Item description for Genesis and the Mystery Confucius Couldn't Solve by Ethel R. Nelson & Richard E. Broadberry...
Overview In this unique study, Dr. Ethel R. Nelson and Richard E. Broadberry examine ancient Chinese characters and the mysterious Border Sacrifice and conclude that the inventor of these symbols knew the creation story and the promise of a Savior. ShangTi, who was worshiped at the Border Sacrifice was the Triune God, according to the authors. Dr. Ethel R. Nelson is a pathologist, and her years of medical research were of help as she undertook this massive research project. She was also a resident of Thailand for many years. Richard E. Broadberry adds expertise as one fluent in the Chinese language and a medical laboratory specialist in Taipei.
Publishers Description Analyzes the oldest Chinese ideographs to reveal that ancient Chinese history includes biblical events from creation to the flood.
Promise Angels is dedicated to bringing you great books at great prices. Whether you read for entertainment, to learn, or for literacy - you will find what you want at promiseangels.com!
Studio: Concordia Publishing House
Est. Packaging Dimensions: Length: 7.99" Width: 5.41" Height: 0.43" Weight: 0.5 lbs.
Release Date Dec 1, 1994
Publisher Concordia Publishing House
ISBN 0570046351 ISBN13 9780570046356
Availability 0 units.
More About Ethel R. Nelson & Richard E. Broadberry
Reviews - What do customers think about Genesis and the Mystery Confucius Couldn't Solve?
Wrong character being translated. Sep 25, 2007
In the first page, the word for "Shangdi/Shangti" isn't what it's supposed to be in ancient characters. Shang means up or above, but the character being used is its opposite, xia and the second character is something even I, as a Chinese, can't interpret. So, the so-called "Shangdi/Shangti" is actually "Xia something" from the first page of the book. "Xia" means "under, below, etc..." Here by "something", I meant I wasn't able to interpret the second character used, which was supposedly "ti/di", meaning Emperor. It's a shame that people who don't know Chinese are trying to profit from the language that they don't have any knowledge of. Actually the Chinese first used "di" for the Jade Emperor from Chinese mythology since ancient times. But the Jade Emperor ISN'T God!
Well Worth Considering, more than just coincidence Aug 12, 2007
The author discusses the significance of the mysterious Border Sacrifice which had been carried on by the Chinese Emperor from time immemorial until the Imperial system was overthrown in 1911. In this sacrifice, an unblemished bull is given to the God of Heaven, ShangDi (Highest King). Confucious knew about this ritual but did not understand it. He realized that whoever did understand the meaning behind this would be able to govern the world. In the recitations of the Border Sacrifice, the Emperor acknowledges ShangDi as the Creator. The author matches what is reported in the Hebrew Bible with what is written in the ancient Shu Jing and the Border Sacrifice recitations.
Looking for more clues, the authors turn to the earliest Chinese language pictograms. Those that were written on oracle bones, seal script, bronzeware. It turns out that evidence exists that the pictograms were pieced together by the occurances in Genesis. The creation of man is depicted, as is the Fall, and early sacrificial worship near the Garden gates. Since this study is so detailed it is easy to get lost in it if you do not have a good working knowledge of Chinese (which I do not).
However just look at a few of them and be amazed. The word for righteousness is the character for lamb on top of the character for me. This is so, even in modern (traditional) Chinese. It cannot be a coincidence that a lamb covering me is righteousness. It is because God has revealed to us that the Lamb of God taketh away the sins of the world. And to apply that salvation to yourself is to take cover under the righteousness of the Lamb of God (Jesus Christ).
For a shorter summary and more examples of what is covered in this book, search for answers in genesis chinese and you'll get a hit for an article telling about the original unknown God of China. Another good book is Eternity in Their Hearts, which tells about how knowledge of God and the events in Genesis were known to various people groups throughout the world. And indeed, when Paul visited Athens he found an altar to the unknown god, which he made known to them in that day.
"Neither Koreans nor Japanese Solved" Jul 8, 2005
That is what I should add to the title if you may. It has been my life long admiration and curiosity what each of the Chinese characters has consisted of. So when I found this book which a friend of mine showed me first, I was delighted. My curiosity of language in general started when I was introduced to semantics in Japanese. Although I do not believe that there is a spirit in words, I do think they almost do have spirit. If you read this book you will understand what I mean. I am certainly not a linguist but certainly can say something obvious. That is the totally different explanation of or approach to the origin of the parts of Kanji has been taught in Kanji dictionaries in Japan at least (and I am almost certain that regular Chinese dictionaries have the same tendency since Japanese scholars base on them). So, one side must be wrong. If you believe what you read in John 1:1 ~ 13, you'll naturally incline to what this author is about to say. Amazingly painstaking scholarly work there is which you cannot easily see anywhere else especially in the area the book is about. It was my eye opening experience itself which gave me deeper insight not only on the origins of Chinese language but also the origin of the world and the human being. A casual eye cannot see what the book explains as it reads Chinese characters. However, the non-ordinary thinkers such as you may, in turn have a heart warming experience as they plod through this work. There is one useful feature at the end, which is a character reference table you may enjoy. "Is there a risk of obtaining and reading this book?" you may ask. The only risk I can think of is that you might end up with referring frequently to and reading further the Bible. And, if you may, you will be more curious about your own (non-Chinese) language and the Author of our human language HIMSELF.
Sheer Fantasy Oct 11, 2004
The kinds of analysis given in this book are totally without foundation.
Ethel Nelson's previous book on this subject, "The Discovery of Genesis: How the Truths of Genesis Were Found Hidden in the Chinese Languages" was based on modern Kaishu forms, which are often totally different from the original forms, so that the elements into which the characters were analyzed did not even exist in the original forms.
When this was pointed out to Nelson after the publication of that book, she then came out with this one, scrapping most of her previous contentions and producing new ones, using older character forms as a basis. However, the authors are careful to pick and choose forms that support their analysis, even if other forms are far more common. You can find lots of samples of oracle bone characters on the Web. See for yourself. In fact, it appears that some may be made up on the basis of related forms, as I can't find any examples of them.
Also, this book and the previous one share another set of problems. Nelson and her co-authors seem to have no idea that the origins of specific Chinese characters have been well understood for quite some time. They don't even recognize that the vast majority of characters are not simple indicative or compound indicative forms, as they would have us believe, but are semantic-phonetic compounds. They consistently miss this well-know point. It is obvious that they have never read a single work on this subject, but have simply made up their own stories out of whole cloth. This is nothing more than a work of imaginative fiction.
They also don't realize that many characters are known to be phonetic loans. For example, "lai2" ("to come") was originally a character for "barley" or some related grain, also pronounced "lai2". For a while, the same form was used for both. Later on, the "grass" radical was added to the "barley" character to distinguish it. This becomes quite obvious when you compare the character for "barley" with the character for "wheat" ("mai4"), as they have many elements in common. It is simply ridiculous to analyze the character as two people (presumably Adam and Eve) coming from behind a tree. They even analyze the hook at the bottom of the vertical center stroke as "possibly representing a foot...to indicate movement". They didn't even know that the hook is a modern innovation in the brush-written form, and does not even appear in older forms. It's really sad to see people taken in by such nonsensical fantasies.
It's quite amusing to see how Nelson confidently puts forth one analysis of a particular character, like the one for "fire", in the first book, and then produces an equally confident explanation of the same character in the second book that completely contradicts the first one. The fact is that the second analysis is just as baseless as the first.
A final problem with both books is that many of the characters that they analyze did not even exist in the beginning stages of the writing system, which is what these books are trying to deal with. That is, there are no examples of the existence of these characters among the Shang period oracle bone characters--only about 1000 of which had even been deciphered at the time of publication.
If you want to know something about how Chinese characters are really composed, I suggest starting with "The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy", by John DeFrancis. If you want to know more about Chinese oracle bone characters, try "Sources of Shang History" (pretty expensive), by David N. Keightley. A cheaper, but less reliable, source is "The Composition of Common Chinese Characters: An Illustrated Account", from Peking University Press. Even Wieger's "Chinese Characters: Their origin, etymology, history, classification, and signification." is light years ahead of Nelson's attempts. (Parts of this were simply copied word-for-word from my review of Nelson's first book.)
Historic context May 23, 2002
Hold on there, dudes. Etymology of Chinese characters does NOT prove that they independently developed a prehistory based on Adam & Eve and the Great Flood. The Chinese alphabet evolved much later than Sumerian. Historians already recognize that trade brought not only the idea of writing from Sumer to other cultures but also their prehistory. All we can accurately say is that Sumerian writing and prehistory influenced the development of Chinese writing. That is not the same thing as saying that China preserved its own memory of the same events. Please do read the book, but with a healthy context rather than a wild eyed, unsubstantiated and unsupportable conclusion.