THat now why the Teachers of the World, Schollars and School-masters, teach People and Children which will not have People, nor Children, speak Thou to one, and You to many, is not sense, nor good Latine, nor good English, nor good Greek, nor Hebrew: Therefore, to you that stumble at the word Thou to a particular, because we do not say You to a particular, is this

BATTLE-DOOR is for you to learn, that you may speak Thou to one, Singular, You to many, Plurall.

In Latine, Tu is thou singular, and Vos is you plural.

In Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 attah, Thou man singular, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 attem, Ye, or You men plural.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or atti, thou woman singular, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 atten, ye, or you women plural.

In Greek, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Su is thou singular: and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , hun • eis is you, or ye plural.

The Arabick is the same, Thou to one, You to many. The Syriack, Aethopick, Caldee, the Egyptian, the Samaritan, &c.

God spoke singular to one, God spoke plural to many.

Christ spoke singular to one, He spoke plural to many.

Ths Saints spoke singular to one, The Saints spoke plural to many.

Come Priests and Professors, Schollars and School-masters, you have the Original, as you call it; to you is this BATTLE-DOOR.

Is not your own Original, Thou to one singular, and You to many plural; and proper speech, not non-sence? Do not they speak false English, false Latine, false Greek, false Hebrew, false O • ldee, false Syriack, and Arabick, false Dutch, false French; and false to the other Tongues, that followes here in this Book, that doth not speak thou to one, what ever he be, Father, Mother, King, or Judge, is he not a Novice, and Unmannerly, and an Ideot, and a Fool, that speaks You to one, which is not to be spoken to a singular, but to many?

O Vulgar Professors, and Teachers, that speaks Plural when they should Singular, lapis a stone, lapides stones, that is, more than one.

Come you Priests and Professors, have you not learnt your Accidence. Singulariter, Ama amato,love thou Amet amato,love he, or let him love

Say on,

Amemus, love we, or let us love. Amate amatote, love ye Ament amanto, love they, or let them love.

And Singular. Amo, I love Amas, thou lovest Amat, he loveth Plural. Amamus, we love Amatis, ye love Amant, they love

Will not Boyes, and Children, shame Professors and Teachers, through Pride and Ambition, to be degenerated from their own Mother Tongue; to be Fools, and Novices, and Ideots, from that which they learned when they were Children.

But you Teachers, Professors, Schollars and Magistrates, who rages at them that speaks Singular to Sing. and Plural to Plural, who pretend that you know Accidence and Grammar, Logick, Rhetorick, and Divinity; yet in practice you must have your BATTLE-DOOR again, but is this Schollar-ship true English, Latine, or sence to say of us, instead of, of me, to us for to me; towards us for towards me, and to put off you, for off thee? and is not this non-sence, and false English, and false Latine, to put Nos, vos, illi; we, ye, you, and they instead of Ego, tu ille, I, thou, and he. Read on: Singular I of me to me towards me from me Plural we of us to us towards us from us Singular Thou of thee to thee towards thee O thou from thee Plural Ye of you to you towards you O you from you Singular He of him to him by him with him she of her to her by her with her it of it to it by it with it Plural They of them to them by them with them Singular My thy Plural our your Singular his, her Plurall their, theirs Singular My selfe I my self my own selfe Plural Our selves we our selves our own selves Singular Thy selfe thou thy selfe thine one selfe Plural Your selves you your selves your own selves Singular him selfe her selfe it selfe Plural themselves Singular he himselfe she herselfe Plural they themselves Singular his own selfe her own selfe its own selfe Plural their own selves

To put us for me, and they for he, and you for thou, and we for I; and to put every one of these words aforesaid out of its proper place, would it not be confusion, and like unto the confused Priests and Teachers speech in the world?

Come Professors, Teachers and Magistrates, would you not be offended to say Author for Authors, and to say in Authors for in an Author; or to the Authors, for to the Author? is not this non-sence, and such as knows not Singular and Plural? or at least doth not practice it: and to say learned Authors, for a learned Author, will this please you? Plural for Singular? or to say Books for a Book, or the Books for a Booke, or in Books for in a Book, is it not contrary to Plural, and Singular, and sence, and your own Schoole-directions, and contrary to English and Latine?

Is not Singular, a Book, an Author, and old Author; and is not Plural, Books, Authors, and old Authors? do not rage at them that do not speak Plural to Singular.

But read the BATTLE-DOOR, that you may come to the Accidence, Grammer, and Bible; you who pretend you have the Histories.

Who was the first that brought up this evil custome, to put you for thou, or to say we when you should say I; and they, when you should say he; our, when you should say mine, us, when you should say me; your, when you should say thy?

Answer ye learned men; who hath brought this evill custome to put Plural for Singular? Come ye Doctors and School-masters, and Teachers, and Professors, and Magistrates: Come ye peevish Professors, and Teachers, answer me, and so read again you three Persons (so called) Singular, and Plural, in this BATTLE-DOOR.

Singular I thou he Plural We ye or you they

Ego tu ille that is I thou he Singular

nos vos illi that is We ye or you they Plural

Now it is not nos I, nor ego wee, but ego I, and nos wee; it is not tu you, nor vos thou, but tu thou, and vos ye or you; it is not ille they, and illi he, but ille he, and illi they.

PRofessors, Teachers, and Magistrates, would it not be nonsence, and not right English, to say doces you teachest; legis you readest? And would it not be false English, and false Latine, and non-sence, to say, audis you hearest? yet you Professors and Teachers, and Magistrates, are in such a rage against a simple and Innocent People, for speaking the word thou to one, and you to more than one; and call them Fools, and say they cannot speak true English.

But come ye before Mentioned, and read; is it not docetis ye teach, legitis ye read, auditis ye heare? and is it not doces thou teachest, legis thou readest, and audis thou hearest? have you forgott Amo, amas, amat, amamus, amatis, amant? In English, I love, thou lovest, he loveth, we love, ye love, they love.

And when one of your Priests goes to a Towne to Teach, for him to say docemus we teach; were this truer English, or truer Latine, than to say doceo I teach? is it proper English and Latine for our Professors, and Teachers, and Magistrates, for them to say Amo we love, amas you love, amat they love? is this good Latine, or good English, you Schollars and Old Professors, and Magistrates, which rage so at such as speak not Plural, but Singular to one?

Come to the BATTLE-DOOR again; but is not this the proper English, and proper speech, you Professors, Teachers, and Magistrates for to say, Amo, I love, amas, thou lovest, amat, he loveth, singular? Amamus, we love, amatis, ye love, amant, they love; plural?

But this is that which pleases the Teachers, Magistrates and Professors of Christs words out of the life, (to whom this BATTLE-DOOR is sent to read) for to say Amamus, I love, amatis, thou lovest, amant, he loveth; is this good Latine, and good English, and good sence, you that cannot beare the Singular Language to a single person your selves. Pluraliter, docetis, thou teach; docent, he teach? and is it good Latine, and good English, and good sence, to say Legitis, thou readest, legunt, he readeth, Audimus, I hear, audio, we hear?

Now if you teach that which you call the Singular Number, instead of the Plural, and the Plural, instead of the Singular; and will not have them to practice it, nor speak it, but are angry with them because they do speak Plural and Singular; and yet you teach them in your Accidence, the Plural and the Singular, are not you the Novices, Fools, and Ideots, and keep People and Children in Ignorance, that they shall neither speak true sence, nor true English, nor true Latine, but speak false?

Doce, doceto, teach ye; lege, legito, read ye; audi, audito, hear ye; you School-masters, you Ministers, and Doctors, and Magistrates, is this good English? is this good Latine? is this good sence? who rages at the people of God called Quakers, because they speak the word thou to one? would not your School-masters have whipped you, if you had read so? and will you persecute others because they say, doce, doceto, teach thou; lege, legito, read thou? will you persecute us because this wee practice, and say thou to a particular: But to say the Plural in the Singulars place, you, for thou, this pleases our Priests, and School-masters, and Peevish Magistrates: Thou's thou me, Cry they: and thus they have forgotten their Accidence.

The proper Speech, true Latine, true Sence, true understanding, true English, which Teaches Plural and Singular, it hath not been the booke that taught friends Spiritual understanding, but the Lord.

Come Professors, Teachers, and School-masters, and Schollars, and Magistrates, learn the pure Language, learn Friends Language; learn Plural and Singular; To say hi lapides, a stone; is not this non-sence? or is it good English or Latine, you that love Plural to the Singular, and cannot endure the Singular to the Singular, but the Plural to the Singular? Therefore we gave you here the Plural to the Singular?; See if this would not be non-sence to you, false English, and false Latine, and stink in your own Nostrills; but this is the true English, and true Latine, we must tell you all School-masters, and Professors, and Magistrates, that rages so against us that Lapides, is stones Plural, that is many stones, or more than one; and lapis, is a stone Singular.

Come Teachers, Schollars, Professors, and Magistrates, is this true English, good Latine, proper sence for to say, hi Magistri, a Master; and hic Magister, Masters? so when he calls master, he calls masters; is this sence you that cannot endure thou to a Singular, but would have Plural to him? is not hic Magister, a Master; and hi Magistri, Masters? is not a master Singular, and masters, Plural? is not this proper sence, proper English, and proper Latine. Who are the Ideots, Novices and Fools, but such as have learned most of their life time, and cannot bear singular to one, as the word thou; but he rages, and frets, and knaws himself?

Come Priests, and Schollars, and Magistrates, hoc Regnum, Kingdoms: is this sence? and haec Regna, a Kingdom; is this good Latine? is not this like unto the English sence, and their Teachers, Schollars, Magistrates and Professors Language, who will take plural to the singular, and offended, if the plural be not spoken to the singular. Are not these the men that have abused the English Tongue, and darkned the people from good sence? but the plural and singular is this, in your Accidence; Hoc Regnum, a Kingdome, singular: and the plural is Haec Regna, Kingdomes; not Haec Regna, Kingdome, nor Hoc Regnum, Kingdomes.

You Schollars, and Teachers, and Magistrates; is not Musa, a Song; and Musae, Songs? Now, to put Musae, for Musa, Songs, for Song, would be Improper, and very Boyes would laugh at the Teachers, Professors, and Magistrates faces, because they do speak plural, when they are to speak singular; Musae, Songs, instead of Musa, a Song.

And Filia, a Daughter, and Filiae, Daughters; not Filiae, for Filia; not Daughters; for Daughter.

And Mensa, a Board, or a Table in the singular, and Mensae, Tables, or Boards in the plural number: not Mensae, for a Table, but Mensa.

And Dominus, Lord, and Domini, Lords; now, to say Dominus , Lords; is this sence?

And Deus, God, and Dii, Gods; and to say Dii, for Deus, Gods, for God; would not this be non-sence? and is not Deus, singular; and Dii, plural?

And Is't Pater, a Father, in the singular; and Patres, Fathers, in the plural: now to put Patres, for Pater, this were to put Fathers, for Father; plural for singular; for Pater, a Father, is singular; and Patres Fathers, is Plural.

Caput, a Head, singular; and Capita, Heads, plural; but to put Capita, for Caput, is to put plural, for singular; many Heads, for one Head: and is not this the doings of the Professors, Teachers, and Magistrates?

Animal, a living Creature; Animalia, living Creatures; to put Animalia, for Animal; is to put the plural, for the singular; and to say many Creatures are one, and one is many.

Mater, a Mother; and Matres, Mothers: Now, to say Matres, for Mater; is to put plural for singular again.

Homo, a man; Homines, men; and to say Homines, to a man, instead of Homo, a man; and that is the Language, that must please our Teachers, Professors, and Magistrates, to put the plural to the singular: But Homo, is a man; and Homines, is men.

And in the fourth Declention, so called, it's read Haec Manus, a hand, and Hae Manus, hands; not Hae Manus, a hand, nor Haec Manus, hands; and to say many hands, where there is but one hand, is that sence?

And it's Haec Facies, a Face, in the singular; and Hae Facies, Faces, in the plural.

And is not Bonum, a good thing; and Bona, good things: but to put Bona, for Bonum; things, for thing; a plural for a singular; This is the Professors, and Teachers, and Lawyers Road; it will not please them, unless the plural be put for the singular: and all are Novices, and Fools, and Ideots, and unmannerly, and ill-breed, and wants learning, and do not speak plural to them when he should speak singular; when plural is many or more than one; and singular is one; as Bonum, a good thing, and Bona, good things; and Homo, a man; and Homines, men; and to put Homo, men, and Homines, a man; is not this it that pleases you, is not this non-scence? and is not this it that pleases the Ideots, and the Fooles, and the Novices, and ill-breed; when a manor a woman will grin like doggs, if they have thou spoken to one, and not you.

PEr insegnarli di parlare secondo le lor direttioni Grammaticali, nelle quali, come anco nella lor traduttione de la bibbia, si servono del plurale e singolare, [tù] ad uno, e, [voi] a molti, ancor che nella prattica lor si son degenerati, cosi ben che l' inghilterra, la francia e gli altri dominii del Papa, perche, come ho dimostrato, che nel latino Ego è per Io, tu per tù, ille per colui, nos per noi, vos per voi, & illi per coloro, cosi osserva qui, quali paroli che hanno posto ne i libri loro, come direttioni, per li fanciulli e genti, per imparare la lingua lor.

That is:

TO teach them to speak according to their Grammatical directions, in which, as also in their Translation of the Bible, they use the plural and singular, [tù] thou to one, & [voi] ye or you to many; although in their practise they are degenerated, as well as England, France; and the rest of the Popes Dominions; for, as I have shewed, that in the Latine Ego is for I, tu for thou, Ille for he; n • s for we, vos for ye or you, and illi for they, so mind here, what words they have put in their Book • ; as Directions for Children and People to learn their Language by. Il Singolare is the Singular. Il Plurale is the Plural l' huomo is the man gli, or li huomini is the men dell' huomo of the man de gli, or delli huomini of the men all' huomo to the man a gli, or alli huomini to the men O huomo O man O huomini O men dall' huomo from the man dagli O dalli huomini from the men Singolare è Singular Plurale   Plural, il padre è the father i padri is the fathers del padre of the father de', or de i padri of the fathers al padre to the father a' o a i padri to the fathers O padre O father O padri O father dal padre from the father da' o da i padri from the fathers Singolare Singular Plurale Plural la donna the woman le donne the women de la, or della donna of the woman de le o delle donne of the women a la o alla donna to the woman a le, or alle donne to the women O donna O woman O donne O women de la, or dalla donna from the woman da le o dalle donne from the women

Hor per dire gli huomini, i padri, le donne, quando si debba dire l' huomo, il padre, la donna; è questo buon Italiano, O buon senso O proprieta di parlare? e non è questo di dire che sono molti huomini molti padri, O molte donne, quando non e piu d'un huomo, d'un padre, O d'una donna.

That is:

Now to say the men, the fathers, the women; when you should say the man, the father, the woman; is this good Italian, good sence or proper speech? and is not this to say that there are many men, many fathers, or many women; when there is but one man, but one father, or but one woman? Singolare Singular Io is I Tu thou colni, egli, ei, e', & quello he Plurale Plural noi is we voi ye, or you Coloro, loro, Eglini, & quelli they

Hor per dire [noi] in luoco di [Io] O [Coloro] in vece di [Colui]; saria questo buon • enso, O a proposito? & ancora non è tanto a proposito quanto di dire [voi] in luoco di [tù?]

That is:

Now to say [we] instead of [I] or [they] in lieu of [he,] would this be good sense, or proper? and yet would it not be as proper, as to say [ye or you] in place of [thou?]

singolare il mio plurale i miei singular & plural mine male la mia le mei female il tuo i tuoi thine male la tua le tue female il suo i suoi his male la sua le sue female singolare il nostro plurale i nostri singular & plural is our male la nostra le nostre female il vostro i vostri your male la vostra le vostri female il loro i loro or lor' their male la loro le loro or lor' female

Hor per dire il nostro, il vostro, il loro, quando se debba dire il mio, il tuo, il suo, non è questo di parlare come d'un pluralita di persone quando una sola persona s'intende? questo non è huon Italiano, ne parlar propriamente, ma falso, e non savio.

That is:

Now, to say our, your, their, when you should say mine, thine, his: is not this to speak as of a plurality of persons, when one single person is intended? this is not good Italian, nor to speak properly; but false, and not wise. Singolare   Singular Plurale   Plural Io amo is I love noi amiamo is we love tù ama thou lovest voi amate ye, or you love colui ama he loveth Coloro amano they love

Hor per dire noi amiamo, voi amate, Coloro amano quando si debba dire, Io amo, tù ami, colui ama; non è questo di parlare nel plurale pello singolare?

That is:

Now to say we love, ye love, they love, when you should say, I love, thou lovest, he loveth: is not this to speak in the plural for the singular? Singolare   Singular Plurale   Plural Io sono is I am noi siamo is we are tù sei thou art voi sete ye, or you are Colui è he is coloro sono they are

Hor per dire noi • iamo, voi sete, Coloro sono, quando si debba dire Io sono, tù sei, colui è sariae questo buon Italiano, e parlar al propo • ito, come dotto? O parlare come un stol • o & un pazzo?

That is:

Now to say, we are, ye are, they are, when you should say, I am, thou art he, is, would this be good Italian, and to speak proper as learned? or to speak as a Fool and a Mad-man?

E adesso, voi che dite [tù] a i vostri servi di bassa conditione, e [voi] a i vostri servi da megliore stìma (come si chiama) e [vosignoria] l'un a l'altro; Non sete voi degenerati dallo vosiro proprio Linguaggio Volgare, e per la vostra superbia & ambitione, parlate contrario alle vostre grammatiche proprie e Bibbia? E cosi sete cascati nel rispetto di persone, dicendo [tù] a i vostri servi di bassa conditione (come si dice) e non [Voi] a quelli, ma [Voi] a i vostri servi da megliore stima, & a gli artefici, e [V. S.] l' un a l' altro. Non è questo quell' antichristo ch' è inalzato sopra tutto quello che si dice Iddio? Perche, dite voi [Voi o V. S.] a Dio, o a Christo? & anchora l'arrogate a voi stessi; dite voi a Dio o a Christo, Io • vi pregho O signore? O, Io pregho V S O signore? come Voi dite a l'huomo Vano & ambitioso: Anco non destrugge questo tutta la vostra instruttione nelle vostre Gramatiche laqual' è [tù] ad uno, e [voi] a molti? e piu, non sta la vostra bibbia testimoni • al' incontro dello vostro parlare cosi, & a l' incontro della vostra accettation di persone?

That is?

And now you that say [tù] thou, to your servants of low degree, and [voi] you, to your servants of better account (as you call it) and [vo signoria] that is your Lord-ship to one another; are not you degenerated from your own Mother Tougue, and through your Pride and Ambition, do speak contrary to your own Grammers, and Bible? And so are falne into the respect of persons, saying, [tù] that is thou, to your servants of mean account, (as you call it) and not, [voi] that is, you to them, but [voi] you, to your servants of better esteem, and to Artificers, and [V. S.] your Lord-ship to one another. Is not this the Antichrist, who is exalted above all that is called God? for, do ye say, [voi], you, or [V S] your Lord-ship to God▪ or to Christ? and yet do take it to your selves; do you say to God or to Christ, I beseech you O Lord, or I beseech your Lord-ship, O Lord? as ye say to Vain and Ambitious Man: and doth not this destroy all your Teaching in your Grammers, which is [tù] thou to one, and [voi] ye to many? again, doth not your Bible stand a witnesse against your so speaking, and against your respect of persons?

Qui seguitano alcuni essempi • fuor della scrittura, del [tù] e del [voi.] Il Centurione parlando a Christo medesi • o, gli diede del [tù] Matth. 8. dicendo.

Signore io non son degno che [tù] entri sotto'l mio totto, &c. Nota, qui non si dice, signore io non son degnò che [V S] entre, &c. O, che [voi] entrate, &c. ma che [tù] entri, &c. E Gie su rispondendo disse a lui, nel ver. 13. va e secondo che [tù] hai creduto, cosi ti sia fatto. Anco qui Christo disse, [va] nella seconda persona Singolare, e non [andate] nel plurale, ne [vada] nella • erza persona singolare come voi; E secondo che [tù] hai creduto cosi ti sia fatto, non secondo che voi havete creduto, cosi vi sia fatto, O secondo che V S ha creduto cosi gli sia fatto.

That is:

Here follow some scriptures Examples concerning Thou, and You.

The Centurion speaking to Christ himselfe, [as the Italians Phrase it] gave him the thou, or thou'd him, Matth. B. saying, Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldst enter under my roof, &c. Note, here it' not • aid, Lord I am not worthy that your Lord-ship should enter, &c. or that you should enter, &c. but that thou should'st enter, &c. And Jesus answering, said unto him, in the 13. ver. Go thou, and according as thou hast beleeved, so be it done unto thee: again, here Christ said, Go thou, • n the second person Singular, and not go ye, in the Plural, nor let him go, in the 3. person Singular, as you do: And according as thou half believed, so be it done unto thee; not according as you have believed, so be it done unto you; or according as your Lord-ship hath believed, so be it done unto him.

Mu Chris • o parlando a quei che lo seguitavane, disse Io [vi] di •• in Veritù. E. parlando a Simono chiamato Pietro, & Andreo suo fratello, 4. Matth. 18. disse lor • , Venite dietro a me, & io vi faro pescatori d' huomini, Qui Christo non disse, io ti dic • , ma io vi dico in verita, ne, veni dietro a me, & io ti faro, &c. ma venite dietro a me, & io vi faro pescatori di huomini.

That is:

But Christ speaking to those that followed him, said, Verily I say unto [you]. And speaking to Simon called Peter, and Andrew his Brother, Matth. 4. 19. said unto them, Come [ye] after me, and I will make [you] Fishers of men. Here Christ did not say, I say unto [thee,] but verily I say unto [you;] nor come [thou] after me, and I will make thee, &c. but come ye after me, and I will make you Fishers of Men.

Il giouene il eugino di Paolo Parlasse nel Singolare al Capitano, gli Fatti di Apostoli, 23. cap. 20. & egli disse. I Giudei si son composti, di pregarti che domani tù meni fuor Paolo, &c. osserva, non è di pregar Vi, o di pregar V. S. ma di pregarti, &c. E che [tù] meni, &c. non che Voi menete &c. o che V. S. mene fuor Paolo, &c. Altra Volta, V. 21. ma [tù] non compiacer lore, qui è [tù] non voi, ne V. S.

That is:

The young man, pauls kins-man, spake in the singular to the Captaine, the Acts of the Apostles the 23. chapter and the 20. verse, and he said, The Iewes are agreed to desire thee, that thou would'st bring forth Paul to morrow, &c. mark, it is not to desire you, or to desire your Lord-ship, but to desire thee, &c. and that thou would'st bring, &c. not that you would bring, &c. or that your Lord-ship would bring forth Paul, &c. again, ver. 21. But do not thou yield unto them: here it is [thou,] not you, nor your Lord-ship.

E Paolo parlando al Re Agrippa, I Fatti di Ap. 26. cap. v. 19. disse, Io desiderarei da dio che & in poco & in molto non sol [tù] ma ancor tutti, &c. osserva altravolta, è [tù] non voi, ne V. S. e pin, ver. 29. Credi [tù] Re Agrippa, a i Profeti? Io so che [tù] credi, qui è, credi tù? & Io so che tù credi. Non credete voi? & Io so che voi credete. Ne crede V. S.? & io so che V. S. crede.

That is:

And Paul speaking to King Agrippa, the Acts of the Apostles the 26. chap. ver. 29. said, I would to God, that not only [thou] but also all, &c. observe again, it's [thou] not you, nor your Lord-ship: and again, Ver. 29. King Agrippa, Believest thou the Prophets? I know that thou believest. Here it is, dost thou believe? and I know that thou dost believe. Not, do you believe? and I know that you do believe. Nor, doth your Lordship believe? and I know that your Lord-ship doth believe.

E Agrippa parlando a Paolo disse, in poca cosa, mi persuadi, a far mi christiano. Non è, in poca cosa mi persuadete, &c. Ne V. S. mi persuade, a far mi Christiano.

That is:

And Agrippa speaking to Paul, said, Almost thou perswadest me to be a Christian. It is not, Almost you perswade me, &c. Nor your Lord-ship perswadeth me to be a Christian.

E Paolo diede del in a Pietro, 2 Gal. 14. Dissi in presentia di tutti, se tu (non voi, ne V S.) che sei Giudeo, &c.

That is:

And Paul thou'd Peter, 2 Gal. 14. I said before them all, if thou, (not you, nor your Lordship) who art a Iew, &c.

Ma Paolo scriuendo a i Santi, parlaua in plurale, [voi] 1 Gal. 3. Gratia e Pace a voi, &c. non a te, &c.

That is:

But Paul writing to the Saints, spake plural, you, 1 Gal. 3. Grace and peace unto you; not unto thee.

E Christo disse [tù] a Pietro, quando disse, Ami tu me? non amate voi me? O mi ama V. S? Saria questo buon Italiano voi Giesuiti, e Frati, e Cardinali, e Papae, di porre [Voi] in luoco di [tù?] O per usar la medesima parola [Voi] quando parlate ad uno, com • quando parlate a piu? perche non vi servite del [tù] quando parlate a molti, cosi ben che del [Voi] quando parlate ad uno? perche, [voi] è la parola ch' è posta nelle vostre grammattiche per molti, cosi ben che [tù] per uno? e quello s'intende esser usato sempre, quando si parla ad uno, e [voi] quando si parla a piu d'uno. E cosi christo disse [voi] quando parlasse a gli scribi e pharisei, Matth. 23. 16. G • ai a [voi] guide cieche. non Guai a [te] guide cieche. Non saria questo cecita, di mettre a te, per a voi, o a voi per a te.

That is:

And Christ said [thou] to Peter, when he said, Lovest thou me? not do you love me? or doth your Lord-ship love me? would this be good Italian, you Jesuites, and Fryars, and Cardinalls, and Pope, to put [you] instead of [thou] or to use the same word [you] when you speak to one, as when you speak to more? wherefore, do you not use [tù] thou, when you speak to many, as well as [voi] ye, or you, when you speak to one? for [voi] ye is the word which is put in your Grammars for many, as well as [tù] thou, for one▪ and that is intended to be used alwayes, when one is spoken to, and [voi] you, when more than one is spoken to: And so Christ said, [voi] y • u, when he spake to the Scribes and Pharisees, Matth. 23. 16. Woe unto you blind guides; not woe unto [thee] blind guides: would not this be blindnesse to put unto thee, for unto you; or unto you, for unto thee.

THE GREEK Language hath it's proper distinctions betwixt the Singular, Duall, and Plural numbers, so called, and when they speak of (or to) one single person, they speak in the SINGVLAR, when of two in the DVALL, and of more than two in the PLVRALL number; and do not confound the Duall, or Plural with the Singular; or speak Plural when they should speak Singular; as you do, that say You, when you should say Thou; as you may see in the GREEK GRAMMAR, or in these following Examples taken from thence, and out of the Scriptures of Truth:

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ho logos is a, or the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , tou logou of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to logo to the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ton logon the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , O l • ge O word Duall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to logo is the tvvo words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , toin logoin of the, & to the two words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , O logo O the two words Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , hoi logoi is words, more than two 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ton logon of the words, more than two 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , tois logois to the words, more than two 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , tous logous the words, more than two 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , O logoi O words, more than two

Now to say Tô lógô, or Hoi lógoi, when you should say Ho lógos; this were to say two words, or more than two words, when you should say a, or the word: This is false Greek, and false English; for Ho lógo • is a word, or the word; and Tô lógô is two words; and Hoi logoi is words more than two.

So 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , he mousa is a Song; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ta mousa is Songs two; and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , hai mousai is Songs more than two. Now to say Ta mousa, or Hai Mousai for Hc mousa, that were to put Duall or Plural for Singular: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , He time is Honour; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Ta tima is Honours, Duall; and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Hai timai is Honours Plural. Now is it good Greek, to say Ta tima, or Hai timai, when you should say He time? to put the Duall, or Plural for the Singular.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , To Xulon is A tree; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , To Xulo is Trees Duall; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Ta Xula is Trees Plurall. Now to say, To xulo, Two Trees; or Ta xula, More than two trees, when you should say, To xulon, A tree, would this be good Greek, or good English?

So 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Ho krites is a Iudge; and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Ho basileus is a King; and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to krita is two Iudges; and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , To Basilee, or Basile, is Two Kings; and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Hoi kritai, is Iudges more than two; and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Hoi Basilees, or Basileis, is Kings more than two.

Now to say Tô Kritá, or To Basilée, lè, when you should say Ho Kritês, or Ho Basileus; This were to say Two Iudges, or Kings, when there is but One Iudge, or One King. And to say Hoi Kritai, or Hoi Basilées, leis, for Ho Krites; or Ho Basileus, is to say more than two Iudges, or Kings, when there is but one Iudge, or one King. Is this good Greek, or good English; or proper, or truth? Well, say on, and see the Pronounes (so called.) Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Ego is I 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Su Tu thou 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Ekeinos he Duall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Noi, no is we two 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Sphoi, spho ye two 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Ekeino they two Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Hemeis is we, more than two 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Humeis ye, more than two 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Ekeinoi they, more than two

Now, to say Noï, or Hêmeis, instead of Ego, were to say, We two, or We more than two, instead of I: and is this good Greek, or good English, or proper sence? Answer you that say You for Thou.

And to say Sphô, or Humeis, when you should say Su; this were to put the Duall, or Plurall, with the Singular, and so to speak confusedly, without any distinction, as you do, that say You to many, and You to one.

And to say Ekeino, or Ekeinoi, when you should say Ekeinos; would this be good Greek, or good English, to say, They two, or They, More than two, when you should say He? Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Emos is mine 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Sos, or Teos, thine Duall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Noiteros is our of two 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Sphoiteros your Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Hemeteros is our 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Humeteros your

Now to say Noïteros, Sphôiteros, or Hêmeterós, or Humeteros, when you should say Emos, or Sos Teos; this were to say Our, or Your, speaking of two, or of more than two, when you should say mine, or thine, speaking of one: Would this be good Greek, or good English, to say Nôïteros, our, of two, when you should say mine, and so fourth? Go on, and see Examples in the Verbs. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Tupto is I beat 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Tupteis thou beatest 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Tuptei he beateth Duall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Tupteton is ye two do beat 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Tupteton they tvvo do beat Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Tuptomen is We more than two do beat 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Tuptete ye, more than tvvo do beat 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Tuptousi they more than two do beat

Now to say Túpteton, or Túptete, when you should say Tupteis; this were to say, Ye, two do beat, or Ye, more than two do beat, when you should say, Thou dost beat. Is this good Greek, or good English, to say You for Thou? Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Eimi is I am 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Eis, ei thou art 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Esti he is Duall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Eston is ye tvvo are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Eston they tvvo are Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Esmen is We are more than tvvo 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Este ye are more than tvvo 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Eisi they are more than tvvo

Now to say Eston, or Este, when you should say Eis, or Ei; this were to say, Ye two are, or ye, more than two, are, when you should say Thou art; and this is to say You, when you should say Thou; would this be proper Greek, to put the Duall, or Plural for the Singular? Answer you Doctors, Schollars, Teachers, Priests, and Professors? or is it proper English?

And to say Esmen, when you should say Eimi; is this good Greek? Ansvver you Schollars, &c. that say you for thou: Are not you Novices, that are degenerated from your Original?

And to say Eisi, vvhen you should say Esti; this is to say they, vvhen you should say he: Is this sence, you that say you to one, vvhen you should say thou, and say its the Custome of the Nation, vvhose custome is degenerated from your native Tongue? Come read on, and see some Examples out of the Scripture, about thou and thee, and ye and you.

Jesus thee'd his Mother, and said, What have I to do with thee? In Greek its, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ? Ti emoi kai soi? Mark, it's Soi, Thee, Singular, not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Humin, You, Plural, Iohn 2. 4. Jesus Christ you'd the Scribes and Pharisees , and said, Woe to them that professed that which they did not practice, Matth. 23. 13, 14, 15. Verses, he saith, Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees Hypocrites; There is three Woes, and three Yous in these three Verses; in the Greek it is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Ovai humin Grammateis kai Pharisaioi hupocratai. Here it's Ovai humin, Woe unto you; this is plural: you may see Humin, You, when he speaks to many; but when he spoke to one, to his Mother, he said soi, thee. So here you Doctors and Teachers, who in your practice deny a distinction when one is spoken to, but will have you to one, and you to many; you are contrary to Christs practice in speaking here, who said soi, thee, to his Mother; and humin, you, to the Scribes, Pharisees, and Hypocrites.

The Apostle thou'd Philemon, a particular, saying to the Church in thy house, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Kat' oikon sou Ecclesia. Here it is thy house, oikon sou; not your house, oikon humoon. And so Verse the 18. If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought. In the Greek it is, Ei 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Ei de ti edikese se e opheilei. 'Tis se, thee, not humas, you. And in the same Epistle, ver. 3. when he writes to many, he saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , charis humin; that is, Grace unto you, not soi, unto thee.

And Paul you'd the Saints again, when he wrote to the Ephesians, 2. chap. And you who were dead: In the Greek it is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : Kai humas ont as nekrous. And here see its humas, that is, you, not thou, plural not singular, when he speaks to more than two. Jesus thee'd Pilate, Iohn 19. 11. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Apekrithe ho Iesous, ouk eiches exousian oudemian kat' emou, ei me en [soi] dedomenon anoothen, dia touta ho paradidous me [soi] meidzona hamartian echei. That is in English, Jesus answered, thou couldst have no power at all against me, if it were not given thee from above: therefore, he that hath delivered me to thee hath the greater sinne.

THe HEBREW TONGVE (which the Jewes call the HOLY LANGUAGE) hath as full, and plain distinctions, when one is spoken to, and more than one are spoken to, as any Language that is, which may confound the Doctors, Schollars, Priests, Teachers, and Professors of England, and elsewhere, who have forgotten what they have learned at School, or at least, do not practice what they learned: Therefore this BATTLE-DOOR is sent to such, who do not practice what they have learned at School, but are degenerated from Grammar-Directions, and Scripture-Examples, who in every Language, in which there are Grammars, and Bible, hath a perfect distinction for Singular and Plurall; contray to the practice of the Teachers, Priests, and Professors, who will say you, or ye, to one; and you, or ye, to more than one; and so have forgotten to practice what they have learned in Grammars, and read in the Bible, who in every Language, in which they are written, hath its proper terme, when more than one are spoken to, distinct from, when one is spoken to as the Battle-door following plainly shewes. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ani or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 anochi is I (man) or (woman) Plurall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 anahhnu or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nahhnu is we (men) or (women)

Now to put Anahhnu, or Nahhnu for Ani, or Anochi, were to put We for I; and this would be false Hebrew, and English both: for Ani, or Anochi is I (man) or (woman;) and Nahhnu , or Anahhnu, is We (men,) or (women.) Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 atta is thou (man) Plurall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 attem is you, or ye men

Now to say Attem, when you should say Atta, were to say you, ye men, when you should say thou man; and this were false: for Atta is Thou (man;) and Attem is You, or Ye men. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hu or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hahu is he, this, or that (man) Plurall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hem or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hemma is they, or those men, or these things

Now to say Hem, or Hemma, when you should say Hu, or Hahu, this were to say, they, or those men, or these things, when you should say He, this, or that man; and this would be false Hebrew: for Hu, or hahu, is this, or that (man;) and Hem, or hemma, is they, or those men, or these things.

Would this afore-mentioned manner of speaking be good Hebrew ye Priests and Schollars, who rages at the Singular language? would not the I • wes laugh at you here in their native Tongue to hear you speak it in such a Non-sensicall way? Come Schollars, is not this to speak Plurall, when you should speak Singular? this is for a man to say he is speaking to many men, when he is speaking but to one man; where is the Giddy-heads now? you use to call Friends Giddy-heads, the Elect people of God, which you in Scorn call Quakers.

Come now to the Feminine Gender, (so called,) Singular     Plural     〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 atti is thou (woman) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 atten is you, or ye (women)

Now to say Atten, when you should say At, or Atti, is nonsence, to speak Plurall for Singular, and make people believe you are speaking to many women, when you are speaking but to one woman; Is this good Hebrew? And have you not made people believe you have been the wisest upon the Earth? and now must you come to be whipped, and taught the BATTLE-DOOR. Read one: Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hi or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hahi is she, this, or that (woman) or female Plurall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hen or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 henna is they, or those (women) or these things (female)

Now to say Hen, or henna, when you should say hi, or hahi; this were to say they, or those women, or these things female, when you should say she, this, or that woman, or female; and this would be false Hebrew and English both: for hi, or hahi, is she, this, or that (woman) or female; and hen, or henna, is they, or those women, or these things female, or feminine, (so called.)

Come now, and read those that are called the Affixes, which are placed at the end of words, and signi • ies as followeth: Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i is I, Me, My, Mine 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ani 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 eni 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 enni 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ai 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ti Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 enu is Vs, Our Ours, at the end of words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 anu 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ennu 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 enu or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 enu

Now to put Enu, anu, ennu, or enu, instead of i, ani, eni, enni, ai, ti; this were to put us, our, ours, in place of I, me, my, mine; and this is false English, and false Hebrew; and they that speak thus, are more like mad-men, than men in their wits. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 cha or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 cha & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 echa is Thee, Thy, Thine, at the end of words Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 chem is You, Your, or Yours, at the end of words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 echem

Now to say chem, Echem, when you should say 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 cha, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and Echa; this is to say, You, Your, yours, when you should say, Thee, Thy, Thine; and this is false Hebrew, and deserves the Rod. Read again: Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 v is him, his, at the end of words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 u 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 O 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hu 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ennu Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 m is them, their, or theirs, at the end of words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mo 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hem 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 em 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 am 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ehem & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 emo

Now to put m, mo, hem, em, am, ehem, and emo, in place of v, u, o, • u, and ennu, were to put, and say, them, their, or theirs in place of him, and his: Those that followes are used at the end of words, when you speak, to, or of a woman, or women; or to or of that which is called the F • eminine gender. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ech or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 chi & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ajich is thee, thy, thine, female Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 chen is you, your, or yours 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 echen

Now to say chen, echen, when you should say ech, chi, ajich, is to say, you, your, and yours, when you should say thee, thy, and thine: and they that say so, are ill-bred, unlearned, and unmannerly. But say on: Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ha is her, hers 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ah 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 enna Plurall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hen is them, their, or theirs, female 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ehen 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an

Now to say an, hen, ehen, when you should say ha, ah, and enna, this is to say them, their, theirs, when you should say her, and hers; and this is now the practice of most in Christendome, to say them, when they should say her; and their, or theirs, when they should say hers; and to stand in the Babylonish Confusion, crying up Tongues, and yet practiceing nothing of them, out of the Obedience. Read on: Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ani or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 anochi is I (man) or women 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shelli of me 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 li to me 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 othi me 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 menni or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mimmenni from me Plurall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 na •• n • , or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ana •• nu is we (wo.) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shellan • of us 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lanu to us 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 othanu us 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mennu or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mimmenu from us

Now to say nahhnu, or anahhnu, shallanu, lanu, othanu, and mennu, or mimmennu, when you should say ani, or anochi, shelli, li, othi, and menni, or mimenni; this were to say, we, of us, to us, us, and from us, when you should say, I, of me, to me, and from me: and this manner of writing, and speaking, would be a grosse perverting of every word above-mentioned, from its own proper signification. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 atta is thou (man) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shellecha of thee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lecha to thee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 othecha thee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mimmecha from thee

Plurall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 attem is you, or ye men 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shellachem of you 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lache •• to you 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ethchem you, or ye 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mimmechem from you

Now to say attem, shellachem, lachem, ethchem, and mimmechem, when you should say atta, shellecha, lecha, othecha, and mimmecha: This were to say, you, or ye, of you, to you, you, from you, when you should say, thou, of thee, to thee, thee, and from thee: and this would be false Hebrew, and English both; and like unto their manner of speaking, that sayes you, of you, &c. when they should say thou, of thee, &c. But read on.

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hu is he 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shello of him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lo to him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 otho him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mimmennu from him

Plurall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hem or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hemma is they (men) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shellahem of them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lamo or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lahem to them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ethem or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 otham them (men) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mehem from them

Now to wrest all these words abovesaid out of their proper place, and speak the plural when you should speak singular, would not this be the same in Nature, with speaking you to one man, which is to be used when more than one is spoken too.

Those that followes, are when a woman, or women, are spoken to, and of:

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at is thou (woman) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shellach of thee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lach to thee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 othach thee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mimmach from thee

Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 atten or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 attena is you, or ye (women) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shellachen of you (women) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lachen to you 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aethchen you, or ye 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mimmechen from you Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hi is she 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shellah of her 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lah to her 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 othah her 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mimmennah from her

Plurall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hen or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 henna is they (women) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shellahen of them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lahen to them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 othan or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 eth-hen them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mehen from them (women)

Now to write, or speak all these words contrary to their own place, and to put the Plurall in the Singulars place, Would it not be like their sayings, that sayes you woman, of you woman, &c.) when they should say thou woman, of thee (women, &c •• ) What say you Schollars? will you snuff hereafter, if one say thou to a particular? you will not, will you?

Come Priests, read some of your Hebrew Nounes, (so called) which you have in your common Grammars.

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 jad Dual 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 jadaji • is is a hand both the hands

This the Grammarians calls the Duall Number, which shews forth onely two by Nature.

Now to put jadajim for jad, were to put both the hands for one hand; Is this good Hebrew? you will come to the Singular language by the Rod, who would have the Plural for the Singular.

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 reghei Dual 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 raglajim is is a foot both the feet

Now to put raghlajim for reghel, is to put feet, for a foot.

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dabhar Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 debharim is is a word words

Now to say debharim for dabhar, is to put words for a word; and this is like unto the Priests Doctrine, that puts the Scriptures, which is the Words, for the WORD. Professors, and Schollars, and Teachers, read on:

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shophet Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shophtim is is a judge judges

Now to say Shophtim, Iudges, when you should say Shophet, a Iudge, Is this good Hebrew? is not this false? and to speak Plural, when you should speak Singular?

Therefore thou must read Shophtim, Iudges, and Shophet, a Iudge: But to say there are many Judges, when there is but one Judge, Would not these be looked upon as mad men? they could not perswade them, but they were many men, when there is but one, Thou, and is not You; and they cannot distinguish betwixt Iudges, and a Iudge: So not betwixt You, and Thou; Shophtim, and Shophet. Say on:

Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shephot 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shephatim, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sh • phutim is is a judgement, or a plague judgements, or plagues

And to put Shephutim Shephatim, in place of Sphephot, is to put Iudgemens, and Plagues, for a Iudgement, and a Plague; Is this good Hebrew? Is this good sence? Are not these SotHeads, and Giddy-Heads, that speaks thus, to put the Plural for the Singular. But read on.

Singular Plurall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shekketz, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shikkutz 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shikkutzim is is Abo • ination Abominations

Now to put shikkutzim for shekketz, or shikkutz, were to put abominations for abomination, were this good Hebrew? like as you Pr •• ests have put many men for one man: Plural for Singular.

Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Saraph 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Seraphim is is a burning, or a fiery Serpent fiery Serpents

Now to say Seraphim, when you should say Saraph, this is to say, here are many Serpents, when there is but one Serpent; Is this good Hebrew, you that put Plural for Singular? Is not this like unto you, that have corrupted your own Mother Tongue? and the Corruption in you is offended, if it be not given. Read on:

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ben Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 bani • is is a Son Sons

Now to Say Banim, when they should say Ben, is not this to say You, when they should say Thou? and to say Sons, when its but a son.

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 rosh Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 rashim is is a head heads

Now to say Rashim, when you should say Rosb; this is to say Heads, when you should say a Head.

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ir Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 arim, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ajarim is is a City. Cities

Now to say Arim, or Ajarim, when you should say Ir, here the man speaks non-sence, when he sayes Cities, when there is but one City; as they that say You, when they should say Thou; and speaks of many where there is but one; and so the world is bred, and trained np in Non-sence, which speaks Plurall, when they should Singular.

Come Doctors, Lawyers, Schollars, Scool-masters, come to that which is called the Verb.

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pakad Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Paked • is is he visited they have visited

Now to say pakedu, when you should say pakad, were to put plural for singular, and were not true Hebrew; and none sayes so but the Novices, and Ignorant and Vulgar, though they tell the people they are Schollars. Say on:

Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pakadta 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pèkadtem is is thou (man) hast visited ye, or you (men) have visited

And to say pèkadtem, when you should say pakadta, that when you are speaking to one man, you are speaking to many; would this be good sense, or true Hebrew? and is not this non-sense in the eyes of people, and like mad-men? But read on: Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pakadti 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pakadnu is is I have visited; that is, one we have visited; that is, more than one

Now to say pakadnu, when you should say pakadti, Is not this foolishnesse? Is not this to speak we, when you should speak I? and is not this false Hebrew? and to say we have visited, when you should say I have visited, Is this to speak like men in their sences? is not this non-sence?

Now read the Feminine, (so called) that is, when a woman, or women are spoken to, or of.

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pakeda Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pakedu is is she visited they have visited

Now to say pakedu, when you should say pakeda; this were to put many women for one woman: and to say you, or ye women have visited, for thou woman hast visited, Who would speak in this language that were in their wits, or sences either?

Come Priests and Schollars, who cries up your Learning so much; Is it not false Hebrew, to speak pakedu, when you should speak pakeda? were not this to speak you, when you should speak thou? and you women, when you should speak thou woman?

Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pakadt 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pèkadten is is thou (woman) hast visited you, or ye (women) have visited

Now to say pekadten, when you should say pakadt, is to say you, or ye women have visited, when you should say, thou woman hast visited; and this is non-sence, and false Hebrew; and they that teach this, you, for thou, and cannot bear it, but they must have you for thou, Are these men of undeastanding? or the Vulgar, and Ignorant, Barbarous, and Brutish? Yes, they be so.

Read on, and see some more Examples about that you call your perfect Verb.

Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 niphkadta 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 niphkadtem is is thou (man) wast visited you, or ye (men) were visited

Now to say Niphkadtem, when you should say Niphkadta, this were to put plural for Singular. Read again:

Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pikkadta 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pikkadtem is is thou • ast visited diligently you, or ye have visited diligently

This is not true Hebrew, to say, You have visited diligently, when you should say, Thou bast visited diligently

Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hiphkadta 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 kiphkadtem is is thou (man) hast caused to visit you, or ye have caused to visit

Now to say hiphkadtem for hiphkadta, were to put you for thou.

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hophkadta is thou (man) wast made to visit, or thou wast visited by another

Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hophkadtem is you, or ye men were made to visit, or you, or ye were visited by another

Now to say hophkadtem, when you should say hophkadta, were to say, you, or ye, were made to visit, or were visited by another, when you should say, thou wast made to visit, or wast visited by another. Read on again,

Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hithpakkadta 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hithpakkadtem is is thou man hast visited thy self you (men) have visited your selves

Now for to say Hithpakkadtem, when you should say Hithpakkadta, were to say, you have visited your selves, when you should say, thou (man) hast visited by self; and this were false, for Hithpakkadta, is thou (man) hast visited thy self and Hithpakkadtem, is you, or ye (men) have visited your selves. Say on:

Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lamad 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lamedu is is he hath learned they (men) have learned

Now to say Lamedu, when they should say Lamad; is not this to say many learned, when but one learned, and to put plural for Singular. Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lamadta 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lemadtem is is thou (man) hast learned you, or ye (men) have learned

Now to say Lemadtem, when you should say Lamadta, is to say you have learned, when you should say thou hast learned; and to put plural for singular. Say on again:

Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lamadti 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lamadnu is is I (man) or (woman) have learned we (men) or we (wo.) have learn'd

Now to say Lamadnu, when you should say Lamadti, this were say we (men) or we (women) have learned, when you should say, I man, or I woman have learned; for lamadti is I man or woman have learned, and Lamadn • ; is we men, or women have learned.

Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lamadt 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lemadten is is thou (woman) hast learned ye, or you (women) have learned

And to say Lemadten, when you should say Lamada, this is to say, (women) have learned, when but a woman hath learned.

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lanreda Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lamedn is is she hath learned they have learned

Now to say Lamedu, when you should say Lameda, were to say, they women have learned, when you should say, she women hath learned; for Lameda, is she bath learned, and Lamedu, is they (men) or they women have learned.

Read some more Examples: Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lemôd Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 limdu is is learn thou (man) learn you, or ye men

Now to say Limdu, learn thou man, doth not this deserve the Rod? which Limdu, is learn you, or ye men, and Lemôd is learn thou man Singular, and to say you, when he should say thou, is this good sence? is this good Hebrew?

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 limdi Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lemôdena is is learn thou (woman learn you, or ye wo.

Now to say Lemôdena, when you should say Limdi, were to say, let many women learn, when they should say, let one woman learn. Read on:

Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tishlach 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tishlachu is is thou (man) shalt send you, or ye (men) shall send

Now to say Tishlachu, when you should say Tishlach, is to say many shall send, when you should say, one shall send.

Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tishlechi 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tishl • chna is is thou (woman) shall send you, or ye (woman) shalt send

Now to say Tishlachna, many women shall send, when they should say Tishlechi, which is, one woman shall send, that is not good Hebrew, for Tishlechi, is thou (woman) shall send.

Say on: Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 jiphkod Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 jiphkedu is is he shall visit they (men) shall visit

Now to say jiphkedu, when you should say, jiphkod, you put they, for he in so doing, and this is non-sense, out of sence. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tiphkod Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tiphkedu is is thou (man) shalt visit you, or ye shall visit

Now to say Tiphkedu, when you should say Tiphkod, is to say you, or ye men, when you should speak thou.

Look unto the English, and many others who have corrupted their own tongue. Read on: Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ephkod is I shall visit, when a (man) or (woman) are spoken of Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 niphkod is we shall visit, when (men) or (women) is spoken of

Now to say Niphkod, when you should say Ephkod, this is to say we, when you should say I, and this would be false Hebrew; for Ephkod, is I man; or I woman shall visit, and Niphkod, is we men, or we women shall visit. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tiphkod Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tiphkodena is is she shall visit they (women) shall visit

Now to say Tiphkodena, they (woman) shall visit, when you should say Tiphkod, she (woman) shall visit, this is to say, many shall visit, when but one shall visit. Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tiphkedi 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tiphkodena is is thou (woman) shalt visit you, or ye shall visit

Now to say Tiphkodena, when you should say Tiphkedi, were to say you, or ye, women shall visit, when you should say, thou woman shalt visit and such speaking is false Hebrew, and English both, for Tiphkedi, is thou (woman) shalt visit, and Tiphkodena, is you, or ye, (women) shall visit.

THe CALDEE Language, which teaches Thou and Thee to Singular, and You and Ye to Plural, though the Nations will hardly own it; either the French, Spanish, Italians, Greeks, or Latines, or English. But see some few Examples taken out of the Grammars, and Bible, as followeth:

But first read the Letters which are the same with the Hebrews Letters.

a b g d h v u z ch or hh t j i y 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 k or ch I m n s oo p ph or f 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ts tz or z q or k r sh th or t 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 àno or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 àno is I (man) or (woman) Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 anan or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 anahhno or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nahhno is we (men) or (women) Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ant is thou (man) or masculine, so called) Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 antun or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 atun is you, or ye (men) or (males) Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hu or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hau or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 jhu is • e (male) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 himmon or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hinnun or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 innun is they (males) Now to say himmon, hinnun, jnnun; atun, antun; anan, nahhno, or ana •• no; this were to say they, you, or ye, and • ree, when you should say he, thou, and I, and this were false Caldee, and English both. Now read those that are used, when a woman, or women, or f • eminines so called are spoken to or of. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 anti or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ant or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at is thou (female) Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 anten or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aten is you, or ye (females) Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ihi or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hi is she 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 innen or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hinne • is they (females) Now to say jnnen, hinnen, aten, anten, when you should say at, ant, anti, and hi, jhi, this were to say, they (women) or ( f • emales) and ye, or you, (women) or (f • emales) when you should say, thou (woman) or female, and she (woman) or female: and this is to speak to many (women) or (females) when there is but one to speak to: but now read on to those which are called in the Caldee Grammars, the Inseparable Pronounes, and Affixes, or Suffixes, placed at the ends of words, and signifies as followeth. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ai 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ni or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nnani or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ano is me, my, at the end of words Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ain or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 no or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nan is us, our, at the end of words

Now to put an, ain, no, nan, when you should put i, ai, ni, nnani, or ano, this were to put us, our, when you should put me, my; and this would be false, and deserves the Rod. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 och or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 noch or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aik is thee, thy, at the end of words, when a man, or a male is spoken to Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 cho •• or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 cho •• is you, your, at the end of words, when men, or males are spoken to

Now to say chom, chon, when you should say, och, noch, aik, this were to say, you, your, when you should say, thee, thy; and this were to put many Men, or Males, for one Man, or one Male. But Say on: Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 o • i is him, his, at the end of words; or this, or that Male, or Masculine (so called) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 eh 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 eh 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hi 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 neh Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hon is them, their, or these, or those Males, or Masculines (so called) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hom 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nun

Now to say hon, hom, nun, when you should ohi, e • , hi, ne • , this were to say, them, their; or these, or those (males) or (masculines) when you should say, him, his; or this, or that (male) or (masculine;) and this would be false again, as all the rest before mentioned; and a grosse perverting of every word from its own proper signification, and contrary to Grammar directions; and Scripture Examples; Now come to those that are put at the end of words, when a woman, or women, or f • emales are spoken of or to. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ek is Thee, Thy, at the end of words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ki 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aik 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nek Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 chen or chen is You, Your

Now to put chen, when you should put ek, ki, aik, nek, is to put you, your; when you should put thee, thy; and this were false again. But Say on. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 oh is her, at the end of words; or this, or that Feminine (so called) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ho 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 noh Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hen is them, their; or these, or those Females, or Feminines (so called) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nan 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nin 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nen

Now to put, or place hen, nan, nin, nen, at the end of words, when you should put, or place; oh, ho, no • , this were to put them, their, or these or those females, or feminines, in place of her, or this, or that female, or feminine; and they that write or speak thus, must come and be taught this BATTLE-DOOR.

First see the Letters. In the end. In the middle. In the beginning of a word.   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 B, or Bh, or u   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 G, or Gh   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 D, or Dh   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 H   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 V, u   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Z   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hh, Ch   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 T, tt   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Jiy   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 K, c, or Ch   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 L   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 M   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 N   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 S   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Aa, or Oo This letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is not expressed in sound in the Battle-Door, because the pronunciation of it is unknown to the Grammarians themselves. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 P, Ph, or F   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ts, tz, z, ss   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Q, or K   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 R   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sh, Sch   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Th, or t  

The Syrian Language is thou to one, and you to many, Singular and Plural, in the Testament and Grammar; as may plainly appear here in this Battle door. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 eno or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 no is I (man) or (woman) Plurall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hhnan or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nahhno is we (men) or (women)

Now to say hhnan, or nahhno, when you should say eno, or no, this were to say we, when you should say I, and this were to put Plural for Singular, for eno, or no is I; and hhnan, or nahhno is we. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at is thou (man) Plurall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 anthun or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 atun is you or ye (men)

Now to say anthun, or atun, when you should say at, this were to say you, or ye (men) when you should say, thou (man) and this were false Syriack, and English both, for this deserves the rod; for at, is thou (man) and at • n, or anthun, is you, or ye (men.) Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hu or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hau is he Plurall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 honun, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hen • l or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 enun is they (men)

Now to say honun, or henun, or enun, when you should say, hu, or hau, this were to put they (men) for he (man) and this would be false Syriack, and English both; for honun, or henun, or enun, is they (men) and hau, or hu, is he (man;) but read on: Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ati or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at is thou (woman) Plurall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aten is you, or ye (women) Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hi, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hoi is she, or it (female) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hai, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 he Plurall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 honen 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 henen or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 enen is they (women) these, or those (females)

Now to say aten, honen, henen, or enen, when ye should ati, or at, this were to say, you, or ye (women) and they (women) or these, or those (females) when you should say thou (woman) and she, or it (female.) And this were to say, there were many (women) or (females) when there is but one (woman) or one (female) and this would be false Syriack, and English both; for ati, or at, is thou (woman) and hi, or hoi, or hai, or he, is she, or it (female) and aten is you, or ye (women,) and honen, or henen, or enen, is they (women) or these, or those (females.) But come, read on, Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 eno or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 no is I (man) or I (woman) or Male or Female 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hhnan, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nahhno is we (men) or (women) or (Males) or Females 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dil or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dili or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dilai of me (man) or (woman) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dilan, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dilon of us 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 li or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lai to me 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lan or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lon to us 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lai or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 li me 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lan or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lon us 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 meni or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 men is from me (man) or woman 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 menan from us

Now to say hhnan, or nahhno dilan, dil • n, lan, lon, lan, lon, and menan, when you should say eno, or no, dil, dili, dilai, li, lai, li • lai, and men, or meni, this were to say we; of us; to us; and from us; when you should say I; of me, to me, me, and from me, and this would be false Syriack, and English both; for eno, or no, is I; and •• nan, or nahhno is we, dil, or dilai; or dili, is of me, and dilan, or dilon is of us, li, or lai, is to me, and lan, or lon, is to us, lai, or li is me, and lan or lon is us, men, or meni, is from me, and menan is from us Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at is thou (man) or (male) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 atun or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 anthun is you or ye men 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 diloch of thee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dilchun of you 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 loch, to thee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lechun to you 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 loch thee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lechun you or ye (men) or males 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 menoch from thee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 menchun from you

Now to say atun, or anthun, dilchun, lechun, and menchun, when you should say at, diloch, loch, loch, and menoch, this were to say you, or ye (Men) or Males, of you, to you, you, or ye (men) or males, and from you, when you should say thou (man) or (male) of thee, to thee, thee, and from thee, and this would be false Syriack and English both; and Contrary to the Examples above mentioned Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hau or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hu, is he 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 honun is they men 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dileh of him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 henun or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 enun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 leh, to him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dilhun, of them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 leh, him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lehun, to them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 meneh, from him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lehun or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 enun them (Men) or (ma • es)     〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 menhun from them

Now to write or speak any of these words above mentioned out of its proper place were the same in Nature and ground, with saying you when you should say thou. Now read on to those which are called the faeminine, when a woman, or (women) are spoken to or of, Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ati or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at is thou (woman) or (Female) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dilech or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dilechi of thee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lech or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lechi, to thee, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lech or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lechi thee, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 menech or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mennechi from me • , Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aten is you, or ye women 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dilchen, of you 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lechen, to you 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lechen you, or ye 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 menchen from you Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hi, is   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 honen is they (Females) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hoi, she, or it (female) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 henen or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 enen 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hai or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 he 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dilhen of them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 diloh of her, or of it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lehen to them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 loh to her, or to it her, or it (female) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lehen them, or those (Females) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 loh 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 menhen or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 menhen from them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 menoh from her, or from it

Now to say honen, henen, or enen, dilhen, leben, lehen, and menhen, when you should say hi, hoi, hai, or he, diloh, loh, loh, and menoh, this were to say they (women) of them, to them, them, and from them, when you should say she or it, of her or of it, or to it, her, or it; and from her or from it female. And this manner of speaking would be a grosse perverting of words from their proper Signification, like unto the Priests and Doctors, and Scholars and Professors that sayes you to one, when they should say thou.

Now come read those that are called the Inseparable pronouns 〈◊〉 , or affixes, or suffixes placed at the end of words, and signifies as followeth; Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ai, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ni, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ini, being placed at the end of words, when a man or (male) speaketh of himself; or a (woman) or female speaketh of her self, is me, my, myne; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ain, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nan at the end of words is us, our ours when men or women, Males or Females speaketh of themselves.

Now to put an, ain, and nan, when you should put i, ai, ni, and ini, this were to put us, our, and ours; in place of me, my, myne, and this would be false Syriack and non-sence, and the least child that hath but read the first Rudiments in Syriack would laugh at you, if you should thus pervert words Contrary to Grammar rules, and Scripture Examples in the Bible; Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 och or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ok, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aik, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nok these at the end of words is thee, thy, thine, when a man, or a male is spoken to, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 chun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aikun, is, you, your, yours, when (men) or, males are spoken to,

Now to say chun, aikun, when you should say ocb, ok, aik, or nok, this were to say you, your, and yours, when you should say, thee, thy, and thine, and this would be false again; but read on, Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 eh 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 au, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 oi, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 neh 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hun, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aihun, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nun is is him, his, at the end of words them, their

Now to put or place hun, aihun, nun, when you should put eh, au, oi, neh, this were to put them, their, in place of him, his; Now read those that are used at the end of words, when a woman, or women, or the feminine so called are spoken to, and of Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ech or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ek and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aik is thee, thy, &c. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 chen or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ken and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aiken is you, your, &c.

Now to put chen or ken and aiken when you should put ech, or ek, and aik, were to put you, your, in place of thee, thy, and this were to speak to many women or females where there is but one woman or female to speak to Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 oh, is her, or hers, or it, or this or that female, or feminine so called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hen, is at the end of words is them, their, or these or those (females) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 eh and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 noh 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 enen   〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aihen,

Now, to put hen, enen, and aihen in place of oh, eh, and noh, this were to put them, their, or these or those females, in place of her, hers, or it, or this or that female, and such Syriack and English both deserves the rod and must be brought to read this Battle-Door; Now come and see some of those words that are called Nouns in the Common Grammars, Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 melek or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 malko is a king 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dmelek, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dmalko, of a king 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lmelek, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lmalko to a king 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lmelek, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lmalko the king 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 menmelek or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 menmalko from a king Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 malkin or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 malke, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 malko or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 malkai is of kings, and so adding the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 l, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 men, as is above mentioned in the Singular, to every word of the Plural, it will be lmalkin, lmalke, lmalko, lmalkai, is to kings, or the kings, and menmalkin, menmalke, menmalko, and menmalkai is from kings; any of these words is for kings 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dmalkin 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dmalke, &c.

Now to say malkin, malke, malko, malkai, dmalkin, dmalke, dma • ko, dmalkai, lmalkin, lmalke, lmalko, l • malkai, and menmalkin, menmalke, menmalko and menmalkai, when you should say malek, malko; dmelek, d • malko; lmelek, lmalko, and menmelek, or menmalko; this were to say kings, of kings, to kings, the kings, and from kings, when you should say a king, of a king, to a king, the king, and from a king; and this would be false and contrary to Grammar directions, Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 zedqo or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 zedqtho is Righteousnesse 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 zedqon, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 zedqotho is Righteousnesses;

Now to put zedqon, or zedqotho instead of zedqo, or zedqtho were to put Righteousnesses for Righteousness, and this were to put Plural for Singular like them, that puts you for thou▪ But read on, Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 gabhro or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 gèbhar is a man 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 gabhrin or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 gabhre or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 gabhrai is men

Now to say gabhrai, gabhre, or gabhrin, when you should say gèbhar or gabhro, this were to say men, when there is but a man; And this were non-sence, and they that speak thus are more like mad men, than men in their sences. Singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 abo, is a father Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 abohe or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 abohotho is fathers

Now to say abohe, or abohotho, when you should say abo, this were to put fathers for a father, and this would be false; for abo is a father, and obohe or abohotho is fathers. Come you that will not have one say thou to a particular, but you, and will make no diftinction in your practice, betwixt you and thou, Plural and Singular, read on in some few Examples, in that which is called the perfect verb. Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pkadt 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pkadtún, is is thou (man) hast Commanded you or ye have Commanded, Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pkudh 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pkudù is or without the laft letter ù, sounded pkud is Command you or ye (man) Command thou (man) or (male) Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tephkudh is thou (man) shalt or wilt Commaud, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tephkdun is you or ye men shall or wil Command.

Now to say pkadtun, pkudù, or pkud, and tephkdun, when you should say pkadt, pkudh, and taphkudh, this is to say you, and ye (men) have Commanded, Commaund you or ye (men) and you or ye shall or will Commaund; when you should say thou (man) hast Commanded, Commaund thou (man) or (male) and thou man shalt or wilt Command, and this manner of writing and speaking both would be hist at in every Scool that learns the Syrian Language, and would be Contrary to all Writers of Grammar in that Tongue, and Contrary to Scripture Examples; but before you come to Scripture Examples, read a little more about thou and you, in that word above mentioned, when a (woman) or female or women, or females are spoken to and of. Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pkadt is thou (woman) or female hast Commanded; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pkadten is you or ye women have Commanded; Singular Plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tephkdin is thou (woman) or (female) shalt or wilt Command, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tephkdon is you or ye women, or females shall or will Commaund:

Now to say pkadten, and tephkdon, when you should say pkadt, and tephkdin, this were to say you or ye (women) or females have Commanded, and you and ye (women) or females shall or will Command, when you should say thou (woman) or (female) hast Commanded, and thou (woman) or female shalt or wilt Command, and this manner of writing or speaking is like them that sayes you to one woman, when they should say thou.

Now see a few Scriptures Examples in the Syrian Language, about thou and thee, and you or ye, Plural and Singular.

David Thou'd God, and said thee and thou, and thy to him, as you may read in the Psalms all along, but see an Example or two in the Syrian Language, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 umen karso dem aloh • at lo tharhhek men. In Latine it is, & a ventre matris meae Deus meus tu ne absis a me: In English, and thou my God from my Mothers Belly, be not thou absent from me, psal. 22. Mark its 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at, thou, not atun, you;

And in the ninth Psalm, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 wansabhrun boch cul jodeai shemoch, in the Latine its, & sperabunt in te omnes Scientes nomen tuum: in English it is, and all that know thy name will hope in thee.

Mind again, shèmoch thy name, not shèmchun your name, and boch, not bèchun in thee, not in you.

Christ when he spoke to the Scribes and Pharisees, being more than one, he speaks Plurally, when he said woe to you, in the Syriack it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 woi lechun, woe to you, not woi loch, not woe to thee, they being more than one, Matth. 23. But when Christ spoke to the high Priest, being but one Priest, not many, he thou'd him, Matth. 26. in the Syriack, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at emart, thou hast said it, here its at thou, not atun you.

And Iohn writing to the Saints you's them, saying in Syriack, 1 Ep. Iohn 1. v. 20. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Watun meshichuto it lechun men kadisho uforshin atun & lechul nosh. That is, And ye have an unction from the holy one, and ye discern every man. Here its atun ye, not at thou, when he writes to more than one.

Felix theed Paul, Acts 24, 25. I will send to thee Mittam ad te, in the Syriack, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 eshadar bothroch, mark its och, not chun, thee, not you: And Paul thou'd Faelix in the same Chapter; forasmuch as I do know that thou hast been of many years a Judg of this Nation, &c. and because thou maist understand, &c. In the Syriack, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 men shnaio saghiotho joda no dithaik dajono damo hono, mark its dithaik, here is aik which at the end of a word is thee, or thy, not aikun, you nor your, in the Latine version as you call it, its, a multis annis scio te esse judicem hujus gentis; in English its from or of many years: I know thee to be a judg of this Nation.

And because thou maist understand, &c. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 chad meshbach at lmeda, mark again, its at, not atun, thou, not you: in the Latine, Quum tu possis nosse, &c. that thou maist know, &c.

And in the same 24 Chapter, Tertullus a certain Oratour, thou'd and theed and thy'd Faelix the Governor, seven or eight times in the beginning of that Chapter, and we do not read that the Governor was offended for using the Singular Language, you will not say that Tertullus was ill-bred, he was a Rhetorician, he knew fine speaking; he knew how to affect the Governor with his adorned speech, and yet he uses the Singular Language to him; as you may read in his Speech to him, in the beginning of that Chapter, and any that knowes the Syriack Tongue, may see that there is no mention of you, ye, nor your, but thou, thee, and thy, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mettulthoch for thy sake, mark its och, not chun, thy, not your: And so seven or eight times, or more, there is och, ech, and aik, and at, used by the Orator to the Governor, which in English as before mentioned is thou, thee, thy, and not chun, aikun, nor chen, nor aiken, which at the end of words is thee, thy, thine, nor atun, which is you, or ye, and so all along throughout the Testament in the Syrian Language, the Singular tearms are used to the Singular, and Plural to the Plural, not like the Scholars and Teachers of England and elsewhere in most parts in Christendome, who are degenerated from the propriety of their own Language, and will not practice what they teach in their Grammars, nor what is written in the Scriptures of truth, and many more places I might instance, that the Syriack Language, which the Scholars sayes was Christs Language, is as punctuall and as clear in making a distinction, in this patticular, betwixt Singular and Plural, as any Language, though the Teachers in England makes none in their practice, who will say you to one man, and you to more than one, but sure this that already hath been said about it, may be sufficient to convince them about it, or at least to stop their fretting against any for saying thou to one man, which is the propriety of the English Tongue, and not you to one.