Gary R., List:

I was simply responding to Helmut's statement that he did not understand my
previous post, which (among other things) sought to correct his
misinterpretation of Matthew 25:40.

Regards,

Jon

On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 5:16 PM Gary Richmond <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Jon,
>
> JAS: Nobody is 100% good *except *Jesus Christ, who is both God and
> human. That is why his death alone satisfies the debt that we all owe to
> God for our own sins.
>
> I thought that you were *not* going to express your personal religious
> views here. We panentheists, and Sufis, First Nations Peoples, Kabbalists,
> Zennists, Taoists, etc., etc., etc. do not  see it your way. The above is
> your belief, and has nothing to do with even Peirce's religious -- and
> definitely not his metaphysical -- views.
>
> Panentheists -- of whatever stripe -- see all men and women as their
> brothers and sisters; they see all of us as children of God (or Mind, or
> however one cares to characterize it). But you see only those who believe
> what you believe as being 'saved' and all the other trappings of a
> dogmatic, doctrinaire, credal Christianity.
>
> That your philosophical work seems to me to be directed to always
> supporting your religious viewpoint appears more and more to me to be,
> frankly, unscientific -- and in the extreme. Peirce on several occasions
> asked that others try to *disprove* his theories. You seem to be
> suggesting that researchers on Peirce-L should attempt to accept your
> theories apropos of God and religion because, what?, that Peirce also was a
> theist?
>
> So let's please attempt in the future to separate these matters
> of personal belief and religious metaphysics. Although I regret having to
> bring it up again, you have said that you cannot consider me your Christian
> brother because I don't adhere to what you see as the fundamental tenets of
> Christianity as expressed in, for example, the Nicene Creed and as you
> expressed it in the quotation at the top of this message.
>
> No doubt there are some Christians here who accept the tenets of the
> Nicene Creed.
>
> We believe in one God,
>     the Father, the Almighty,
>     maker of heaven and earth,
>     of all that is seen and unseen.
>
>
> We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
>     the only Son of God,
>     eternally begotten of the Father,
>     God from God, Light from Light,
>     true God from true God,
>     begotten, not made,
>     consubstantial to the father.
>     Through him all things were made.
>     For us and for our salvation
>         he came down from heaven:
>     by the power of the Holy Spirit
>         he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
>         and was made man.
>     For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
>         he suffered death and was buried.
>         On the third day he rose again
>             in accordance with the Scriptures;
>         he ascended into heaven
>             and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
>     He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
>         and his kingdom will have no end.
>
>
>
> We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
>     who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
>     With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
>     He has spoken through the Prophets.
>     We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
>     We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
>     We look for the resurrection of the dead,
>     and the life of the world to come. Amen.
>
> But many of us, even some of us who yet tenuously hold to *Cosmic*
> Christianity, do not. I think it is best that we all try harder here to
> have more metaphysical and less theological discussion (admittedly, I have
> got to do better in heeding my own advice).
>
> Best,
>
> Gary R
>
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 5:38 PM Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Helmut, List:
>>
>> A mother is necessary *for her child*, but she is still a contingent
>> being *overall*--it is obviously possible for her *not *to be. In fact,
>> a pregnant woman is sometimes used as a metaphor for panentheism. By
>> contrast, as Peirce states, *Ens necessarium* is uniquely "that which
>> would Really be in any possible state of things whatever."
>>
>> Dynamical objects change because they are affected by *their own*
>> dynamical objects, which determine them as signs. Dynamical objects are *not
>> *affected by the signs that they determine.
>>
>> Nobody is 100% good *except *Jesus Christ, who is both God and human.
>> That is why his death alone satisfies the debt that we all owe to God for
>> our own sins.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Jon
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 1:41 PM Helmut Raulien <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Jon, List,
>>>
>>> I´m afraid, I haven´t understood anything. A mother is necessary for her
>>> child, but affected by him/her. Dynamical objects change. Nobody is 100%
>>> good.
>>>
>>> Best regards, Helmut
>>> *Von:* "Jon Alan Schmidt" <[email protected]>
>>> Helmut, List:
>>>
>>> Again, panentheism *cannot *coherently conceive God as *Ens necessarium* 
>>> without
>>> qualification, because panentheism maintains that God is affected by the
>>> world and thus a *contingent *being in at least some respects, not a
>>> thoroughly *necessary *being.
>>>
>>> Peirce explicitly states that the dynamical object *of a particular
>>> sign* is unaffected *by that sign*. "For the sign does not affect the
>>> object but is affected by it" (CP 1.538, 1903). "In its relation to the
>>> Object, the Sign is *passive*; that is to say, its correspondence to
>>> the Object is brought about by an effect upon the Sign, the Object
>>> remaining unaffected" (EP 2:544n22, 1906). On the other hand, I agree that
>>> dynamical objects *within the universe* are also signs that are
>>> affected by *their *dynamical objects, with the understanding that all
>>> such *individual *signs/objects/interpretants are artifacts of analysis
>>> prescinded from the real and *continuous *process of semiosis.
>>>
>>> Christian theology *does not* maintain that going to heaven or hell is
>>> a matter of being greater or less than 50% good. On the contrary, anyone
>>> who is less than 100% good deserves hell, which is most accurately defined
>>> as an everlasting state of existence apart from God. However, as I already
>>> summarized the other day, God himself provided the remedy by becoming human
>>> (John 1:14) and then dying on the cross to satisfy the debt that we all owe
>>> to God for our own sins (Colossians 2:13-14); and the Holy Spirit applies
>>> it to us by graciously giving us the gift of faith in his promises--not
>>> just *belief*, but also *trust *in what he has done for us, rather than
>>> anything that we can do ourselves (Ephesians 2:8-9).
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
>>> Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
>>> www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt / twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 9:40 AM Helmut Raulien <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jon, List,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for the detailed outline! I so far understand, that classical
>>>> theism says, that God is only ens necessarium, and therefore unaffected,
>>>> while panentheism and nonclassical theism say, that God is not only creator
>>>> (ens necessarium), but has aspects too, that are affected. The Peircean
>>>> idea, that God is dynamical object of the universe, doesn´t say in my
>>>> opinion, that He is unaffected, because DOs can be affected in a semiosis,
>>>> I think. How else could things change? I remember (have looked it up)
>>>> Matthew 25.40: "Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of
>>>> these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me." (Jesus), though this
>>>> is a quite hellish chapter, I don´t like due to this binary judgement with
>>>> only two options to go, heaven or hell. A person who is 49 % good and 51%
>>>> bad goes to hell, and a person who is not very different, just 51% good,
>>>> goes to heaven. That is not fair.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards, Helmut
>>>>
>>>
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY is now at 
https://cspeirce.com  and, just as well, at 
https://www.cspeirce.com .  It'll take a while to repair / update all the links!
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON 
PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . 
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] 
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.

Reply via email to