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 ...?

[PinSeeker]

It's a simple thing. If the woman sees the harmony of joints in a healthy human being as being indicative of a creator designer, then logically speaking, the disharmony of joints in a non-healthy human being should not be indicative of a creator designer.

Actually no, that's not logical at all. For the reason I previously stated. It's not simple, it's simplistic.

I did not use the word mistakes, so I don't know why you are singling it out by putting it in scare quotes.

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

[Clownboat]

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 ...?

Like most demi gods of the day.
He was fathered by a god and born from a virgin.

I would think that they would realize that this concept was very common back in those days and take it for what it's worth.

I don't understand the problem...

[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

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 13 by JehovahsWitness]

Do you think full blown creationism is really the best place to introduce secularists (ones who already found the idea of virgin birth laughable, no less) to Christianity?

No. I don't think creationism is biblical, my understanding is "creationists" take everything in the Genesis account literally. I do however recommend people study what the bible has to say with Jehovah's Witnesses. It has been a method that has proved successful with many from many different walks of life which is why I recommend it.

Was Life Created? Introduction: Was Life Created? Introduction
https://www.jw.org/en/publications/vide ... mv_1_VIDEO

The point is to question and find out for oneself. This is why I like this video, I think would definitely recommend it to people unfamiliar with Christianity.

Further Petr Muzny: A Law Professor Explains His Faith
https://tv.jw.org/#en/mediaitems/Origin ... cr_3_VIDEO

JEHOVAH'S WITNESS


RELATED POSTS


What material is best suited for an atheist examinjng the question of whether life was created?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 612#937612

[Tcg]

No. I don't think creationism is biblical, my understanding is they take everything in the Genesis account literally, I do however recommend people study what the bi me has to say with Jehovah's Witnesses. It has been a method that has proved successful with many from many different walks of life which is why I recommend it.

What is your measure of success?

Why do you consider this success beneficial?

[StuartJ]

Hey folks - don't let the faith community take you off topic for another critique of evolutionary science.

It's a standard ploy.

The topic is how to explain Jesus' nativity to educated professionals with very little exposure to ancient fantasy tales ...

And demonstrate how these fantasy tales can appear real to minds in advanced cultures.

[Bust Nak]

No. I don't think creationism is biblical, my understanding is "creationists" take everything in the Genesis account literally.

Okay, so I get that Jehovah's Witnesses are not young Earth creationists, but you guys seems to be in some limbo where 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.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 27 by Bust Nak]

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


I'm not implying you said I must, just trying to see the relevance. The OP asks how I would advise explaining a notable biblical miracle to someone unfamiliar with Christianity, I suggested building a base by establishing a belief in God as a first step. Obviously this implies examining the question of Creation. I suppose a purely literal interpretation would be less convincing but since that is not my argument I don't see why I should need to address it.

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

[Bust Nak]

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

Sure, the one reason is that my view is commonly shared amongst both atheists and theists alike. People usually see two distinct classes of evolutionist vs creationist, if you are not one, then you are the other. Is that significant enough reason?

The OP asks how I would advise explaining a notable biblical miracle to someone unfamiliar with Christianity, I suggested building a base by establishing a belief in God as a first step. Obviously this implies examining the question of Creation. I suppose a purely literal interpretation would be less convincing but since that is not my argument I don't see why I should need to address it.

I think leaving it as "I simply have faith that..." is easier to swallow than a challenge to the enquirer. Easier to just explain your view without trying to convince.

(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.

[JehovahsWitness]

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.

.

Sounds like argumentum ad populum to me... in any case, your opinion has been duly noted.

l still dont care.

An argumentum ad populum (Latin for "argument to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition must be true because many or most people believe it, often concisely encapsulated as: "If many believe so, it is so."

I think leaving it as "I simply have faith that..." is easier to swallow than a challenge to the enquirer.

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


JW