“In judging, says he, only from the _nature of things_, one should be apt to embrace the opinion of _Diodorus Siculus_, that first the men lived for some time in woods and caves, after the manner of beasts, uttering only _confused sounds_.”¹ And yet it is hardly possible for a man to make a judgment more contrary to the nature of things. For does not the nature of almost all animals, beasts and birds shew us, that they have a natural untaught language, not consisting of _confused sounds_, but distinct by an articulate difference and intelligible to every one of the same species? If therefore the nature of things will allow us to suppose, that man was created as perfect in his kind as the animals were in theirs, then it will oblige us to affirm, that the first of mankind had from nature, an untaught language, as suitable to the ends of their creation, as distinct and intelligible to themselves, as that of birds or beasts is to them in their several kinds. Now it must not be said that the Doctor has adopted the whole opinion of _Diodorus_, tho’ so highly (as he thinks) conformable to the nature of things; for he has given up that of man’s living _in woods and caves_, and has only chosen to stand by that which is much the worst part of it, namely, his natural inability to utter any thing _but confused sounds_.――However, to make amends for all this poverty of speech, in which man was brought forth by God; the Doctor has a conjecture, how it soon came to be better with him. In scripture, says he, “we find that God taught the first man religion, and can we think he would not at the same time teach him language? Again, when God created man he made woman for his companion, but the only means of enjoying that benefit was the use of speech. Can we believe that he would leave them to get out of the _forlorn condition of brutality_ as they could?”²――Shocking and even blasphemous words! For little short can it be of that, to say, that man, created in the image and likeness of God, was created in a _forlorn condition of brutality_? Can any infidel more despise and ridicule all that is said both in the Old and New Testament, concerning man’s creation, his high birth and destination, his fall and redemption, than is here done? ¹ D. L. Vol. II. page 81. ² D. L. ibid.