Directory_and_Chronicle_1850 — Page 232

1850.

Term for Elohim and Theos.

203

lated where the word is used for objects of worship in general. Neither shángtí, t'ientí, nor ti alone, will cover the ground. But have not the Chinese a term of definite application which will just cover the ground of soí thus used? This term I think to be shin ming, which is not so unlimited as shin, and if I mistake not, is a more dignified expression. Is there any sufficient reason, to cause an in- variable adherence to the same term, to translate Osos and ☺sói, with- out any regard to the local meaning and application? For the want of such a term in the Greek language as skin ming

seems to be

in the Chinese, the sacred writers were compelled to make an unphi- losophical use of sol. The suggestion I therefore would make is, that when the idea of the sacred Scriptures is polytheism (as is the case in the First Commandment), the term used to translate God should be in- variably employed: but when esoi is employed in an extensive sense em- bracing all idols, and so idolatry is the mental idea, then skinming

should be introduced.

J

But is there not danger that the Chinese will confound the true God with their own idols, if we use ti? What if another Kánghi should arise and refuse baptism, “always excusing himself by saying he wor- shiped the same God with the Christians.” What answer could be given? The Greeks in hearing Paul preach of God by the name of ¿ Asos, could have raised the same difficulty. And the manner in which Paul managed when placed in circumstances somewhat similar, will be safe and easy to the missionary; that is, turn to the excuser himself, and say, The God" whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you."

Experience is better then theory, and the former must be followed when the two clash. Dr. Morrison's theory was that shin must be used for God. His experience, especially in his late years, seems to have been that shin was not adequate to express God, and he resorted to various combinations of Chinese characters to reveal the true God, and even used shángti. This is a fact worthy of serious reflection.

Let me beg that so important a question may be investigated, rather than speculated on; on its decision mainly hangs the issue, whether the Chinese shall soon have the sacred Scriptures or not.

The more we investigate Chinese authorities, and compare them with standard works on the Greek mythology, the more will we be constrained, it appears to me, to something like the following conclusions:-

1. That ti of the Chinese, and sog of the Greeks, as used by natives, are very nearly synonimous. Both designate xa?' sğoxv that class of beings by each respective people esteemed highest in rank among their