4. But however thus far there is no word found, that signifieth a Witch in the sense we have laid down, nor any such person that hath a real familiar Spirit, either in them, or attending upon them, ready visibly to appear at their beck, this is not yet to be found out. 5. The next is ‏וּמְנַחֵשׁ‎ from the root ‏נִחֵשׁ‎, _nichesch, auguratus est, observavit, augurium fecit_, which our English Translators have erroneously rendred an Inchanter, which it no way signifieth, nor hath any relation unto, having in the next verse named a Charmer, as though Enchanter and Charmer were not all one, when the word plainly (as Mr. _Goodwin_ and the learned _Masius_ do confess) importeth an Augur or Sooth-sayer: That is, such an one, who out of his own experience draweth observations of good or evil to come: of which we may note these things. 1. The most of all the Translations given us in the _Polyglot_, do render the Hebrew word by _auguratus est_, and so understand it to be an Augur or Sooth-sayer, a Conjecturer, or an Observer, from whatsoever it be that he taketh his observations, as from the flying noise or motion of birds or beasts, looking into their entrails, and the like, and from thence taking upon them to foretel good or evil to come, or what was hidden and secret. 2. The Hebrew word, is by the Septuagint rendred οἰώνισμα, _Augurium, Auspicium_, that is, an Augur, an Observer, or a Conjecturer, which _Luther_ translateth: =eyn de vp Voegell geschrey achte=. And in the Low Dutch Bible it is rendred agreeable thereto; and the French render it _aux Oiseaux_, from the word _Oiseau_, _Avis, Volucris_; and the Italians render it _Auguropista_, which are all to one purpose, and no difference at all, and so the gross mistake of our English Translators is most apparent, that make it to be an Inchanter or Charmer, to which it hath no relation at all. [Sidenote: Gen. 30. 27.] [Sidenote: Gen. 44. 5, 15.]