I have read somewhere that they were divided into seventy-two, according to the number of the Sanhedrim. Olympas. This is more imaginative than real. It is obvious to those who have closely examined the structure of the languages of the world, that they have sprung from a common origin, and that three branches corresponding to the three sons of Noah, may be demonstrated to be the remote parents of all the modern languages of the whole earth. True, indeed, their languages are greatly mixed up with innovations and amalgamations which greatly obscure their common origin, and justify the hypothesis that the languages introduced at Babel were as numerous as the nations and colonies into which these archmasons formed themselves. Many linguists have been at pains to trace the origin of the languages of Asia, Africa, Europe, and America, to one common fountain. Take, for example, the very word origin: it is plainly sprung from the Latin origo; from orior, I raise; whence oriens, the East; and the orient; and thus orior from the Greek oro, to raise; and that again from the Hebrew or, to lift up oneself, to raise. How evident the descent! Hebrew or, Greek oro, Latin orior, orient, origo, English origin. Take another example: The word air comes from the Latin aura, from the Greek aer, from the Hebrew aur. But we may trace its kindred branches still farther: in many of the Eastern languages are evidences of its passing through them. Thus in the Chaldee ur denotes fire; in the Egyptian or represents the Sun; in the Gentoo, or Sanscrit, our expresses day; and in many Eastern languages the same word denotes light, fire, and air. Of all the dialects, the Hebrew spoken by Noah, Shem, Abraham, and Moses, seems to have escaped the wreck of tongues, and to have been the dialect of Adam. Some foreign words are found in it, but that they have crept in from junior rather than from senior dialects, is more probable than any other supposition. Thus we find Latin words in Greek authors, and Welsh terms in Roman. Among the sister dialects of Europe, the French, Spanish, German, Italian, &c. we have many proofs of a Roman parentage; and among the sister dialects of Asia, the Chaldee, Arabic, Sanscrit, Chinese, &c. &c. we find equal vouchers for a Hebrew ancestry. But the Lord inflicted these diversities of tongues in indignation for past abuses, and as merciful preventions of greater misfortunes to the human race. Thomas. And may not the neighborhood, positions, and localities of certain nations their frequent intercourse, commerce, and conflicts, greatly contribute to the introduction of many foreign words into all their languages, and have had an influence in assimilating them to one another in some respects? 36 Olympas. True, it had, as in the case of France and England, whose dialects, terms, and phrases are now more incorporated with each other, than they were even some fifty years ago. Tell me, Thomas, in what positions did the elder nations after the flood radiate from the dwellings of the first plantation? Thomas. As I have learned, the three families of Noah first located themselves bordering on each other in the very central regions of Armenia, Assyria, and Mesopotamia. From these, time after time, new colonies were formed, and new and even far distant communities erected. To every point of the compass they directed their way from the central settlements. The Chinese, Persians, Ethiopians, and Indians directed their journeys in an eastern direction; the Arabians, Egyptians, Phenicians, Lybians, and some of the Ethiopians, went southward; while the Goths, Greeks, and Latins, Peruvians, Mexicaus, and Americans migrate westwardly, leaving the North for the Scythians, Celts, and Tartars. Olympus. The affinities in the dialects of these people and nations are in the ratio of their proximity to each other, and the frequency and familiarity of their intercourse, and satisfactorily demonstrate the force of circumstances that sometimes combine in the amalgamation of dialects and the transformation of language. But enough of this What moral lessons are we taught in this affair? for the present. Will you all in rotation tell me your reflections, and what moral instruction you have derived from this marvellous event? We shall begin at the youngest and ascend. Susan. How happy it would have been for us had Ham and Japhet accepted of their lot and not presumed to unite in opposing God! We would then have had to learn but one grammar! James. And we could have travelled all over the earth and needed no interpreter! How many good lessons we might have learned from those nations whose speech we cannot now understand! Henry. And then, too, we would have needed no translations of the Scriptures, and could have sent them all over the earth as soon as we can send them all over America! William. There would have been no controversy about the meaning of foreign words, and in a few years we might have got from school and been employed in business which would be better for ourselves than others! Mary. We would also have loved mankind better; for those who speak the same language always like one another better than those who speak foreign languages. Now had we all spoken one language, still there would have been more love and less hatred in the world. 1 I do not think there would have been half so many wars. Edward. I have read that language was at first a divine revelation, and now I believe it; for as many new languages began to be spoken on the same day, they could not have been acquired by art, but must have been communicated by God. Eliza. On the day of Pentecost God gave the gift of tongues to the Apostles, that they might gather the nations into one fold that had been scattered by the confusion of speech at the building of Babel. God can therefore make many languages a blessing after they have been a curse, and therefore I think the more languages we now learn the better, that we may converse and commune with more of the family of man. Thomas. I have found a new argument for the truth and authenticity of the Bible in the 11th chapter of Genesis. It is this: It gives a proper reason for what no infidel can explain. All animals on earth have a language of their own. Every species has its own dialect, and they understand one another. Birds and beasts of the same species, brought together from Asia, Africa, America, and Europe, understand one another. But "lands intersected by a narrow frith" understand not each other. Dialects interposed make enemies of nations, who else "like kindred drops had mingled into one." The true definition of a Barbarian is one that speaks an unknown tongue. Now why is it that man, the master spirit too of language is so babelized and confounded that he and his dog can parley with each other more fluently and intelligibly than he and his neighbor that lives across the river? This is a mystery-an anomaly which no infidel can explain without the fact that Moses records. Olympas. The fact of the confusion of language is undeniable, and the cause, as you say, is inexplicable from all the lights of philosophy. It is therefore of the order of miracles, and a miracle must be assumed or believed in the case, The sceptic, you mean, assumes one, and the Christian believes on good testimony. Proceed. Reuben. So far as the first eleven chapters of Genesis develope the ways of God and the grand scheme of moral government, it appears to me that sin, even under a remedial system, requires severe and frequent interpositions of vengeance in the way of checks and restraints upon its progress. Already in a space of 1775 years four tremendous checks have been laid upon its progress-the deluge, the contraction of the period of human life from hundreds to tens, the confusion of human speech, and the wide dispersion of mankind all over the earth. But for these, human guilt would have transcended even the bounds of God's forbearance. John. And yet what misfortunes have resulted to mankind! what 4 impediments to salutary, benevolent, and grand enterprize have followed these prolific calamities so necessary to the endurance of the world! But my principal moral reflection remains to be stated. It is this: If the confusion of speech was a necessary means to the dispersion of the human race-to the formation of distinct and rival nations; does it not seem, then, that the restoration of one language to the world is as indispensable to union, as dialects are to sects and parties? I do not assume that diversities of tongues are the only cause of division; but certainly they are a cause—a chief cause; and while they exist a strong, if not an insuperable barrier to union, harmony, and cooperation. The friends of union among nations and religious parties, it would seem, then, have a lesson of the most practical and influential character in this chapter, the philosophy of which seems to me to suggest the only rational and practical course of uniting the jarring and discordant sects of Christendom and the world. Olympas. True, very true. The restoration of a pure speech, and of one speech, is essential to the raising up of the tabernacle of David that is fallen down, the rebuilding of the city and the temple of the living God on earth, as the skilful architects of Galilee laid the foundation in Jerusalem of old. The creeds, then, are the dialects of Babylon: the Bible, the pure and the only divine speech. To call Bible things by Bible names is, as I have often told you, the only way to obtain a true, permanent, and blissful union among the people of God. But we have some other questions and suggestions to offer on this chapter at our next lesson. A. C. DIFFICULTIES IN CHURCHES-No. V. APPEALS. My remarks on appeals (page 513, vol. 4, new series,) have elicited some inquiries and strictures from the opposite points of the compass. Brother Williams, of Bourbon, Ky., in a very kind and courteous manner suggested the possibility of construing them into a warrant for conventions, associations, &c.; while our vigilant brother of the "Journal of Christianity," with his characteristic promptitude, informs us that until some better authority for appeals than the Antiochan case is adduced, he "must regard the recommendation of brother Campbell as unscriptural," and very faithfully reminds his readers that "it is better for our church to err through prejudice or ignorance, than for the whole to go astray."* This is very true, and ought to be *No. XII. 1840. duly considered. But the church in North street, Baltimore, has gone more seriously and resolutely to work, and gives us an octavo of 23 pages on the subject; a specimen of which, and all that we have room for at present, we shall now quote in regular order from the beginning: "THE CHURCH OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, WORSHIPPING IN NORTH STREET, BALTIMORE-TO THE EDITOR OF THE MILLENNIAL HAR BINGER. Doth our law judge any man before it hear him, and know what he doeth?'-John vii 51. He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and a shame unto him.'Proverbs xviii. 13 He that is first in his own cause seemeth just; but his neighbor cometh and searcheth him.'-ibid. xviii. 17. 'He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they both are an abomination to the Lord.'-ibid xvii. 15. To have respect of persons is not good; for, for a piece of bread that man will transgress.'-ibid xxviii. 21. 1. "Brother Campbell-We have read with no little surprise and regret in your Harbinger of the current month, the unceremonious notice which you have taken of us: surprise, that you should have placed us in a false position before your readers on the representations of four individuals who had been confessedly excluded from our communion, without one word of communication with us; regret that these circumstances compel us to obtrude upon the brethren an account of our own sufferings for the sake of truth, in order that we may not forfeit their kind consideration; for the divine word commands us to shun even the appearance of evil. But before we attend to the misrepresentations of the individuals alluded to, permit us to examine, with all kindness and respect, the position which you have assumed and the manner in which you have endeavored to fortify it. However high your standing, and however great your ser vices to the cause of our common Master, and none acknowledge them with more kindness and gratitude than we do,-you are still but an individual, and as such come under the prophetic and apostolic description, All flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass,' and are to be regarded with reference to the warning of Jeremiah, xvii. 5. 'Cursed be the man that trusteth in man and maketh flesh his arm.' 2. "Whilst in the same word we are represented as the house of God, "which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth,' 1 Tim. iii. 15. We say the church, for we are not a community called a church, nor do we read of such a community in the New Testament; if it has escaped our attention, please point us to the passage. 3. "We have thus stated our relative positions in the light of God's word, that our relative duties may be the more manifest. 4. "It is under these circumstances that you, on your own individual responsibility, without one word of inquiry made of us, that you might learn, not whether we are innocent or guilty, (the possibility of the former never seeming to enter into your mind,) but whether we are 'in any sense justifiable, or in every sense unjustifiable,' you call upon our neighboring churches to assume a rule and authority over us, for which, as we shall show, God's word gives no warrant whatever, and which you have repudiated and condemned in terms as strong as any we shall desire to use. 5. "Before, however, we produce our authorities we will remark, that if the principle of appeal which you contend for be carried out, then in no case is a church positively able, without the help of a neighbor, to |