

Arms

Arms, his right and left Hand, Fingers, Heart, Bowels, Bofom and Feet. Nor is this all, for an obferving Reader may find several other remarkable Inftances of the ̓Ανθρωποπάθεια upon other Occafions. We find attributed to God Sadneß, Repentance, Anger, Hatred, Jealouse, a Knowledge, not from Eternity and conftant to it felf, but acquired by Experience, Remembrance, Forgetfulneß, Laughter,Noise,Labour, Vows, Going down, Rifing up,Walking, Sleeping, Watching, and feveral things of the like nature, which though they are faid more humano, are yet to be underfood compeπs, which the abovementioned Learned Author has ingenioufly remark'd, whom the Reader, if he pleases, may confult himself. Thefe frequent Examples were formerly infifted upon, and abused by the 'Apo wooppita, from whose Errors nevertheless the Hebrews were always free, as they were from the Idolatry of their Neighbours.

Some feeble Objections may be urged against this Opinion, but they are fo effectually confuted by Bochart, that a Man must be incurably Obftinate, who after he has read his Reafons, will ftill perfift in the defence of them; fo that fince they will fall down of their own accord, if we do but remember what has been already advanced, 'tis not neceffary to dwell any longer upon them. But fome body perhaps will think to affright us with the Title of Holy, which is a Compliment the Jews have paffed their own Language. Now if they mean

upon

по