requestId:684aed8f616492.66543267.
Original title: The ultimate question of understanding: “Divine Will” and “Destiny” – Evaluation of the Confucian dialogues learned by Wen Yu and Lin Anwu in 2018 at Hunan Master Fan
Author: Lin Xiaobin
Source: Author Authorized Confucian Network Published
“Journal of Christian Civilization” Autumn (Issue 40)
Time: Confucius was in the 2570th year of the tenth month of Jihai Guimao
� To put it simply, Confucianism focuses on hearing the meaning of the meaning of heavenly destiny in the middle of enlightenment, while Christianity receives the will of God in the path of faith-inspiring this religion. Whether it is destiny or divine will, they are closely related to human preservation. What is different is that the interpretation of the differences between Confucianism and Jesus on destiny and divine will lead to two methods of preservation of differences. Confucianism cultivates one’s character in its participation in cultivation and education, and moves towards “a universal combination of six and a sequel to form all things”; Christianity accepts God’s will in faith and completes the renewal of self-concept information, and advances the preservation of God’s will. This Confucian dialogue between humanity and religion is, in fact, a collision of two preservation views. This collision confession, when these two preservation views coexist in a unified situation, they will not prevent the inducement of certain forces independently and in combination.
Keywords: Divine destiny; divine will; commentary; life view; cognition discussion
Divine destiny and divine will seem to be in line with a certain ultimate relationship, and this relationship is of great appeal to human preservation. That is to say, if a person can master the destiny and understand the will of God, he can live in a preservation state of “smooth heaven and prosperity” or “discussing God’s joy”, which not only has the ultimate support, but also has a continuous preservation power. The problem is, what kind of way should we use to grasp the destiny of heaven or recognize the will of God, and then to achieve such preservation? Confucianism and Christianity each have their own opinions. If each of them is only a life in their own closed territory, they will naturally be in peace and self-satisfied. However, once they have to live in a unified area, all aspects of their careers have to deal with each other, the power between the two preservation methods will immediately become prominent. We found it very hard to find that if they had to preserve in a unified social-natural environment, the best way to deal with it is to talk in thinking and know each other’s confidence. On April 27, 2018, the Hunan Master History System organized a lecture on the theme of “Destiny and God’s Will: The End of Concerns and Jesus’ Dialogue”, inviting Professor Wen Yujie (Shandong University) and Professor Lin Anwujie (Ciyi University) to deliver theme speeches and conduct dialogue transportation. Professor Luo Heng Lin was in charge of the forum. The thinking power presented in this dialogue is ultimately extreme, and entering this dialogue will make peopleA sense of soothing feeling is infected. The road to mutual interaction between Religion and Ye is arduous and the way is long!
1. How to discuss “God will”?
The key to the problem of “Divine Will” is not to analyze and discuss its specific content, but how people understand the dimension of “Divine Will”. This is also an important concern for Xie Wenyu to discuss this issue from a Christian perspective, and it is also his purpose in this Confucian and Jesus dialogue. In Christ’s worship, believers receive God’s will in faith and preserve it according to God’s will. This financing contract is what they ask for. Obviously, the key to realizing this preservation is to understand God’s will. However, God’s transcendence is not something that people can understand in their existing understanding structures. Or maybe it is impossible for humans to grasp God’s will in the existing understanding structure. Therefore, the problem of how a person knows God is the key point. Professor Xie Wenyu asked this question at the beginning of his speech. How does the classic Christian text answer this question? We need to evaluate the relevant essays of the Holy See.
Xi Wenyuche believes that the problem of divine will is an cognitive discussion problem. If the Holy One asks the believer to keep according to God’s will, he must offer a useful way for the believer to apply in God’s will. Let’s first examine the opening of “The Holy Creation”. The creation of God is a real history to believers, not the so-called mythological stories written by many non-believers. How to show that the creation is a real thing?
Let’s analyze it. Creation is a process of “creating something out of nothing”. The first question I encountered was how did Moses, the author of the Century, understand this? At the time of creation, no one existed yet. The only subject that can understand the creator itself is the creator himself. This is to say that people are not present, so there is no qualification to verify the history of creation. The creation of Moses as a man was not based on it. In Christianity, God created the world according to his will and plans. But what do Christians say about this? This is a simple cognitive discussion problem.
This is how people’s cognitive activities are conducted. First, people recognize sensory objects through their senses.That is, it uses the touch, observation, and listening methods of the body and five senses to form impressions and ideas, and build a system of visual thoughts on this basis to form experience knowledge. Secondly, people also present the object of thinking through logical statements, such as, you have a too-sized one. This topic presents an object that is not in your experience of feeling, but it is a real existence. How do you understand that you are too good? It’s hard to point out that you applied a certificate. You have a father; your father has his father; your father has a father; your father has a father; in this way, you must have a great man. Although you have never seen this “too” but you know that he exists in a certain period of time and without him there would be no you. As long as you receive this certificate, you will understand the tooth in the conclusion.
However, in the case of creation, people have not yet been born and cannot form a sensory experience of creation activities. Therefore, creation activities are not the object of perception. So, can people recommend the creation activities? Creation is a process from nothing to something. As far as people know, people can identify those thinking objects through recommendations. For the “existence” in “the origin of nothing”, we can present it in the proof by tracing the changes and development of things, that is, we recommend in the causal link that all things have a root cause; the instinct is from there; the instinct of the instinct; the instinct of the instinct is from there, and the instinct of the instinct must be a “root”. In other words, based on human evidence, we can present and recognize the final “has”. However, the recommendation is only applicable to things that have existed or have existed. We cannot recommend things that never existed. “No” cannot be defined and presented in some kind of recommendations and proofs, so it cannot obtain the proof of thinking, and it is not an object that can be recognized through ideology. Since neither of these two methods can provide cognitive theory for creatorialism, then, is the basis for creatorialism of Christianity?
Regarding the understanding of the inception of Christianity, Xie Wenyu taught Augustin’s statement in “The Record of Confessions” during the Fifth Century AD. Augustin theology has a very high position and authority in the Christian thinking world, so his interpretation has a broad and profound impact within Christianity.
Agustin talked that according to Moses’s Chronicles in the Holy See, God’s creation of the six kingdoms was neither created in time and space nor created with any visible things or materials. The completeness was completed by this creator himself. From the perspective of all things, the starting point of the creative activity is a state of nothingness; from this “nothing”, God said that there is something, and gave birth to a world of “existence”. This creation is complete based on the creator’s own meaning, or the creator’s own self-design.
But what did Moses write about this worldly destiny? The process of creation was not seen by Moses; and Moses did not use a recommended method to demonstrate this creation. Therefore, we cannot understand the creation of things in the above two ways.Or maybe, creative activities are not sensory objects or thinking objects. Of course, the creator, as the creator, understands this creator. If the Creator himself actively exposes the Creational Activity to Moses, and Moses simply exposes
發佈留言