Monday, January 08, 2007
Nations (Language-Chinese)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c58d6/c58d6b835a07548a6449845a716d472629361f53" alt=""
India and China appear to have developed outside of the influence of Mesopotamian and Mediterranean regions. Their connection to the Biblical worldview is very puzzling. A historian has to rummage through historian garbage to try and determine the first settlers in this region. I believe the devout belief in the Evolution Hypothesis has disabled us from understanding the early Asians. Could the early settlers in China have brought with them stories of old?
Dr. Ethel R. Nelson, a pathologist and resident of Thailand; Richard E. Broadberry, a medical laboratory specialist in Taipei, fluent in Chinese; C.H. Kang; Kui Shin Voo; Larry Hovee and many others believe to have found a connection with ancient Chinese characters and Creation, the Garden of Eden, and the Great Flood as told by Moses.
The earliest understood writing in China is found on Oracle bone scripts. Interestingly, this writing is during the time of the Shang Dynasty, as was the worship of ShangTi (see post on Religion-Chinese). As with cuneiform and hieroglyphics, the earliest characters are pictographic in nature. Some linguists believe some of the characters to be phonograms. However, it can clearly be seen at the following site that many were logograms.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_character
As seen in the website above, Chinese still use a variation of ancient characters today. Sadly, in order to reduce the number of characters in their language, the Chinese are tending toward the Simplified Script. I hope they are not losing the ancient details with this transition.
But how does a language depict concepts and ideas in a pictographic nature? This topic is debated among historians. For the most part, they believe a lot of the concepts came from phonetic sounds of the words you could depict with pictures. Other historians believe they used pictures by association.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2b3a9/2b3a9203c59c1e9152e1a887f47793c791e04a3d" alt=""
As with any discovery, a historian or archaeologist must be careful to come to any conclusion too quickly. I believe Nelson has given substantial evidence for her theory. However, sometimes I believe she forces many of the characters and associations. You can come to your own conclusion (see the references below).
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/99d80/99d80e40beb647ca61d4c6b17b8c03d4df37314e" alt=""
REF: Nelson, Ethel R., and Richard E. Broadberry. Genesis and the Mystery Confucius Couldn’t Solve. Shunichi Yamamoto: 1994.
http://www.wbschool.org/chinesecharacters.htm (MUST SEE)
http://www.creationism.org/genesis.htm
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/pdf_notice.asp?pdf=/home/area/magazines/tj/docs/tjv13n1chinese_lamb.pdf
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v20/i3/china.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/Docs/388.asp