對於「譯名之爭」，以前比較多地關注於「利瑪竇派」與 「龍華民派」之間的立場或派別之爭，近期的研究則漸趨於持 平地分析龍華民其人其文的意義。與學界對此的系列新解讀相 應，本文即嘗試對「帝天說」展開另一視角的研討，期許獲得 新的啟示。認為其不僅是一種在地化策略的使用及處境神學下 的發明，更是一種浸潤在經學與神學兩大詮釋傳統下的上帝存 在的證明。在利瑪竇看來，中國古人對上帝的正確認識來源於 「自然法」，其本質是運用自然神學與歷史框架來構建明末的 上帝論。惟「帝天說」能夠推證西方的天主與東方的上帝是文 明本根處「同體異構」的概念，從心理及社會效應層面幫助儒 家基督徒小心規避「兩頭蛇」式的緊張與衝突，所以士人們才 可以由儒入耶，並最終達致一為自我及舆評所接納的儒耶交融 的理想境界。此種視域下的「帝天說」無疑帶來了辯證天主教 至上神存在的問題，是漢語神學的濫觴，而不應僅將其片面化 處理成譯名上的論爭。

This paper discusses Matteo Riccfs idea of shang-ti^ t'ien and translation of “Deus” in late-Ming Chim. Affected by the hermeneutic tradition of the Classics and Theology，Matteo Ricci’s translation of “Deus” is not only the use of localization strategy and innovation in contextual theology, but also proffers a proof for the existence of God. In the view of Matteo Ricci, Chinese Ancients，light knowledge of God comes from the “natural law”； its essence is to construct a doctrine of God through the use of natural theology and a historical framewoirk. From this perspective’ Matteo Ricci’s idea will bring forward an important issue: Whether the supreme god of the Catholic Church already existed diousands of years ago in ancient China. It is not only one of the focuses of the Rite Controversy, undoubtedly it is the origin of Sino-Christian Theology.