论语和Christianity: for your criticism. :) - 未名空间MITBBS历史存档

国际科技财经博客移民网络热点娱乐民生时事公众号

Redian新闻

>未名空间

>Thoughts - 思考者

论语和Christianity: for your criticism. :)

论语和Christianity: for your criticism. :)# Thoughts - 思考者

w*d2003-06-09 07:06

1 楼

发信人: Tujl (1110001100110**11**1), 信区: literature
标题: Re: 浅尝论语
发信站: 又爱又喜 (Sun Jun 8 21:04:59 2003)
haha, good. I was thinking when we will see Lake's writting, as
I read many of your forwards. :)
Looking forward to it. :))

Never know Lake's Confucian side. :))
But to be frank, though I very agree that we should know more about
Confucius, I think Confucius is no longer for our mordern time.
Confucius defines what we should do is good as a set of rules,
however he did not define why we should d

zr2003-06-09 07:06

2 楼

..
..
..
..
It's rediculous when you say you don't know much about Confucius, you still
make a conclusion about it. What's your logic?
follow
Unfortunately it is not just a set of rules. It really has said why we should
do this. Have you really read it?
So you give up and surrender immediately, right? I don't think you know
and understand Confucius enough to write the following. I think you know
much more about Christianity. Unfortuately I think it's totally wrong for
Chinese to accept Western

【在 w******d 的大作中提到】

: 发信人: Tujl (1110001100110**11**1), 信区: literature
: 标题: Re: 浅尝论语
: 发信站: 又爱又喜 (Sun Jun 8 21:04:59 2003)
: haha, good. I was thinking when we will see Lake's writting, as
: I read many of your forwards. :)
: Looking forward to it. :))
:
: Never know Lake's Confucian side. :))
: But to be frank, though I very agree that we should know more about
: Confucius, I think Confucius is no longer for our mordern time.

w*d2003-06-09 07:06

3 楼

Hi, Please read the post carefully... Lake wrote his comment about Lunyu
in Chinese, and Tujl (actually Tujl is Windmind here. hehe. )
wrote his analysis in English.
The conclusion: Lake is not Tujl... Please criticize after
careful reading. okey? :))
should
Maybe I made too harsh conclusion here without any detailed reference.
If you can, please provided the references that explains why.
I would really like to read them in more details.
For now, my reply to your charge is that, even in case Con

zr2003-06-09 07:06

4 楼

抱歉很晚才回你。同时也不能用英文。宗教自由是当今社会
普遍接受的原则。你信基督教我不必多嘴。如果你提出你信
基督教乃因为中国儒家思想的落后，那这就大有商量之处。
我说的儒家是先秦儒家，代表人物是孔孟。另外加上宋明继承
先秦儒家思想并给于发扬的程朱(理学)陆王(心学)。网上有
的是批判的。可少有说到点子上的。好象蜀犬吠日。更奇的是，
破不成另外又无所立！不过潜台词大致是功利主义或实用主义。
此容当别议。你说的“三省吾身”语出“论语”，“慎独”语
出“大学”。儒家是身体立行的学问。于人生的理解，道德
的发扬只能用精微深妙，博大元浑来形容。儒家为学要立志。
立什么志？“三军可以夺帅，匹夫不可夺志”的志。再读“论
语”“冉有公西华侍坐”一段。孔子怎能“吾与点同”呢？
为什么我认为儒家的道德恰恰是解放人性的呢？中国走向民
主，平等，法制，自由是大势所趋。儒家思想的发扬光大就是
主要途径。此话说来就太大，还得再论。中国人自有精神上
的安身立命之处，为何要舍自家宝藏而求嗟来之食呢？

still
the

【在 w******d 的大作中提到】

: Hi, Please read the post carefully... Lake wrote his comment about Lunyu
: in Chinese, and Tujl (actually Tujl is Windmind here. hehe. )
: wrote his analysis in English.
: The conclusion: Lake is not Tujl... Please criticize after
: careful reading. okey? :))
: should
: Maybe I made too harsh conclusion here without any detailed reference.
: If you can, please provided the references that explains why.
: I would really like to read them in more details.
: For now, my reply to your charge is that, even in case Con

w*d2003-06-09 07:06

5 楼

It seems you are indeed an expert of Confucian thoughts and literatures, at
least you tried to prove. :)
I always admire some people like you who read this many and remember this
many. hehe.
I never said Confucius was totally wrong, I said it is great to know more
about his theories(in my first post) and I said his thoughts was comparable to
Moses's ten conmandment. What I said is that the rules he defined are
difficult to execute for human, as difficult as that of ten commandment,
because of th

【在 zr 的大作中提到】

: 抱歉很晚才回你。同时也不能用英文。宗教自由是当今社会
: 普遍接受的原则。你信基督教我不必多嘴。如果你提出你信
: 基督教乃因为中国儒家思想的落后，那这就大有商量之处。
: 我说的儒家是先秦儒家，代表人物是孔孟。另外加上宋明继承
: 先秦儒家思想并给于发扬的程朱(理学)陆王(心学)。网上有
: 的是批判的。可少有说到点子上的。好象蜀犬吠日。更奇的是，
: 破不成另外又无所立！不过潜台词大致是功利主义或实用主义。
: 此容当别议。你说的“三省吾身”语出“论语”，“慎独”语
: 出“大学”。儒家是身体立行的学问。于人生的理解，道德
: 的发扬只能用精微深妙，博大元浑来形容。儒家为学要立志。

t*n2003-06-09 07:06

6 楼

偶插一句：上述两家都有能点出名来的法利赛人。好象不应该用双重标准来评论，说自个
方面的坏典型是由于个别人信仰不纯，对方的则是人家信仰的本身有问题。
其实，什么信仰系统（1）都会有少数人搞伪善，（2）都会有少数人能身体力行。要减少
第一种、增加第二种，也都是有法子的。

【在 w******d 的大作中提到】

: It seems you are indeed an expert of Confucian thoughts and literatures, at
: least you tried to prove. :)
: I always admire some people like you who read this many and remember this
: many. hehe.
: I never said Confucius was totally wrong, I said it is great to know more
: about his theories(in my first post) and I said his thoughts was comparable to
: Moses's ten conmandment. What I said is that the rules he defined are
: difficult to execute for human, as difficult as that of ten commandment,
: because of th

t*n2003-06-09 07:06

7 楼

自
产
法
诅
中
什
中
减
比如在行为标准上实际一些。儒家现在不讲“饿死事小，失节事大”了，基督教也不讲ti
the了，因为都太难做到。硬要求,容易造就伪君子。
比如强调言行统一的重要。还没听说过有哪一个道德系统反其道而行之。
再比如内部整顿，对抓到的伪君子进行严肃处理。儒家和基督教在过去某些阶段都真有过
杀一儆百的极端例子。

zr2003-06-09 07:06

8 楼

你说“the rules he defined are difficult to execute for human”。这我
便不同意。你的意思是很难做到，还是很难实行？儒家思想都是发自人之肺腑的思
想。于人身体立行的最细微处着眼。“君子慎其独也”很难作吗？君子，未必人人
敢当，而“慎其独”恰恰是绝大多数人在未必绝大多数时间作到的。“三省”作不
到，“一省”总会有吧？为什么非“上帝”出现才行呢？你还用“内功”“外功”
作比喻，岂不成了误导？这里不好耽误时间，长篇大论。其实关键一点在于，儒家
思想认为人之所以为人是具备了一个“本心”，正因此，人能够“求仁得仁”(“我
欲斯仁斯仁至矣”)，人能够“成全自己”(电影“霸王别姬”有这句台词)。人能
够通过“克己”(克，能也)而达到人性光辉至善之巅。彻底解放人性。为什么孔子
说“七十从心所欲而不逾矩”呢，既然道德是束缚人的？那么是鼓励人求仁得解还
是律人为恶，这还不是很明白的吗？况且人欲为恶何患无辞无理由呢？
基督教则不同。以为人有原罪，要先忏悔。此立足点就南辕北辄(怎么无此字？)。
上帝之有无又大成问题。GENESIS恐不能圆其说。人不用理性，

【在 w******d 的大作中提到】

T*x2003-06-09 07:06

9 楼

You did not get my point. Confucius just tell people how to conduct a life but
did not tell people why should conduct it in that way or where the teachings
come from. So it is natural that people in modern times disbelieve his
viewpoint and conduct the life in different way or modify his viewpoint and
extend it into something like neo-confucisim.
Bible also tell people how to conduct a life but it also tells people why
conduct life in that way. So one can only argue that he does not believe in
G

t*t2003-06-09 07:06

10 楼

Yeah, Bible told us the reason behind "how to conduct a life", but
1. Is this a valid reason?
2. Did all Christians really comply to these rules?
3. Do Christians really behave better than non-Christians?
4. Have the rules for Christians never changed in the last several centuries?

but
teachings
e.g.
society
题
在

【在 T*******x 的大作中提到】

: You did not get my point. Confucius just tell people how to conduct a life but
: did not tell people why should conduct it in that way or where the teachings
: come from. So it is natural that people in modern times disbelieve his
: viewpoint and conduct the life in different way or modify his viewpoint and
: extend it into something like neo-confucisim.
: Bible also tell people how to conduct a life but it also tells people why
: conduct life in that way. So one can only argue that he does not believe in
: G

t*t2003-06-09 07:06

11 楼

so, this only confines to yourself, not everyone.
but the problem is that whether this absolute criterion has worked in the
history. Everyone knows what happened when absolute Christian standard ruled.
I am talking about the feasibility of applying this absolute standard. It
seems it is good, but not practical --- like communism.
The basic things in Confucius also did not change. what's the advantage of
Cristian?
life
why
absolute
teaching
sense,
extreme
current

【在 T*******x 的大作中提到】

o*e2003-06-09 07:06

12 楼

这一条又是胡说。是因为无知还是喜欢撒慌?
先不说,基督教起源于犹太教,其信仰即有对犹太教信仰的继承,也有根本的创新.最早期的
基督教可以被看做犹太教的一个分枝.
早期的另一个基督教信仰分枝是Gnostic Christianity. 其信仰的一个核心是二元的上帝
观:旧约中造世的Jehovah是一个邪恶的上帝,是一切恶的来源;新约中的JESUS是善的上帝.
即使是PAUL改造的基督教,其早期的阿里乌斯派否认三位一体，一度很有政治势力。
宗教改革以后多数新教教派宣称人可以和耶和华直接交流，与罗马天主教相比,这也是基
本思维出发点的改变。
life
why
absolute
teaching
sense,
extreme
current

【在 T*******x 的大作中提到】

w*d2003-06-09 07:06

13 楼

Sorry, I was away for a conference for a week.
The points I made are just my own understandings... Therefore some of them may
be totally absurd if you first heard of them... Actually I was also frightened
when I developed such views... But I have to live with it as I just felt so
now...
I feel both happy and sorry when seeing so many people continued this topic...
I am happy because my point caught the attention of everybody...
I am sorry because it seems indeed I can not convince anybody else e

【在 zr 的大作中提到】

: 你说“the rules he defined are difficult to execute for human”。这我
: 便不同意。你的意思是很难做到，还是很难实行？儒家思想都是发自人之肺腑的思
: 想。于人身体立行的最细微处着眼。“君子慎其独也”很难作吗？君子，未必人人
: 敢当，而“慎其独”恰恰是绝大多数人在未必绝大多数时间作到的。“三省”作不
: 到，“一省”总会有吧？为什么非“上帝”出现才行呢？你还用“内功”“外功”
: 作比喻，岂不成了误导？这里不好耽误时间，长篇大论。其实关键一点在于，儒家
: 思想认为人之所以为人是具备了一个“本心”，正因此，人能够“求仁得仁”(“我
: 欲斯仁斯仁至矣”)，人能够“成全自己”(电影“霸王别姬”有这句台词)。人能
: 够通过“克己”(克，能也)而达到人性光辉至善之巅。彻底解放人性。为什么孔子
: 说“七十从心所欲而不逾矩”呢，既然道德是束缚人的？那么是鼓励人求仁得解还