1850.
Term for Elohim and Theos.
191
question, quoted below,* in which it is stated that the object of enquiry is to find a term in the Chinese language analagous in its use to the word God in English, or to the Deus of the Latins, the fog of the Greeks, or the p of the Hebrews; and it is then remarked, "These several terms have in the language to which they belong, a general application to whatsoever may be an object of religious worship, without regard to the character of that object." Again, “The bɛos of the Greeks represented a multitude of objects of worship, each of which had its respective proper name; while all collectively were designated by this common term." The writer then announces his opinion that shin is such analogous term; and hence embracing, what is attributed top and Aɛos, "Whatsoever may be an object of religious worship without regard to the character of that object."
To the Editor of the " China Mail."
"Thoughts upon the manner of expressing the word for GOD in the Chinese language: by JOHN BOWRING, LLD.”
Sir.-The above is the heading of an article in the November number of the Chinese Re- pository, which I read with interest. The learned writer has there expressed much that is inge- bious and important on points connected with the question, but in my opinion has not met the question itself. The inquiry is not, if I apprehend it, about the proper name of the Supre.ne Being, who has called himself Jekovak, nor is it how that name shall be expressed in the Chinese language, but the search is for an appellative term for God. It is supposed that Jehovak, the proper name of the Deity, will be transferred to the Chinese language, on the same principle that Jesus, the proper name of our Savior, or Moses, the proper name of the Jewish lawgiver, will be conveyed to that language, viz: by expressing as nearly as may be the sound of the naine in Chinese characters, without regard to their siguification. This being done, there will still bo wanting an expression for the generic or general term God. The Christian believes in but que God, still there are many that are called gods, and it is supposed that every language bas an appellative term similar in its use to the word God in English by which this order of beings is desiguated. The object of inquiry appears to be, to find in the Chinese language a term analagous in its use to the word God in English, or to the Dews of the Romans, the Theos of the Greeks, or the Eloak of the Hebrews. These several terms bave in the language to which they belong, « general application to whatever may be an object of religious worship, without regard to the character of that oħject. In English, we speak of the true God and of false gods: the Romans had a Jupiter, a Néptune, a Venus, and others, but all were classed under the general term Deus. The Eloak of the Hebrews was alike applied to the true God and the idols of the surrounding heathen, and the Theos of the Greeks represented a multitude of objects of worship, sach of which had its respective proper name; while all, collectively, were designated by this common term. The Chinese also worship a multitude of objects, each under its distinctive Dame, but have some appellative term to designate them as a class, and which is common to them all. This common termi I think is Skin. This may be seen written in a large character and pasted up in the boats, the shops, and dwellings of the Chinese, and is made the symbol, or general representative, of all the objects they worship. Before this written character is kept the altar and smoking in- cense, and to it worship is performed on the first and fifteenth of every moon ; and special offer- ings are made at the same shrine on the birthday of every god in their Calendar. If they worship the spirits of departed ancestors, they are called Skin; if_they_worship_the latent principle of nature, it is called Skin, if they worship Ma-tsoo po, Pik-te-ye, or Shang ti all are called Skin; and should they worship Jupiter, Juggernaut. Jehovah, or Jah, they all would be called Shim. The Chinese speak of Tien-skin (heavenly gods,) 7”u ti skin (local gods.) Shan-skin (gods of the hills,) Ho-shin (gods of the river.) &c. They have presiding deities over the elements. the seasons, and the various professions of men, each with a distinctive name; but all are called Skin or gods, as we speak of Confucius, Shak-poare, or Socrates, under the appellative torni men. If it be objected to shin that the Chinese apply it to their idols, and consequently it should not be applied to the Supreme Beiug, the same objection with equal propriety might be made to the use of our word God, which is applied to idols, to men, and to Satan himself, who is called “the god of this world." The same objection might also be urged against the Greek word Theos, term used to designate the false and fabulous deities of the heathen; still the Divine Author and first teachers of Christianity applied the term to the Supreme Being. The Savior of mankind, when he came to give his religion to the world, did not form a new symbol, nor introduce a foreign word for God, but selected one from the language of the people he came to teach,-
-a term fami- liar to them, and one which they applied to the objects of idol worship. Though this termi, by s people iguorant of the living and true God, was applied to senseless blocks of wood and stone, still the Author of Christianity usca this very term in giving to them a knowledge of the Almighty,