Jump to content

Talk:Christianity in Korea

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

History of this Article

[edit]

I first wrote this article about fifteen years ago, as an essay for a Korean Culture/History paper that I was studying at Auckland University at that time. Apart from the last paragraph, which I have rewritten substantially to include changes that have taken place over the past fifteen years, I have hardly changed the text at all. I find it amazing how almost all of what I wrote in 1988 is still true today. (David Cannon)

Korean spellings are incorrect.

My apologies for incorrect Korean spellings. If you know the correct spellings, could you please edit accordingly? I'd be so grateful. Thanks! David Cannon 08:10, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Format

[edit]

This article is superb. I was just wondering if the bibliography and references could be modified or shortened to fit the standard Wiki format? And perhaps would could edit the tone/style slightly? But mega kudos to the author once again. Thanks ~ Dpr 05:45, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! I wrote most this article as a student essay back in 1988; of course I've updated it, but it is, for the most part, much as it was then. By all means feel free to edit the bibliography and references to fit the Wiki format (I'd rather not see them deleted, though). And yes, the tone could be slightly modified also (I think a few people have already tweaked it; feel free to put your own touches on it:-) David Cannon 10:44, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Names for God

[edit]

I made a slight change in the section mentioning traditional names for God. The original pure Korean name for God was 하느님, which is related to the word 하늘 (sky), and is still used by most non-Protestant religious groups in Korea. The name 하나님 is derived from 하나 (one), and my understanding is that it was coined by early Protestants who objected to the use of 하느님, due to its reference to the sky. (User:Chamdarae)

Since I can't read Korean, would you mind spelling those in enlgish for me so I know how to pronounce them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.144.42.153 (talk) 12:48, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikify

[edit]

I added Template:Wikify even though this article is fairly well-laid-out and linked, because the footnotes would work much better if wikified, using e.g. Footnote3. -- Visviva 03:19, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Most of the footnotes are to book titles that have no article to link to. If and when articles are written covering the titles, we can link them then. I appreciate your interest, but I see no point in doing so now. I have removed the template. David Cannon 11:02, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I didn't explain very well, sorry. Footnote3 doesn't link the footnotes to outside sources, it just links the numbers to the notes, so the user can view the citation easily. Footnote3 also makes the numbers (somewhat) less obtrusive, so the article is easier to read.
Anyway, I went ahead and made the change. If it absolutely must be reverted, then please do so, but give it a shot first. Using a markup for the footnotes helps bring out the best in this already very nice article. I checked the conversion and I think that all of the note-reference connections are intact. Everything should be as it was before, except for the addition of one number to cover the previous second instance of footnote #9. Also I had to put #7 back into the text -- it seems to have been lost at some point, but since the text of Choi 1984 is online I was able to figure out what it had been the source for. Cheers! -- Visviva 14:24, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, I misunderstood what you meant. I like what you've done! I must apologise; some time ago there was some guy who played around with the links and the footnotes and I jumped to the conclusion that you were talking about the same thing. That was my mistake. I'm sorry. David Cannon 10:45, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Glad you like it. And again, kudos on the great article.  :-) -- Visviva 08:49, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Correctness of Korean text

[edit]

I'm not sure (I can only read Korean, my vocabulary is limited to about 50 words), but it looks like there are still some minor problems with the Korean versions of some of the names. Someone who knows, please verify the following:

  • Introduction:
    • David Yonggi Cho 조용기목사
  • Underpinnings of Christian growth:
    • Yi Sung-hun 이성헌
  • The Impact of Christianity on Korean society:
    • King Sejong 세종대왕
    • Yin 음
    • Park Chung-hee 박정회

It could just be that there's a problem with the transliteration of some of these. I see "Park Chung-hee" is linked, so some people apparently think that's a legitimate way to transliterate pak... :-p Tomer TALK 03:19, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

Actually I'm fairly sure that all of those names are correct. Let's go through them:
    • 조용기목사 (Jo-yonggimoksa) means "Reverend Jo Yong-gi (or Cho Yonggi)." Since "David" is Rev. Cho's English name, it wouldn't be included in the Korean name.
    • 이성헌 would normally be romanized Yi Seong-heon or I Seong-heon or Yi Sŏng-hŏn, but "Yi Sung-hun" is much more common.
    • 세종대왕 (Sejongdaewang) literally means "Great King Sejong," aka Sejong the Great of Joseon, but it's not necessary to call him "great" all the time.
    • 음 (eum) is the Korean pronunciation of the Chinese character 陰, which is known in English as "yin".
    • 박정희 (Bak Jeong-hui) ... well, everybody calls him Park Chung-hee, or else something unprintable. :-)
So I think all these names are OK, although I wonder if the Korean text is really necessary here. -- Visviva 08:46, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Cheu Yonggi uksa is really how you say "David Yonggi Cho" in Korean? Tomer TALK 12:05, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
No, it's Jo-younggimoksa - really. Yes, I'd keep the Korean text - for much the same reason that our articles about Chinese topics often have names of Chinese people and places written, in parentheses, in chinese. David Cannon 13:20, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I mis-read it. Still...What part of that is "David", David?  :-p Tomer TALK 20:37, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
The "David" is not included in the Korean text. "David" is the name he uses in America and other English-speaking countries; it is common for Koreans to Anglicize their names abroad, but in his homeland that name would not be used at all. Very likely, many in his church don't even know that he uses that name outside of Korea. David Cannon 21:35, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gaccia. Thanks for the explanation. Tomer TALK 22:21, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

Christianity takes credit for Korea's economic success!!

[edit]

The economy is another area in which Christian "geomentality" has been an influential factor for change. Traditional Korean thought was permeated with the Taoist-Confucianist concept of the Yin (음) and the Yang (양) - which held that the universe is governed by complementary opposite forces which must be kept eternally in equilibrium. Such thinking is not conducive to developments which interfere with what is perceived as the natural order. Judeo-Christian teaching, by contrast, gives man dominion over nature (Genesis 1.26; Psalm 8.6-8). South Korea's dramatic economic growth over the past three decades may be linked in part to the growing influence of the Christian view of ecology. There were, of course, other factors, too - the massive inflow of American capital has also been instrumental.

So Christianity is the driving force for Korea's economic success? I presume that's why Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore have remained impoverished and undeveloped?

Somewhere a line must be drawn. A writer pushing his own pet theory with no references is unacceptable. This section should be removed.

-- ran (talk) 04:43, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

I think that part should be reworded somewhat. I based it on what I was taught by my professor at Auckland University years ago; he (himself a Korean) believed that Christian thinking had been a factor (though by no means the only one) in the economic transformation of Korea, based on the reasons given above. However, I will reword the section to reflect that it is a position claimed by its supporters, but not universally endorsed. David Cannon 10:05, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What a silly paragraph. Japan has an economy that ranks it with the US and EU without Christianity having even a toehold. China is rising to superpower status and India is on its way to being a powerhouse. While South Korea has an economy smaller than several US states. And speaking of the US, you couldn't even explain the economic landscape here with the idea posited in the paragraph. The most religious states tend to cluster in the lower half of a ranking based on economy and the upper half is dominated by the more secular, "liberal" states. About the only major exception is Texas which controls almost the entire US oil supply, making for an automatic economy long as the US needs oil no matter what Texans believe. I can't see any correlation at all. Mark K. Bilbo 12:50, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ran and Mark have a point here, although the arguments given are not valid (because they represent their own point of view which can be added to the article in a Criticism section if they can document criticism. Likewise, your? current wording does not comply with WP:NPOV / WP:NOR. Is is, however, a fact that many if not most of South Korea's 12,000,000 Christians are fundamentalists/evengelicals strongly believe what your professor told you: that economic success is seen as a gift from God. In other words, the Section header above is almost correct - Christianity *in South Korea* takes credit for the country's economic success. (You will need to add quotes per WP:CITE)- but I'm sure there is a lot of info out there, in paper and on the Internet). I have to run but I'll be back later to see if I can be of assistance here. In the meantime Ran and Mark may want to help you understand the main policies and guidelines. AvB ÷ talk 14:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have to stick to my guns here. There's just no obvious correlation between the religion and economic success. In fact, an easier case can be made to the contrary. Additionally, New Testament Christianity is actively hostile to capitalism. It's only been in very recent years that the religion has been linked with capitalism and free market economics. For a very long time--even in the US--Christianity was quite often linked to socialism (one of the great ironies of the "pledge fight" in the US was that it was originally written by a Baptist socialist but its defenders now are religious rightists... go figure).
Let's apply WP:NPOV, WP:CITE and WP:NOR and work together. AvB ÷ talk 18:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, the above paragraph asserts things as fact that appear to be the opinion of some. The current version relies--unfortunately--on weasel words (such as "cited by some," "claimed by some," etc.). I'm not even advocating a "criticism" section but, rather, to the extent this is a widespread belief or there is a school of thought that holds this position, we get a more NPOV treatment with citations. At this point, it appears to merely be the free floating belief of a vague "some" which isn't a terribly encyclopedic treatment of any subject. Mark K. Bilbo 15:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Same thing. AvB ÷ talk 18:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I'm not even advocating for a "criticism" section necessarily. I do want the author to give me, say, "One school of thought..." with cites. Who are these people and where have they published? If it's a belief among S. Korean Christians, are there surveys to cite? Where does the phrase "Christian 'geomentality'" come from? As the article now stands, it's introduced pretty much "out of the blue." Most of the rest of the article has plentiful citations. This paragraph needs to be NPOV'd and brought up to the same standard. And citing the Bible is a bit of a skew. Such as "dominion over nature" is also interpreted to mean stewardship and can be used to argue for radical environmentalism and heavy governmental regulation.
The beliefs of the majority of the Christions in South Korea cannot be left out. Like I said, it will need citations. You do not really have to repeat that. On the other hand, you will also need citations if you think this particular belief is not grounded in fact, and even if you have them, you cannot suppress it simply because it isn't true. Billions of people believe things that aren't true. Coming on strong with expressions like "pet theory" where the person in question quite probably believes this with all his heart is not the way to work together. AvB ÷ talk 18:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As a whole, the article tackles a very notable subject worthy of inclusion in the Wiki. Christianity most certainly has had a major impact on S. Korea. I would push the author to take another look while keeping in mind that not everybody interprets Christianity the same way. For example, the phrase "...the Christian teaching that all men are created in the 'Image of God'..." doesn't necessarily lead to Western style civil liberties as the author implies. There is a school of thought along those lines but NT Christianity isn't all that supportive of liberty. Such as the apostle Paul telling slaves to obey their masters in the cause of Christ rather than Paul advocating an end to slavery. Mark K. Bilbo 16:09, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe Mark, recent and ancient unchristian behavior from supposedly Christian people really irritates you doesn't it? But you also know it doesn't have to be that way. (Actually I would be surprised if David went the way of JG, but perhaps you know something I don't...). But I'm game, I'll try and rewrite the paragraph the way I think it should be done (unless someone else comes in and does so first). AvB ÷ talk 18:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Believe it or not, that... ahem... other incident isn't coloring my attitudes. I knew that, um, issue (?) from the outside and there was a history tagging along. But, also, I wasn't all that worried. From lurking about the Wiki, I figured the community here could handle itself. And it did.
Far as this article, I'm out my depth. All I can offer is some critique and suggestions. Such as, I'm not talking about "leaving out" anything per se (unless it can't be sourced but that's a Wiki given). But I don't know what the majority of Christian S. Koreans think. There exists in Christianity more than one line of thought on material wealth. The old line dispensationalism I was raised in looked at material wealth with suspicion as a possible sign of selling out to "the world." Associating material and economic success with being devout is a rather US American line of thought. As in we want to believe we have so much money and power because we're the new "chosen." So I don't know it follows that because there are Christians in S. Korea that they widely believe the economic success of the country is because of the faith or "god's blessing." I don't know what they think. Yet. Mark K. Bilbo 20:49, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok with me, and IMO these critique points and suggestions are fully justified. I can only hope David will not be too unhappy with my upcoming edit since I will have to delete parts. David, please feel free to add (back) anything as long as you also provide supporting citations from one or more reputable sources. For example, if your professor has written an article on the subject, it can probably be cited as a source. AvB ÷ talk 23:59, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine with me! I have no problem with your edit, which I think is the best anybody could do given Wikipedia's NPOV requirements. David Cannon 09:33, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Try that version (that is, I just twiddled the paragraph). I'm still not happy with the way it "flows" but maybe somebody else can kick it around. Also, if there is a cite for the professor who proposed "geomentality," I think a bit more after the last sentence would be good (something to explain the idea briefly and a link to a published work?). Mark K. Bilbo 17:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I like it. It's still somewhat patchy but much improved.
Just a thought - Your mention of David's? "geomentality" term reminded me of something called the "Christian work ethic". Google's fourth link led me to [1] which states "In fact of the top 20 nations, 19 are Christian nations with Japan being the only exception." While the correlation is not as strong as presented here ("Christian nation" is a rather vague definition), perhaps it can still be used to support the idea that the "Christian work ethic" may lead to higher productivity etc. I'm sure there must be better sources.
David, is this your professor? AvB ÷ talk 01:03, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Hong-Key Yoon. That's the man! I haven't seen him for many years now, but it's definitely him. David Cannon 04:17, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly a well-published, well-funded researcher. A pity he hasn't charted the facts that might support the theory (work ethos influenced by Buddhism vs Christianity), or published the theory itself.AvB ÷ talk 20:13, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know about the "gospelcom.net" as we'd be getting into, well, agendas and bias. The Harvard study is a good source having to go through peer review (etc.). I think the "geomentality" idea is the better bet (peer reviewed sources, etc.). Not to mention just interesting. (Okay, I confess, I went back to school in recent years to get my degree in anthropology with an emphasis in linguistics and was about a third of the way to my masters before finances got in the way. I'd have my masters and be looking to a Ph.D. by now otherwise.) Mark K. Bilbo 02:26, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(restarting indentation)

Re "work ethos" thought: I fully agree Gospelcom.net is not the best of links in this context; if someone decides to expand the idea, s/he may want to find better references. (I floated the work ethos idea just in case someone else would like it.)

Geomentality. Yes, certainly looks interesting. And it's a real academic subject, with some of its research involving Korea. AvB ÷ talk 20:13, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but Japan has done fabulously well economically, in parallel with South Korea, and they have a proportionally miniscule population of Christians. Should this not be mentioned as a caveat? Even South Korea's Christian population is not near majority, for that matter. --SohanDsouza 04:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've just finished a major edit of this page, not changing much in terms of information but just polishing the text and making it look and read more like a professionally written encyclopedia article. I've worked hard on the "economic success" section to remove POV language while maintaining the factual information, but I'm a bit confused about the angle that the critics here are seeing.
If I'm reading it right, the article (even as it appeared before, and I've tried to clarify it even more) does not say that the influence of Christianity in South Korea has had a significant impact on the nation's economic success. What it says is that many Christians believe that this is the case, and that this belief has been influential in the growth of Christianity in South Korea. Obviously this claim, like any other, needs to be backed with sources and presented with NPOV language, but providing that those factors are (or will be) in place, I don't see that the claim itself is inappropriate at all. But I've certainly made mistakes before and will again, so I hope someone will bring it to my attention if I've interpreted it incorrectly.
Speaking of sources, one weak point in my edit is that I haven't added many of them; that's simply not my strong point so I normally leave it to others for the most part. But I do try to retain the ones that are already present unless it comes to my attention that they're either not good sources or truly not needed, and I've done that here. It wouldn't hurt to have some more if anyone knows of something that could apply.
Also, the "Numbered References" section is messed up and I haven't been able to figure out how to fix it, and the article could use more images, another area in which I'm very weak. I offer my sincere thanks to anyone who can help out with those parts. -- edi (talk) 04:01, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity vs. Catholicsm edit war

[edit]

I noted that there is an edit war going on where a user keeps reverting changes--insisting that "Catholicism is not a part of Christianity" and therefore should have no place in this article. To say this is utter silliness. Both a cathedral and the Yoido church buildings are prominent examples of Christian architecture that reflects the different religious beliefs in Korea; why not include both photographs?--Merkurix 17:28, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree 100 percent. Let's have both photographs, and let's try to find 2 or 3 more photos also. It's a long article, and could do with some colour. BTW, POV aside, Catholicism self-defines as "Christian." I know, some Protestants don't regard Catholics as true Christians (POV). Likewise, some Catholics think they are the ONLY true Christians (also POV). Neither POV has any place in an NPOV encyclopedia like Wikipedia. David Cannon 22:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I read this otherwise great article for one of two reasons. One of themt was to find out why many Koreans insist that Christianity is the same as Protestantism, and that Catholicism is not a Christian religion (claimed by Catholics as well as protestants). But I did not find out why. Can someone enlighten me? Perhaps its worth putting into the article as well. Thanks. User:Anonymous, 3 December 2006
(The other reason for reading the article was to find out if academics more tend to be Christians than others, which is my experience, but I guess thats a more difficult topic. Being a non-believer myself, coming from a very secular country where Christians are often coming from lower classes, I find it unusual that Christians seems to have higher education than others, and would like to see if there were any explanations here.)

Clean Up Tag

[edit]

I was briefly skimming through the article and found several grammatical errors; sentence structure is poor and the section labeled Controversies has some problems.

Controversies -- is there a definite outside reference/source that attacks Christianity in Korea? Yeah, there's articles about certain problems but if there aren't any critics, I really think IMO the section could be either redone or just deleted.

If there's any problems, by all means discuss and if you strongly feel that the article is up to par as a good article, then take off the tag. --Nissi Kim 22:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think your criticism is justified. There may be a few grammatical errors that I've overlooked, but unless the cleanup job is HUGE, a tag is not justified. Just correct the errors yourself. I didn't add the controversies section - somebody else did, and I don't know enough about that to edit it or remove it. Anyway, I'm taking the tag off, but will attend to the grammatical flaws. David Cannon 00:26, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Impact section sounds very much like a college term paper--not an encyclopedic article.--Nissi Kim 21:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rapture

[edit]

In the early 90s, notably in 1992, there was a bit of a "Rapture movement" in South Korea. Some people, a small minority I'm sure, were convinced the end of the world was coming. I was there at the time and recall it getting some coverage on CNN Headline News. I don't know if that makes it worth including in this article, but certainly something could be said for the minor Christian cults that have sprung up. For more information search for the Korean Hyoo-go or Rapture Movement, and Lee Jang Rim, leader of the Korean doomsday cult Mission for the Coming Days (also known as the Tami Church). 74.99.167.47 04:29, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

[edit]
  • Merge — obvious overlap — Jack · talk · 13:25, Tuesday, 3 April 2007

Ewha Hakdang

[edit]

As having attended two Ewhas, I feel very embarrassed to see 'Ewha' spelled as 'Ehwa,' which I do admit is how one would reasonably translate 이화. Also, the official name of 이화학당 is "Ewha Hakdang." Looking forward to the corrections, thank you very much.

Christianity and Economic Success redux

[edit]

I have taken a shot at making the discussion of the possible role of Christianity in Korea's economic growth a little more complete. I did not add to the bibliography yet, pending other folks' comments. Also, I have to say I find the references on this page confusing--there are 50-some reference numbers, but only 40-some numbered references. Is there something miscoded here, or am I misunderstanding how these things are supposed to work? Please comment! Rikyu 18:58, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Success story of Christianity in Korea?

[edit]

This article reads like a pamphlet from Christian missionary! (Except for a non-informative Scandal section). Especially the part about social impact. Many countries in Asia have been able to get rid of the social evils in their countries without the help of Christianity. I think this article is completely biased. Leotolstoy 17:24, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So change it (with appropriate sourcing etc.). That's how the game works.Rikyu 17:59, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know about that. There is Communism in Asia, I've heard rumors about promiscuity in Japan being as bad as Europe, I've heard rumors about harsh punishment in Asia (getting caned for vandalism in Singapore, getting a hand removed for theft, etc.), I've heard rumors that Chinese parents don't want their daughters and Americans often adopt them. Besides, I don't think ANY country has gotten rid of its social evils completely. You notice that social evils are greater now that we have greater apathy toward any religion, a materialistic world-view, and widespread acceptance of evolution here in the West.--69.234.214.160 (talk) 19:57, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article is quite well written. Related to the economic success or political liberties, I guess there might be some controversies. However, I think it might be true that Christianity has played a positive role in enhancing the political freedom or boosting the economic developments. Someone mentioned Japan, Singapore.. etc. These countries have higher GDP per capita than S. Korea. But even in 1950 ~ 1960, these countries were not as poor as S. Korea. ) 19:54, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Leotolstoy, the article is POV. First of all it doesn't examines the fact that Christianity is undergoing a decline in Korea. In 1980s Christians constituted the 39% of the total population, while today they're roughly the 26%. In 1990 there were 10 million Protestants, today they're 8 million. --Xi Zhu (talk) 10:56, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So change it (with appropriate sourcing etc.). That's how the game works.Rikyu (talk) 15:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup effort/deleted section

[edit]

It has occurred to me that my note on this page was poorly placed and may escape many people's attention, so I just want to point out that I've done a large amount of editing and my comments about it can be found under "Christianity takes credit for Korea's economic success!!" above.

Also, I see that an anonymous user has deleted an entire section. I thought the section was fairly useful but not crucial, so I'm on the fence about reverting. I'd appreciate any comments (especially from the person who deleted it) on why it was deleted and whether it might be beneficial to put it back in. Thanks. -- edi (talk) 20:01, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My feeling is that deleting an entire section without comment is close to vandalism--like blanking a page. I would revert without further thought, but if you prefer to wait for justification from whoever deleted the section, that's fine with me, too. Rikyu (talk) 00:59, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've reworded a couple of recent additions to the page to clarify them and make them more encyclopedic, and I also added a paragraph that had been deleted because I don't see any reason to delete it. I'm posting this here so that my intent will be clear and it won't appear that I have any personal agenda in the reworking that I've done. If anyone disagrees with my changes, I'll be happy to discuss them. Thanks.
Also, big thanks to Esimal for adding a reference citation. That's something we don't have enough of in almost any article! -- edi (talk) 06:54, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article is good.

[edit]

I believe this is the Majority point of view held by both Catholics and Protestants in South Korea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.68.114 (talk) 15:32, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Korean shamanism

[edit]

I should point out that Korean shamanism wasn't monotheistic at all, and, not having an actual institution or organisational structure, did not have a singular creation myth, as it differed according to regions in Korea. There was no one all-powerful god, but some very powerful godS, and many less powerful gods. According to one Shamanistic creation myth, it was actually Maitreya, the Buddha of the Future, who separated and shaped earth and sky. If one wanted to argue it, one could say that Maitreya is the Christian God's equivalent, but no Buddhist is even going to try to make that claim. Also, academics who have actually studied the etymology of the word "하늘님" or "하느님" will tell you that the word was never used in pre-modern Korean history to mean "The Heavenly God" or any variant of such until Protestant missionaries arrived. The usage of 하늘님/하느님 in pre-modern Korean poems was strictly so that the author of the poem can use a three-syllable word for "sky," with the end product sometimes functionally resembling the vocative form of a word in Latin. The popular misconception was spawned by the misconception of the missionaries who tried to earnestly to find a way to tack Christian beliefs onto Korean popular culture. One hypothesis is that, in their haste, the missionaries were overly ambitious and saw what they wanted to see - a three-syllable word that merely meant sky, but was turned into an address for the Christian God. I'm not pulling this out of my rear...I'm just representing the work of Dr. Don Baker from the University of British Columbia. — Dark_chancellor 12:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

That's interesting, but it would be better if you cite the sources so that we can use your information in the article. Also, some of the characterizations you used, like "misconception," "overly ambitious," "earnestly," etc., express judgements that may be difficult to support from factual historical sources. Be careful about introducing personal attitude into the article! Otherwise, go for it. --Amble (talk) 10:46, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Care Needed

[edit]

Last week, today being 4/Aug/'09, awoman and her family were jailed. The lady had in her possession a Bible. She had earlier given a Bible to her friend! What we say here may have reprocussions. I havn't named the place, etc.

MacOfJesus (talk) 20:48, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, huh? The article is a general summary, I see absolutely nothing in it that could put anyone at any kind of risk, especially since almost all of the article is about South Korea. TallNapoleon (talk) 20:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was antisipating, not reflecting, or judging. To be prepared, rather than say something that would be difficult for others. Pax.

MacOfJesus (talk) 23:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So? Did the woman having a bible on her make a difference to her being jailed? Is this noteworthy to wikipedia rather than just being a news story? What does this have to do with Korea? Munci (talk) 09:24, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The woman was jailed because she had a Bible, this is the talk page not the article page, let us be sensitive as Christians should be, "good will to all men of good will".

MacOfJesus (talk) 21:48, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NOTFORUM, particularly this: "[T]alk pages exist for the purpose of discussing how to improve articles; they are not mere general discussion pages about the subject of the article..." Discussion here should focus on the article, and nothing else. I assure you that no one is about to start outing North Korean Christians here. So, let's keep this talk page on topic. TallNapoleon (talk) 22:21, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Focuses too much on Protestantism?

[edit]

I almost changed the title of this article to Protestantism in Korea instead of Christianity in Korea.

There are not much information available on Catholicism in this article. I suggest the article be separated into a Protestant one and a Catholic one. (1tephania (talk) 01:18, 28 January 2010 (UTC))[reply]


POV

[edit]

This article is strongly pro-christian. I would even believe that a Korean christian wrote this article. On the Religions of South Korea article, it states that Korean Christians are often vandalizing other religions. Also, many non-believers, be them atheists or those of other belief, are totally disgusted by the mass rallies, corruption, the 'missionaries' and so on. This is probably the main reason for the decline of christian population in Korea, yet the article doesn't even handle this?

If I have to, I can provide quite a lot of Korean news sites that indicates all the 'negative' aspects of Korean christianity, which the article clearly does not want to dispute.


Turtlesoviet (talk) 01:47, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For one thing, it highlights such things as women's rights and such as due to "Christian ideology", utterly failing to mention that Christian societies in past times were just as bad or worse than the Korean or Chinese societies of the time periods being compared. What about the 2000 long history of Christians submitting without fail to Kings and Emperors? Can this really be attributed to Christianity in general, or wouldn't it be more appropriate to merely attribute it to modern Christian ideology in Korea? If so, modern native religions in Korea aren't any more discriminatory and such than modern Christian ideology, so there'd be no improvement to draw. It also utterly fails to explain how women and children aren't in total submission in Japan and other mostly non-Christian societies. Christians have such a horrific minority complex; why do they always feel the need to take credit for everything?98.95.156.43 (talk) 07:48, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Syŏnggyo [Sŏnggyo paek] mundap

[edit]

Songgyo paek mundap [One Hundred Questions and Answers on the Sacred Teaching]

http://books.google.com/books?id=F3R4-YWl5PoC&pg=PA36&lpg=PA36&dq=songgyo+paek+mundap&source=bl&ots=vmy4aVtU7b&sig=1VEcXVM7K4cnoacOqQM4KKugAHU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=dAvbUJSIBMuM0QHr34CoAg&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=songgyo%20paek%20mundap&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=t88uAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false


Title Syŏnggyo [Sŏnggyo paek] mundap Author Jean Blanc Published 1884 Original from Harvard University Digitized Oct 16, 2008 Length 60 pages

Rajmaan (talk) 14:57, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

쥬년첨례광익

[edit]

http://books.google.com/books?id=988uAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Title 쥬년첨례광익 Volume 1 of Chunyŏn chʻŏmnye kwangik, Gustave Charles Maries Mutel Author Gustave Charles Maries Mutel Publisher 천주당, 1908 Original from Harvard University Digitized Oct 16, 2008

http://books.google.com/books?id=cdAuAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Title Chunyŏn chʻŏmnye kwangik, Volume 2 Chunyŏn chʻŏmnye kwangik, Gustave Charles Maries Mutel Author Gustave Charles Maries Mutel Publisher Chʻŏnjudang Original from Harvard University Digitized Oct 16, 2008

http://books.google.com/books?id=tNAuAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Title Chunyŏn chʻŏmnye kwangik, Volume 3 Chunyŏn chʻŏmnye kwangik, Gustave Charles Maries Mutel Author Gustave Charles Maries Mutel Publisher Chʻŏnjudang Original from Harvard University Digitized Oct 16, 2008

Rajmaan (talk) 13:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Horace Grant Underwood and Lillias Horton Underwood

[edit]

http://books.google.com/books?id=ZbRGAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Title The call of Korea: political--social--religious Author Horace Grant Underwood Edition 3 Publisher Fleming H. Revell co., 1908 Original from the University of California Digitized Nov 26, 2007 Length 204 pages Subjects History › Asia › China

History / Asia / China History / Asia / Korea Korea Missions Religion / Christian Ministry / Missions     http://books.google.com/books?id=QzEWAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false


Title The call of Korea: political, social, religious Author Horace Grant Underwood Publisher Fleming H. Revell, 1908 Original from Harvard University Digitized Feb 29, 2008 Length 204 pages Subjects History › Asia › China

History / Asia / China History / Asia / Korea Korea Missions Religion / Christian Ministry / Missions

http://books.google.com/books?id=yCB0Sr6WYr8C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Title Underwood of Korea: being an intimate record of the life and work of the Rev. H.G. Underwood, D.D., LL.D., for thiry one years a missionary of the Presbyterian board in Korea, Volume 45; Volume 510 Colonial period Korea Underwood of Korea: Being an Intimate Record of the Life and Work of the Rev. H.G. Underwood, D.D., LL.D., for Thiry One Years a Missionary of the Presbyterian Board in Korea, Lillias Horton Underwood Author Lillias Horton Underwood Publisher Fleming H. Revell company, 1918 Original from Harvard University Digitized Nov 2, 2006 Length 350 pages Subjects Missions     http://books.google.com/books?id=UpALAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Title Fifteen years among the top-knots: or, Life in Korea Author Lillias Horton Underwood Publisher American tract society, 1904 Length 271 pages Subjects Korea Missions

Rajmaan (talk) 14:24, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No numbers

[edit]

This article could use some numbers: How many Catholics, etc. are there in South Korea?Kdammers (talk) 05:41, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

See [2] for a recent very useful source. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:39, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Christianity in Korea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:34, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Christianity in Korea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:04, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

merge

[edit]

I merged the Roman Catholicism in South Korea article with this one. They seemed to overlap badly, and can be dealt with well if kept together. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 09:29, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Christianity in Korea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:29, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Christianity in Korea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:54, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Christianity in Korea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:48, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tags?

[edit]

The two tags at the beginning of the page were added in a month ago by the same IP user—no discussion here that I saw. Perhaps the claims were valid; not sure how these processes work, but usually tags like those come with some sort of discussion. So…to remove? Or solve? Or evaluate? 173.76.165.235 (talk) 19:49, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And to clarify: This is the edit I refer to, in which a POV tag and rewrite tag were added to the top of this page. 173.76.165.235 (talk) 19:51, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Twelve days later, no discussion (and none on the related topic in ~6 years). Removing per WP:WTRMT. 173.76.165.235 (talk) 19:22, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Added

[edit]

Should this source be added. http://book.aks.ac.kr/lib/down2.asp?idx=482 Manabimasu (talk) 20:00, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Christianity_in_Korea&oldid=1217255314"