Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Except you misrepresented what the 10000 things are. And you can not make the false claim that 'the Chinese today don't understand ancient Chinese thought' and then say you used a Western translation to explain something the Chinese can not understand.
If only there were more Daoists here (classical Confucianism usually avoids religious ideas), it would make an interesting comparison with Buddhism. I too would like my wife's teacher to join in, but that is politically difficult as he lives in China.
Whether my claim is false or not is debatable. And it is not false until it is proven so. Naturally, such a proof can only be presented by an idiot based on reasoned argumentation of the kind you are demanding. To my mind, the only way we can settle this is to determine what "ancient Chinese thought" is and proceed from there. Are you up to the task?
What you call "classical Confucianism" is a western reference to the philosophy expounded on by "Confucius". It is not his philosophy. He is a mythical figure probably invented by the first westerner who was allowed into China, the Jesuit Matto Ricci, who cracked the Chinese linguistic code. It was amazing that he could do that. Anyway, the authorship of the Confucian classics were attributed to Master Kung (孔夫子) (i.e. Confucius) who, in the tradition of the scholars, studied the received wisdom transmitted from ancestors. There was no way the Chinese believed that they were apes. One of those ancient works was a favorite of Master Kung. It was the mother of all classics: the I Ching.
I get that and understand it because you have not met Him.
How very full of yourself to say so.
Quote:
But since you are someone who has thought his way out of fundamentalism, I must ask you. You still seem to believe that God was angry with us and needed to be appeased or "paid" for whatever it was that so angered Him. What exactly do you think it was that would cause an Almighty God to curse His own creations and their descendants in perpetuity until Jesus could pay Him a ransom or whatever?
No, I don't believe that God was angry. But the sin issue had to be addressed by God in judgment and so he addressed it by himself becoming a man and taking the punishment himself in our place. Kind of nice of him wouldn't you say?
I also don't believe in 'original sin.' If there was an Adam and Eve they were not the first human beings, nor was 'creation cursed' because of their sin. Death, disease, and suffering are realities that are as old as life on this earth has existed which is billions of years and they are a natural part of life.
Sorry, who started this instead of actually addressing my post?
Hint ...
Do not start fights you can not finish, and then pretend I threw the first punch.
I never intentionally dialogue with you because you are always looking for an internet fight. Your posts do not interest me, and I chalk the aggressive attitude to Germany's high percentage of Marxist belief.
Additionally, I've noticed you look to take exception with anyone who rubs phetoria the wrong way.
I never intentionally dialogue with you because you are always looking for an internet fight. Your posts do not interest me, and I chalk the aggressive attitude to Germany's high percentage of Marxist belief.
Additionally, I've noticed you look to take exception with anyone who rubs phetoria the wrong way.
Whether my claim is false or not is debatable. And it is not false until it is proven so. Naturally, such a proof can only be presented by an idiot based on reasoned argumentation of the kind you are demanding. To my mind, the only way we can settle this is to determine what "ancient Chinese thought" is and proceed from there. Are you up to the task?
The text says the three create the 10000 things, not scientism. You were wrong, and now you are trying to evade that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by myuen2
What you call "classical Confucianism" is a western reference to the philosophy expounded on by "Confucius". It is not his philosophy. He is a mythical figure probably invented by the first westerner who was allowed into China, the Jesuit Matto Ricci, who cracked the Chinese linguistic code. It was amazing that he could do that. Anyway, the authorship of the Confucian classics were attributed to Master Kung (孔夫子) (i.e. Confucius) who, in the tradition of the scholars, studied the received wisdom transmitted from ancestors. There was no way the Chinese believed that they were apes. One of those ancient works was a favorite of Master Kung. It was the mother of all classics: the I Ching.
It is irrelevant if Confucius existed or not, the early Confucianists existed, and it is to their texts and ideas I am referring, hence the use of the term 'classical'.
I never intentionally dialogue with you because you are always looking for an internet fight. Your posts do not interest me, and I chalk the aggressive attitude to Germany's high percentage of Marxist belief.
I was correcting a misrepresentation about Daoism, based on my research into Daoism, and based on what I have learnt from a Chinese Daoist. Tzap took offense at the fact there really are people faking their alleged superior religious knowledge, and simply dismissed my post as irrational; and then you joined in with a misrepresentation of what I was doing instead of addressing my post directly. I was not the aggressor, as you can see if you follow the conversation back using those arrows in the comments. You can keep on pretending otherwise, but all you are doing is showing that too many of the 'spiritual' here are neither self aware, honest, or humble.
As to Germany's high percentage of Marxist belief, I do not believe I know any German Marxists. And I chalk the aggressive attitude of the select group of spiritual people here to the fact we know they are faking it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayle White
Additionally, I've noticed you look to take exception with anyone who rubs phetoria the wrong way.
The text says the three create the 10000 things, not scientism. You were wrong, and now you are trying to evade that.
It is irrelevant if Confucius existed or not, the early Confucianists existed, and it is to their texts and ideas I am referring, hence the use of the term 'classical'.
Interesting! May I ask why this attitude is not sufficient when applied to this one?? It is irrelevant if Christ existed or not, the early Christians existed, and it is to their texts and ideas I am referring Just curious!
The text says the three create the 10000 things, not scientism. You were wrong, and now you are trying to evade that.
It is irrelevant if Confucius existed or not, the early Confucianists existed, and it is to their texts and ideas I am referring, hence the use of the term 'classical'.
Evade? My forte is Chinese philosophy. Why would I evade a discussion on my favorite subject? There is no winner or loser here, Harry.
What are early Confucians? What texts and ideas are you talking about? There are no native scholars of substance in mainland China today. Mao Tze Tung wiped them all out. The only experts on Chinese philosophy now are found in the halls of academia in the west, mostly "white guys and gals". And their ideas are similar to Chinese take-out chow mein and kung pau chicken for the western palate.
The text can say anything we want it to say. Your Daoist teacher can say one thing, and I can say another. And I say "the three" is scientism making things up to fill heaven and earth.
Evade? My forte is Chinese philosophy. Why would I evade a discussion on my favorite subject? There is no winner or loser here, Harry.
What are early Confucians? What texts and ideas are you talking about? There are no native scholars of substance in mainland China today. Mao Tze Tung wiped them all out. The only experts on Chinese philosophy now are found in the halls of academia in the west, mostly "white guys and gals". And their ideas are similar to Chinese take-out chow mein and kung pau chicken for the western palate.
The text can say anything we want it to say. Your Daoist teacher can say one thing, and I can say another. And I say "the three" is scientism making things up to fill heaven and earth.
I'm sure we'd like to know how it's your forte.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
