Confucianism

[Panhan]

I've created this thread to find out what your opinions of Confucianism. First I'll provide some information about by background. My direct family line are currently living in China and I visit annually. I was born in England and experienced a very multi-religious education, I was taught to appreciate the Jewish, Muslim and Christian religions.

Now to the point, I rank Confucius as one of the most influential person who ever existed. I will excuse the majority of this forum because you can't read or write mandarin therefore meaning you can't read or fully appreciate the works of Confucius. But if you do a little research (be careful there are many misleading sites and I can't really provide you with good sources as it is something you experience rather than learn in my opinion). The essential point in my opinion is that Confucius basically teaches the same messages of Jesus excluding all the points about god (in terms of morality). Confucius was born before Christ and managed to amass more followers than Jesus ever did in his life-time.

Thoughts and comments on Confucius and Confucianism? I am not here to preach but I am saying that there is a very, very viable alternative soceity that can be compared with the Christian soceity. However I do not wish this thread to deteriorate down to an argument of East vs. West or communism.
Keep it clean and I'm very interested in seeing your responses.

[piesquared]

Completely off-topic:

Someone once told me that "Every statement I make is a lie" was a paradox. On the face of it, this seemed to be the case... but a more then cursory examination shows that it isn't a paradox. (Exactly why should be obvious, if not now then by the end of my post proper.)

I rather suspect this topic comes from a similar mistake.

=================================================
So how to put this...

It is only theists who have ever believed that morality comes only from god.

No atheist would be surprised at the "revelation" that none of jesus's attributed moral messages were divinely inspired things of perfection that no mere mortal could have devised in the thousands of years of civilization before him. Because, you see, atheists by definition don't believe he was divinely inspired (if they believe the bible depicts a historical figure in the first place).

You might also need to be reminded that just because atheists don't believe the bible is the inerrant word of god, doesn't mean that they reject every single word as false. I mean, it obviously mentions that there was a country called Rome, and this is correct. In a similar vein, it says that treating others as you might like to be treated is generally a good idea. This is also true.

It does contain some obviously untrue things (genetics works by combining the genes of the parents, looking at a striped pole while mating won't make a striped goat) but that doesn't mean every word is false.

[bowmore]

Originally Posted by piesquared

Someone once told me that "Every statement I make is a lie" was a paradox.

It obviously isn't. Perhaps that person made a mistake when he tried to refer to the liar's paradox : "This statement is false."

[Martin]

Originally Posted by bowmore

the liar's paradox

Isn't it called Epimenides paradox, "All Cretans are liars".

It's even in the Bible:

Titus 1:12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.
Titus 1:13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;

[bowmore]

Originally Posted by Martin

Isn't it called Epimenides paradox, "All Cretans are liars".

It's even in the Bible:

Titus 1:12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.
Titus 1:13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;

That's its historical origin, yes. There are several variants.

[Panhan]

You might also need to be reminded that just because atheists don't believe the bible is the inerrant word of god, doesn't mean that they reject every single word as false.

Did I ever imply that? Or is that a general statement applying to more than just me? My topic isn't about totally throwing away the bible, it is just that Confucius was able to develop a similar standard of morals without the mention of god. Also to get others opinions.

[piesquared]

Originally Posted by Panhan

Did I ever imply that? Or is that a general statement applying to more than just me? My topic isn't about totally throwing away the bible, it is just that Confucius was able to develop a similar standard of morals without the mention of god. Also to get others opinions.

I was speculating on why you might think this was worth bringing up. As an atheist, I don't find it remarkable that other people came up with similar moral messages. It's a consequence of the fact that jesus didn't have any special divine insight.

The only train of logic I came up with while reading your post that would make sense coming from a christian in an attempt to bring others to his point of view was "Look, other people agree with Jesus on this point. Therefore the entire bible is true."

The other reason that this might be significant would if someone was making the argument "Look, yet another example of what Christians claim is divine insight such as could only come from the mind of the One True God was just plagiarism from a much earlier philosophical system." This argument would obviously not make much sense coming from you, so I dismissed it as your motive.

Since reading some other recent threads I suppose you might be arguing "Look, other people were worshiping the same god as Christianity, you can tell because they had the same divine insights" but since that's the most phenomenally stupid line of reasoning I can think of to support this that anyone in the world might consider sound, I also dismissed it.

[Panhan]

I don't find it remarkable that other people came up with similar moral messages. It's a consequence of the fact that jesus didn't have any special divine insight.

I think that about summed up what I was thinking at the time.
Although I don't find it particularly remarkable that Confucius was able to come up with a set morals, it is just a more well documented and it was pre-Christ.

[xcept2010]

Originally Posted by Panhan

I think that about summed up what I was thinking at the time.
Although I don't find it particularly remarkable that Confucius was able to come up with a set morals, it is just a more well documented and it was pre-Christ.

No... its isn't more well documented. Do you have proof for this? Because as I've mentioned over and over there are plenty of manuscript evidence for thw Bible especially the NT.

[steenkh]

Originally Posted by xcept2010

Because as I've mentioned over and over there are plenty of manuscript evidence for thw Bible especially the NT.

You keep saying this over and over, but what does "plenty of manuscript evidence" prove? Only that there really is a book called the Bible that can be traced back to certain historical periods. We have a general idea of what the oldest manuscripts must have looked like (as Martin told you, there are more divergence in the extant manuscripts than there are words in the NT).

The manuscript evidence is in no way evidence that a single word in the Bible is true.