The Anti-universalist, or history of the fallen angels of the Scriptures; proofs of the being of Satan and of evil spirits: intended as a refutation of the three main points of universalism, namely, that there is no hell after death; no devil or Satan as a being; and no future day of final judgment / by Josiah Priest ; embellished with twenty-two engravings. Part I.
- Priest, Josiah, 1788-1851.
- Date:
- 1837
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: The Anti-universalist, or history of the fallen angels of the Scriptures; proofs of the being of Satan and of evil spirits: intended as a refutation of the three main points of universalism, namely, that there is no hell after death; no devil or Satan as a being; and no future day of final judgment / by Josiah Priest ; embellished with twenty-two engravings. Part I. Source: Wellcome Collection.
20/592 (page 12)
![such an enquiry, the Arabic lan^iage may be expected to alTom some help, on account of its great sinwlarity, and even relation to the Hebre^v. Here, before we pursue,, this autlior's reasonings on tliis sub¬ ject, at length, we will take occasion to state the recisons ?r/?y the Hebrew and Arabic languages, were most undoubtedly simi¬ lar, if not identically the same in the time of Moses, when the book of Genesis was written,—and therefore may be resorted to, as an aid in the interpretation of the Hebrew word Nacbashyixs well as of many others in that language. The Arabians claim Abraham as their fitther, throufrh the ancestry of Ishmael^ the son of Abraham, by the Eg}q)tian girl, or servant-maid of Sarah, tlie wife of Abraham. On which account, the Arabians were anciently known, and named among the nations, Ishmaelites^ the descendants of Ishmael, the son of Abraham. Now the language which Hagar and her son spoke: who was but thirteen years old, when he, with his mother, was compelled to leave the dwelling and company of Abraham's numerous household,—most assuredly was that of Abraham; consequently, it is clear, that the two languages, have the same origin, and that one of them arose out of the other ^ and who can now determine which is the purer Hebrew, the old Arabic, or Ishinaelite language, or the language of Moses and the Israel¬ ites, when they were among the Egyptians. It is true, that from the time in which Hagar and her son went out from Abraham, into the great wilderness, to commence the fulfilment of God’s word of promise to Abraham, concerning Ishmael, namely, that he should become a multitude, and that he should be a wild man, and that out of him twelve kings should proceed;—was till the time of Moses, all of four hundred years ; 3^et on account of the proximity of the Egyptians, where tlie Israelites in the land of Goshen were,during this four hundred years, and the Arabians, or Ishmaelite country, the language or dialect of the two races, cannot with any show of reason, be sup- ]X>sed to have been at all dissimilar; as the fact is, even '-.:oii\ they are exceedingly alike. Which of the two languages, as spoken by Moses, or as spoken by the Arabians, icheyi the Scriptures of both the Old and New Testaments, were first translated into their language, (which was not till after the Christian Era,) was most like the language of Abraham, is hard to decide. But of the Arabic language, Dr. Clarke says, that it is of great use, even noic. in understanding the most ancient Hebrew Manuscripts of the Bible. The fact, no doubt is, the two languages are brothers, arising out of the same source, and from the little intercourse of the Arabians or Ishma- elites, from time immemorial, with other nations, has aided in retaining their ancient manners, their customs, and their Ian-](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b29292785_0020.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
