When Latin scholars translate Hebrew and Greek proper nouns into Latin, these words seem to follow various declension rules. For instance, Elias (prophet in the 9th century BC) follows first declension (genitive is Eliae and ablative is Elia); Michael (the archangel) follows third declension (genitive is Michaelis and ablative is Michaele); and Gabriel and Noe are indeclinable. These are the words we can find in Latin dictionaries to ensure we understand correctly. In the Book of Genesis of Vatican's Nova Vulgata, the man Seth was mentioned several times, and to me it wasn't immediately clear how the proper noun is supposed to be declined or pronounced (Sēt???), but after reading it again it looks like they are treating it as indeclinable. Am I correct? Quotes from Nova Vulgata: Genesis 4:25"Cognovit quoque Adam uxorem suam, et peperit filium vocavitque nomen eius Seth dicens: 'Posuit mihi Deus semen aliud pro Abel, quem occidit Cain'."Genesis 5:3"Vixit autem Adam centum triginta annis et genuit ad similitudinem et imaginem suam vocavitque nomen eius Seth. "Genesis 5:4"Et facti sunt dies Adam, postquam genuit Seth, octingenti anni, genuitque filios et filias. "Genesis 5:6"Vixit quoque Seth centum quinque annos et genuit Enos."Genesis 5:7Vixitque Seth, postquam genuit Enos, octingentis septem annis genuitque filios et filias. A more challenging puzzle for those interested in this would be what is preferred or the most correct when coining a Latin adjective from a Hebrew or Greek loan word. There are so many variations that exist. For instance, I have seen at least three words in Latin that's equivalent to the English adjective Mosaic (as in "Mosaic law"): Moseus, Moseius (sounds Classical?), and Mositicus (sounds Medieval, similar to Solomonicus?).