you are, I insert the following defence of the passage which has so roused your indignation, hoping that it may fall under your review. You first observe that no learned antiquarians advocate the opinion contained in the Messenger, No. 7; and, second, that the remarks ĺ have there made are not true. Now, both of these observations, however they may do honour to your heart, certainly prove you but a smatterer in knowledge, a dabbler in antiquities. The very words of the passage might have corrected your first error, for they imply the existence of two profound antiquarians who believed in the opinion. The passage runs thus :—"The first, beginning," observes Higgins, "at the bottom of the series, is Aesar, easar, aesfhear or aosfhear: he is called God, or fire intelligent; Dia or Logh. Mr. Vallancey says the word logh means the spiritual flame, and identifies itself with the logos of the Greeks."-Monthly Messenger, No. 7, p. 163. Is not this a full confutation of your first observation, viz., "that no learned antiquarians have held the opinion"? You surely will not have the effrontery to say that Vallancey, the erudite editor of the Collectanea De Rebus Hibernicis, was not a learned antiquarian. Nor that Godfrey Higgins, the profound author of the Anacalypsis, the Celtic Druids, the Apology for the Life of Mahomet, and other works, did not sustain the same character. If you affirm this, I need only refer you to their works, as a sufficient confutation of your opinion. Your second critical and learned remark is, "that the observations I have made on the word logh, are not true." With all deference to your superior learning and judgment, I beg leave to suggest that I have made no remarks at all on the word, but simply stated a fact; viz., that Vallancey said "the word logh meant spiritual flame, and identified itself with the λoyos, logos, of the Greeks." In relation to this point, therefore, your critique is directly the reverse of the truth. But, as I made no remarks on the word then, I shall endeavour to make up the deficiency now. 66 Leos, leas, leis, lois, luis, logh-light, fire, blaze, flame; luisne, a blush; solus, light; glus, light, flame, blaze; leisan, a little flame; loisge, burnt; losg, blind, i. e., gan-los, without light. In the Persian, lesej, or lezej, signifies blind. The radix is la, lu, light, fire. The monysyllable lo, in the Chinese, denotes fire. Alu, in the Arabic, signifies flame; leza, burning. In the Hindostanee lu means flame."* To a learned and practised ear, which I fear you do not possess, these words appear to be all cognate. But this is not all, for this original word spreads through all the northern and Celtic dialects. Thus, in the Welsh, llosg means burning; llosgi, to burn; llosgradd, a seraphim that is burning; golou, light, blaze; golosgi, burnt, roasted corn; losey, burnt. "In the Teutonic, laug, loug, louc, flame. In the Icelandic, log, loge, flame. In the Swedish, loge, loeghe. In the Gothic, lauh. In the Saxon, loge, leg, lig. Greek, phlox, flame. In the Albanois dialect, ligune signifies roasted. In the Congo, luilu, heat, flame. In the Tonquin, lua signifies in a blaze, on fire."† If you take the trouble of looking into Owen's Welsh and English Dictionary, you will there find the following words, thus interpreted: 66 Llos, that has a tendency to take away, that tends to consume; llosg, a burning, a heat, an inflammation; llosgaberth, burnt sacrifice; llosgaberthiad, a burning sacrifice." Mr. Oreilly thus interprets the word logh, and some of its derivatives, with other cognate words: "Logh, God; logh, fire, etherial spirits; loghmar, bright; laiche, laichead, a light, candle, lamp, lightning, flame, splendour; loises, a flame; loisead, inflamed; loisge, loisg, burnt; loisgeach, of a burning quality; loisgead, loisgneas, a burning; loisceanta, fierce, fiery, blasting."S Here you may perceive, sir, the word logh running through a vast number of languages. Logh means God, and it also denotes fire and etherial spirits. The * Vallancey's Prospectus, p. 51. + Ibid. Owen's Welsh and Eng. Dict., sub voc Llos aut Llosg. logos of St. John is usually interpreted the word. The Grecian Mercury was called the word, or λoyos; but of this more at some future opportunity. Logh means God, fire, etherial spirits; logos is used by St. John to denote the Christ of the gospel. God is said to be a consuming fire, in the New Testament; and in the Old he is frequently represented as symbolizing his presence by fire. Our trinitarian divines contend that the logos of St. John is God, or the Son of God. Now, I simply ask the question, why do the cognates of the word logos run through so many languages, and all stand in some relation to fire, or light, or flame? Your last observation manifests as consummate ignorance as the others I have refuted. You say, "that if I could prove an identity between the word logos, as used by St. John, and the word logos as used by the Greeks," to which I suppose I may add its cognates in the northern dialects, "you would renounce a belief in the divinity of Jesus." But, sir, allow me to inform you that you need not give up your faith on such conditions. That the word logos was used by the Greeks, and that, too, to designate one of their divinities, (Mercury,) is an assumption which few scholars will dispute. But this mere fact, though it certainly excites suspicion, affords not absolute proof of the identity of the two personages. St. John might have used the word logos to signify his divinity, in contradistinction to the Mercury of the Greeks; as the deist uses the word God to denote his divinity, which is entirely a different being to the divinity to whom the Christian gives the same appellation. John Wesley is reported to have said "it was no harm to steal a tune from the devil." And why may not St. John have thought it no harm to borrow a name for his divinity from the nomenclature of the Grecian mythology? In conclusion, sir, allow me to observe that, with the best wishes for your welfare, I subscribe myself Your very humble servant, J. N. BAILEY, A DISSERTATION ON THE DOCTRINE OF ABSOLUTE CREATION, AS TAUGHT BY MODERN CHRISTIANS, PRIESTS, AND THEIR ÅBETTORS. Further Proof that the Doctrine of Creation is to be found among all Nations. (Continued from page 186.) GENESIS i. 5.-And the evening and the morning were the first day. THE Scandinavian day was divided into twelve parts, to each of which was assigned a distinct name; but in their computation of time they made use of the word night instead of day.* Tacitus observes the same thing concerning the Germans. They do not, he tells us, in their computation of time, reckon, like us, by the number of days, but of nights. In this form all their resolutions and summons run: so that with them the day seems to lead the night. We are also informed by Cæsart that the Gauls consider themselves according to their druidical traditions as descended from father Dis on which account they reckon every period of time according to the number of nights, not of days; and observe birth-days, and the beginnings of months and years, in such a manner that the day seems to follow the night. It may be remarked that the vestiges of this method of computation still appear in the English language, in the terms se'nnight and fortnight: this mode of speaking is also adopted in many other countries. GENESIS ii. 7.-And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. *Mallet's North. Antiq., vol. i., p. 358. † Tacit. Germ., c. 11. The Hindus, like some of the ancient philosophers, suppose that the soul is an animation of the spirit of God breathed into mortals; but their manner of expressing this idea is more sublime; for instead of calling it a portion of the divine spirit, they compare it to the heat and light sent forth from the sun, which neither lessens nor divides his own essence; to the speech which communicates knowledge, without lessening that of him who instructs the ignorant; to a torch at which other torches are lighted, without diminution of its light.-Sketches of the Hindus, vol. i., p. 261. GENESIS v. 2.-Male and female created he them, and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. In addition to the most common etymology given by commentators respecting the word Adam, from Adamah, red mould, or earth, it may be remarked that in the Sanscreet, the word Adim signifies the first.— Maurice, Ind. Ant., vol. i., p. 24. It is from the summit of the mountain called Hammalled, or Adam's Peak, as tradition reports, that Adam took his last view of Paradise before he quitted it never to return. The spot on which his foot stood at the moment is still supposed to be found in an impression on the summit of the mountain, resembling the print of a man's foot, but more than double the ordinary size. After taking this farewell view, the father of mankind is said to have gone over to the continent of India, which was at that time joined to the island; but no sooner had he passed Adam's bridge than the sea closed behind him, and cut off all hopes of return. This tradition, from whatever source it was originally derived, seems to be interwoven with their earliest notions of religion, and it is difficult to conceive that it could have been engrafted on them, without forming an original part. I have frequently had the curiosity to inquire of black men of different casts concerning this tradition of Adam.—All of them, with every appearance of belief, assured me that it was really true, and in support of it produced a variety of testimonies, old sayings and prophecies, which have |