634
Defense of an Essay, &c.
"And the Earth
And the huge Ocean, and the sable Night,
And all the sacred race of deities
Existing ever."
"The lovely race
DEC.
Of goddess Nereides, rose to light;" &c.
Elton's Remains of Hesiod.
Dr. Legge's doctrine is that the words "Elohim and so of themselves tell us nothing of the nature of the Being, or Beings which they represent," and that Shangti, "Supreme Ruler," tallies exactly with these words.
How would it accord with the picture drawn of the Olympian deities by Homer and the other Greek poets, to regard them as a mere assembly of rulers? All rulers, or rather all Shángti, Supreme Rulers!!! If such was "the assembly of the gods," what becomes of the sovereignty of Zeug? The Goddesses, what are we to make of them? Are they "Supreme Ruleresses?"
Dr. Legge lays much stress on the etymology of the word Elohim; but etymology is a very uncertain guide to the character and meaning of words. Every work on logic is full of warnings against our being misled by sophis- tries derived from this source. It is wholly conjectural, and there is no other field perhaps in which learned men have so indulged their fancics. If a serious doubt once arises, there is no means of setting it at rest; the most that can be contended for is that my conjecture is more probable than your's. And even where the etymology is manifest, it is of comparatively little service, as it is the subsequent use which determines the character and meaning of a word much more than its root. In this case, from Dr. L's own showing, there is so much diversity of opinion among the learned, the only safe inference to be derived from their conflicting opinions is, that no satisfactory conclusion on this point can ever be arrived at, none certainly which one can afford to make the basis of an argument.
But suppose Dr. L's view to be conceded-that the radical idea is power, I can not see how this will show that the word is a mere relative term; power being one of the essential, eternal attributes of God, as this word denotes an intrinsic perfection, not an outward relation like that expressed by the words dominion, ruler, &c. Fuerst's view of the word El, given by Dr. L. (Letters, p. 20), shows how compatible such a derivation is with our regarding the word God as an absolute term. He says, "Robustus, powerful, brave. It is used (b) for God, on account of his very powerful and excelling nature” (not because of his sustaining any relationship), "and with the article ha-El, the Omnipotent, who is over all things, as in the phrase el-Elohim (God of gods), that is, superior to all false and feigned gods in his strength and power," (not a being sustaining a superior relationship, or having a more exalted office, but of a more excclling nature, of “strength irresistible, and power infinite.")
The Omnipotent, the powerful One, the Almighty, the Omniscient, &c., are very different to the words Ruler, King, &c.; and if Dr. L. can succeed in establishing the etymologies for which he contends, it will afford him no aid