Explaining Christmas to Chinese Friends

[StuartJ]

I have a number of Chinese friends.

They are educated and cosmopolitan.

They know very little of Christianity. It's quite foreign to them.

How can I explain the details of Jesus' nativity ...?

[JehovahsWitness]

(I don't know what "theistic evolution" is so I can't say if I reject it or not).

Something along the lines of, God used evolution in a hands off manner to create life on Earth, he set up the laws of nature in such a way that humanity is the inevitable result, without active interference/upkeep required. This either means no literal Adam; or that Adam is a special one-off creation, placed into existing humanity.

O.k. thanks.


No, I don't believe that.

JW

[Bust Nak]

Sounds like argumentum ad populum to me...

Well it isn't, because word meaning is dictated by usage. People use the word that way, then that's what the word means.

Fair enough, everyone is different. If you believe that should be the way to go, feel free to address the OPoster and recommend that.

Okay.

No, I don't believe that.

Which leaves creationism... but not the Young Earth variety.

[JehovahsWitness]

... you believe in a literal Adam as the forefather of all of mankind, you explicitly reject theistic evolution and common ancestors. That's still creationism in my book.

Fair enough. Is there a reason I should care about your book?

Sure, the one reason is that my view is commonly shared amongst both atheists and theists alike.

.

Well it isn't, because word meaning is dictated by usage.

I see, I misunderstood your point, I apologise. When I asked you why I should care about "your book" , I took " my book" to be a euphemism for your OPINION (People don't usually refer to dictionaries as "their book"). If above you were simply saying thhat according to "most dictionaries" Jehovah's Witnesses would be classified as "creationists" fair enough, I have no problem with that statement, its probably true (I'd have to check some dictionaries to be sure).

Anyway, we definitely believe in God had a direct hand in the creation of the universe and everything in it ( meaning he created, set up and directed all the laws that played a role in the existence of matter and physical and non-physical life forms) including the first human couple, from which humanity has descended. I would say that we (Jehovah's Witnesses) do not reject proven science, whether we are promoting "pseudoscientific beliefs" is a matter of opinion.

JW

[PinSeeker]

"Scare quotes"? I... don't even know what that means, much less how to respond to it. Wow.

That's odd because you just used them to introduce this reply. You obviously have some level of understanding of them. This will help fill in the missing details:

"Scare quotes (also called shudder quotes,[1][2] sneer quotes,[3] and quibble marks) are quotation marks a writer places around a word or phrase to signal that they are using it in a non-standard, ironic, or otherwise special sense.[4] Scare quotes may indicate that the author is using someone else's term, similar to preceding a phrase with the expression "so-called";[5] they may imply skepticism or disagreement, belief that the words are misused, or that the writer intends a meaning opposite to the words enclosed in quotes.[6]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes

Whatever, man. All I was doing was using the same term that another poster had used in a previous post and noting the misuse of it. There may have been others, but whoever said they had "laid out" whatever it was and explained it didn't really lay it out or explain it in any kind of correct sense at all. So, disagreement, for sure. Just the term 'scare quote' is a misnomer, in my opinion. There's a lot of those (minomers) around these days. Their just attempts at demagoguery, really. Peace, bro.

[Tcg]

"Scare quotes"? I... don't even know what that means, much less how to respond to it. Wow.

That's odd because you just used them to introduce this reply. You obviously have some level of understanding of them. This will help fill in the missing details:

"Scare quotes (also called shudder quotes,[1][2] sneer quotes,[3] and quibble marks) are quotation marks a writer places around a word or phrase to signal that they are using it in a non-standard, ironic, or otherwise special sense.[4] Scare quotes may indicate that the author is using someone else's term, similar to preceding a phrase with the expression "so-called";[5] they may imply skepticism or disagreement, belief that the words are misused, or that the writer intends a meaning opposite to the words enclosed in quotes.[6]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes

Whatever, man. All I was doing was using the same term that another poster had used in a previous post and noting the misuse of it. There may have been others, but whoever said they had "laid out" whatever it was and explained it didn't really lay it out or explain it in any kind of correct sense at all. So, disagreement, for sure. Just the term 'scare quote' is a misnomer, in my opinion. There's a lot of those (minomers) around these days. Their just attempts at demagoguery, really. Peace, bro.

For a person who is so upset about scare quotes, you sure use them often.

Given that your displeasure with a commonly understood term is totally unrelated and irrelevant to the topic of this thread, I'll leave you with your displeasure.

[bluethread]

I have a number of Chinese friends.

They are educated and cosmopolitan.

They know very little of Christianity. It's quite foreign to them.

How can I explain the details of Jesus' nativity ...?

As one would do in explaining anything, one sshould begin with their perspective. The Chinese are not a monoculture and educated and cosmopolitan are rather general descriptions. Are these registered communist atheists, mystical theists or something in between?

[StuartJ]

I have a number of Chinese friends.

They are educated and cosmopolitan.

They know very little of Christianity. It's quite foreign to them.

How can I explain the details of Jesus' nativity ...?

As one would do in explaining anything, one sshould begin with their perspective. The Chinese are not a monoculture and educated and cosmopolitan are rather general descriptions. Are these registered communist atheists, mystical theists or something in between?

Irrelevant ...

I suggest you are dodging the topic.

Because I, my Chinese friends, and - I further suggest - very many people of faith - recognise the angels and virgin and scurrying star and other such as fantasy tales from a superstitious culture.

Fantasy tales that are an embarrassment to an advanced society.

I suggest the honest answer is that you can't explain them ...

You need to omit the details and obfuscate.

[bluethread]

As one would do in explaining anything, one should begin with their perspective. The Chinese are not a monoculture and educated and cosmopolitan are rather general descriptions. Are these registered communist atheists, mystical theists or something in between?

Irrelevant ...

I suggest you are dodging the topic.

Then I suggest you really do not want to know. Your question was how to explain something. The answer is to begin with the current understanding of the enquirer.

Because I, my Chinese friends, and - I further suggest - very many people of faith - recognise the angels and virgin and scurrying star and other such as fantasy tales from a superstitious culture.

Fantasy tales that are an embarrassment to an advanced society.

I suggest the honest answer is that you can't explain them ...

You need to omit the details and obfuscate.

Well, when one labels a culture, it is easy to reject it's archetypes out of hand. I am honest and can explain them. You may not agree with them when I am done, but that latter was not the mission you set forth. In order to properly explain anything, one must establish a common frame of reference. So, what is the cultural framework of those "Chinese friends" of yours?

[StuartJ]

[Replying to post 38 by bluethread]

The common frame of reference is Christianity.

How would you present the "factual" details of the Nativity of Jesus ...?

One doesn't need to know the backgrounds of individual audience members to present "factual" details.

Please lay out the details ....

[bluethread]

[Replying to post 38 by bluethread]

The common frame of reference is Christianity.

How would you present the "factual" details of the Nativity of Jesus ...?

One doesn't need to know the backgrounds of individual audience members to present "factual" details.

Please lay out the details ....

However, that is not how one explains things. You say that Christianity is the frame of reference. Well, what do these people know about Christianity?