requestId:684c3e3ce6cf61.00662832.
How to compare Confucianism and Jesus’ ultimate respect for worship
——Agreement with Xie Wenyu
Author: Zhang Jun
Source: Author Authorized Confucianism Network, Originally published by “Southern Academics” No. 3, 2018
[Abstract] The religious idea of distinguishing Confucianism and Christianity through “admiration” and “reverence” is worthy of profound exploration in the academic community. Compared with the Christian God’s worship, Confucianism’s awe or admiration of destiny must be carefully analyzed. After all, the “nature of destiny in the Doctrine of the Mean” and “Shang Shu” and “Shang Shu” are not the same as the “destiny of destiny” and the “destiny of destiny” in “Shang Shu” and “Shang Shu” are not the same as the “destiny of destiny”. The “faith of destiny” in “Shang Shu” and “Shang Shu” are not the same as the “destiny of the destiny”. In modern Chinese literature, the concept of “destiny” has rich connotations, which can refer to the decree of the divine heaven, the political destiny of the ruler, the internalized acquired priesthood, and can also express the will and decree of the sacred king, individual destiny and even natural laws, etc. In the Eastern Christian tradition, it is impossible to find a concept of “destiny” that can correspond to it. “Heaven” is just a creation of God in Christian civilization, not God himself, so Christianity cannot even apply the concept of “destiny” to the most meaningful meaning of “God’s will”. This determines the ultimate worship comparison between the two religions of Confucianism and Jesus, and can be compared with the comparison between “destiny of heaven” and “destiny of God”, and cannot be described as a comparison between “destiny of heaven in China and the West”. To compare the Confucianism and Yeshi religions, we must first divide the Confucian religious conception and the humanistic conception. If limited to the comparison of religious destiny, Christian concepts such as “Holy Word”, “Inspiration”, “God’s Will”, “God’s Will”, and “Prepare” can be established as the basis for the more dialogue between China and the West. But in terms of human civilization and internalized thinking on destiny, the Confucian “respect for destiny” is difficult to communicate with Christianity. The destiny of Confucianism’s inner transformation and moral character cannot be as good as the “reverence” method of self-denying Christianity. It can only be recognized by “being sincere to the Lord” and “every heart and nature”. It highlights the main principle of life. In terms of this dimension, the worship of civilization by Ruye can be simplified into the difference between seeking inwardly and seeking outwardly, self-power and other power. In addition, the most basic thing about worship is not an awareness activity, its essence is a life-threatening view or direct recognition of the ultimate reality. Moreover, no matter whether it is Confucianism or worship, it cannot be defeated into feelings. Feelings are not related to cognitive activities, and feelings are related to activities that live in life and body, and are related to the actual subject.
[Keyword] Destiny, God, Confucianism, Christianity, Admiration, Contemporary
Author profile: Zhang Jun, professor and doctoral supervisor at Yuelu School of Hunan University, director of the Hunan University of Science and Technology’s research on religion and civilization, chief expert of the National Social Science Fund’s critical projects. The purpose of the discussion is religion and aesthetics, and at the same time, it also explores and compares the fields of philosophy, literature theory and general teaching. outHe has published seventy or eighty articles in his book “The Rejuvenation of Classical Aesthetics” and “Enjoyment and Reverence”.
Control: The meaning of “destiny” in China and the West
Since the late Ming Dynasty, the discussions and discussions about the different “Deus” and “God” or “Heaven” in the Middle Earth have never stopped. Although this case of religious and civilized transportation between China and the West has not been finalized, its historical results as the Eastern Exposure of Christian Western Studies are undoubtedly the goal of the world. In that year, priests (such as Lima Tsu) used the “God” meaning “Deus” in Confucian classics to interpret the meaning of the Abrahamic monotheism and the One God’s religion with the supreme God’s meaning in the system of Chinese deities. Although this method of conception was of great success in worshiping civilization and promoting the contextualization and externalization of Christ’s worship, it was not a complete and accurate translation. However, the connotation of the history of civilized transportation lies in that this inaccurate translation name ultimately “the seldom occupy the nest”, which made the Abrahamic monotheism overwhelmed the Han-word “God”. In the academic world today, some even used the concept of “God” that was unique to the Abrahamic monotheism, to the reverse meaning of “God” in modern Chinese scriptures. As a result, the originally vague moral problems in the communication of civilized civilization became more confusing and difficult to distinguish between male and female.
The “Controversy in the Translation” between the Ming and Qing Dynasties is a classic case in the communication between Chinese and Western religious civilizations. The civilization reflection related to it has always been a topic that the Religious and Ye have been enthusiastic about and discussed in dialogue. The basic advancement of worshipping civilization from the West is often regarded as the most direct evidence to reveal the distinction or similarity of religious civilizations in China and the West. In recent years, many excellent commentaries have emerged in this topic, but the academic results of profound philosophical thinking on the essence of civilization in China and the West have not been many. Among them, the article “”Admiration” and “Respecting”: The Differentiation of the Destiny of China and the West” [①] can be regarded as one of the more representative works. In this text, the authorization of the authorization must develop from the primitive nature of emotional recognition effectiveness, and show the difference between the two based on the destiny presented in the Confucian and Christian texts. In the question of “relationship between heaven and man” or “relationship between god and man”, he believed that Confucianism treats the ultimate reality (God or God) with “admiration” feelings, and Christianity faces the ultimate reality (God or Jesus Christ) with “respecting” feelings. The “admiration” of the subject and his subject said in panic: “Do you want to drink some hot water? I’ll go and burn.” The relationship is a relationship of authority and service. “Consecration” is the relationship between the subject and his subject, and there is also a relationship of respect.The relationship between “inspiration” and mutual trust. As for the ultimately realistic approach to understanding theories, Confucianism seeks to present and recognize destiny in the feelings of “integrity” is an inward approach; Christianity teaches to become a receiver in the feelings of “faith” is an inward approach to dependence.
The academic community should not object to the teaching of using the concept of “consideration” to describe the Christian sentimental attitude towards Jesus Christ. In order to distinguish Christian worship, the concept of “awe” or “admiration” should not be too many people in the academic world to describe the Confucian and even Chinese people’s attitude towards destiny (God, heaven, heaven, heaven) in order to distinguish it from Christian worship. In fact, how much more of this focus has been discussed in the academic world in the previous century. For example, Mou Zongsan (1909-1995) said that fear, piety and worship are both related to religious ideas, but the Confucianism and Jesus religions are different in nature. Christianity is based on the “religion” of the classics, while Confucianism is based on the “humanistic teaching” that has more than the sexual energy level or religious ideas. For Christianity, believers can use “consideration” to realize the integration of the subjective energy in the face of the ultimate reality. “Sacrifice” means “refuge”, which often originates from the “terrible consciousness” of religion, and ultimately manifests itself as the abandonment of the main energy and the dependence on the supernatural energy. “Therefore, the terrible consciousness is the classical concept of refuge in religious consciousness. Refuge means to eliminate its own subject. In other words, it means to have a thorough denial of its existence, that is, to have a self-negation, and then attach the self-dependence after self-declaration to a transcendent existence in worship – God.” [②] For Confucianism, sim
發佈留言