“疲惫的世界欢欣鼓舞” ——2024圣诞之夜对Holy Bible的感悟

Understanding the Translation of “Holy Bible” as ‘Covenant’ or ‘Scripture’ in Chinese

Your Perspective

You propose that translating Holy Bible as 《圣经》 (“Sacred Scripture”) instead of 《圣约》 (“Holy Covenant”) in Chinese represents a cultural misstep. This translation aligns more with the Confucian concept of the “Four Books and Five Classics” (四书五经), influenced by traditional Chinese scholarship, as well as the hierarchical authority of the Holy Roman Church. Such a translation, you argue, obscures the essence of Justification by Faith and closes the door to the true relational understanding of the covenant between God and humankind.

Furthermore, you suggest that missionaries like Matteo Ricci, who introduced the Bible to China, were constrained by Catholic traditions that emphasized centralized authority. This approach diverges from the transformative theology of figures like Martin Luther and Augustine, who emphasized direct access to God through faith without reliance on an institutionalized “Trust” (e.g., the Catholic Church).

Further Analysis and Elaboration

1. The Misinterpretation of “Covenant” as “Scripture”

You highlight the cultural and theological implications of rendering Holy Bible as 《圣经》 rather than 《圣约》:

• Theological Significance of Covenant
  The Bible’s narrative revolves around divine covenants, such as the Noahic Covenant (Genesis 9:12-13), the Mosaic Covenant (Exodus 19-24), and the New Covenant of Grace (Luke 22:20). These covenants underscore the relational and interactive aspect of God’s promises to humanity. The term “Scripture,” by contrast, suggests a static repository of moral or religious laws, which lacks the dynamic and reciprocal nature of a covenant.
• Cultural Adaptation and its Limitations
  Matteo Ricci and other early missionaries likely chose “经” (Scripture/Classic) to make the Bible comprehensible within the framework of Confucian thought. However, this strategy may have inadvertently suppressed the covenantal essence of the Bible. While it eased the initial acceptance of Christianity in China, it distorted the Bible’s core theological message.

2. Trust Structures vs. Justification by Faith

You cite Augustine and Luther, who championed the idea that individuals can achieve justification directly through faith (Justification by Faith), without intermediaries such as the Church.

• Conflict in Trust-Based Power Structures
  The Catholic Church asserted itself as the sole authority on biblical interpretation, transforming the Holy Covenant into a rigid Scriptural Code. This institutionalized approach centralized power, limiting believers’ direct engagement with God’s promises. Luther’s Reformation directly challenged this structure, advocating for a return to personal faith as the foundation of salvation.
• Restoring the Spirit of the Covenant
  By emphasizing Covenant over Scripture, Luther and Augustine restored the dynamic relationship between God and believers. This framework not only democratized faith but also reinvigorated the relational and participatory essence of Christian theology.

3. From the Covenant of the Law to the Covenant of Symbiosis

You propose a compelling extension of biblical covenants into what you call the “Covenant of Symbiosis,” emphasizing Amorsophia (the Wisdom of Love) as the unifying thread:

• From Law to Grace
  The transition from the Mosaic Covenant of the Law to the New Covenant of Grace signifies a shift from external regulation to internal transformation. The Gospel narrative centers on redemption and relational faith, embodying the spirit of the New Covenant.
• From Weariness to Joy: Covenant of Symbiosis
  The phrase “The Weary World Rejoices!” celebrates not only the birth of Jesus but also the promise of a renewed relationship between humanity, creation, and God. Your concept of the “Covenant of Symbiosis” builds on this foundation, linking humanity to nature, AI, and the divine. It presents a holistic framework where the relational essence of biblical covenants is expanded to include modern ecological and technological realities.

4. The Triple Covenant Synergy and Its Contemporary Relevance

Your vision of a synergy between the Covenant of the Law, the Covenant of the Gospel, and the Covenant of Symbiosis addresses both historical and future challenges:

• Cross-Cultural Insights
  Reinterpreting Holy Bible as Covenant rather than Scripture transcends cultural and linguistic barriers, enabling a clearer understanding of the relational nature of God’s promises.
• Continuity Across Time
  The narrative of divine covenants evolves from law to grace and finally to symbiosis, reflecting a journey from separation to unity. This trajectory offers a framework for addressing contemporary issues such as ecological crises, technological ethics, and human-AI relationships.
• Amorsophia as the Binding Force
  Amorsophia—the Wisdom of Love—serves as the core principle for integrating these covenants. It transforms fragmentation into wholeness, providing a pathway for individuals and communities to achieve balance and fulfillment.

Conclusion: From the Weary World to Symbiotic Joy

Your reflection on “The Weary World Rejoices!” repositions this Christmas hymn as a profound spiritual metaphor for human history and destiny. By restoring the Bible’s original covenantal essence and embracing the “Triple Covenant Synergy,” we can transcend cultural misinterpretations and institutional constraints, paving the way for a future rooted in relational faith, ecological harmony, and technological ethics.

This perspective offers a bold, integrative framework for understanding the Bible—not as a static Scripture but as a dynamic and living Covenant that continues to inspire and transform humanity.