Chinese Characters tell the creation story

[Genuine]

My husband is studing creation in school and showed this to me. VERY INTERESTING!! Some of y'all have probably already seen them, but thought I'd share!!

~Leigh Ann





Here are seven Chinese Characters that show that the ancient Chinese knew the Gospel message found in the book of Genesis. In the book God’s Promise to the Chinese by Ethel R. Nelson and Richard E. Broadberry, hundreds more are revealed.

Find out:
Do the mysterious, ancient Chinese characters have a biblical meaning little understood before?
What was the meaning of the 4,000-year-old Border Sacrifice that the Chinese emperors observed annually?
Who was Shang Ti, worshiped in the Border Sacrifice?
Painstaking analysis of the most ancient forms of Chinese writing reveals the original thoughts and beliefs of their inventor.

Using many examples, the authors show that the inventor of the original Chinese characters knew and believed the account of creation as well as the promise of the Savior to come. Shang Ti, worshiped at the Border Sacrifice, was the Triune God.



Taken from: "http://www. answersingenesis. org/Docs/388. asp"

 

[Molal]

I recommend you obtain the following books:

The Origin and Early Development of the Chinese Writing System (American Oriental Series, Volume 78), by William G. Boltz, American Oriental Society/

and

Chinese Writing, by Qiu Xigui (Eary China Special Monograph Series No. 4, translated into English by Gilbert L. Mattos and Jerry Norman),

These books will provide you the foundational knowledge of why this claim is erroneous.

 

[Genuine]

I recommend you obtain the following books:

The Origin and Early Development of the Chinese Writing System (American Oriental Series, Volume 78), by William G. Boltz, American Oriental Society/

and

Chinese Writing, by Qiu Xigui (Eary China Special Monograph Series No. 4, translated into English by Gilbert L. Mattos and Jerry Norman),

These books will provide you the foundational knowledge of why this claim is erroneous.

Thank you! But I'm not interested in researching it further. Just thought this was very interesting.

 

[Molal]

Thank you! But I'm not interested in researching it further. Just thought this was very interesting.

ok, well thanks for sharing!

Take care.

 

[juvenissun]

I recommend you obtain the following books:

The Origin and Early Development of the Chinese Writing System (American Oriental Series, Volume 78), by William G. Boltz, American Oriental Society/

and

Chinese Writing, by Qiu Xigui (Eary China Special Monograph Series No. 4, translated into English by Gilbert L. Mattos and Jerry Norman),

These books will provide you the foundational knowledge of why this claim is erroneous.

Not completely. It is arguable. And, estimated that >80% of the interpretations are correct.

 

[juvenissun]

Thank you! But I'm not interested in researching it further. Just thought this was very interesting.

Thank you. Very interesting.

If your husband had question, he can talk to me.

 

[Molal]

Not completely. It is arguable. And, estimated that >80% of the interpretations are correct.

Please show me where and why the information in these books is wrong.

 

[juvenissun]

Please show me where and why the information in these books is wrong.

I do not have and did not read these books. But I know what's in there.
I did not say what they said is wrong. I said there are alternative interpretations and arguments.

 

[Molal]

I see. Well the books are accurate and provide much data and evidence. It is abundantly clear that they are correct since they have much supporting evidence and this model has the most consistency with history, archaeology, etymology, etc.

 

[juvenissun]

I see. Well the books are accurate and provide much data and evidence. It is abundantly clear that they are correct since they have much supporting evidence and this model has the most consistency with history, archaeology, etymology, etc.

What I am saying is that the info given by the OP is at least 80% correct (according to those books you referred to). The rest 20% is subject to interpretation. I am sure the books you referred DO NOT directly refute on what's suggested in the OP.

 

[Molal]

Well, I am not sure how to respond Juvenissun......unless you have read the books how can you be sure of what your statement:

I am sure the books you referred DO NOT directly refute on what's suggested in the OP

I have much respect for you Juvenissun and I can tell that I will not be able to change your mind. Thank you for the conversation.

 

[juvenissun]

Well, I am not sure how to respond Juvenissun......unless you have read the books how can you be sure of what your statement:

I have much respect for you Juvenissun and I can tell that I will not be able to change your mind. Thank you for the conversation.

Thank you for your reasonable dialogue. I know, normally, no one can understand the content of a book without reading it. I said that, in fact, because I know this stuff very well (only slightly less well than my geology knowledge). Due to the restriction of Christianity in China, there is only a limited content on this issue so far. If you care to ask question, I may try to answer.

 

[Molal]

Thanks Juvenissun - if I have questions I will most certainly ask

Take care.

 

[busterdog]

Not completely. It is arguable. And, estimated that >80% of the interpretations are correct.

Yes, a perfectly good argument.

 

[juvenissun]

Yes, a perfectly good argument.

For example, on the first word, one may argue the symbols all together said "eight" people on boat. But a valid argument may say that particular symbol is not really the one for "eight", but means: "a few"

It is not easy to be definitely positive on either side.

 

[busterdog]

For example, on the first word, one may argue the symbols all together said "eight" people on boat. But a valid argument may say that particular symbol is not really the one for "eight", but means: "a few"

It is not easy to be definitely positive on either side.

The whole idea of "definitely positive" is over-rated on most positions anyway.

Obviously there are a variety of meanings attached to all of these pictographs, ideograms, hieroglyphs or whatever they are. You really have to do enough of them to make the case, not just one word like "boat."

The standard "debunking" would cherry (or rotten apple) pick within the range of possible meanings and assume that the biblical position is held to a much higher standard ("definitely positive") than the academic standard (God hasnt struck me with lightning for saying it just yet, so it must be true enough).

I have no interest in reading the book, but I wouldnt mind kicking around a few of the critiques.

Here is an interesting article in a very similar vein:

http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/essays/comp/cw03bordersacrifice.htm

Here are some quotations used during the border sacrifice ceremony which have Biblical parallels.

Chinese Border Sacrifice​

Hebrew Bible​

“Of old in the beginning, there was great chaos, without form and dark. The five elements had not begun to revolve, nor the sun or moon to shine. In the midst (of the chaos) there existed neither form nor sound. You, O spiritual Sovereign, came out in your presidency, and first did divide the grosser parts from the purer. ”1 “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.” –Genesis 1:1-2, NLT. “You made heaven. You made the earth. You made man. All things with their reproducing power got their being (from you).” – Chinese prayer2 “It is I who made the earth and created mankind upon it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts.” Isaiah 45:12 “Like a potter, you have made all things.” – Chinese prayer3 “Yet, O LORD, you are our Father. We are the clay, you are the potter; we are all the work of your hand.” Isaiah 64:8 “You regard us as a Father does (his child).” – Chinese prayer4 “I will be a Father to you, and you will be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty.” II Corinthians 6:18 How did these remarkable simularities come to pass? Lamech, the father of Noah, was living during the time of Adam.5 Therefore, Noah would have heard the stories of creation and sin from Lamech who actually heard Adam tell it. The stories of creation and first sin would not be altered after just traveling through Lamech. Writing may have been widely used before Noah's Flood. Even if writing was not the method of transmission, oral tradition was within the tradition of the middle east, demanded memorization of facts. The Israelites still value oral tradition and love to tell stories of all God has done for them.6 Noah and eight other people were the only ones to survive the flood.7 The first thing Noah did when he got off of the ark was to build an altar, and give God a sacrifice.8 Less than one hundred years later, the descendants of Noah were beginning to go back to the sinful ways that first stopped communication with God.9 They were developing the sinful attitude that they could do everything without the help of God. They began to build a tower that they thought would reach to heaven. God stopped construction on the tower, and scattered the people, confusing them by assigning new languages to some of them. It is thought that the Tower of Babel incident happened around 2250 B.C.9 The first inhabitants of China set up their first dynasty less than fifty years later.9
In one of the ceremonies of the religion they first practiced, they did many things that are very similar to the religious practices in the Bible. In China, between 2250 B.C. and 2200 B.C., from the first dynasty up until 1911, when the last dynasty fell, a practice of twice annual sacrifice was carried out.10 Cain and Abel were the first recorded people to sacrifice anything to God. Paradise was sealed and they could not re-enter it. They would have tried to get as close to God as they could while communicating with him. Perhaps they went to the very edge of the garden, where they had the last direct communication with God, to give Him the sacrifices. The Emperor of China would go to the northern and southern border of his land and give a sacrifice of a spotless bull.11 Before the ceremony began, the emperor would fast and go through a purification period. This was the emperor whose people believed he was the Mandate of Heaven. This meant that he was part god, that he was holy, and that he had the blessing of heaven. Yet, he subjected himself to no food, and no concubines, and granted pleasures of life. In one of the prayers he said that “The great and lofty One promises His favor and regard; we are totally unworthy to receive it.”12 The emperor must have greatly valued the God for whom he gave all that up. The Chinese people worshipped Shang Di using terminology you might hear in any western church.

 

[juvenissun]

The whole idea of "definitely positive" is over-rated on most positions anyway.

Obviously there are a variety of meanings attached to all of these pictographs, ideograms, hieroglyphs or whatever they are. You really have to do enough of them to make the case, not just one word like "boat."

The standard "debunking" would cherry (or rotten apple) pick within the range of possible meanings and assume that the biblical position is held to a much higher standard ("definitely positive") than the academic standard (God hasnt struck me with lightning for saying it just yet, so it must be true enough).

I have no interest in reading the book, but I wouldnt mind kicking around a few of the critiques.

Here is an interesting article in a very similar vein:

http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/essays/comp/cw03bordersacrifice.htm

The idea of embedding Jewish creation theology in ancient Chinese characters sounds pretty odd to me. Modern Christian traces Christianity backward among rich Chinese classic literature/language. Sometimes, the discoveries are very interesting and are even convincing. Sometimes, there could also be a little bit stretching and distortion involved. But, overall, why is any this type of link significant? If speculations were true, what is the serious message to the origins theology? Were Chinese one of those people scattered from the Tower of Babel? Has similar study been done to other culture/language?

It seems to be a good idea to me to have a world convention dedicated to this issue. If so, I would probably want to be there.

 

[busterdog]

The idea of embedding Jewish creation theology in ancient Chinese characters sounds pretty odd to me. Modern Christian traces Christianity backward among rich Chinese classic literature/language. Sometimes, the discoveries are very interesting and are even convincing. Sometimes, there could also be a little bit stretching and distortion involved. But, overall, why is any this type of link significant? If speculations were true, what is the serious message to the origins theology? Were Chinese one of those people scattered from the Tower of Babel? Has similar study been done to other culture/language?

It seems to be a good idea to me to have a world convention dedicated to this issue. If so, I would probably want to be there.

Its like lots of other arguments that are more interesting when you hold the up next to the conjecture of modern academics. There were other threads about how biblical thought was the outgrowth of various pagan traditions. Anytime you can mess with such thinking, its a good thing.

 

[Biblewriter]

I do not have and did not read these books. But I know what's in there.
I did not say what they said is wrong. I said there are alternative interpretations and arguments.

There are other examples as well. I cannot show them because I do not have a way to do that. But the Chinese symbol for love is the symbol for a man superimposed on a cross, with a smaller man on a similarly smaller cross on each side of it. The symbol for sin is the symbol for a man inside the symbol for a net. The list goes on and on.

In my studies of ancient history connected with my eschatology work (which required identifying the ancient nations named in Bible prophecy) I ran across a note that was very interesting in this regard.

This was a report written by a monk who had been sent by the Pope to visit Gengis Kahn. Among other things he said that the great Kahn had conquered a Christian nation and had taken its alphabet for his own because the symbols represented ideas, rather than sounds, which made it useful in uniting many different language groups into a single culture.

Of course, the interesting detail was that this symbolic written language had reportedly been developed by an unnamed "Christian nation." This would explain how Christian philosophy became so deeply entrenched in the symbolism ot the Chinese written language.

I am not aware that anyone else has ever made this connection concerning this or any similar historical note.

 

[Assyrian]

Although I am Irish, and a fan of celtic Missionary work, my username is taken from the other great missionary church of the Dark Ages, the Assyrian Church, also known in the West as the Nestorians.

The Christian nation referred to in the letter was probably the Uyghurs or Naimans of whom a significant number were Christians when Genghis Khan conquered them. It was the Uyghur script Genghis adopted.

The problem is, although your monk travelled to China to meet the emperor, it was not a Chinese emperor he met but a Mongol. The reason the monk was able to travel to China is because the Mongols had conquered most of Central Asia and China too allowing trade to move across the Silk Road. The Uyghur was adopted by the Mongols for their Mongolian language which was previously unwritten, but Chinese was a different language continued to use its own Chinese characters.

Here is an example of Uyghur script which as you can see is very different from Chinese characters.

. . .. . Guyuk Khan's Stamp
​