• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

How does a non-Christian / non-Jew explain this?

Bananas

Endangered Species
Its not really informative and Im also wondering why it is only for the non-Christian and non-Jews to comment, are Christians and Jews supposed to bow down and buy into the argument like sheep?

Anyway... other than the poor presentation it is poor in its misuse of the Chinese language, Im no expert but this theory works on the assumption that all Chinese language works in the exact same pictorial way, when the reality is most of it is phonetic. It also uses its results to reinforce its own belief with out giving any logical reason to do so. You may as well argue clouds look like sheep, so my insane theory that sheep come from space is true!!

Personally I think this kind of desperate attempt to justify religious stories diminishes the true value of a religion and only gives said religions negative press. Why not accept the stories for what they are, whatever it is you choose that to be.
 

FutureTrackStar

Registered Member
Its not really informative and Im also wondering why it is only for the non-Christian and non-Jews to comment, are Christians and Jews supposed to bow down and buy into the argument like sheep?
- It's for non-Christians and non-Jews because it is probable that those people don't believe the events of the OT actually happened in history.

... it is poor in its misuse of the Chinese language, Im no expert but this theory works on the assumption that all Chinese language works in the exact same pictorial way, when the reality is most of it is phonetic.
- It does not assume that the entire Chinese language works like a pictograph. It only assumes that some words are combinations of simpler words... which is common in the Chinese language.

Just did some research. All Chinese characters are logograms which are symbols that represent words. This contrasts phonograms (e.g. a, b, c) which are symbols that represent speech sounds. Most of the Chinese characters are radical-radical compounds (like the examples given in the website) or radical-phonetic compounds, which consist of a meaning part and a phonetic part. The website does not misuse the Chinese language in any way. Many Chinese characters are formed in the same manner. For many more examples: Pictographic Chinese Characters and Associative compound characters - Chinese Forum

here's an excellent example: 男 = 田 + 力 is "male"="field"+"labor/force"


It also uses its results to reinforce its own belief with out giving any logical reason to do so. You may as well argue clouds look like sheep, so my insane theory that sheep come from space is true!!
- That made absolutely no sense. Clouds and sheep are not man-made symbols used for communication. If you can find an example of a Chinese character meaning "outer space" which is composed of a cloud-part and a sheep-part, then you might have an argument.
 

Bananas

Endangered Species
here's an excellent example: 男 = 田 + 力 is "male"="field"+"labor/force"

The website had a diffent definition for 田, it just highlights that certain aspects are being distorted to suit a story.

- It's for non-Christians and non-Jews because it is probable that those people don't believe the events of the OT actually happened in history.
If it happened or not is superflous to the notion that Chinese script has any relationship to that of Genesis... Unless of course you actually count this theory as some kind of evidence?
 

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
I disagree that it is superfluous to whether the events in the OT have any relationship to the Chinese script, I think it is evidence that it does. How reliable that evidence is or whether there is any contradictory evidence is subject to debate. I'm not saying this is proof of anything, only that it is evidence and worth looking deeper into.
 

Mirage

Secret Agent
Staff member
V.I.P.
The website had a diffent definition for 田, it just highlights that certain aspects are being distorted to suit a story.
Let's just be fair and assume there was some distortion to suit their claims. At first I was pretty skeptical too, but regardless of what you believe, it's hard to deny the fact that there definitely seems to be a heck of a lot of early Biblical imagery in the Chinese words laid out in that presentation.

I don't know Chinese, so I have to take them for their word, but I'd be just as interested in seeing a Chinese expert dispute this as any non-believers here. I don't want to buy into this claim if it's fabricated, but at surface level, it seems like they have done quite a bit of research on this.

If even half of those characters do in fact mean what they claim, they have a pretty solid claim if you ask me.
 
Last edited:

Bananas

Endangered Species
I disagree that it is superfluous to whether the events in the OT have any relationship to the Chinese script.
I think you need to reread what I wrote... I stated is that if the events are real or not(or if you believe them to be real or not) has no bearing on the relationship between the OT and the Chinese script.



Hybrix; said:
Let's just be fair and assume there was some distortion to suit their claims. At first I was pretty skeptical too, but regardless of what you believe, it's hard to deny the fact that there definitely seems to be a heck of a lot of early Biblical imagery in the Chinese words laid out in that presentation.
..or... its just the way its been laid out and presented to you. Which to be fair, is more likely.

Before we deny the fact, it is first correct to assert the fact.... and... the fact is that even if the Chinese script has similarities to the OT it is in no way that uncommon for two cultures to share similarities either through divergence or convergence.

Hybrix; said:
I don't know Chinese, so I have to take them for their word, but I'd be just as interested in seeing a Chinese expert dispute this as any non-believers here.
...and I would not take anybody's unless they were an expert. Rather than dispute this I'd prefer it if it were first validated as even being a plausible comparison.

Hybrix; said:
If even half of those characters do in fact mean what they claim, they have a pretty solid claim if you ask me.
A claim to what exactly?
 

FutureTrackStar

Registered Member
The website had a diffent definition for 田, it just highlights that certain aspects are being distorted to suit a story.
- Not really. 田 is an agricultural field, specifically a field which is cultivated, which is basically a garden. Look it up...

If it happened or not is superflous to the notion that Chinese script has any relationship to that of Genesis... Unless of course you actually count this theory as some kind of evidence?
- Of course I'm presenting it as evidence. How could the imagery of the events of Genesis be embedded in Chinese language?

Why is 禁 (forbidden) composed of 林 (trees) and 示 (show; manifest; demonstrate), i.e. forbidden is a demonstration of trees?

Why is 倮 (naked) composed of 亻(a person) and 果 (fruit, i.e. 田 on a 木 (a cultivated field on a tree)). What does a fruit have to do with nakedness?
------
I think you need to reread what I wrote... I stated is that if the events are real or not(or if you believe them to be real or not) has no bearing on the relationship between the OT and the Chinese script.
- Except that if the story of the tower of babel is true, then the ancient Chinese were the people who migrated west from Babylon. They would have known the history of the flood and creation (if it were true).
 
Last edited:

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
I think you need to reread what I wrote... I stated is that if the events are real or not(or if you believe them to be real or not) has no bearing on the relationship between the OT and the Chinese script.
Yeah I know and I disagree. I do believe it may have a bearing on the relationship between the OT and the Chinese script.

I think it may be evidence of the events told in the OT, I don't believe it is proof of the events in the OT.
 

Bananas

Endangered Species
- Not really. 田 is an agricultural field, specifically a field which is cultivated, which is basically a garden. Look it up...
As I stated; distortions. Why not use the word for garden? 園

FutureTrackStar; said:
Of course I'm presenting it as evidence. How could the imagery of the events of Genesis be embedded in Chinese language?
Because they are not. If you really wanted to you could draw similarities between The Very Hungry Caterpillar and genesis.

The problem is you are getting the characters to fit the story. You want to see the patterns so you will allow yourself to see them. I shall quickly demonstrate...

Why is 禁 (forbidden) composed of 林 (trees) and 示 (show; manifest; demonstrate), i.e. forbidden is a demonstration of trees?
In nearly all cultures the forest is seen as home to the evil spirits and in most of those cultures it is ill advised to enter them, you could say it is forbidden. Basically what you are presenting is an argument saying Hansel and Gretel is a parody of Genesis?


CaptainObvious; said:
Yeah I know and I disagree. I do believe it may have a bearing on the relationship between the OT and the Chinese script.
If you disagree can you elaborate further and explain why does ones belief in judeo/christian stories have any relationship to whether or not there are similarities between Chinese script and Genesis? ....surely there are similarities or there aren't and ones religious beliefs to this observation are irrelevant.
 
Top