{"title":"Divine and Human Love: Religious Foundations of Mo Zi's Universal Love and Christian Agape","authors":"Song Liu, Chengjia Li","doi":"10.1111/jore.70015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>This study examines the theological foundations and ethical implications of Mo Zi's concept of “universal love” (<i>jian ai</i>) and Christian “agape,” exploring their religious dimensions, ontological bases, and contemporary significance. While existing scholarship has often emphasized the ethical similarities between these two traditions, this research provides a more nuanced theological analysis that reveals their distinctive religious foundations. Through systematic examination of Mohist writings and New Testament sources, particularly the Gospels and Johannine literature, this study demonstrates that these love concepts emerge from fundamentally different religious worldviews: Mo Zi's universal love flows from Heaven's impartial concern for human welfare and seeks sociopolitical harmony, while Christian agape emerges from God's self-giving nature and aims at divine-human communion. Despite these theological differences, both traditions establish love as a religious imperative with radical implications for social ethics, transcending conventional boundaries of moral concern. This comparative theological analysis offers resources for contemporary interreligious dialogue and cross-cultural ethical engagement, suggesting how these complementary religious visions might address shared global challenges while respecting their distinctive spiritual foundations.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":45722,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS","volume":"54 1","pages":"26-57"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jore.70015","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study examines the theological foundations and ethical implications of Mo Zi's concept of “universal love” (jian ai) and Christian “agape,” exploring their religious dimensions, ontological bases, and contemporary significance. While existing scholarship has often emphasized the ethical similarities between these two traditions, this research provides a more nuanced theological analysis that reveals their distinctive religious foundations. Through systematic examination of Mohist writings and New Testament sources, particularly the Gospels and Johannine literature, this study demonstrates that these love concepts emerge from fundamentally different religious worldviews: Mo Zi's universal love flows from Heaven's impartial concern for human welfare and seeks sociopolitical harmony, while Christian agape emerges from God's self-giving nature and aims at divine-human communion. Despite these theological differences, both traditions establish love as a religious imperative with radical implications for social ethics, transcending conventional boundaries of moral concern. This comparative theological analysis offers resources for contemporary interreligious dialogue and cross-cultural ethical engagement, suggesting how these complementary religious visions might address shared global challenges while respecting their distinctive spiritual foundations.
期刊介绍:
Founded in 1973, the Journal of Religious Ethics is committed to publishing the very best scholarship in religious ethics, to fostering new work in neglected areas, and to stimulating exchange on significant issues. Emphasizing comparative religious ethics, foundational conceptual and methodological issues in religious ethics, and historical studies of influential figures and texts, each issue contains independent essays, commissioned articles, and a book review essay, as well as a Letters, Notes, and Comments section. Published primarily for scholars working in ethics, religious studies, history of religions, and theology, the journal is also of interest to scholars working in related fields such as philosophy, history, social and political theory, and literary studies.