My History as a Missionary to China

[Wolfman]

This thread is a continuation of a discussion started here:

I've mentioned my past as a Christian missionary before, but never gone into much detail, at least in part because as an atheist today, its quite frankly rather embarrassing. However, I thought it might also provide good fodder for discussion, particularly the 'inside view' of what being a missionary is all about.

Some background: I was born and raised in a tiny Canadian village. My father was an Anglican (Episcopalian) priest, but unlike most Anglicans (who tend to be quite casual and liberal about their religious beliefs), my parents were evangelical fundamentalists, very much into Christianity, and proselytizing others. In fact, my parents went through an even more extreme Charismatic phase ("Charismatic" here refers to a particular Christian religious movement, not to how charming they are) that had demons as its central point of theology. I couldn't listen to any music that had a drum beat, because drum beats summoned Satan. UFOs were demons. Martial arts were demonic. Even illusionists and ventriloquists were Satanic, because either they A) were manifesting real occult powers, or B) were using deceit to fool others, both of which were the work of Lucifer. I also had to go through a monthly ritual, similar to an exorcism, where I would confess my sins, and then have the demons associated with those sins (who were infesting my body) cast out.

So...all of this establishes that I did not have what one might consider a 'normal' upbringing. The village I grew up in had a population of 900, and there were no atheists (or nobody who'd admit to being one). I wasn't really taught evolution, even in school...we were primarily taught the creation story. But perhaps my one saving grace as I grew up was my absolute passion for dinosaurs. I was a complete dinosaur fanatic, and had every book I could find ever published about them. In Grade 6, I made a complete model of the dinosaur family tree out of hand-crafted plasticine figures, which took honorable mention in a national contest at the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto (and won me a lifetime membership there). I didn't realize for years that that family tree directly contradicted what I'd been taught (and believed) about Creation. When I finally realized that (around 14 years of age), I faced my first major split with my parents, accepting the scientific evidence over what the Bible said. I didn't reject Christianity...I simply adopted the belief that the Biblical story of creation was allegorical, and the Earth was actually much older...but that all life was still created by God, and that evolution was guided by him.

By 14 years of age, I was preaching from my father's pulpit (and invited to preach in other churches, also). By 17, I was doing street evangelism. At 18 years of age, I went to attend one of the most conservative Bible Colleges in North America, Prairie Bible Institute, to train as a missionary.

Long story short -- while training me to be a missionary, Bible college also gave me a much deeper understanding of the Bible, and of Christian theology; but rather than affirming and strengthening my faith, that knowledge led to more and more doubts and questions, as I saw numerous inconsistencies and factual errors contained within. That started me down the path to (a decade later) finally rejecting my religious beliefs entirely.

Having given that background, I'd like to talk more specifically about being a missionary. Prairie Bible College was pretty much the number one missionary training school in North America; most of the teachers were people who'd spent years abroad as missionaries themselves, and had tons of experience and knowledge to share. Many of them had been responsible for translating the Bible into obscure local languages.

There was a huge focus on cultural sensitivity...not the 'cultural imperialism' of imposing one's culture on the people you converted, but rather of first understanding their culture, then presenting the scriptures to them in a way that was culturally relevant, and could be more easily adapted. Of course, cultural practices that clearly contradicted Biblical teachings (polygamy, worship of idols, etc.) had to be stopped...but in other areas (how they dress, what food they eat, etc.), no attempt was made to change the culture. Thus, a central aspect of our training was to demonstrate a respect for local cultures, and a real desire to understand those cultures.

Of course, inevitably, we were seeking to change them...but to a much lesser degree than many other missionary efforts.

During my time there, I read the biography of Hudson Taylor, a missionary to China during the mid-1800s, and the founder of the China Inland Mission. He was one of the first missionaries to adopt this attitude of respecting and learning local cultures, rather than the cultural imperialism of other missionaries who insisted that those who converted to Christianity also had to adopt their cultural norms. This was the period of European colonialism in China, and most missionaries of that time lived in foreign enclaves, speaking only English, living only with other foreigners. Chinese converts were required to dress like them, learn to speak English like them, act like them, etc. And all churches established by those missionaries had to be led by white men (Chinese were considered spiritually incompetent to take positions of religious leadership).

Hudson Taylor, by contrast, learned Chinese, dressed like the local Chinese, and lived in local Chinese communities. He helped prepare one of the first Chinese translations of the Bible, so that Chinese could read it in their own language. He started local churches where Chinese were the leaders, not outsiders. In fact, there are a great many Christian congregations in China today that trace their heritage directly to Hudson Taylor, and the other missionaries that he trained.

Hudson Taylor became my hero, and I fixated on China. After finishing Bible College, I went on to do a four year bachelor's degree in a regular university...then finally, came to China as a missionary.

Of course, China didn't (and still doesn't) allow people to come in with the stated occupation of "missionary"; so I came as a "tent-maker" missionary (Christian lingo to mean that I got another legal full-time job, and did the missionary stuff on the side), working as an English teacher in university. My first year in China was very much focused on learning the language and culture, not on proselytizing...I had a very sincere desire to understand this fascinating culture, and present the gospel (which at the time I of course considered to be very important) to them in a culturally relevant manner, so that they could accept it more easily. By my second year, I became more active in preaching to others, and by the end of the second year, had helped establish a local house church, and was involved in supporting two others.

When I arrived in China in 1993, my doubts about my faith had become fairly strong, but had not yet led to a rejection of those beliefs. My trip to China as a missionary, besides doing it because it was what I thought God wanted me to do, was also done in hopes that working in such a capacity, I'd personally witness God's power, and thus have my faith restored.

However, reality was quite different. The evidence and arguments against my beliefs just kept adding up, and by 1997, I'd realized I couldn't believe this stuff any more. One day, I simply realized, "I'm an atheist."

This news, of course, didn't meet much positive reaction. Almost everyone I knew, the entire community I was a part of, were all Christians. My family, my friends, the Chinese Christians I was working with (and some of whom I'd converted to Christianity) all saw this as a terrible tragedy. Some shunned me entirely, rejecting me from any involvement with them; others retained strong relationships, with an attitude that "they would bring me back to the faith through prayer". Today, some of those people are still my friends (and they're still praying for me).

I then had to go about re-building my life from scratch...figuring out what I did believe (rejecting Christianity meant that I had to re-evaluate my entire moral/ethical system, and reach my own conclusions, in some cases involving some radical changes), making new friends, building new networks, etc.

My work since then -- doing business, starting an NGO, etc. -- have all been adequately discussed in other threads, so I won't go into it here. I hope this can start as a jumping-off point for discussion about missionaries (do we have any other reformed missionaries here?), their strategies, etc.

[Ryokan]

Thanks for the story. You've led an interesting life, for sure, and continue to do so - and I always enjoy reading your posts.

I also grew up in a very small community, on an island off the coast of Norway with about 2000 inhabitants, with quite a lot of religious people, but luckily for me my family members ranged from not caring about religion to being outspoken atheists. When I grew up we had Christianity as its own subject in school, from 1st to 9th grade, and I also voluntarily went to Sunday school from age 10, but by the time I became a teenager I had pretty much discovered that religion was baloney, and I became an outspoken atheist myself. This did create some problems for me, especially with my Christianity teacher, put I persevered and when I was 15 I moved to the closest city to get away.

But I never really suffered. Atheism is too common in Norway for people to really get flustered about, outside a few very small religious communities. I'm sad to hear that you've lost friends and family over 'coming out' as an atheist, something that is incomprehensible to me. It's their loss, not yours - although I'm sure it must feel that way.

[Wolfman]

Originally Posted by Ryokan

I'm sad to hear that you've lost friends and family over 'coming out' as an atheist, something that is incomprehensible to me. It's their loss, not yours - although I'm sure it must feel that way.

Just two quick comments. First, I should clarify that I didn't 'lose family' over this...my parents, although obviously disappointed and concerned about my loss of faith, remained supportive and friendly towards me (continuing to pray for me regularly).

Second, while it was certainly regrettable that so many Christians cut ties with me after abandoning my faith...I think there are a great many atheists who, if a friend who was previously atheist suddenly adopted strong religious beliefs, would likewise be likely to cut ties.

The truth is that maintaining friendships requires some kind of common ground, common interests, etc. What I've found is that among the Christian friends I've retained, they are interested in understanding what others (atheists, other religions, etc.) believe...and thus, we retain the common ground of being able to discuss our respective beliefs, and the reasons for them (a few Christian friends have ended up becoming atheists because of those discussions, too). But for a great many others, the truth is, there simply was no common ground. Their conversations focus on the power of God in their lives, and the amazing ways God is answering their prayers...obviously, those are not conversations that I'm going to be able to contribute positively to (at least not from their perspective).

[Ryokan]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Just two quick comments. First, I should clarify that I didn't 'lose family' over this...my parents, although obviously disappointed and concerned about my loss of faith, remained supportive and friendly towards me (continuing to pray for me regularly).

Ah, that's good to hear!

[devnull]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

JI think there are a great many atheists who, if a friend who was previously atheist suddenly adopted strong religious beliefs, would likewise be likely to cut ties.

Id never considered this, but I think you're absolutely right.

[Apathia]

I have somewhat of a missionary history as well.

I was a deteriorating Christian when I graduated from a Seventh-Day Adventist college (Now known as Southern Adventist University) in 1978.
By "deteriorating" I mean in a doctrinal sense. I continued the Adventist neo-puritan lifestyle while I was beginning to outgrow my Christian beliefs.

I took an assignment to teach English at an SDA college in Seoul (Sam Yook University) and from there to one in Singapore (It no longer exists.)
I Singapore I cast off my "missionary arrogance" as I began to learn about Asian spiritual traditions.

I winged it out of SDA and went on from Singapore to Japan where I got a good appreciation of Buddhism. Christianity faded away for me, along with Theism.
These days you could characterize me as a Secular Buddhist, Unitarian-Unilateralist.

Main thing about the journey was chucking the missionary arrogance.
Yet I met career missionaries who had been in their target countries for years who hadn't a clue about the religious traditions around them and were learning nothing from cultural exposure. For example, In Singapore we lived in a missionary compound, a nice little, white little, missionary stew. Some of them didn't even learn anything about the local cuisine. And refused to learn Chinese or Malay.

[westprog]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Just two quick comments. First, I should clarify that I didn't 'lose family' over this...my parents, although obviously disappointed and concerned about my loss of faith, remained supportive and friendly towards me (continuing to pray for me regularly).

Second, while it was certainly regrettable that so many Christians cut ties with me after abandoning my faith...I think there are a great many atheists who, if a friend who was previously atheist suddenly adopted strong religious beliefs, would likewise be likely to cut ties.

The truth is that maintaining friendships requires some kind of common ground, common interests, etc. What I've found is that among the Christian friends I've retained, they are interested in understanding what others (atheists, other religions, etc.) believe...and thus, we retain the common ground of being able to discuss our respective beliefs, and the reasons for them (a few Christian friends have ended up becoming atheists because of those discussions, too). But for a great many others, the truth is, there simply was no common ground. Their conversations focus on the power of God in their lives, and the amazing ways God is answering their prayers...obviously, those are not conversations that I'm going to be able to contribute positively to (at least not from their perspective).

It strikes me that if you were going to be a missionary to China, mixing with atheists would be a basic requirement. It's people who stay home who can afford to be choosy.

[westprog]

Originally Posted by devnull

Id never considered this, but I think you're absolutely right.

I suppose everyone has a deal-breaker when it comes to friendship. Sometimes you might not even know what it was until it happens. Turning gay, turning republican, going to prison, joining the police, leaving a spouse, abandoning a child - different in every case.

[Wolfman]

Originally Posted by Apathia

Yet I met career missionaries who had been in their target countries for years who hadn't a clue about the religious traditions around them and were learning nothing from cultural exposure. For example, In Singapore we lived in a missionary compound, a nice little, white little, missionary stew. Some of them didn't even learn anything about the local cuisine. And refused to learn Chinese or Malay.

Oh, I've certainly met that kind of missionary, too. I remember talking to a Christian couple who'd been in China eight years (they didn't admit they were missionaries, but it was pretty obvious) who bragged that not only did they not speak Chinese, but hadn't even eaten Chinese food. As far as I'm concerned, I welcome that kind of missionary...cuz the truth is, they're alienating themselves so much, they'll have little or no real impact.

I also run an NGO, and state that while people with religious beliefs are welcome to get involved, that they must come in with an attitude of both learning to understand the Mosuo (including their religion), and also without a desire to change them (including changing their religious beliefs). There are some 'undercover missionaries' that have tried to sneak in, but since I come from that background myself, am able to weed them out quite easily.

[Wolfman]

Originally Posted by westprog

It strikes me that if you were going to be a missionary to China, mixing with atheists would be a basic requirement. It's people who stay home who can afford to be choosy.

I certainly knew and mixed with many atheists during my 'missionary period'...but I don't think I could call any of them close friends. It wasn't that I was unwilling to make friends with people who didn't share my beliefs (I was actually quite willing)...but more of an issue of having a common ground upon which to build that friendship. Casual friends, no problem. But close friends...that was a different thing entirely.

[Apathia]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Oh, I've certainly met that kind of missionary, too. I remember talking to a Christian couple who'd been in China eight years (they didn't admit they were missionaries, but it was pretty obvious) who bragged that not only did they not speak Chinese, but hadn't even eaten Chinese food. As far as I'm concerned, I welcome that kind of missionary...cuz the truth is, they're alienating themselves so much, they'll have little or no real impact.

Yes.
I felt sorry for them because they were so unaware even of the finer points of their own spiritual tradition. Zombie missionaries!

Oops. I misapplied the spell checker. "Unitarian-Universalist" was what I meant.

[Baby Nemesis]

Wow! Surprising stuff about your upbringing, Wolfman!

Originally Posted by Wolfman

My first year in China was very much focused on learning the language and culture, not on proselytizing...I had a very sincere desire to understand this
fascinating culture, and present the gospel (which at the time I of course considered to be very important) to them in a culturally relevant manner, so
that they could accept it more easily.

What do you find "fascinating" about the culture? And What differences in Chinese culture did you think you would have to take into account when determining how to preach the gospel in the way that would suit them most? Can you give a few examples?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

(rejecting Christianity meant that I had to re-evaluate my entire moral/ethical system, and reach my own conclusions, in some cases involving some
radical changes)

What "radical" changes would you say you made?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

I remember talking to a Christian couple who'd been in China eight years (they didn't admit they were missionaries, but it was pretty obvious) who bragged that not only did they not speak Chinese, but hadn't even eaten Chinese food.

Why would anyone "brag" about that kind of thing? I mean, surely they'd have known they'd have more impact if they learned the language, since there can't have been that many Chinese people who spoke English? Or are there?

What made you want to stay in China after your reason for going there in the first place had vanished? Why do you like it so much? And what valuable lessons did you learn about the culture when you first went that you find useful now?

[Hoppy]

Thanks for telling your story. I had a business associate who sold it all and went to China
as a missionary 5-6 years ago. Every person on his mailing list was hit-up for a donation
so he could bring the truth of god to the un-believers. The thing that I found so weird about the whole deal was that it was totally based on a lie. I don't remember the exact ruse but teaching English was part of it, as you had made reference to.
It is my understanding that if found out you are told to leave the country.

[Leumas]

Wolfman,

Your story is REMARKABLY similar to the one told in the following book. He was in Africa but very similar in almost all aspects....this must happen a lot.

Why I Believed: Reflections of a Former Missionary

I know an Atheist who became one (closeted) While studying at the Vatican University to become a priest....which he did become.

He only confided in very few people about his Atheism and I was one of them. I had all sorts of fascinating discussions with him and he tells amazing stories about his life in the Vatican.....he is a remarkable man.

[Wolfman]

Originally Posted by Baby Nemesis

What do you find "fascinating" about the culture?

I've long had a passion for different cultures (that was entirely independent of my religious beliefs, but certainly helped motivate my drive to be a missionary). Growing up, most of my friends were foreign students, by university I actually had relatively few Canadian friends, most of them were foreign. Japanese, Russian, Kenyan, Brazilian, etc. Learning about different cultures reveals fascinating aspects of our own cultures, and enables one to pick and choose which are the 'best' aspects of each culture, and meld them together into your own multi-cultural framework (or at least, that's what I like to do).

China, having over 6000 years of history, has a culture that is very deep and complex; but it is also a culture in a process of incredibly rapid transition. While I find the history fascinating, it is actually the modern stuff that truly fascinates me...watching how the culture changes, why it changes, what effect it has on the Chinese people, etc. (I'd something of an expert in this area, and have been a speaker at numerous conferences on this topic, as well as providing consulting to China's Education Bureau on strategies about how to incorporate this in their educational plans).

Quote:

And What differences in Chinese culture did you think you would have to take into account when determining how to preach the gospel in the way that would suit them most? Can you give a few examples?

Sure. Chinese culture is modeled on Confucian paradigms which result in a very different social model than what we have in the West. Obedience to authority is stressed much more strongly; responsibility to family is paramount, while responsibility to people you don't know is minimal or non-existent; etc. So teaching unquestioning obedience to God is generally easier than in the West, but teaching to love everyone equally is much more difficult.

Perhaps the biggest difference, however, is the perception of the dichotomy between 'good' and 'evil'. Christianity (and Western culture in general) is built on the concept of a 'good' side battling an 'evil' side, with the former eventually defeating the latter. Chinese culture, by contrast, is based on the concept of yin and yang. These are not 'good' and 'evil', but rather 'positive' and 'negative' forces (not 'negative' in terms of 'bad', but in terms of the 'negative' pole of a magnet). In Chinese culture, "good" would mean keeping positive and negative forces balanced; "evil" would mean having positive and negative forces unbalanced.

This concept of yin and yang underlies pretty much everything in Chinese culture. Foods are assigned different values, and should be eaten in balanced proportions. Illnesses are a result of imbalances in your yin and yang. Marriages should take into consideration the balance of yin and yang between the couple.

Thus, the whole 'good vs. evil' message of the Bible doesn't really translate very well...had the Bible originated in China, it would much more likely have been written to show a struggle to prevent either God or Satan from gaining a dominant position, but rather keeping the two of them equally balanced.

Forgiveness is another thing that is different. Christianity teaches forgiveness for everyone. Chinese/Confucian culture teaches forgiveness for those close to you...but not for others. In Chinese culture, not only do you keep a grudge for your entire life, but your family will carry on keeping that grudge after you die. As a missionary, this was actually one of the biggest sticking points for Chinese to convert...when told that they had to forgive enemies (particularly family enemies), that often was too much of a demand.

Lots of other examples, but these should suffice for now.

Quote:

What "radical" changes would you say you made?

Well...adjusting from being pro-life to being pro-choice in the abortion debate. Or adjusting from believing that homosexuality was a sick perversion, to believing that it was normal and acceptable. In fact, pretty much my entire moral/ethical system had to be re-evaluated...as a Christian, I didn't have to think much about what was right or wrong, I just followed what the Bible said I should do. There might be some debate about particular Biblical passages (ie. should Christians drink alcohol or not), but for the most part, I didn't have to think about it. When I rejected those beliefs, I no longer had a predefined code to follow, and had to figure it out for myself. It took about two years for me to put something together that I felt was reasonable...and then discovered Humanism, and realized that what I'd come up with was virtually the same thing.

Quote:

Why would anyone "brag" about that kind of thing? I mean, surely they'd have known they'd have more impact if they learned the language, since there can't have been that many Chinese people who spoke English? Or are there?

I've seen not just missionaries brag like this, but others including businesspeople and diplomats. In every case, I'd think that learning to understand the culture would make their jobs much easier.

What it really comes down to is the "we're better than you" attitude. For some Christian missionaries, their culture is inextricably linked with their religion. They will tend to think like this: "I am a good Christian, and I grew up in a good Christian community. All the good Christians I know dress this way, eat this kind of food, talk like this, etc. Therefore, this is how any good Christian should dress/eat/talk/etc." A similar attitude is obvious in some businesspeople and diplomats, with "good Christian" replaced by "good businessman" or "good politician/government".

Truth is, most such missionaries aren't doing this because it is something they enjoy, or want to do. They often have the 'martyr complex'...the idea that a 'good Christian' should suffer for God. So they'll go off to some foreign country, refuse to change in the slightest, face all sorts of terribly problems, and then actually brag about all the difficulties they endure for God. I knew plenty of missionaries like this back in my Christian days, and hated them even then.

Quote:

What made you want to stay in China after your reason for going there in the first place had vanished? Why do you like it so much? And what valuable lessons did you learn about the culture when you first went that you find useful now?

China fits my personality perfectly. I thrive on challenge, on an atmosphere of frequent change, on an environment that constantly has new opportunities to learn, and to do new things. China, with its incredible pace of growth (and corresponding rapid pace of change) fits the bill perfectly. I am also a fairly ego-driven person, and in China, I've been able to get involved on a level that I would probably never have been able to in Canada (helping write the speech that won the 2008 Olympic bid for China; establishing my own NGO to work with an ethnic minority group; starting several businesses of my own; being a consultant on national educational policy; etc.).

The way I see it is like this. If I'd stayed in Canada (or if I returned to Canada), I'd likely have a much easier, more comfortable life. But I'd also be largely irrelevant (ie. if I was there, or not there, it wouldn't make much difference). Whereas in China, I can arguably demonstrate that I've made a difference, that things would be different if I hadn't been here. Not for China as a whole, but for particular pockets of Chinese people. I also think that I'm a much better person, and a much more complex person, due to the exposure to such radically different cultures and social environments; I'm an almost entirely different person than I was when I first came to China, and I like the current me much, much better.

Originally Posted by Hoppy

Thanks for telling your story. I had a business associate who sold it all and went to China as a missionary 5-6 years ago. Every person on his mailing list was hit-up for a donation so he could bring the truth of god to the un-believers. The thing that I found so weird about the whole deal was that it was totally based on a lie. I don't remember the exact ruse but teaching English was part of it, as you had made reference to.
It is my understanding that if found out you are told to leave the country.

Pretty much every missionary to China is here based on a lie (rather an irony). And yes, if they are caught, their visa will be revoked, and they'll be kicked out of the country. There are quite elaborate training programs that missionaries will go through before they come to China, to tell them what to say, how to act, and what strategies to use. There tend to be two major camps of missionaries:

Short-term: These are groups like Campus Crusade for Christ, who send young people to China on two-week evangelism projects. Since they only plan to be here a very short time, they'll usually be able to finish all evangelistic activities before being caught and ejected by the authorities, so they'll tend to be more aggressive and overt in their activities.

Long-term: These are the groups that want to stay in China longer. They'll tend to adopt what is usually called the "lifestyle evangelism" methodology. You see, in China, it would be considered illegal to initiate a conversation that was obviously targeted on convincing you of religious beliefs (ie. "Have you thought where you'll go when you die?" or "Have you heard the wonderful Gospel message of Jesus Christ our Savior?"). But if Chinese people happen to ask you, in conversation, about what you believe, it is legal for you to answer those questions. The key here is that it must seem passive...a response to questions others are asking. Not an active effort to initiate and guide such conversations.

Thus, Christian missionaries will be cautioned strongly against initiating such conversations, but to make the way they live their lives very, very obvious. Drop mention of going to church into conversation as often as you can (so people will ask you why you go to church). When people mention drinking, sex, etc., then you always say, "Oh, I never get drunk, I believe it is wrong" or "I believe that pre-marital sex is wrong", so that people will be more likely to ask you questions why. Carry your Bible with you everywhere, and read it (or appear to be reading it), so that people will ask you about it.

Originally Posted by Leumas

Wolfman,

Your story is REMARKABLY similar to the one told in the following book. He was in Africa but very similar in almost all aspects....this must happen a lot.

I don't know how often it happens, but in my experience, not that often. And for those who do, like myself, it often tends to be a rather embarrassing issue that they prefer not to talk about.

Quote:

I know an Atheist who became one (closeted) While studying at the Vatican University to become a priest....which he did become.

He only confided in very few people about his Atheism and I was one of them. I had all sorts of fascinating discussions with him and he tells amazing stories about his life in the Vatican.....he is a remarkable man.

After I became an overt atheist, I actually had several Christian leaders (priests, pastors, etc.) who in private told me that they didn't believe in God, either...but that their entire lives were so strongly built on those beliefs that they couldn't get out. Where does a pastor -- whose family are Christian, whose entire network of friends are Christian, and who has no training for jobs outside of the ministry -- go if he decides he wants to reject his beliefs?

In fact, as I've spoken to groups in Canada and the U.S., I've had a fair number of Christians come to me and tell me that they secretly agree...but that the challenge of the transition to being a 'real atheist' is just too daunting for them. I can understand, and sympathize with them. My own transition was one of the most difficult periods of my life, which involved having to re-build and restructure my life from the foundations upward.

[joedonjj]

Originally Posted by Leumas

Wolfman,

Your story is REMARKABLY similar to the one told in the following book. He was in Africa but very similar in almost all aspects....this must happen a lot.

Why I Believed: Reflections of a Former Missionary

I know an Atheist who became one (closeted) While studying at the Vatican University to become a priest....which he did become.

He only confided in very few people about his Atheism and I was one of them. I had all sorts of fascinating discussions with him and he tells amazing stories about his life in the Vatican.....he is a remarkable man.

Can you share some of those sotories? Thanks

[Leumas]

Originally Posted by joedonjj

Can you share some of those sotories? Thanks

I will ask him if he does not mind.... since they were told to me in conficence.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Wow, I'm surprised, Wolfman. I knew you had adopted China as your current home but I always thought it had a business beginning.

[MontagK505]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

<snip>
In fact, as I've spoken to groups in Canada and the U.S., I've had a fair number of Christians come to me and tell me that they secretly agree...but that the challenge of the transition to being a 'real atheist' is just too daunting for them. I can understand, and sympathize with them. My own transition was one of the most difficult periods of my life, which involved having to re-build and restructure my life from the foundations upward.

Thanks for sharing the personal history Wolfman.

I can't help wonder just how many closet deist / atheist's are actually out there, but are living lies because of social pressure.

[Baby Nemesis]

This is interesting stuff, Wolfman!

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Growing up, most of my friends were foreign students,

I'm just wondering why you remained so convinced the strict version of Christianity your parents taught you was correct for so long with all the differing beliefs you must have been exposed to growing up; or were most of those foreign students from places with firm beliefs in demons so their beliefs weren't all that different from what your family believed? Did some of them believe drum beats were a tool for calling up spirits, for example?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Learning about different cultures reveals fascinating aspects
of our own cultures, and enables one to pick and choose which are the 'best' aspects of each culture, and meld them together into your own multi-cultural
framework (or at least, that's what I like to do).

Do you mean it's interesting to hear about how your own culture's viewed from their perspective and there are some surprising things you just wouldn't have thought about before?

And what would you say were the best bits of the foreign cultures you've been exposed to that you thought would be good to adopt as your own?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

China, having over 6000 years of history, has a culture that is very deep and complex; but it is also a culture in a process of incredibly rapid transition.
While I find the history fascinating, it is actually the modern stuff that truly fascinates me...watching how the culture changes, why it changes, what
effect it has on the Chinese people, etc. (I'd something of an expert in this area, and have been a speaker at numerous conferences on this topic, as well
as providing consulting to China's Education Bureau on strategies about how to incorporate this in their educational plans).

Would you say it's improving a lot?

Is it rapidly becoming more westernised? Does that include their attitude to what gender of baby they prefer? Or is it still important to most that their baby's male, because females still leave the family when they marry so they're not around to look after them in their old age ... isn't that the rationale for them preferring male children? In your years of living there, would you say there are noticeably a lot more men around than women?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Chinese culture is modeled on Confucian paradigms which result in a very different social model than what we have in the West. Obedience to authority is stressed much more strongly; responsibility to family is paramount, while responsibility to people
you don't know is minimal or non-existent; etc. So teaching unquestioning obedience to God is generally easier than in the West, but teaching to love everyone
equally is much more difficult.

That's interesting.

Interestingly enough, a Chinese man on another board once told me he didn't think much of Confucious; he didn't like the way Confucious was popularised, because factory bosses were using his sayings to convince the workers they had to obey them unquestioningly.

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Perhaps the biggest difference, however, is the perception of the dichotomy between 'good' and 'evil'. Christianity (and Western culture in general) is
built on the concept of a 'good' side battling an 'evil' side, with the former eventually defeating the latter. Chinese culture, by contrast, is based
on the concept of yin and yang. These are not 'good' and 'evil', but rather 'positive' and 'negative' forces (not 'negative' in terms of 'bad', but in
terms of the 'negative' pole of a magnet). In Chinese culture, "good" would mean keeping positive and negative forces balanced; "evil" would mean having
positive and negative forces unbalanced.

This concept of yin and yang underlies pretty much everything in Chinese culture. Foods are assigned different values, and should be eaten in balanced
proportions. Illnesses are a result of imbalances in your yin and yang. Marriages should take into consideration the balance of yin and yang between the
couple.

Thus, the whole 'good vs. evil' message of the Bible doesn't really translate very well...had the Bible originated in China, it would much more likely
have been written to show a struggle to prevent either God or Satan from gaining a dominant position, but rather keeping the two of them equally balanced.

That's really interesting. So if a man abused and then killed a child, instead of thinking of him as an evil man, would they think something more like, "Wow, that man's yin and yang are way, way out of balance!!"? What would they think the remedy should be? Or would the treatment still be fairly Western, like prison or the kinds of Psychiatric treatments you might get in the West?

And how would that relate to the Bible's moral code; instead of thinking, for instance, "We need to stop getting drunk because that's bad and God disapproves", would they understand the Bible more if it said something more like, "Getting drunk is too yang; you need to do this and this and this to get more yin in your lives so you won't want to get drunk any mored"? That kind of thing? So if you'd written part of a Bible translation, would you have changed it so it said the Bible said things like that? So the Bible would have sounded like a Chinese self-improvement regime run by God?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Forgiveness is another thing that is different. Christianity teaches forgiveness for everyone. Chinese/Confucian culture teaches forgiveness for those
close to you...but not for others. In Chinese culture, not only do you keep a grudge for your entire life, but your family will carry on keeping that grudge
after you die. As a missionary, this was actually one of the biggest sticking points for Chinese to convert...when told that they had to forgive enemies
(particularly family enemies), that often was too much of a demand.

Yikes. Does that tend to lead to multi-generational feuds?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Originally Posted by Me

What "radical" changes would you say you made?

Well...adjusting from being pro-life to being pro-choice in the abortion debate. Or adjusting from
believing that homosexuality was a sick perversion, to believing that it was normal and acceptable.

Oh, the "hot topics" of the "religious right" in America, so I gather! Are there large areas of Canada equally obsessed with that stuff, or is it just small pockets here and there?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

In fact, pretty much my entire moral/ethical system
had to be re-evaluated...as a Christian, I didn't have to think much about what was right or wrong, I just followed what the Bible said I should do. There
might be some debate about particular Biblical passages (ie. should Christians drink alcohol or not), but for the most part, I didn't have to think about
it. When I rejected those beliefs, I no longer had a predefined code to follow, and had to figure it out for myself. It took about two years for me to
put something together that I felt was reasonable...and then discovered Humanism, and realized that what I'd come up with was virtually the same thing.

So didn't you have any kind of rationale for obeying the Bible before then apart from "God says so"? Do you think that's common?

Two years? I'm a bit puzzled by that, because most New Testament teaching's really based on principles of behaving in such a way as to avoid doing either deliberate or accidental harm to others. Or did the church you grew up in teach extra stuff, a bit like the Jewish religion having loads of little rules designed to help stop people breaking the laws but which are really restrictive?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Truth is, most such missionaries aren't doing this because it is something they enjoy, or want to do. They often have the 'martyr complex'...the idea that
a 'good Christian' should suffer for God. So they'll go off to some foreign country, refuse to change in the slightest, face all sorts of terrible problems,
and then actually brag
about all the difficulties they endure for God. I knew plenty of missionaries like this back in my Christian days, and hated them even then.

Daft. Do you know if there are churches that have the idea that it's important that people suffer for God as a significant doctrine? Would the missionaries have got the idea from certain sects they grew up in?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

... being a consultant on national educational policy; etc.).

What kind of advice have you given the Chinese leadership regarding education? Have they put any into practice?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

I also think that I'm a much better person, and a much more complex person, due to the exposure to such radically different cultures and social environments; I'm an
almost entirely different person than I was when I first came to China, and I like the current me much, much better.

In what ways?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

In fact, as I've spoken to groups in Canada and the U.S., I've had a fair number of Christians come to me and tell me that they secretly agree...but that
the challenge of the transition to being a 'real atheist' is just too daunting for them. I can understand, and sympathize with them. My own transition
was one of the most difficult periods of my life, which involved having to re-build and restructure my life from the foundations upward.

I don't understand that. Were their difficulties mostly to do with worrying about what their families would think, or other things?

Sorry about all the questions; hope you don't mind.

[Wolfman]

Originally Posted by Baby Nemesis

I'm just wondering why you remained so convinced the strict version of Christianity your parents taught you was correct for so long with all the differing beliefs you must have been exposed to growing up; or were most of those foreign students from places with firm beliefs in demons so their beliefs weren't all that different from what your family believed? Did some of them believe drum beats were a tool for calling up spirits, for example?

Getting to know people from other cultures was, actually, an important part of the overall process of abandoning my Christian beliefs. I was told stories, for example, of people who converted to Christianity from Buddhism, Islam, atheism, etc....who would testify that before they knew Jesus, their lives were empty and shallow. This was good evidence of the validity of my faith...until I started meeting Buddhists/Muslims/atheists who'd 'converted' from Christianity to their current belief system, who likewise said that they were much happier than they had been as Christians. That kinda' threw a wrench in the arguments I'd been presented for so much of my life.

But that evidence by itself wasn't enough...it was an important part, but was only one piece in a much larger puzzle.

Quote:

Do you mean it's interesting to hear about how your own culture's viewed from their perspective and there are some surprising things you just wouldn't have thought about before?

Both...but more of the latter. A simple example...Canadian culture tends to put a very strong emphasis on the individual; Chinese culture tends to put a very strong emphasis on family. Having had significant exposure to both sides of the coin, I've seen benefits and problems to both systems. On the Canadian side, many Canadian families lack the very significant family support structure that Chinese families do; but Chinese children will often act towards family members out of duty, rather than out of love. Looking at all of it, I'd adopt an approach that's more in the middle, taking the best aspects of both cultures, but trying to minimize the problems. (I don't have kids of my own, so this particular example would be fairly theoretical for me at present).

Quote:

And what would you say were the best bits of the foreign cultures you've been exposed to that you thought would be good to adopt as your own?

I think a great example would be the Mosuo, the ethnic minority group I work with in China. Theirs is a unique culture, where women are in charge, and more importantly, there is no marriage. The Mosuo culture has no idealized expectations of "true love" with lifelong bondings. In their culture, couples stay together for as long as they are happy together (this may be weeks, months, years, or decades). If they're not happy, they'll separate and find new partners. The result? You simply don't see Mosuo couples who are unhappy together, forcing themselves to stay together in misery because of social expectations that separating would be bad.

Compared with my Christian upbringing that you marry only once, and it is a consecrated vow made before God that you keep until death, that is quite a huge difference. I wouldn't go quite as far as the Mosuo (because of other cultural differences that make this way of life much easier for them than it would be for me), but I've certainly gotten rid of any expectation of a 'life-long bond'. I actually do plan to marry in about one year, but both of us have discussed it, and both agree that if we some day reach a point where we're not happy together, separation/divorce will be a real option. We've made a commitment to stay together based only on how we feel...not based on the expectations of others (families, friends, society, etc.)

Quote:

Would you say it's improving a lot?

Is it rapidly becoming more westernised? Does that include their attitude to what gender of baby they prefer? Or is it still important to most that their baby's male, because females still leave the family when they marry so they're not around to look after them in their old age ... isn't that the rationale for them preferring male children? In your years of living there, would you say there are noticeably a lot more men around than women?

I don't think its possible to make an overall general assessment such as "Chinese culture is improving" or "Chinese culture is getting worse". What I can say, without any hesitation, is that Chinese culture is changing. Some of those changes are very positive (for example, as families become more affluent, and the economy more stable, the emphasis on having male children decreases). Some of those changes are very negative (first, the Communists destroyed religion, removing that moral/ethical structure, and replacing it with a moral/ethical structure dictated by their Communist leaders. As Chinese today have lost faith in Communism, that's left them without any real kind of moral/ethical code, and led to a largely amoral society among the youth, where "whatever is good for me" is often the predominant sentiment).

Quote:

That's interesting.

Interestingly enough, a Chinese man on another board once told me he didn't think much of Confucious; he didn't like the way Confucious was popularised, because factory bosses were using his sayings to convince the workers they had to obey them unquestioningly.

A great many people in these forums would say, "I don't like Christianity"...yet their culture, and many of the ways they view right/wrong, have been shaped by their Judeo-Christian heritage. "Like" or "don't like" is largely irrelevant to such issues...we grow up in cultures that inevitably and almost inescapably shape us, and our world views...and those cultures have been developed over thousands of years, based on specific philosophies and beliefs. Same for China...many Chinese may say that they don't follow Confucius, but Confucian values have still helped shape their world view.

Quote:

That's really interesting. So if a man abused and then killed a child, instead of thinking of him as an evil man, would they think something more like, "Wow, that man's yin and yang are way, way out of balance!!"? What would they think the remedy should be? Or would the treatment still be fairly Western, like prison or the kinds of Psychiatric treatments you might get in the West?

Actually, as I'm sure your aware, capital punishment is quite common in China. Not just because the gov't wants it, but because the people want it. The purpose of any government in China (and the standard by which the people judge that government) is to maintain social harmony. Murder disrupts that harmony, it ruins the 'balance'...so it must be removed. Murder isn't 'evil' so much because of the individual's action, as it is because of its affect on society overall, and the disruption of the proper balance.

Yin and Yang doesn't mean that if there are a lot of good people doing good things, then you also need to have more bad people doing bad things. It is more an issue of balance. Think of it like this. If you are healthy and happy, that would mean your yin and yang are balanced; if you're unhealthy, that means they are unbalanced. To restore health/happiness, one must find the specific cause of the imbalance, and remove it. Causes could be entirely different for different people...so five people who all have exactly the same problem (ie. the common cold) may receive five entirely different treatments under yin and yang theory, because they all have different imbalances.

Society is the same...a healthy society is one where the population is healthy and happy. If there are problems in society, it is because of an imbalance, and the cause of that imbalance must be remedied to restore harmony. The murderer isn't so much seen as a cause of imbalance, as a symptom...but, like a cancerous tumor, it must be removed as part of the process of restoring balance.

This is, despite my efforts, a rather poor explanation. The differences are so huge that it's really impossible to explain adequately in such a short time. It took me a decade to really come to terms with understanding what these concepts meant, and how they affected Chinese culture and thinking; our very language makes it difficult to explain, because we don't have words that have the same meanings as the Chinese words.

Quote:

And how would that relate to the Bible's moral code; instead of thinking, for instance, "We need to stop getting drunk because that's bad and God disapproves", would they understand the Bible more if it said something more like, "Getting drunk is too yang; you need to do this and this and this to get more yin in your lives so you won't want to get drunk any mored"? That kind of thing? So if you'd written part of a Bible translation, would you have changed it so it said the Bible said things like that? So the Bible would have sounded like a Chinese self-improvement regime run by God?

In regards to sin, Christians can't really change that...the Bible cannot be changed in the way you suggest (from a Christian perspective). Instead, as a missionary, I'd recognize that the way I teach about Christian beliefs would need to change...that things that Canadians would find easy to understand and accept (such as the idea of social responsibility to everyone, not just to those people I know) are difficult for Chinese to accept, and vice versa. So I'd need to adjust my teaching, to focus more on some areas, less on others...and hopefully, to find examples within Chinese culture that could be used to illustrate the meaning of particular Biblical passages.

A simple example...Jesus talks about going to a feast, and instead of taking the seat of honor beside the host, taking a seat much lower down the table, and then having the host invite you to sit beside him. Westerners can understand this, to a certain degree...but truth is, we don't have really strictly regimented seating for the most part, and this isn't a terribly important passage to most westerners.

But to Chinese, this is a much more relevant and important passage...because in Chinese culture, this is exactly how you act. Seating positions are clearly defined, and you can tell immediately upon entering a room who is important relevant to everyone else at the table. To take a position of higher status can indicate excessive pride/arrogance...and in the worst situation, you may be asked to leave that seat because there's someone else more important to you, which means a massive loss of face. Whereas if you develop the habit of always taking one of the lowest seats, you face some risk of having people let you stay there (which means some loss of face), but it is more likely that you'll be asked to move to a higher position, which is a public acknowledgement to everyone of your value, and gives lots of face.

When talking to Canadians, I'd rarely mention this passage, except in passing; with Chinese, it is an important passage to demonstrate how similar Jesus' culture was with their culture...that they're not so much accepting Western culture, but that the original culture out of which Christianity developed was more similar to theirs, than it is to mine.

Quote:

Yikes. Does that tend to lead to multi-generational feuds?

Oh, absolutely. I've met many a Chinese family who will have nothing whatsoever to do with people from another particular family because of something bad that happened between their great-grandfathers.

Quote:

Oh, the "hot topics" of the "religious right" in America, so I gather! Are there large areas of Canada equally obsessed with that stuff, or is it just small pockets here and there?

They're hot topics in Canada, but not to the same degree as in the U.S.

Quote:

So didn't you have any kind of rationale for obeying the Bible before then apart from "God says so"? Do you think that's common?

God was the creator of the universe; God by definition defined what was good, and what was evil. I had a choice between ending up in eternal bliss, or eternal suffering...the right choice was a rather obvious one to me. Thus, what I personally thought of such rules was irrelevant...the important question was what gets me eternal bliss, and keeps me from eternal suffering. Standing in front of God and trying to argue, "Oh, but I don't see it that same way that you do" wasn't gonna' get me through those pearly gates.

Quote:

Two years? I'm a bit puzzled by that, because most New Testament teaching's really based on principles of behaving in such a way as to avoid doing either deliberate or accidental harm to others. Or did the church you grew up in teach extra stuff, a bit like the Jewish religion having loads of little rules designed to help stop people breaking the laws but which are really restrictive?

That's not two years to figure out what was right or wrong, so much as it was to figure out what is my basis for determining what is right or wrong. On what basis do I judge whether homosexuality should be accepted, or condemned? What is the standard for judging when I should help others, and when I should focus on my own needs? Having spent my entire life in a system that predefined the answers
to such questions, it took time to work out answers that relied on no outside authority.

Quote:

Daft. Do you know if there are churches that have the idea that it's important that people suffer for God as a significant doctrine? Would the missionaries have got the idea from certain sects they grew up in?

Read your Bible. Almost exclusively, the greatest heroes of the Bible (Old Testament and New Testament) are those who demonstrated their commitment to God by suffering for him. King David was sold into slavery by his brothers...yet remained faithful to God. The apostle Paul was imprisoned, beaten, tortured, and eventually killed...but remained faithful to God.

Or check out which people are most respected, who garner the most respect and attention from Christians. Is it the person who says, "I grew up in a happy Christian family, I've had a fairly easy life, and not much to complain about"? No, it's the person who talks about suffering through drug abuse, or some other kind of great suffering/trial.

If you're seeking status as a Christian, there's no better way to do it than by demonstrating how much you've suffered for God. And particularly if you've grown up in an environment where there wasn't that much difficulty, being a missionary is a great way to fast-track yourself on that path. Choose some country where it'll be difficult for you; go and spend a few years there, suffering every day (and being sure to tell everyone else about how much you are suffering in the name of spreading the Gospel); then return home to your comfy life, secure in the knowledge that you can point to your period of missionary suffering as proof of your commitment to god.

Quote:

What kind of advice have you given the Chinese leadership regarding education? Have they put any into practice?

My focus and contribution has been in the area of critical thinking and creativity. Chinese education currently does almost nothing to teach either critical thinking or creativity...but they're recognizing the need to change. But the need to change is counterbalanced by the fact they don't want to teach their students to question or challenge the government too much.

For the most part, my input has been in a purely advisory capacity, giving suggestions as to how critical thinking and creativity could be incorporated through an incremental process; but I have no idea whatsoever how much (if any) of my suggestions they may consider.

Quote:

In what ways?

Far too difficult to answer here...in almost every area of my life. I am a radically different person from who I was 20 years ago.

Quote:

I don't understand that. Were their difficulties mostly to do with worrying about what their families would think, or other things?

So many people, in considering this question, seem to think of us as individual islands...but as the saying goes, no man is an island. Our network of social connections -- family, friends, etc. -- is extremely important to most of us, and in many ways defines who we are.

To discard all of that -- not just one or two people, but almost everyone you know, everyone who is close to you -- is one of the most difficult things for a person to do. I had friends who were extremely close friends, central to my life...who I lost because I abandoned Christianity. Not only did I lose them (and the support and encouragement I relied on them for), but it took a long time to establish and build new friendships to replace the lost ones. You don't find a new 'best friend' overnight.

In all honesty, I think that being in China made it easier for me...not because it is a largely atheist country (an accusation some Christians have made about my de-conversion), but because I'd already separated myself from the comfort of my existing network, and had to start developing a new one from scratch. So, for me, it wasn't as big a barrier as it would be to many others.

Consider the people who are closest to you in your life. The people you turn to when you need help, support, love, etc. Now, consider making a decision that will cause you to lose most or all of those friends. On top of that, face a situation where you're likely gonna' spend at least the next one or two years without any of that support, until you've been able to develop new close relationships with an entirely new group of people.

How easy would it be to make such a decision? For many, it is almost impossible.

[Wolfman]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

So many people, in considering this question, seem to think of us as individual islands...but as the saying goes, no man is an island. Our network of social connections -- family, friends, etc. -- is extremely important to most of us, and in many ways defines who we are.

To discard all of that -- not just one or two people, but almost everyone you know, everyone who is close to you -- is one of the most difficult things for a person to do. I had friends who were extremely close friends, central to my life...who I lost because I abandoned Christianity. Not only did I lose them (and the support and encouragement I relied on them for), but it took a long time to establish and build new friendships to replace the lost ones. You don't find a new 'best friend' overnight.

In all honesty, I think that being in China made it easier for me...not because it is a largely atheist country (an accusation some Christians have made about my de-conversion), but because I'd already separated myself from the comfort of my existing network, and had to start developing a new one from scratch. So, for me, it wasn't as big a barrier as it would be to many others.

Consider the people who are closest to you in your life. The people you turn to when you need help, support, love, etc. Now, consider making a decision that will cause you to lose most or all of those friends. On top of that, face a situation where you're likely gonna' spend at least the next one or two years without any of that support, until you've been able to develop new close relationships with an entirely new group of people.

How easy would it be to make such a decision? For many, it is almost impossible.

I want to elaborate on the above, before people start condemning the 'cold-hearted Christians' who would abandon a friend just because they change their beliefs. As I argued above, it is very difficult to maintain a friendship when the beliefs of one of those people are fundamental to who they are, and have been entirely rejected by the other person...you've lost one of the most central commonalities of your friendship.

But beyond that, when I'm talking about the process of a Christian abandoning their faith, I'm talking about potential loss of relationships, not actual. After I announced that I was an atheist, I did lose many friends -- including some very close ones -- but my family remained supportive, and several friends have continued to be close friends to this day. It wasn't a complete loss. But I did not know that would be the result before I made the decision. I was facing the potential loss of everyone.

Recognizing how difficult this is, one of the suggestions I'll give to people who are in this situation (ie. they belong to a particular religion, but no longer really believe in it...but are afraid to get out because of the loss of friends/family) is to take their time. Don't do it right away...but start hanging out with non-Christians, too. Find different clubs, organizations, activities, etc. that are not explicitly Christian. Build a new network of friends where religious beliefs are not a core aspect of the relationship. Then, after some time, your decision will be much less traumatic and difficult to handle...yes, you'll lose friends...but you'll already have an existing network of non-religious friends to support and help you when that happens.

[joedonjj]

Originally Posted by joedonjj

Can you share some of those sotories? Thanks

Thanks... always fascinated by Catholics lol

[Silly Green Monkey]

Are you sure you're not thinking of Joseph? I don't remember David having brothers.

[Wolfman]

Originally Posted by Silly Green Monkey

Are you sure you're not thinking of Joseph? I don't remember David having brothers.

sorry, yes

[Leumas]

Originally Posted by Silly Green Monkey

Are you sure you're not thinking of Joseph? I don't remember David having brothers.

David was the youngest of many brothers ... I will find the relevant verses later.


ETA: here they are....David was te 8^th son of Jesse

1 Samuel 16

Quote:

Samuel Anoints David

1 The LORD said to Samuel, “How long will you mourn for Saul, since I have rejected him as king over Israel? Fill your horn with oil and be on your way; I am sending you to Jesse of Bethlehem. I have chosen one of his sons to be king.”

2 But Samuel said, “How can I go? If Saul hears about it, he will kill me.”

The LORD said, “Take a heifer with you and say, ‘I have come to sacrifice to the LORD.’ 3 Invite Jesse to the sacrifice, and I will show you what to do. You are to anoint for me the one I indicate.”

4 Samuel did what the LORD said. When he arrived at Bethlehem, the elders of the town trembled when they met him. They asked, “Do you come in peace?”

5 Samuel replied, “Yes, in peace; I have come to sacrifice to the LORD. Consecrate yourselves and come to the sacrifice with me.” Then he consecrated Jesse and his sons and invited them to the sacrifice.

6 When they arrived, Samuel saw Eliab and thought, “Surely the LORD’s anointed stands here before the LORD.”

7 But the LORD said to Samuel, “Do not consider his appearance or his height, for I have rejected him. The LORD does not look at the things people look at. People look at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart.”

8 Then Jesse called Abinadab and had him pass in front of Samuel. But Samuel said, “The LORD has not chosen this one either.” 9 Jesse then had Shammah pass by, but Samuel said, “Nor has the LORD chosen this one.” 10 Jesse had seven of his sons pass before Samuel, but Samuel said to him, “The LORD has not chosen these.” 11 So he asked Jesse, “Are these all the sons you have?”

“There is still the youngest,” Jesse answered. “He is tending the sheep.”

Samuel said, “Send for him; we will not sit down until he arrives.”

12 So he sent for him and had him brought in. He was glowing with health and had a fine appearance and handsome features.

Then the LORD said, “Rise and anoint him; this is the one.”

13 So Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the presence of his brothers, and from that day on the Spirit of the LORD came powerfully upon David. Samuel then went to Ramah.

[annnnoid]

Wolfman…

It may seem like a bit of a peculiar question…but I suppose since you’ve made the place your home now for quite a while you might have some understanding of the issues involved.

Now that China has pretty much pulled itself out of the dark ages of Mao and established itself…at least to some degree…as a legitimate international player, do you think China (in a generalized or specific sense) has any variety of home-grown missionary or message that it (or any of it’s multitudes of sub-groups) has any interest in exporting.

In other words….for centuries western missionaries have travelled to and worked in China. Does the Chinese culture, or some aspect of it, produce some kind of equivalent prerogative. From the way you’ve described various Chinese traditions, it would seem not (altruism within family ties but no further and all that). Are there any aspects of their culture that the Chinese feel in any way compelled or obligated to enlighten others with?

[Jon.]

Originally Posted by annnnoid

Wolfman…

It may seem like a bit of a peculiar question…but I suppose since you’ve made the place your home now for quite a while you might have some understanding of the issues involved.

Now that China has pretty much pulled itself out of the dark ages of Mao and established itself…at least to some degree…as a legitimate international player, do you think China (in a generalized or specific sense) has any variety of home-grown missionary or message that it (or any of it’s multitudes of sub-groups) has any interest in exporting.

In other words….for centuries western missionaries have travelled to and worked in China. Does the Chinese culture, or some aspect of it, produce some kind of equivalent prerogative. From the way you’ve described various Chinese traditions, it would seem not (altruism within family ties but no further and all that). Are there any aspects of their culture that the Chinese feel in any way compelled or obligated to enlighten others with?

I'm not Wolfman, and I haven't lived in China, but I married a Chinese woman, have visited China, and have some experience of Chinese culture. I would say that it is unlikely, at least at this point in time, that the Chinese would be interested in proselytizing or being missionaries for any aspect of their culture. To the extent that they have a deep-rooted, historical culture, it is suppressed (or at least not acknowledged officially) by the government. Maybe in the future, if this changes, there could be Confucian missionaries, I don't know.

[Wolfman]

I'd partly agree with Jon. The whole yin/yang thing means that Chinese aren't that interested (for the most part) in making everyone else like them. It's more of a 'you do your thing, and we'll do our thing' attitude. Both Buddhist and Confucian ideologies tend to teach that there are many different paths to truth, there's not "one true path" that everyone must follow.

So in terms of actively proselytizing (for a particular religion, culture, etc.), no, I wouldn't see it as a big thing.

However...there are huge numbers of Chinese. We often hear the number that China represents 1/4 of the world's population...but that doesn't include the huge numbers of Chinese living in other countries around the world. And those Chinese tend to retain strong links to their culture back in China. Which means that Chinese culture is being exported quite aggressively around the world.

In Canada, one of the largest and most popular festivals is Chinese New Year; and its not just Chinese Canadians who are celebrating it. Then look at how many Chinese are making distinctive marks in the world of art (painting, music, etc.), fashion, etc.

Another way of looking at it -- when one looks at China's history, one sees a history of very aggressive expansionism, building one of the largest (and longest-lasting) empires in the world. Yet there was one key difference between their expansion, and that of many others. For the most part, they didn't try to destroy the culture they had conquered, and replace it with their own. Quite the opposite, they tended to appoint leaders from the local region, and encourage them to keep their culture, language, etc.; but they were expected to send regular tribute to the Chinese leadership, and follow Chinese laws.

That pattern changed when the Communists took over, and tried to destroy everything that varied from what they considered 'proper'...but that was an aberration, not a typical aspect of Chinese attitudes.

[annnnoid]

You speak of the ‘yin-yang’ thing Wolfman. I know this is straying from the OP somewhat, but I’m curious as to what the Chinese ‘thing’ may actually be…or to what extent there even is one? I certainly can’t say I know much about Chinese history (so please correct me if I’m wrong), but I get the impression that prior to Mao, though highly evolved in many ways, China was still essentially an agrarian feudal society. The majority of people lived in the country, had little or no say in how they were governed, practiced nothing much beyond subsistence living, and had nothing more than a minimal education. Everything became submerged during Mao…and now everything is resurfacing very rapidly into a so-called modern world.

In the contemporary world everything flip-flops. People are educated and expected to choose their own lives. Governance is based on elections. People have ambitions, self-fulfillment, self-realization, rights, responsibilities, freedom.

The world has changed enormously over the past century …and one of the features of the modern world is the degree to which cultural and social institutions and traditions have been shattered. George Will once described it thus “ It’s hard to be an iconoclast in a world knee deep in the debris of icons”.

Can China expect to be immune from this inevitable assault on its identity? That’s one reason why I ask what the Chinese ‘thing’ may actually be. For better or worse, there is pretty much nothing sacred in the so-called modern world anymore (except what fundamental human nature is still able to implicitly assert as such). How will these inevitable trends manifest in China and what kind of ‘ethos’ can we expect China to assert internationally as its own identity evolves or simply fractures? One obvious conflict (with the 'I'll take care of my family and everyone else can do whatever they want' philosophy) is the obvious degree to which everything is connected to everything else these days. You can't just run your own ship. Borders are porous, people, ideas, and information move around much more easily now. There are environmental considerations, political considerations, economic considerations.

There ya go…a few minor questions to consider before you brush your teeth and hit the pillows.

[Wolfman]

annnnoid,

I think I can best answer your question this way. What you are describing is far from being a modern phenomenon...the history of every major culture on the planet is rife with massive changes being forced on them, as a result of a variety of factors, including being conquered by another culture, significant technological advances, revolution leading to major political changes, the advent of a new religion that becomes widely adopted, etc.

It is pretty much a fundamental fact that all but the most isolated cultures change and evolve. Sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly.

Personally, I think that the ability of a particular culture to survive such change depends not so much on its ability to cling stubbornly to 'tradition', but rather its ability to accept new ideas and integrate them into its existing structure.

And I believe that this is why Chinese culture has such a long, continuous history. Despite the reputation of Chinese culture as being 'traditional' or resistant to change, the opposite is actually more accurate...Chinese culture is actually one of the most readily adaptive cultures on the planet. Throw anything at them, and after a brief period of turmoil, they'll simply adapt it and integrate it into their own culture.

The result? A culture that may be significantly different from the 'traditional' culture that preceded it, but that is still distinctively Chinese. I think again that this is because of the religious and philosophic foundations on which Chinese culture is built...the idea of being "the reed that bends in the wind", the focus on maintaining balance, as opposed to 'this is right, and this is wrong'. Other cultures, in being presented with something radically different from their own, will often respond "This is wrong", and reject it; or, if they accept the new paradigm, will insist on rejecting entirely the previous one (the Roman Empire's experience with Christianity is a great example...first seeing it as a threat that had to be obliterated, then adopting it and seeking to obliterate all non-Christian religions).

Chinese culture, by contrast, won't reject either; it will find a way to combine and incorporate them into a new, uniquely Chinese structure. Again taking the example of Christianity, Chinese leaders (prior to the Communists) didn't object to introducing new religions to China, and in fact sometimes encouraged such efforts. What they did object to was Christianity being used as a way to force Chinese to forsake their culture, and act like foreigners.

So, moving into the future? Chinese culture is changing, and will continue to change. 50 years later, I'm sure that Chinese culture will be significantly different from what it is today...but I'm also sure that it will still be uniquely Chinese, maintaining distinct differences from other cultures, and not simply becoming a part of some homogenous international culture where everyone thinks and acts the same.

[Baby Nemesis]

Sorry for the slight delay in replying, Wolfman.

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Originally Posted by Me

And what would you say were the best bits of the foreign cultures you've been exposed to that you thought would be good to adopt as your own?

I think a great example would be the Mosuo, the ethnic minority group I work with in China. Theirs is a unique culture, where women are in charge, and more importantly, there is no marriage. The Mosuo culture has no idealized expectations of "true love" with lifelong bondings. In their culture, couples stay
together for as long as they are happy together (this may be weeks, months, years, or decades). If they're not happy, they'll separate and find new partners.
The result? You simply don't see Mosuo couples who are unhappy together, forcing themselves to stay together in misery because of social expectations that
separating would be bad.

Compared with my Christian upbringing that you marry only once, and it is a consecrated vow made before God that you keep until death, that is quite a
huge difference. I wouldn't go quite as far as the Mosuo (because of other cultural differences that make this way of life much easier for them than it
would be for me), but I've certainly gotten rid of any expectation of a 'life-long bond'. I actually do plan to marry in about one year, but both of us
have discussed it, and both agree that if we some day reach a point where we're not happy together, separation/divorce will be a real option. We've made
a commitment to stay together based only on how we feel...not based on the expectations of others (families, friends, society, etc.)

But I think the main reason divorce is considered bad in the West is because of how children can be affected. After all, until the welfare state was developed, a male breadwinner deserting a woman with a house full of children could cause them serious hardship. Possibly even hunger or destitution. Even nowadays, the living standard of the side of the family where the child or children are being cared for most can decline quite a bit. And also, children can be distressed by the disappearance of one parent they were close to from their lives, although I think what causes most stress for a child in a divorce is the bitter hostility between parents. But then there are other problems, such as if the woman's looking after growing children and her new boyfriends turn out to be less than salubrious, and the fact that it's harder for one person on their own to discipline children, especially if it's a mother trying to discipline boys who've grown bigger than her. Also, some research has found that boys lacking male role models in their lives and father figures can be more likely to join gangs because they're looking for close bonds with other males.

How do the Mosuo avoid all those problems and bring children up in stable secure environments?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

What I can say, without any hesitation, is that Chinese culture is changing. Some of those changes are very positive (for example, as families become more affluent, and the economy
more stable, the emphasis on having male children decreases).

Are the Chinese government introducing any kind of welfare benefits for anyone?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Some of those changes are very negative (first, the Communists destroyed religion, removing
that moral/ethical structure, and replacing it with a moral/ethical structure dictated by their Communist leaders. As Chinese today have lost faith in
Communism, that's left them without any real kind of moral/ethical code, and led to a largely amoral society among the youth, where "whatever is good for
me" is often the predominant sentiment).

What kind of moral code did the previous religion of the Chinese teach them? I harddly know anything about Chinese religion before Communism, but wasn't a lot of it to do with spirit worship? Or was Buddhism very popular as well?

You say that among the youth there's a selfish "me" culture. How does that manifest itself mostly? And does it tie in with what's already traditional in their culture about how they'll look out for people close to them but won't care about the well-being of people they don't know well?

How would you have got around that traditional cultural attitude if you'd tried to teach them the gospel, since if you taught them they had to be decent to everyone, would that mean a lot of them would be offended because you were saying something that was tantamount to saying their very national culture was wrong? Or would you have got around it by, as you're suggesting, pointing out where Bible stories talk about similar things to the ones that exist in Chinese culture, so you could suggest it was quite similar really so it would just mean their culture would need a bit of tweeking to fit in with biblical ideas, or that there are in fact things in their culture that fit in with them already so they could just think of those aspects being broadened a bit to include more things? You said in another post that their culture readily integrates other things into it; but what if those other things are perceived to run totally contrary to it?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Originally Posted by Me

Interestingly enough, a Chinese man on another board once told me he didn't think much of Confucious; he didn't like the way Confucious was popularised,
because factory bosses were using his sayings to convince the workers they had to obey them unquestioningly.

A great many people in these forums would say, "I don't like Christianity"...yet their culture, and many of the ways they view right/wrong, have been shaped by their Judeo-Christian heritage. "Like"
or "don't like" is largely irrelevant to such issues...we grow up in cultures that inevitably and almost inescapably shape us, and our world views...and
those cultures have been developed over thousands of years, based on specific philosophies and beliefs. Same for China...many Chinese may say that they
don't follow Confucius, but Confucian values have still helped shape their world view.

But I just found it surprising and amusing when the Chinese man said he didn't like the teachings of Confucius, because it seems to me that in the West, he's thought of as some kind of sage who said a lot of wise quotable sayings. I don't know much about him, but I assumed he'd be one thing Chinese people would be proud of and feel patriotic about. So it was just surprising and funny when this Chinese man said that actually, he didn't think much of him. Just not what I expected. It was interesting that he said there was a bad side to the teachings, because I'd never heard such a thing before, assuming Confucius must be revered in China.

But didn't they try to ban Confucius' books at one time a long time ago, for some reason? I read something about it once, but I can't remember it. The ban can't have lasted that long if Chinese society's values have been shaped by his teaching. I didn't realise he had as much influence as that.

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Actually, as I'm sure your aware, capital punishment is quite common
in China.

Actually I didn't know that. Is it justfor the most major offences like Murder? Or can it be given in circumstances that are quite controversial?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Yin and Yang doesn't mean that if there are a lot of good people doing good things, then you also need to have more bad people doing bad things. It is
more an issue of balance. Think of it like this. If you are healthy and happy, that would mean your yin and yang are balanced; if you're unhealthy, that
means they are unbalanced. To restore health/happiness, one must find the specific cause of the imbalance, and remove it. ... Society is the same...a healthy society is one where the population is healthy and happy. If there are problems in society, it is because of an imbalance, and the cause of that imbalance must be remedied to restore harmony.

What if the causes and remedies conflict with each other, for instance if one cause of imbalance is seen as over-population so the remedy is seen as a one-child policy, but the one-child policy makes a lot of people unhappy so what was meant to restore the balance just causes more imbalance? Is there a time when the leadership throws up its hands and declares that yin and yang in society may be well out of balance but there isn't a thing they can do about it, or they don't intend to do anything about it? Would that kind of thing be acceptable to the people?

You said that if the Bible had been written in China, it would have shown a "struggle to prevent either God or Satan from gaining a dominant position, but rather keeping the two of them equally balanced." But if that doesn't mean good and evil should be balanced, what would Satan's role have been? Why wouldn't he have been seen as disruptive to the yin/yang harmony of the earth and destroyed or something?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

To restore health/happiness, one must find the specific cause of the imbalance, and remove it. Causes could be entirely different
for different people...so five people who all have exactly the same problem (ie. the common cold) may receive five entirely different treatments under
yin and yang theory, because they all have different imbalances.

How would whoever treated them determine what kind of imbalances they had? And does this theory lead to people being treated with some really bizarre or dangerous or ineffective methods?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

In regards to sin, Christians can't really change that...the Bible cannot be changed in the way you suggest (from a Christian perspective).

Can't it? But the instructions would all be the same; it would just be the rationale for obeying them that was a bit different. Or would Chinese people find workarounds so they didn't have to think of them as absolute instructions; so, just like if someone was on a diet and ate a big chocolate bar one day and decided to cut out half their dinner the following day to compensate, might Some Chinese people say things like, "I got really drunk last night, and yeah I know the Bible says you shouldn't do that because it's too yang, but I'll just do something extra yin today to make up for it"?

Do they do that kind of thing as it is, saying things like, "Yesterday I did something that was far too yang, so I'm going to do something especially yin today to balance my yin and yang"? Or doesn't it work like that?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

If you're seeking status as a Christian, there's no better way to do it than by demonstrating how much you've suffered for God. And particularly if you've
grown up in an environment where there wasn't that much difficulty, being a missionary is a great way to fast-track yourself on that path. Choose some
country where it'll be difficult for you; go and spend a few years there, suffering every day (and being sure to tell everyone else about how much you
are suffering in the name of spreading the Gospel); then return home to your comfy life, secure in the knowledge that you can point to your period of missionary
suffering as proof of your commitment to god.

So you reckon a lot of people go and be missionaries because they're on some kind of ego trip or they want a major boost in self-esteem, or they want to feel like a really significant person? Have you known missionaries personally who you were convinced had motives like that?

[annnnoid]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

annnnoid,

I think I can best answer your question this way. What you are describing is far from being a modern phenomenon...the history of every major culture on the planet is rife with massive changes being forced on them, as a result of a variety of factors, including being conquered by another culture, significant technological advances, revolution leading to major political changes, the advent of a new religion that becomes widely adopted, etc.

I’m afraid I’d have to disagree Wolfman. The conditions of the modern era…which I’d define rather loosely as the past 50-100 years or so…are not only unprecedented, but massively unprecedented.

…for the first time in recorded history a significant percentage of the world’s population no longer has to concern itself with where tomorrow’s, or next week’s, or next month’s, or next year’s food is going to come from. Subsistence realities were not merely a practical issue…they defined who people were (and who they could ever hope to be) ever since people have been people. A writer once simply described it this way: ‘…nothing saps the spirit like poverty…’
…and since you mentioned you provide educational advice on the issues of creativity and critical thinking…this is the first time in recorded history that any but an elite few have had the opportunity to explore and cultivate skills such as creativity and critical thinking (universal education and the fact that we don’t have to grow potatoes 24/7)
…for the first time in recorded history not just war but the very idea of armed conflict is declining as a credible response to disagreements (idiots with guns still like to play with them but if, for example, some madman from Austria decided to off Prince Harry all the shepherds pie in the universe wouldn’t get the Brits to declare war as a result…progress, of some kind); as people acquire education, wealth, and purpose armed conflict simply disappears from the vocabulary (to get a good idea just how prevalent armed conflict has been throughout history simply check the wiki pages…people hacking each other to pieces non-freakin-stop ever since people have been people)…could we be on the verge (or the verge of the verge of the verge) of the fabled ‘swords into plowshares (or x-box’s or PS3’s)’ proverb?
…for the first time in recorded history just about everybody has access to just about any piece of information they want to have access to …to do with whatever they want (porn beats out poetry a million to one but hopefully maturity prevails)

…and then there’s massive economic, scientific, educational, technological, and political changes on a scale and at a rate that overwhelms even the experts. Throughout most of history, change has been gradual. Sure… idiot A massacred idiot B’s army and made himself head honcho and wenched and whored till the cows came home…but that’s what everybody expected. Slave away 24/7 for ungrateful noble A until ungrateful noble B comes over the hill and then you give him your first born and go back to slaving away 24/7. There might be a new boss, even a new God…but the facts were pretty much always the same. Every once in a while something big happened like a plague, or an elephant appeared, or someone showed up with an orange, or a guy with brown skin from another planet popped up…but other than that…life’s a bitch, then you die.

The long and the short of all this..??? Essentially the individual members of the human race are no longer defined externally (by whatever authority), we are expected to define ourselves. In other words…when someone asks …’what’s going on here then Amen…?’…each individual has gotta come up with their own specific answer (a bit of a stretch when it is quite indisputable that nobody actually knows what the hell is in fact going on here [?...?]…but that’s a discussion for another day).

As you quite capably observed…certain demographics of the human race are not well-equipped to deal with such massive responsibilities. Thus, as their cultural and social institutions wobble and topple under assault from the modern world, China’s youth are becoming just as self-centered, destructive, and aimless as young people everywhere else (and for pretty much the same reasons). The globalization of ennui.

So how is this all relevant to China? Is that the question? All the rest of us have gone through this mayhem and have typically settled for a random grab-bag of lies and illusions. Identity du jour. I’m as Canadian as my Pensacola time-share and my German car and my daughter’s Vietnamese immigrant boyfriend....but I speak Judeo-Christian Canuck Frenglish that I think I picked up from Aristotle by way of Augustine and Elvis.

It seems you’ve been fortunate enough to have to go through the hell of actually deciding who you are for yourself (...just imagine...if it wasn't for Christianity you'd probably be an accountant in a Toronto skyscraper by now). What is the prognosis for the other billion or so Chinese who you share the country with? Will they decide that they want to make the world a better place…or simply that they want to make their house a better place and to hell with everyone else? Or maybe they’ll surprise everyone and emancipate Tibet and off the nut-job over in North Korea.

Seeing as how you're being kind of inundated with off-OP questions I'll be satisfied with a two-word answer.

[Wolfman]

annnnoid,

I'm not talking about subsistence, or anything like that. I'm talking about radical cultural change. Due to being conquered, due to new religions, due to many different factors...the causes of those changes may vary, but the fact that cultures do change, and will inevitably go through periods of sudden, radical change, is what I would consider to be a historically sound fact.

Yes, the conditions today are different, even unprecedented...so the causes of the change may be different. But the fact that change still happens remains unaffected.

China's faced numerous different causes for cultural change. They've been invaded and conquered on several occasions (the Mongols and the Opium Wars being two more obvious examples)...yet they adapted, absorbed what necessary knowledge was needed, integrated it with their culture, and emerged different...but still Chinese.

They've face the importation of Buddhism, then the widespread implementation of Confucianism...one was from an external source, the other from an internal source, both helped to fundamentally re-shape what 'Chinese culture' actually was.

They've faced massive political upheavals that have had huge impacts on their culture.

The list could go on and on...there's over 5000 years of history involved. And if you pick any particular century during those 5000 years, and compare it with any other century, you'll find that A) they have significant cultural differences, and B) they are still uniquely, identifiably Chinese.

So there are new factors, "massively unprecedented conditions". I agree. But my conclusion remains the same. Chinese culture will go through a period of brief upheaval, following which it will integrate various portions of these new conditions into their culture, and will emerge on the other side different from what they are today, but still 'Chinese'.

[annnnoid]

I guess the issue when it comes to China is simply this:

We can say that we now live in a unique time in the history of history (previously explained).

Up until this point, the countries / cultures that have had a global influence have been predominantly western (England, France, Spain [and a few others to a lesser degree] and recently, the US). No Asian community has achieved anything remotely equivalent in terms of a global footprint. Thus we have English, Spanish, and French empires, language, institutions, traditions, etc. mixed with indigenous populations around the world.

One of the ‘institutions’ that evolved with these empires was the right to personal freedom. We are no longer told who we are….we are expected to figure it out for ourselves. For what are we responsible? To what do we owe allegiance? Where before we were defined (by lack of education, by survival imperatives, by simple authoritarian subjugation)…now we are expected to define ourselves…if for no other reason than that the institutions that previously satisfied that requirement have themselves been re-defined, discredited, or demolished. What is left is a maelstrom of constantly evolving meaning that simply buries most people.

You can take your own experience as a very good example (though you weren’t buried). As you said, you had to decide the most fundamental aspects of human identity…as you put it…” I then had to go about re-building my life from scratch...figuring out what I did believe (rejecting Christianity meant that I had to re-evaluate my entire moral/ethical system, and reach my own conclusions, in some cases involving some radical changes), making new friends, building new networks, etc

….now you mentioned that the Communists destroyed religion…thereby destroying the moral / ethical structure that goes with it and replaced it with the Communist ideology. Communist ideology (like many contemporary institutions) is now either re-defining itself, has been discredited, or has been completely demolished …and as a result no structure exists within which certain demographics (youth) can ‘locate’ themselves. There would seem to be a moral / ethical vacuum within Chinese society that echoes the moral /ethical vacuum that is occurring globally as the same processes occur.

The difference, though, is that China is in the process of becoming a global power. But a global power with what kind of identity? The ‘western’ prerogative seems to tend towards justice, human rights, freedom, democracy, etc. (often naively)…as ideals if nothing else. As I pointed out, the world has yet to experience an Asian global influence. China is well on its way to filling that void. But what will a China that is experiencing a moral / ethical vacuum…that is in the process of colliding with a secular modern world that is itself undergoing an equivalent identity crisis (the moral / ethical vacuum in the west is well documented….despite Sam Harris absurd attempts to scientifically establish one [a test-tube morality])…what can we expect this China to contribute?

I don’t expect you to know, I’m just wondering.

You speak of how difficult it is to communicate the depth and breadth of the Chinese identity. That is has endured for millennia and has successfully adapted to every influence and onslaught. The modern world is different though. The modern world is not the presence of something ( "do things this way")…it is defined by the lack of anything….the modern world says…’ here…you can have anything you want…everything you want….so what do you really want?’

Big questions…like usual. I apologize. Blame God…I do.

Ignorance is bliss….but so are answers.

[Orphia Nay]

My mother's parents and her grandparents were missionaries in China, in the Hudson Taylor tradition. My grandmother gave my sisters and me books about him, but I never read them, although I'm an avid reader. (The budding skeptic in me suspecting indoctrination at an early age?)

I sympathise with Wolfman. We're nearly the same age, and while he got far more involved in religion than I did, he became an atheist before I did. (We've known each other for over 10 years.)

This is an interesting thread. Kudos once again, dear Wolfie.

[Wolfman]

Originally Posted by annnnoid

~snip~

You speak of how difficult it is to communicate the depth and breadth of the Chinese identity. That is has endured for millennia and has successfully adapted to every influence and onslaught. The modern world is different though. The modern world is not the presence of something ( "do things this way")…it is defined by the lack of anything….the modern world says…’ here…you can have anything you want…everything you want….so what do you really want?’

First, I disagree with the appraisal that the modern world is "you can have anything you want...everything you want". The vast majority of the people in the world -- even those in first-world, developed nations -- would absolutely disagree with that appraisal. The whole "Occupy [your city]" movement that's going on right now is a good illustration of that.

Now, let me state for the record that I do not believe I can even remotely hope to predict what 'Chinese culture' will be like in 50 or 100 years. Or what kind of impact it will have on the rest of the world. All I'm saying is that A) it will change, probably quite significantly from what it is today, and B) it will still be uniquely 'Chinese', in that it will still have significant, identifiable aspects that will differentiate it from everyone else.

To elaborate on the whole Communism vs. Religion thing, in regards to providing moral/ethical standards...here's how I see it. Prior to the Communists, Buddhism and Confucianism were the predominant sources of moral/ethical teaching and values in China. When the Communists took over, they sought to obliterate those (and all other) systems, and replace it with their own. The Communists, despite being atheist, were every bit as adamant in insisting on their absolute right to determine 'right and wrong' as any religion, and demanded a standard of unquestioning obedience equal to or even greater than many religions.

And for awhile, many Chinese went along with it...in fact, during the first decade of Communist rule, loyalty to the Communist Party and its leadership was quite fanatical.

But as time progressed, and more and more problems were revealed, people lost their faith in Communism. And lacking any other non-theistic moral/ethical system, many of them have ended up going in one of two directions: either re-adopting religion, to provide the 'answers'; or changing to an almost entirely amoral system of 'whatever seems good for me'.

This, to me, is why today in China we simultaneously see a significant portion of the population turning to religion, while another huge portion has become very selfish and self-centered.

This is also why I focus so much time and energy on promoting Humanism in China...because it provides a solid moral and ethical foundation that is entirely non-theistic, that provides a structure that many Chinese want, without reliance either on unquestioning obedience of some supernatural figure, or on unquestioning obedience of some human leader.

I've been working with some local Chinese for over a decade to have an official Chinese Humanist organization recognized and established in China. For many of the Chinese I've discussed it with, they've been very interested, and seen great benefit in it.

But...for all that Humanism would be very appealing to the Chinese gov't in some ways (particularly that it isn't religious), it also actively promotes principles such as human rights and democracy...principles that the gov't obviously has problems with, if being promoted by an official organization within China. So despite lengthy discussions and negotiations, at present, no such organization can be legally run in China.

Actually, having written this, and considering the context of the entire thread...it seems that in some ways, I've never ceased to be a missionary. Before, I was a Christian missionary...and now, perhaps, it might be accurate to describe me as a Humanist missionary. The parallels are rather interesting:

* I came to China trying to establish Christian groups that were considered illegal by the gov't; now I'm trying to find a way to gain gov't permission to establish Humanist groups, which are currently not legal at present

* I came to China trying to convince people to be Christians; now I am working to try to convince people to be Humanists

But there are some important differences, too. For example, as a Christian I worked to establish groups that I knew were illegal; as a Humanist, I have not started any illegal groups, nor am I attempting to do so. Rather, I am seeking, step-by-step, to gain legal status for such an organization. Not something I expect to do overnight...but I am optimistic it will happen eventually. Ten years ago, I was fighting to have Toastmasters (a public speaking group) made legal in China (the gov't didn't like it because it featured Chinese and foreigners having public meetings on discussions that were outside the control of the gov't); and ended up being the founder and President of the first Toastmasters club in Beijing. The NGO I co-founded to work with the Mosuo was one of the very first to get provincial-level authorization and support in China (which again involved -- and still involves -- a great deal of political work in the background). I know what I'm up against...and believe that within the next 5 years, we'll have at least a small trial organization in place.

Another key difference is that as a Christian, I believed Christianity was the only answer, the only solution; as a Humanist, I see Humanism as having great value -- especially in a country that has as many atheists as China, but lacks any non-theistic moral/ethical system outside of Communism -- but I don't see it as the only solution or answer.

[Wolfman]

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

My mother's parents and her grandparents were missionaries in China, in the Hudson Taylor tradition. My grandmother gave my sisters and me books about him, but I never read them, although I'm an avid reader. (

If you can get them...they're actually a good read. Yeah, there's a lot of Christian propaganda, and some of the stories have to be taken with a rather liberal dose of salt...but Hudson Taylor was, in many ways, quite an admirable figure. He had real respect for the Chinese culture, and sought to understand it, not to change it. He was a very active figure in fighting against the abuses of the European colonial powers, taking the side of the 'pagan Chinese' against his own countrymen. There are hospitals and orphanages still active today in China that were established through his efforts.

For those seeking to understand the intricacies, controversies, and abuses taking place in China during that period in history, the books about Hudson Taylor really give quite a significant insight into it all. As an atheist today, I have problems with Taylor's efforts to evangelize the population with a foreign religion; but have great respect for the sincerity of his desire to actually understand and help the people he was working with.

[Baby Nemesis]

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

My mother's parents and her grandparents were missionaries in China, in the Hudson Taylor tradition. ...

That's interesting. Did they tell you lots of interesting stories about it?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

* I came to China trying to establish Christian groups that were considered illegal by the gov't; now I'm trying to find a way to gain gov't permission
to establish Humanist groups, which are currently not legal at present

I'm curious: Does anyone in the government now know you came to do something illegal at first? If so, what's their attitude? Or wouldn't you dare tell them?

Originally Posted by Wolfman

But there are some important differences, too. For example, as a Christian I worked to establish groups that I knew were illegal; as a Humanist, I have
not started any illegal groups, nor am I attempting to do so. Rather, I am seeking, step-by-step, to gain legal status for such an organization. Not something
I expect to do overnight...but I am optimistic it will happen eventually. Ten years ago, I was fighting to have Toastmasters (a public speaking group)
made legal in China (the gov't didn't like it because it featured Chinese and foreigners having public meetings on discussions that were outside the control
of the gov't); and ended up being the founder and President of the first Toastmasters club in Beijing.

How did you convince them? And how are you trying to convince them that a humanist organisation would be OK? Would it be possible to have a special brand of humanism that just promoted certain issues and not others so they wouldn't feel so threatened by it? For instance, a humanism that tolerated benign dictatorships?

(As an aside:

As for all my other questions, I know you suggested via PM that I start three or four new threads more related to the topics that have come up than this thread is and ask them again there, in ways that would be like bringing them up as new issues so others could find it easy to join in because they wouldn't be daunted by the fact they were starting reading in the middle of a conversation; but the truth is that while that would be a good and considerate thing to do, my head has begun to spin at the thought of the monstrous amount of time and effort I envisage that taking, - ... What? I'm exaggerating? ... - And I think I'll either faint or be propelled into levitation/take-off by my spinning head and begin to uncontrollably spin bodily around the room if I carry on thinking about doing that. ... Or something. So I'm wondering if you'd mind starting the threads instead, based on what I've already asked, rather than me saying it all again in a new way? That would be nice. I think it would be easier for you, because you know much much more about the background to these things than I do so you could explain things better.)

[Mister Earl]

I always wondered how the world would look today if the Chinese had never burned the treasure fleet of Zheng He.