Edwina, List: "Personal" is not synonymous with "individual." According to Peirce, God being personal means that "we must have a direct perception of that person and indeed be in personal communication with him" (CP 6.162, EP 1:332, 1892). Conveniently, it turns out that he also prepared the entry for "personal" in the *Century Dictionary* ( http://triggs.djvu.org/century-dictionary.com/djvu2jpgframes.php?volno=05&page=859 ).
*personal*, *a*. and *n*. *I.* *a.* *1.* Pertaining to a person or self-conscious being as distinct or distinguished from a thing; having personality, or the character of a person; self-conscious; belonging to men and women, or to superhuman intelligences, and not to animals or things: as, a *personal *God. The entire universe, conceived as "Mind," is not "personal" in this sense. Moreover, as John 1:3 states, "All things were made by him [the Logos]; and without him was not any thing made that was made." Hence, the Logos as creator of the universe is something *other *than the universe, not the universe itself somehow being self-generating and self-organizing. The latter would be "pantheism, which denies or ignores the personality of God." Regards, Jon S. On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 2:19 PM Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca> wrote: > JAS, list > > I wouldn't say that 'Mind' is 'impersonal'. Following Peirce's > hylomorphism, my understanding is that 'Mind' emerges as organized Matter. > As such, it is both 'individualized' [personal] and, of course, communal > habits [impersonal]. > > Edwina > > On Fri 10/09/21 3:11 PM , Jon Alan Schmidt jonalanschm...@gmail.com sent: > > John, Edwina, List: > > JFS: In the beginning (en arche) was the Logos, and the Logos was with > God, and God was the Logos. That is the only definition of God in the New > Testament. > > > On the contrary, it is by no means the only definition of God in the New > Testament, or even in the writings of John the Evangelist. For example, > "God is a Spirit" (John 4:24); "God is light" (1 John 1:5); "God is love" > (1 John 4:8&16). > > ET: I see ‘Logos’ as Mind. > > > The problem with interpreting "Logos" as impersonal "Mind" in the first > chapter of John's Gospel is what the text goes on to say in verse 14--"And > the Word [Logos] was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his > glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and > truth." This obviously entails a conception of the Logos as personal such > that God became a human being. > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian > www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 11:51 AM Edwina Taborsky < > edwina.tabor...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Yes, I agree, they are compatible. >> >> Other terms- which are used ( by Peirce and others ) - such as ‘soul’ >> would have to be explained . >> I see ‘Logos’ as Mind. >> The development of metaphysical explanations for experience and reality, >> by all peoples, which are filled with both emotional and rational >> narratives is a fascinating aspect of humanity. >> >> Edwina >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On Sep 10, 2021, at 12:39 PM, sowa @bestweb.net < s...@bestweb.net> >> wrote: >> >> Edwina, Jon AS, List, >> >> Those two comments are completely compatible. >> ------------------------------ >> ET: Prayer is, in my view, a psychological form of behaviour - among ALL >> human populations. >> >> JAS: Peirce...:states plainly that prayer is a universal human instinct >> by which the soul expresses consciousness of its relation to God. >> >> But the word 'plainly' is not appropriate. That sentence is a paraphrase >> of a much more nuanced comment, which he would admit is fallible. Please >> note that Peirce's favorite gospel is the one by John the Evangelist: In >> the beginning (en arche) was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and God >> was the Logos. That is the only definition of God in the New Testament. >> And it is consistent with what Heraclitus wrote. >> >> In fact, Philo Judaeus of Alexandria wrote many volumes (in Greek) to >> show that the Greek philosophers were influenced by the Hebrew prophets. I >> don't believe that it's an accident that all of them lived along the Silk >> Road that carried soldiers, merchants, and gurus\ to and from China, India, >> Persia, Babylon, Greece, Israel, and Egypt. >> >> Also note that Alexandria was in Egypt, and Philo used the Septuagint >> (Greek translation of the Hebrew). It's very likely that John was >> influenced by Philo as well as the Greek philosophers.. >> >> John >> >>
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the body. More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
