“Principio cœlum ac terras, camposque liquentes, Lucentemque globum Lunæ, Titaniaque Astra, _Spiritus intus_ alit; totamque infusa per artus Mens agitat molem, et magno se corpore miscet. Inde hominum pecudumque genus, vitæque volantum, Et quæ marmoreo fert monstra sub æquore pontus.”[564] Am I, therefore, presumptuous in appealing to the _community_ to reject this _word_ as applied to the _logos_? A meaning, it is true, has been trumped up for this, as the _communicating vehicle_ between God and His creatures! No doubt the Saviour is all that: but _logos does not express it_; and the _duration_ of an abuse is no reason why it should be perpetuated after its _exposure_. I have said that it degraded the dignity of the Godhead to render this expression by the form of _word_. I do not retract the charge: on the contrary, I _add_ that, independently altogether of the former arguments, adduced to establish its _inaccuracy_, it would be _revolting to common sense_, were it not even thus _incorrect_! For example--“In Him was _life_,” says the text, “and the life was the _light_ of men.” Now, how could there be _life_ in a _word_? except by the most unnatural straining of metaphor. Or, admitting that there was _life_, how could there be _light_, except by the same? Whereas, by substituting the proper term, then all is regular and easy; for what could be more natural, than that there should be _life_ in _spirit_? and that _this life_ should give _light_ to men? You will observe accordingly, that Jesus Himself, when describing His own character, exactly states what I here rectify, saying, “I am the _light_ of the world”--not the _word_ of the world--or any such nonsense. And He continues the idea by noting further, that “he that followeth Me shall not walk in _darkness_, but shall have the _light_ of life.”[565] Thus keeping up an _uninterrupted_ reference to _logos_, or the _spiritual flame_! I do, therefore, humbly, but strenuously, implore of the legislature that they _restore_ this epithet to its _divine_ interpretation! I entreat of the heads, as well of Church as of State, that they cancel the error; for _error_ I unhesitatingly pronounce it to be,--a _derogation_ from the Godhead, and a _perversion_ of the attributes of the Messiah! I will myself show the way--thus: “In the beginning was the _spiritual flame_: and the _spiritual flame_ was with God, and the _spiritual flame_ was God.”[566] How beautiful! may I hope that it will never more be extinguished! Now, there is another text in the same chapter, which, though not incorrectly translated, yet _loses half its beauty_ as at present understood! It will startle you when I recite it! Yet here it comes. “Behold the _Lamb_ of God, which taketh away the sin of the world!”[567]