« PředchozíPokračovat »
and that Elohim, when used for the magistracy, is employed not strictly but figuratively. We are correct in regarding the word as used only figuratively in these cases, because it is comparatively so used but a few times, and we are distinctly told there is but one Elohim strictly speaking.
But this cannot be said of Tí. It is the title by which the highest officer in China has been commonly designated for hundreds of years. It occurs in Chinese books, as the title of this officer, a hundred or a thousand times, to once where it occurs as the title of any invisible Being. To attempt therefore to prove, from the fact that a few invisible Beings are called Ti, that it means God as Elohim does, to maintain that a word is used improperly much more frequently than properly, which upsets all our ideas of the proper meaning of words. There can be no doubt that Tánku ing is regarded by the Chinese to be as properly a Ti as Shing Ti is ; though they would admit that he rules in a smaller sphere.
Another objection to the use of Ti to render Elohim in the first commandment is, that, this term would not exclude from religious worship multitudes of Beings who now receive much the greater portion of the worship offered in China. The worship of the God of wealth, the God of the Kitchen, and a number of other deities, who are all called Shin, but wever Ti, and who receive more worship in one inonth than Sháng tí does in a generation, would not be forbidden by this term. The First Commandinent would if Ti be used to render Elohim, spend its whole strength upon, first the lawful liege Lord and Sovereign of this people, and next upon a few of the Shin, who have been entitled Ti; whilst ninety-nine hundredths of the false worship, practiced by the common people of the present day, would not in any manner be forbidden by the use of this term.
We intended, when we commenced writing, to have devoted a few paragraphs to the consideration of the phrases, Sháng tí, E, and Tien ti, T *; but our Essay has already been extended to such a length that we shall dismiss them with one remark.
If Ti be not the appellative name of God in Chinese, the addition of the qualifying word, “ high,” or “celestial,” cannot make it so; indeed we suppose no one would maintain that either of these phrases is the appellative name of God in Chinese, and the nse of Toien tí, fi.“ The celestial Ruler or Rulers,” could only be advocated on the ground that it was a title of the chief God, which we have sufficiently answered in the first part of our Essay
With a short resumé of our objections to the use of Ti, to render deos, we shall conclude our remarks on this subject.
We object to the use of Ti: 1. That it is not the appellative name of God, or of any class of Beings either human or divine, but is a title given alike to gods and men. 2. That all the Dictionaries, both native and foreign, give Judge, or Ruler, as the meaning of Ti, whilst they give no intimation of its being the appellative name of God. 3. That meaning Ruler, and not God, it is wholly unsuitable to express the doctrine of the Trinity. 4. That Tí was never used even as the title of more than six Beings who were worshiped in the state religion, that neither of the Six was ever worshiped by the people of China, and that five of these six are now worshiped by no one. 6. That if Ti be used in the translation of the First Commandment it will forbid civil government; and 6. 'That it will not forbid ninety-nine hundredths of the false worship now offered in China.
These objections appear to us so weighty, direct and palpable, that all, who regard them as sustained, by the evidence we have adduced, will agree with us that the use of Ti, to render Elohim and deos in the translation of the Sacred Scriptures, is wholly inadmissible.
We give a few additional texts of Scripture to show how subversive of civil government, the use of this word to render Elohim would prove. “I am the Lord and there is none else; there is no God beside me." Is 45:5. Is there a God beside me. Yea, there is no God, I know not any.” Is 44:8.
What would be thought of the English Translator who should use the word King as that whereby to render Elohim, into English, in the passages quoted above. And yet King is not more commonly used, nor more well known as the title of the Ruler of the English nation, than Ti is as the title of him who rules over the Chinese people. Should we render God, in the passages above cited, by a word which is constantly used to designate the individual who holds his office, Fiu Kwung would surely have just cause of complaint; and who could wonder, if under such circumstances, he were to forbid the distribution of our books ? Who could blame him if he did.
In conclusion, we have only to beg that the arguments, produced in favor of the use of the words Shin and Ti, respectively, may be carefully compared, that a right judgment may be formed which of these two words is in truth the appellative name of God in Chinese.
With respect to Shin we have seen, 1. That it is unquestionably
the nine of a class of Beings to whom the Chinese have always offered and still offer religious worship. 2. That the Shin are the highest of the three classes of invisible Beings, whom the Chinese worship. 3. That the Being worshiped in the Kiau sacrifice (the bighest ever offered in China) is the T'icn Chi Shin Ź tib, “God of Heaven.” 4. That this Toien chi Shin, # Ź, is styled Sháng 71.
5. That Shang is called repeatedly the most honor. able of che Shin. 6. 'That Drs. Morrisnn and Medhurst, in their Dictionaries both give Shin as the appellative name of God in Chi. nese; and lastly, that all the Missionaries whether Protestants or Romanists, have used Shin in their writings as the appellative name of God, whilst none of them have ever used Tí.
This is an amount of positive testimony in favor of Shin being the appellative name of God in Chinese, which we risk nothing in saying, cannot be produced in favor of any other word in the lan. guage.
Whatever objections, therefore, may be urged against the use of this word, most he answered by the exigencies of the case. Shin, is the only word the Chinese language ofords us, that can be regarded, after a careful examination of the subject, as having any just claim to be considered the appellative name of God. This word we must therefore use to render Elohim and 1€rs malgré all objections. If we could remodel the literature of the country, we would forbid the employinent of Shin as the Panthoisis have used it, we would forbid its use for the human soul; but we must take the Chinese lan. guage as it is, and can only use the best terms it affords is, it being the only mediuen through which we can make the Chinese people acquainted with the Sacred Scriptures. That Shin is used for 2!! objects of religious worship, including the manes of the dead, makes it only the more available to prohibir ail false worship to which this people are addicted.
If the writer may judge from his own pist experience, the obje;. tion which has hid the greatest weight with the Missionaries, and prejudiced their minds most agaitist the use of Shin for the true God, is the fact that it is used as the appellative name of class including so many contempunle Deicies, that li spems to them almost contamination to cail Jehovah by ö 112me that is common to such Beings
This feeling is most natural, and can only be overcome by remembering that we use this common name to negative the exiurence of these contemptible anil imaginary Derties. A Greek or Ronan
Christian must have had the sanie feeling with respect to the use of deos or Deus. There is no individual of the class called Shin, who is more insignificant than Priapus, or Sterentius, or Occator ; not to descend lower into the Greek and Roman Pantheon.
The appellative name of God in use in each heathen nation must be used. The truths taught in the Bible can alone purify the language, as well as the hearts, of a heathen people.
The writer indulges a strong hope, that, as all the Missionaries have hitherto agreed in using Shin, to translate deos when heathen gods were referred to, they will all ultimately be led to see the propriety of using this same word to render Elohim and dens in all cases The question is one of the utmost importance to the spread of the Gospel in China, and claims from all those connected with the missionary operations here the most prayerful and careful consideration.
May God of His infinite goodness grant wisdom and grace to the Directors of the Bible societies so to decide this question as shall be best for the interests of the Redeemer's cause, and for the salvation of the perishing millions in China, who are expecting the word of God from their hands.
Upon the Missionaries theinselves however must rest the heaviest responsibility in this case; theirs is the chief anxiety, the warmest interest. May the gracious Siviour be present with them all, that the diversity of opinion which now exists on this vital point-the name by which we shall call Him for whom we claim the homage of all hearts in China-may not cause any breach of the harmony which has hitherto existed among the Protestant Missionaries in China.
The writer's constant prayer is that all those in China, " who do confess God’: Holy name may agree in the truth of his holy word, and live in unity and godly love."
ART. II. Desultory Notes on the Gorcrnment and people of China,
and on the Chinese language; illustrated with a sketch of the province of Kwung-tung, showing its division into departments and districts. By Thomas Taylor Meadows, interpreter to her Britannic Majesty's consulate at Canton. London: Wm.
H. Allen & Co. 1847. INDEPEndent thinking and patient research (not always sufficiently loug continued) characterise this little volume, of two hundred and fifty handsomely printed octavo pages. Having for nearly five years, as he tells us in his preface, bestowed undivided attention on Chinese affairs, in an unusually favorable position, Mr. Meadows considered himself entitled to write. He commenced his studies in the autumn of 1841, under the tuition of Professor Neumann at Munich ; early in 1843, arrived in Chiva ; canie to Canton in the suininer of the same year; and in June 1846 completed his “Desultory Notes," having in the mean time translated more than 350 official letters, also many proclamations, and conducted a large amount of official business, bringing him into almost constant communication, oral or written, with the Chinese. These are, in brief, his claims to write on the government and people of China and their language. The book he has dedicated to Mr. Thom, late, H. B. M. consul at Ningpo.
The Notes are nineteen in number, all of them relating to topics of interest and such as had come more or less directly under his own observation. llaviug turued over the leaves of the book with some care, and much pleasure, we will, without attempting a formal review notice a few points that arrested our attention in the perusal.
In his first note by way of apology for the publication of the others, be exposes some of the false notious that are afloat regarding China, il very prolific subject. He is quite right in saying, that the fashions change among the Chinese as they do everywhere e'se; right too in discarding the use of such terms as Lurd
of Canton ;' and, we think "Hoppo," "mandarin," and his "yamun,” ought to go into the same category, being, in the king's English, equally “out landish.
He is hardly correct in speaking of Kinngning as the capital of Kiánguán —that old province being now divided into two, vizi, Kiaugsi and Ngauhwui, and Kiauguing being really the capital of the laller.