# Chinese Characters and the Bible



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih (Jun 20, 2005)

http://www.yutopian.com/religion/words/

This looks almost too strange to believe. Has anyone heard of this before?

Nowing the little bit of Chinese that I do I already have doubts about his explanations but it still looks odd.

On a side note there is another article here - http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/388.asp


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih (Jun 20, 2005)

On second thoughts they really are stretching the Chinese a bit here.

I also want to point out these are modern Chinese Characters and I would have to find out what they really looked like thousands of years ago - they do change.

This would be easier if it was Arabic...


----------



## Jie-Huli (Jun 20, 2005)

I have read books on this before. It is interesting, but I am a bit skeptical of it. It is often presented in an oversimplified way, which I find a bit disengenuous, especially when it is used for evangelism.

For example, for the character for righteousness (the same character I use in my avatar), these articles always say that the character is made up of two parts: the top part means "lamb" and the bottom part means "me". And so they always make a big point about how "the lamb over me" means righteousness, i.e., our righteousness comes from Christ.

But while this makes a lovely illustration (which is of course a precious theological truth), I do not believe it is right to state that this was the original intent of the creators of this character, because the bottom part which means "me" today likely did not have this meaning at the time the character was created, and this part itself is made up of two subparts: the left side means "hand" and the right side means "dagger".

Now it is still an interesting character, because a hand, dagger and lamb all in the same character would seem to evoke the image of a sacrifice, and it is interesting if the original creators of the character linked sacrifices and righteousness. I just do not like to see these arguments put forward in simplistic and mistaken ways, because to do so can only raise doubts to educated Chinese to whom they evangelise. I have seen people really put too much emphasis on these doubtful and speculative things in evangelism, when in fact our faith is built on much surer ground than this.

Having said that, there are indeed interesting questions as to the origin of some of the Chinese characters and their seeming continuity with some Old Testament concepts. It is at least possible that some of the characters were influenced by oral traditions carried to the Far East following the dispersion after Babel. It would be nice if someone from the Reformed side did more rigorous scholarly research into this.


----------



## New wine skin (Jun 20, 2005)

Answers in Genesis has a dvd series of the 2003 world conf on creationism, which includes a lecture on this very topic. I posted a link to it below. The AIG lectures are given by very reputable scholars and scientists. I own this dvd and found it very informative. I think it comes in cassette if you want a lower cost of ownership. 

http://shop5.gospelcom.net/epages/A...752271d45579e7906bd/Product/View/30&2D9&2D040


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih (Jun 20, 2005)

I noticed they also used the 'kou' (mouth) radical/character and said it meant 'man'. Can it mean that in a certain concept? Personally it seemed like they were stretching it. I know you can use it in the context of a measuring word for family (wo jia you si kou ren) but otherwise it seems to be pushing the bounderies of truth.


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih (Jun 20, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Jie-Huli_It would be nice if someone from the Reformed side did more rigorous scholarly research into this.




I think a lot of it is hype which a lot of people want to be true. That said - it is interesting and I would like to see some critical examinations. Maybe I will try some research myself and look into the old characters and not just at the new.


----------

