I love listening to you. Keep it up. You and doctor Peterson are bringing a lot of interest back to the bible. I've been looking for something like you guys for so long.
One gets the impression your words were especially useful to a certain good doctor who was listening to your wise words. I often hear TH-cam personalities kind of putting Dr. Peterson at the top of some heirarchy, with the personalities he inspired below, like you a Pastor Paul. But I don't get that impression at all. Dr. Peterson reintroduced me to the language, but you, Jonathan, and Pastor Paul have lit the fire of Christendom in my heart in a way no purely intellectualized concept could. It is incredible watching the very Biblical journey you, Peterson, Paul V. and even Sargon (even if he doesn't know it) are all on. And you're taking a lot of us with. Kind of like those dudes in the story, who followed a certain Son of God around... Goes to show true disciples always show up when they're needed the most. Keep doin good work, man.
I’m barely hanging on but so drawn to this. My mom was a feminist mythologist influenced by Jung and she was trying to figure all this out but reading angry feminists as well. I think just before she died she had some major insights. I know she would have loved this, Jordan and even the Fr you’ve interview. Fascinating stuff. … I have had this burning question about God using His Word to bring Life into existence (from nothing). What materials then did he make everything from? And how might this fit into the metaphors and logos of unity and multiplicity you speak of. It seems to me that we are made of “God stuff” and this fits in perfectly with the “made in His image” truth of Genesis.
Just as not all Christians are backwards looking or bigoted, not all feminists are angry. I think our culture likes when we hold up caricatures of one another for the sake of endless bickering, despite the fact that we fundamentally agree on most things. What we're often angry at are the intentionally exaggerated or mischaracterized straw men purpose-built to drive conflict. Some feminists are angry, but some have done great things for our scoiety and have led to a more accurate understanding of our world. Some religious people have their heads buried in the sand, while others are genuinely concerned with understanding our world in far more subtle ways than empiricists/positivists give them credit for.
Thanks. The bible passage that came to mind was Paul describing Christ as the manifold or many sided wisdom of God as well as referring to the Christian life as the fellowship of the mystery. It's quite a journey we're on!
Jonathan Pageau I would be glad to help in transcribing a set a videos. Would be a great study for myself as well. Maybe even translate them to Spanish.
I'm having trouble understanding this. In my mind there is a clear distinction between experiencing a thing (e.g. the color blue) and naming it (thinking "blue"). Based on that distinction giving things a name doesn't contribute to creation, just adds qualifiers to what already is created. Where is the error in my reasoning?
The best way to understand this is to use your very example. In many traditional societies, there are three colors: red, black and white. That's it. All of what we consider in the visual realm exists in those three colors. In other societies, maybe groups that live in rainforests, there is no color "blue" at all, but there are 27 names for different shades of green. How many shades of green are there, when does green become blue, or when does yellow become orange? You see color is a field or potentiality, and to name a color is not just to give it a tag, but it is to focus on or attend to a particular, pull out a particular from an indefinite field of potentiality. So in the Bible, there is this chaos at the beginning, and God utters a "let there be". The "let" is important, as if the light is already there in potential, but only needs to be "let be", that is become a thing by being spoken, or named into existence.
I appreciate you taking your time to answer to people - I saw you do this which is why I was inspired to comment. I'm trying to map your descriptions onto my experience and I don't know at what level to do so. Fact is, my experience already appears definite to me. I don't experience "potential" out of which I "decide" to cut out pieces. As I stare into the screen, my larger visual field appears already structured by different patches of colors (and I have no doubt another human being would have a differently-cut visual field) even before I start naming things, even before I pay attention to any specific region of my visual field and, I would argue, even before I started paying *any* attention to my visual field and was fully concentrated on the writing. So it appears to me that if there is something reality-creating about "naming" thing, then this "naming" must be something pre-verbal and even pre-conscious. I'm just the recipient of the already-cut world, which means I can't really take credit for this reality-creating activity.
Yes, that is why the one who names the animal is "Adam", that is Man himself and not you personally. some of it is deep in your human nature, some of it is deep in our traditions, and once in a while we get to experience it directly. One of the ways I have experienced it is in moments where I meet someone I think I do not know, and their face appears a certain way, but then something in the conversation reminds me that I do actually know that person, then suddenly their face actually changes before my very eyes! That random face becomes the face of the person I remember, we could say their "name" appears. Maybe you have experienced this.
Thank you! So it appears to me then that logos is "the thing that gives structure to experience" and even low level, biologically determined perceptual processes such as edge detection can be seen as logos in action? An aside: I'm not sure you are familiar with integrated information theory, but it's quite interesting. It attempts to define bottom up, mathematically, based on a few axioms, a function mapping from physical systems to structures in qualia space (qualia being the quality of experience, such as the blueness of blue). In other words what systems give rise to what conscious experience. Thought you might be interested, there are a few good talks/lectures on youtube about it.
There is a principle that exists within everything. Some call it dharma, law, logos, or the Word. It is the attributes of God, what we call Love, that exists within everything. It is an all encompassing Love and the closer we live to this principle the closer to God we are. This principle is within each one of us and it is our true nature. The closer we live according to this principle the more in alignment we are with God as well as our true nature which are One and the same.
Logi as described here share characteristics with Qualia [from the theory Hard Problem of Consciousness]. Qualia's go-to example is the redness of a red apple. The redness does not exist outside of conscious experience, what can be said to exist outside of experience is a certain wavelength of light [of electromagnetic radiation]. Light that gives rise to redness when experienced by consciousness. It can be related to the well known riddle 'if a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to here it, does it make any sound?' ....the answer to the riddle is 'no'. If there is nobody there to here it then all we have is movement of the tree, the vibration of the air. The sound itself is qualia or perhaps logos, that is what is heard. I understand some [including some modern physicists] take this further and say nothing exists without consciousness ...although I struggle to grasp that intuitively :)] I like very much this idea of a human being as an aggregator of logi [qualia], as a creator of new and subtle logi. It gives us a particular place and creative role in a spiritual universe. That it makes of each of us an active agent within God's work of creation ..... that perhaps collectively all life, perhaps all things contribute. This has remained my favorite talk from Jonathan, the first time I listened to it I looked for the primary source from St-Maximos without success.
A good book to read on St-Maximos is the one by Andrew Louth: azbyka.ru/otechnik/assets/uploads/books/18404/Andrew%20Louth%20Maximus%20the%20Confessor%20Early%20Church%20Fathers.pdf For man as microcosm and the place where all of creation comes together, see from page 69: The division of Being. Also if you have the guts, here is a paper that deal with the Anthropic Theology of St-Maximos and relates it to the Anthropic notion of modern physics. www.jirrs.org/jirrs_nr_3/06-01-jirrs3-bahrim.pdf
In ancient attic Greek it is most certainly pronounced how it is written. It might be though that this is how the Byzantines and perhaps the modern Greeks pronounce it.
"Logoi" is pronounced as you suggest in ancient Greek, but almost exactly like Jonathan pronounces in modern Greek. Ancient Greek is not necessarily what fits best the orthodox speech, so I think he is correct.
It is "logoi" in both ancient and modern greek and it is pronounced like Jonathan pronounced it in both ancient and modern greek. The "oi" in any greek word is pronounced like "i" unless the "i" has a symbol on top of it ike the german umlaut. Same goes for "ai" which is pronouned "e". For example, the word "λόγοι" is pronounced "logi" but if it was written like this "λόγοϊ" it would be pronounced "logoi". The first English translators of ancient texts did not know this, probably because many ancient texts are written in capital letters, lower case is an invention of later times and that umlaut symbol was not existent in the capital case, so people woud have to just know the correct pronounciation by heart, and that caused some confusion to early translators.
Dear Jonathan. Please research more on the war between different logos. Logos of Apollo, Dionysius, and Cybella. As described in Noomahia by Aleksandr Dugin. Also the traces of Cybella logos in fairy tales as pointed out by Dugin. It would be nice to see your discussion with this Russian philosopher, professor at Moscow State University(MGU).
I keep trying my best to explain to people that Logic is God; that, specifically, it is the firstborn of all Creation, that everything that exists came into existence by and through Logic, and that nothing came into existence without Logic. Yet, very few people really understand what I'm saying. Logic is King; Truth cannot be defeated. Any and all actions taken against Truth are simply the creation of more Truth. To try to escape from Truth simply creates the Truth of the attempted escape from Truth. Resistance to the Logos is futile; it is the action of a feeble, human mind. The Father is Mind, the All-Seeing, All-Knowing Source from which the Logos emanated. The "only begotten Son" is Logic, the Logos, which came forth from the Mind that is the Father. The Holy Spirit is Love, which is the bond between the Knower and the Known, and it's the animating force of everything. It's difficult to "see" the things that I see, yet be alone in my sight. I set out to identify the parts of the Trinity, because I was frustrated by the lack of understanding in people, as they couldn't identify those three parts of God in everyday language, and I have succeeded by the grace of God and Revelation, but I'm virtually alone here in the Revealed. There is the internal, the external, and the movement of each. That is all that exists: the Knower, the Known, and the Love between the Two. So few understand me, and people try to make logical arguments against my claims frequently, as if Logic could somehow be defeated by Logic. What logical argument could one make to disprove the efficacy of Logic? It makes no sense. There is no way to oppose Logic without being illogical. The only way to oppose Truth is to be false. That is the Law, and the Law will stand for Eternity.
Andrew Boothe broooo I’ve recently been trying to understand the differences between the three. It’s a fun and challenging thing to think about. You’ll find those people who share those passions man. Make sure you keep living by truth. You have faith you have succeeded in this task of learning/identifying the Trinity. But keep at it brother, ya never know so keep making sure that everything you believe and everything you say is truth. Every thought to God. God bless
Thanks for the encouragement, @@sirspamerino8885. I'm someone who believes in the power of words, and it really bothers me that most of us don't know what these words mean. It does no good to throw a bunch of words around when people don't know the meanings of those words. What is this "God the Father"? What is the "only begotten Son"? What is the "Holy Spirit"? That's my primary contention with religion: emptiness. What is a word if not a vessel for carrying meaning from one individual to another? It is a means of encapsulating a certain form of energy or essence to transfer it to others. If someone comes up to me speaking a foreign language that I don't know and understand, then it's just a bunch of unintelligible sounds that mean nothing to me. If I say, "I love you," to another person, what I'm really trying to do is capture that feeling inside and put it into communicable language so that I can hopefully invoke that feeling of being loved within them. I just feel like there are a lot of bumper-sticker platitudes used in common religion: "Jesus is King." "Jesus died for your sins." "Christ is Salvation." What do these things mean? I want to know, and I want to understand, but very few Christians can help me with that. It took a lot of research and studying for me to be able to figure out the meanings, mostly using definitions and etymology. Etymology has become highly significant to me as a result. It's the study of the roots of words, but, more accurately, it's the study of their true meanings, before they became distorted over time. A great example of this distortion applies to the words "metaphysical" and "supernatural"; they don't actually mean what people think they mean. They mean "mind" or "things related to the mental plane," essentially. The brain/body is physical and natural, and visible, but the mind/heart is metaphysical and supernatural, and invisible; it's essentially the external versus the internal. Everything unfolds from the inside out. God isn't separate from the Universe as some people tend to believe, and simple Logic proves that: There can be nothing outside of everything; if there were something outside of everything, then it wouldn't be "everything". Logic is the key; it leads to the existence of God, specifically the Eternal and Self-Existent nature of God. Logic demands that Causation cannot have an external Causation; if you try to place Causation outside of itself, then you open up a door into infinite regress: "What was the Cause of the Cause of the Cause of the Cause of the Cause..." That will go on forever unless Eternity/Self-Existence is accepted as a foundation. I've seen the Core of Existence using Logic, and that Core is, "I am/It is." Everyone and everything that exists is connected to this Core of Logic. I have so much more that I could say, but most people don't like long comments, because they don't want to devote the time and attention to reading them unless they feel like it's in their self-interest, and it's difficult to show them that it is when they don't know it is. As Sam Harris said, "If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument would you invoke to prove they should value logic?"
@@LordSplittawig ... You also have to take into consideration that all words are basically incantations... And the more you put together, the amplitude raises. Now, the outcome of the incantation depends completely on the energy that is put into it (intentions of the creator of said words), and not the specific words themselves... Hollow words with no intentions or feelings attached, are just hollow and dead. After all... Anybody can teach a parrot to talk!!! . Same goes with receiving items or gifts...
@@LordSplittawig You noted the “emptiness” of religion. The emptiness is a lack of faith. See people have a misunderstanding of what faith means. In order to have faith, you must have knowledge. It’s an inseparable coupling. If you lack knowledge whatsoever of that in which you allegedly have faith, your faith is implicitly empty. In that case, you would lack faith … you don’t actually have any. I also recommend looking into The CTMU if you haven’t found it already (Much of what you say is aligned with the worldview). One of the tautological principles (ARC) is stated as “If there were anything outside of reality that contributes to it or affects it in anyway, then by definition it is real and therefore inside of reality”. (That’s called “proof by contradiction”.) This points to your understanding of logic or “The Logos”. How logic is Gods essence and you can’t ever escape it. Just like you can’t escape reality or else it wouldn’t be real. Anyways it was nice seeing your comment. You’re not alone my friend and I sense that your understanding is an exception.
The description of love in the last minutes (coming together as one while maintaining the multiplicity) immediately made me think of E Pluribus Unum. Is that the same concept?
Hi Jonathan, I have been following you with interest for some time now. You are a person with a lot of clarity and who knows what you are talking about when it comes to signs and symbols. To this comes my concern about the signifier of the linguistic sign Logo. I believe it was Heraclitus of Ephesus who is credited with having given meaning to the sign, he said, that he stood before the one truth, that he was the only one awake and the others were asleep, that he knew everything and the others nothing " listen not to me but to the Logos, it is wise to agree that all things are one." In John's Gospel, some say, the term Logos was changed - or changed to Word, making his first statement a substitution of the linguistic sign for another sign: In the beginning was the Logos, and the logos was with God, and the logos was God... and the logos became flesh" and replaced with the sign Word: saying, in the beginning was The Word, and the word was with God, and The Word was God... and The Word became flesh" my question: why did the linguistic sign change? By changing the linguistic sign, the pre-existing meaning of "The Word" does not affect the significant weight of Logo?
I’ve heard it said that the issue is one of translation; there is no word in English that sufficiently encapsulates logos, and to choose any of the potential translations (word, beginning, end, self, other, being, etc) is to reduce the original meaning to redundancy or confusion
I counter-assert, that the LOGOS = SYMBOL is the expression of PSYCHE. The PSYCHE = imaginary, an example is purpose, is made up FROM/ABOUT the real = PHYSIS but also FROM/ABOUT Logos via the observation process. And is being attributed TO the Physis, and TO the Logos respectively. ***!!! The symbol "logos" is merely re-symbolized in John1 !!!*** Physis is the PRIMARY Psyche-Source Logos is the manmade- or SECONDARY Psyche-Source. The most relevant LOGOI = secondary sources are: Law-texts, science-articles, holy scriptures. See also: "Semiotic Triangle" REFERENT = PHYSIS REFERENCE = PSYCHE *SYMBOL = LOGOS*
Isn't that Lo-go-i. It is Greek, after all. The essences of things, which Mr. Pageau is calling Logi, are the "universals" of modern philosophy. Universals are the concepts of qualities like up, down, soft, quick, etc. that have both material and spiritual meaning but different forms in different realms of Reality, and can be applied to many things: hot bread and heated arguments. The Logos is defined by most ancient authors as the universal order immanent in nature but transcending it.
I don't think logoi are descriptors of things. They aren't attributes. Though calling the Logos the "universal order" is much closer because that implies that it's what holds things together and orients them or directs them. In other words, it's the purpose all things point to
@@papercut7141 Thank you for your comment concerning my remarks. If I may clarify: a "universal" concept is formal concept of a universal attribution. That is, an attribute which is expressed by many different things. Tallness is a universal because many different kinds of things are tall. In fact, every quality expressed in or by any objector act has universal significance and is understood to be also attributable to whatever else may appear which also expresses it: high, low, up, down, wide, fast, gentle. crude, rough, sticky, hot, dark, weak etc. all apply to many things. All of these qualities also have spiritual significance in that they are in analogy to intellectual qualities: hard facts, rough patch of thinking, crude idea, high estimation, or something like the "arm" of God, etc. Universals connect material reality with spiritual (intellectual) reality by means of their innate analogical relations. The Logos is this universal language of concepts that unites these two orders of reality in Truth, howbeit by analogy. Because Truth is that by which all things are ordered, I think it is just to say that if the Logos orders and therefore holds all things together in intelligibility, we must follow the logical rule that if two things are like to a third thing in some respect, in that respect they are like to each other. If the Logos is the Truth about things and universals express this Truth, then universals are the language of the Logos. Because the universe was created by the Word of God, it is not a contradiction to our Faith to recognize this language of universals as the creation He has brought into being by His Word: the Logos. Christ himself is not the Logos per se, but the divine person who speaks the Logos into being which is altogether a reflection of who He is, our God, the Creator of the world.
He's simply repackaging Aristotle's teleology. Aristotle said what makes something "good" is if it fulfills it's function. A good table is one that effectively holds things on it's top. This concept of sin is nothing new and has literally been around for centuries.
Chi non crede in Dio si professa ateo e si fa rappresentare da un noto ATEO contemporaneo, nonché Presidente onorario dell' UAAR, che scrive "Affinché l'impresa scientifica abbia senso lo scienziato deve preventivamente affermare che la natura sia razionale... Nella Natura si manifesta dunque un ordine universale, che si chiama Lògos in greco, Ratio in latino e Ragione in italiano. Il che ci permette di dare un senso letterale al versetto 1,1 di Giovanni: "In principio era la Ragione, e la Ragione era presso Dio, e Dio era la Ragione". (Piergiorgio Odifreddi: "Un matematico ateo a confronto con il Papa teologo", 2011).
Suppose my wife had an expensive pair of Prada heels (alas, she does not). And suppose, through settling over time, a nail worked it's way loose in the drywall of my house. I didn't have a hammer so I decided to use my wife's expensive shoe to drive the nail. I would be abusing the logos of the shoe. Probably I would ruin the shoe, and also damage the drywall while driving the nail. This is why God is so specifically angered at homosexuality. Sex between a husband and a wife is one of the pinnacles of His design, weaving together ten thousand aspects of the two people and their relationship. Abusing that logos is a personal affront to God. It is Da Vinci, watching a vandal deface his paintings in the Sistine Chapel. It is the clay on the potter's wheel, raising its fist in defiance.
Ce que vous décrivez c'est l'holographie. ,'' le monde dans le plus petit grain de moutarde'' Je suis acupuncteur et je prends les pouls chinois pour me parler de l'ensemble du corps. je regarde aussi la langue et d'autres choses pour me confirmer l'image de la personne dans son équilibre des 5 éléments...Une petite partie complète qui reflète le grand ensemble Le principe suivant c'est celui de regrouper les Logos en famille. 4 familles pour les occidentaux... Le nouvelle intérêt en Chine pour le christianisme est que pour eux la traduction du mot Logos se dit TAO, 'je suis le chemin'. À partir de là Jésus a un sens pour eux et ils sont prêt défier le système et a mourir en son Nom parce qu’il est l'incarnation du Tao, le Tao fait chair..la continuité de la tradition. Le Tao, le Teh et le Ching qui sont 3 états du Tao. Je vous conseille la lecture du livre de Hierominonk Damascene : Christ the eternal Tao. Il explique tout ça et parle des missions Orthodoxes en Chine. Si vous le voulez, quand vous êtes en Montréal, je vous le 'prêtre' en échange d'un café :)
Je connais bien ce livre. En fait, j'ai fabriqué deux croix pectorales pour P.Damascene. Pour le café, il faut plutôt faire l'effort de venir me voir à Ste-marthe-sur-le-lac.
Merci, pour votre réponse. Darn, je viens de perdre ma chance de me faire payer un café :) Merci de la réponse, je viens de perdre ma chance de me faire payer un café :) Ce livre a changé ma manière de pratiquer l'acupuncture. En fait il a confirmé ce que je travaillais en radiesthésie. Quand j'ai du temps, depuis quelques années, je change les concepts de 5 éléments orientaux de la médecine chinoise en 4 éléments occidentaux sur un plan cartésien. J'y ai classé les vertus, les animaux, les nations, les aliments et plein d’autres choses en point sur des axes X et Y. Ça me permet de mieux comprendre les métaphores et les équivalences symboliques et diagnostiquer les situations de tout ordre ( hologramme) comme je le ferais d'un patient. C'est un peu difficile à expliquer, je classe les choses en 4 saisons, il y a les qualités printemps, ses aliments, ses animaux, ses nations et ceux-ci sont en opposition à ceux de l'automne. En les classant dans un plan cartésien, on comprend mieux la nature des choses et la famille qui les entoure. Ainsi le printemps est entre l'eau et l'air et est émotionnel, l'été entre l'air et le feu et est individualiste, l'automne entre le feu et la terre et est rationnel, et l'hiver entre la terre et l'eau et est communautaire. Chacune de ces familles a aussi un aspect positif et négatif représenté sur un axe Z. Ainsi socialement présentement nous sommes en période de printemps négatif ( émotions exagérées, communications toxiques, mensonges, irrationalité) avec des tendances vers un hiver négatif ou l'individu (été) est détruit vers un contrôle totalitaire par le groupe. La solution est la rationalité positive ( automne) ou le printemps positif l'humour (KEK, meme). Comme je dis, c'est un peu difficile a expliqué parce que ça fonctionne d'une manière différente de la pensée analytique ou on isole les choses une de l'autre. Cette manière de penser regroupe les choses et les compare à son milieu pour en comprendre sa nature. Je ne sais pas si c'est compréhensible, vous me le dirais. Vous me dires aussi si ça vous intéresse D'un autre côté n’avez vous jamais entendu parler des ondes de formes ? C'est un autre excellent exemple d'holographie et de mesure qualitative de la nature des choses. C'est la classification des formes pour en connaitre leur nature. J'imagine en faisant de l'iconographie comme vous le faite ça vous a probablement intéressé. J'ai beaucoup d'ouvrage sur ce sujet. J'ai peut-être plus de chance de gagner un café par cette approche :) Merci pour votre travail, je ne peux pas vous dire que j'écoute beaucoup par manque de temps, mais suis heureux que des personnes comme vous puissent nous apporter la lumière et nous sortir du discours irrationnel matérialiste dominant
I largely agree with what you say in how you describe the underlying structure of reality. but I disagree that Things *need* to be anything. The expectation of things needing to be a certain way. They can be what you say, and things may develop along the path you want if they do. But nothing *needs* to be a certain way. That's part the freedom we got when creation allowed us to forget who we are. We can always choose to go along a certain path, but the expectation was literally stripped away to allow a more diverse experience of creation.
♾️ Infinity is a closed loop, because the beginning is the end and the end is the Beginning. God is the first and the last. The beginning and the end. The Alpha and the Omega. God is the singularity responsible for the Big bang and according to the many laws of conservation, that singularity had to be equal to or greater than ALL mass, energy, and information/intelligence in the universe combined and since things are neither created or destroyed but rather transferred or transformed, this means God became the universe. God is omnipresent omniscient and omnipotent. God is everything everywhere. 5For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), 6yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live. Jesus is God's only begotten son and through him all things were made by God. Jesus will return after Jerusalem gets nuked by the abomination which causes desolation mentioned in Matthew 24. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy are those who have part of the first resurrection for the second death has no hold of them. They will reign with Christ for a thousand years. After the 1000 years the rest of the Dead will be brought back to life. Then comes the end. Jesus must reign until he has defeated all of his enemies. All Power, Dominion, and Authority then the last enemy that will be defeated is death itself. Then He will return the kingdom back to God. God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has He said, and will He not do? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good? God said, I will make a mortal more rare than fine gold,A man more than the golden wedge of Ophir.Therefore I will shake the heavens,And the earth will move out of her place. The Earth is Hell in the future (2 Peter 3). It gets hit by an asteroid (Revelation 9) and pushed toward the sun (Isaiah 13-13). In the future after death is defeated, an asteroid will strike the dark side of the Earth penetrating the planet deep and pushing it toward the Sun. The Beautiful and Eternal New Jerusalem will take the best of humanity and the glory of the nations to a new Earth where righteousness dwells. But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie. The cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad. Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? For we know that if our earthly [a]house, this tent, is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. Now He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who also has given us the Spirit as [c]a guarantee. The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.” www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRCjXAwt/
I disagree that sex becomes a lie when it’s unitive purpose is expressed separately from procreation. We allow the elderly to get married. We allow the infertile to get married. Why not allow gay couples to get married? Who says the sex only fulfills it’s logos when procreation is possible? Biological that seems not to be the case.
Kyle Tyson it more of an accidental thing, it a product of the fall. If one attribute of the essence of something is off in some way, yet still points to the Divine in all others then it okay.
In the Orthodox faith what Jonathan says is our faith and our practice based on Tradition. Some couples choose to become celibate, or even live separately in monasteries we learn in our study of the lives of the saints. Gay relationships, involving physical, sexual acts, are not in line with our faith. Life in the Orthodox Church helps us to become more human, by helping us become closer to God. Biology is part of it, but not the beginning, nor the end.
All scripture was first written in Hebrew....they are Hebrew, the Torah is Hebrew, the Tanakh is Hebrew. Scripture tells us the Lord spoke Hebrew Acts 26:14 and Paul when he spoke to his fellow Hebrews he spoke Hebrew tongue Acts 21:40 and 22:2. Their names are Hebrew, they came from Israel which is the land of the Hebrews. Their fathers spoke Hebrew, David, Abraham and even Noah spoke Hebrew.....why oh why would they ever write the Holy Word of God in a gentile language? They wouldn't.
LOGOS originated in Greek mythology & philosophy. It teaches that 'divine, eternal reason pervades the universe. It predates Christianity by many centuries! The 'Logos', the WORD of John 1:1 had NOTHING TO DO with the greek definition. John simply called Jesus the "Word" because he came to earth with the word of his Father "What I teach is not mine, but belongs to Him who sent me" ( John 8:26). 'church Fathers' REINTRODUCED the philosophic 'Logos' into 'christianity in the 2nd century! its a fact!
That's false. The term, as it is used in Christianity, actually has it's origin in the biblical wisdom literature as much as the Greek, philosophical tradition, being the concept of Divine Wisdom, through which God created all things, as well as in the concept of Memra', or the Word of God, which is highly similar to the Greek concept of Logos.
Lucifer mimics the primary creator. He pre-programmed the order so it becomes a man, the logos, God was in a humanoid. So, this will be repeated, this dimension is the place, but better. That's your anti-christ, your Messiah in the place of the Jewish Messiah. The creator beat all other creators in advance, but science constantly moves the order to a mimic. However long it takes, it happens. Even if it requires many perpetual carnations, even millennia. The struggle. When followers of the messiah of Israel die from here, they beat everyone instantly. Forever. The struggle is, preserve the followers of the true God of earth. Sometimes they go blind, some follow the false messiah, who is alien here. But they are necessary, must be stolen from the creator, the psychopathic beast.
It's actually painful to hear you trying to redefine Eros and the Feminine Principle as logi. Yes, Logos is patterns and facts and textbooks etc., but there is no Life in Logos without Eros. A friend said I should look you up, and I have, this being the first of your videos I've watched, so I will watch a few more, but here you seem to be missing the point. The word you were looking for is "coniunctio," which is the uniting of opposites. Here you're pretending to shave off part of one side of the opposites, and pretending that somehow it is the opposite, without addressing the other.
It is best to try to understand people on their own terms instead of trying to fit their thinking in your own categories. I read your comment and see nothing of what I either think or said in there. My definition of logos which is based on St-Maximos has to do with identity (analogous to light) and how identity is both the principle which makes something "one" and in a way the very process of gathering multiplicity into that "one". It is not so much about uniting opposites, more to do with communion and hierarchy. In the sense of sexual analogy, it could expressed as the manner in which the masculine seed, or the name, is the pattern which organizes feminine potentiality.
I see we have a very long way to go before we will understand one another. In the case of your final sentence, wouldn't it be fair to say that the DNA provided by the feminine side is just as organizing as the DNA provided by the masculine side? I know I have a Grand Daughter who looks just like my Brother at her age, but that DNA clearly came to her via my Daughter, and not her Father. That DNA was not "potential" when it joined with the DNA of her Father; it was a physical fact and it had a fundamentally organizing role. I recognize that speaking as you do in your last sentence helps perpetuate the idea that men should be in charge, and women cannot have a role without a man, which is what all Logos all the time leads to, but I am persuaded that all Logos is a dead end, and that the paragon of Perfection of Logos (Yahweh) is not a man but a monster. I'll reference ¶621 of Dr. Jung's book _Answer to Job_ for my last remark.
...Moving from archetypal structures grounded in phenomenological experience to biochemical categories based on data from the laboratory without the blink of an eye. ...a long way indeed.
@jonathan please do not let this guy represent Jungian thought for you. He is trying to start an argument with you where there is none and he seems to have some weird dogmatic view of jungian thought.
Another Roman Catholic distortion of the truth based on human theology but why should we surprised. Whenever one steps outside of the Hebraic understanding of the Scriptures, this is what happens. Just because Yahuwah GOD allowed Adam to name the creatures He created DOESN'T mean Adam was involved in creation of anything. It's a deliberate deceptive means of conning one into believing their beliefs and the Roman Catholic Church excels at this.
@@sealevelbear You obviously have no understanding of the English language. I WROTE that any time anyone steps outside of the Hebraic understanding of the Scriptures, you loose all understanding of the Scriptures and I don't care who you are or what nationality or religion you profess, the truth remains the same for ALL man everywhere.
I used to pronounce it "logoi" the way it was written, but then I head several scholars pronounce it "logi" so I switched. I don't know if it has to do with how modern Greek has changed.
I love listening to you. Keep it up. You and doctor Peterson are bringing a lot of interest back to the bible. I've been looking for something like you guys for so long.
Jonathan, I love you. The Holy Spirit is working in you, for the benefit of the world
7:40 when all things come together: Communion, an identity, the end, the beginning, one, nothing, becoming and being both at once.
correct. "communion" is what he was hinting at
One gets the impression your words were especially useful to a certain good doctor who was listening to your wise words.
I often hear TH-cam personalities kind of putting Dr. Peterson at the top of some heirarchy, with the personalities he inspired below, like you a Pastor Paul.
But I don't get that impression at all. Dr. Peterson reintroduced me to the language, but you, Jonathan, and Pastor Paul have lit the fire of Christendom in my heart in a way no purely intellectualized concept could.
It is incredible watching the very Biblical journey you, Peterson, Paul V. and even Sargon (even if he doesn't know it) are all on. And you're taking a lot of us with.
Kind of like those dudes in the story, who followed a certain Son of God around...
Goes to show true disciples always show up when they're needed the most.
Keep doin good work, man.
How the fuck have people not swarmed here from JP's stuff? This is a great man here.
😂 Spread the word, boys!
I was also expecting some more people from Peterson's side as well; which would also include me.
I’m barely hanging on but so drawn to this. My mom was a feminist mythologist influenced by Jung and she was trying to figure all this out but reading angry feminists as well. I think just before she died she had some major insights. I know she would have loved this, Jordan and even the Fr you’ve interview. Fascinating stuff. … I have had this burning question about God using His Word to bring Life into existence (from nothing). What materials then did he make everything from? And how might this fit into the metaphors and logos of unity and multiplicity you speak of. It seems to me that we are made of “God stuff” and this fits in perfectly with the “made in His image” truth of Genesis.
Just as not all Christians are backwards looking or bigoted, not all feminists are angry. I think our culture likes when we hold up caricatures of one another for the sake of endless bickering, despite the fact that we fundamentally agree on most things. What we're often angry at are the intentionally exaggerated or mischaracterized straw men purpose-built to drive conflict. Some feminists are angry, but some have done great things for our scoiety and have led to a more accurate understanding of our world. Some religious people have their heads buried in the sand, while others are genuinely concerned with understanding our world in far more subtle ways than empiricists/positivists give them credit for.
Carl jung disliked feminism
Word is literally logos.
2:17 Cameo appearance haha
loved this talk btw
All of this makes so much sense. I wish we could all live like this. But it's difficult.
Is there a difference between men and women when it comes to the relation and understanding of Logos?
No.
No
Amazing. This is the kinds of thing we need to incorporate in our daily lives. We have gotten way way way off course.
Thanks. The bible passage that came to mind was Paul describing Christ as the manifold or many sided wisdom of God as well as referring to the Christian life as the fellowship of the mystery.
It's quite a journey we're on!
truly a divine perspective on the Logos
I would love to be able to have a transcript of this.
One of my projects is to have a website where I can put transcripts up of all my talks at some point. Hopefully we will get there.
Would be awesome. Ancient Faith Radio has a program where you can sponsor a transcript. Perhaps something like that would be helpful.
Thank you. :)
@@neptuner175 it's deleted...
Jonathan Pageau I would be glad to help in transcribing a set a videos. Would be a great study for myself as well.
Maybe even translate them to Spanish.
It would be lovely to hear you deepen the subject.
@9:29 the frame of reference (inherently participatory) as enabling recognition of light & life everywhere already
What a beautiful video. Thank you so much Jonathan, I feel you're changing my life.
I'm having trouble understanding this. In my mind there is a clear distinction between experiencing a thing (e.g. the color blue) and naming it (thinking "blue"). Based on that distinction giving things a name doesn't contribute to creation, just adds qualifiers to what already is created. Where is the error in my reasoning?
The best way to understand this is to use your very example. In many traditional societies, there are three colors: red, black and white. That's it. All of what we consider in the visual realm exists in those three colors. In other societies, maybe groups that live in rainforests, there is no color "blue" at all, but there are 27 names for different shades of green. How many shades of green are there, when does green become blue, or when does yellow become orange? You see color is a field or potentiality, and to name a color is not just to give it a tag, but it is to focus on or attend to a particular, pull out a particular from an indefinite field of potentiality. So in the Bible, there is this chaos at the beginning, and God utters a "let there be". The "let" is important, as if the light is already there in potential, but only needs to be "let be", that is become a thing by being spoken, or named into existence.
I appreciate you taking your time to answer to people - I saw you do this which is why I was inspired to comment.
I'm trying to map your descriptions onto my experience and I don't know at what level to do so. Fact is, my experience already appears definite to me. I don't experience "potential" out of which I "decide" to cut out pieces. As I stare into the screen, my larger visual field appears already structured by different patches of colors (and I have no doubt another human being would have a differently-cut visual field) even before I start naming things, even before I pay attention to any specific region of my visual field and, I would argue, even before I started paying *any* attention to my visual field and was fully concentrated on the writing.
So it appears to me that if there is something reality-creating about "naming" thing, then this "naming" must be something pre-verbal and even pre-conscious. I'm just the recipient of the already-cut world, which means I can't really take credit for this reality-creating activity.
Yes, that is why the one who names the animal is "Adam", that is Man himself and not you personally. some of it is deep in your human nature, some of it is deep in our traditions, and once in a while we get to experience it directly. One of the ways I have experienced it is in moments where I meet someone I think I do not know, and their face appears a certain way, but then something in the conversation reminds me that I do actually know that person, then suddenly their face actually changes before my very eyes! That random face becomes the face of the person I remember, we could say their "name" appears. Maybe you have experienced this.
Thank you! So it appears to me then that logos is "the thing that gives structure to experience" and even low level, biologically determined perceptual processes such as edge detection can be seen as logos in action?
An aside: I'm not sure you are familiar with integrated information theory, but it's quite interesting. It attempts to define bottom up, mathematically, based on a few axioms, a function mapping from physical systems to structures in qualia space (qualia being the quality of experience, such as the blueness of blue). In other words what systems give rise to what conscious experience. Thought you might be interested, there are a few good talks/lectures on youtube about it.
@@JonathanPageau ok, have to read this a few times and getting that feeling wash over me when one learns something new...thank you-exciting stuff.
Completely brilliant Jonathan, thank you!
There is a principle that exists within everything. Some call it dharma, law, logos, or the Word. It is the attributes of God, what we call Love, that exists within everything. It is an all encompassing Love and the closer we live to this principle the closer to God we are. This principle is within each one of us and it is our true nature. The closer we live according to this principle the more in alignment we are with God as well as our true nature which are One and the same.
Good stuff Jonathan, nice delivery too !
I believe the word you were looking for is "Meld". Interesting presentation. I dis enjoy it.
Is that Jordan Petersen in the background?
Pretty sure it is there in the bottom right corner… yeah!
Logi as described here share characteristics with Qualia [from the theory Hard Problem of Consciousness]. Qualia's go-to example is the redness of a red apple. The redness does not exist outside of conscious experience, what can be said to exist outside of experience is a certain wavelength of light [of electromagnetic radiation]. Light that gives rise to redness when experienced by consciousness.
It can be related to the well known riddle 'if a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to here it, does it make any sound?' ....the answer to the riddle is 'no'. If there is nobody there to here it then all we have is movement of the tree, the vibration of the air. The sound itself is qualia or perhaps logos, that is what is heard. I understand some [including some modern physicists] take this further and say nothing exists without consciousness ...although I struggle to grasp that intuitively :)]
I like very much this idea of a human being as an aggregator of logi [qualia], as a creator of new and subtle logi. It gives us a particular place and creative role in a spiritual universe. That it makes of each of us an active agent within God's work of creation ..... that perhaps collectively all life, perhaps all things contribute.
This has remained my favorite talk from Jonathan, the first time I listened to it I looked for the primary source from St-Maximos without success.
A good book to read on St-Maximos is the one by Andrew Louth: azbyka.ru/otechnik/assets/uploads/books/18404/Andrew%20Louth%20Maximus%20the%20Confessor%20Early%20Church%20Fathers.pdf For man as microcosm and the place where all of creation comes together, see from page 69: The division of Being.
Also if you have the guts, here is a paper that deal with the Anthropic Theology of St-Maximos and relates it to the Anthropic notion of modern physics. www.jirrs.org/jirrs_nr_3/06-01-jirrs3-bahrim.pdf
Thanks, I'll take a look [I've a degree in Physics, it's a bit vague to me nowadays, but hopefully I'll be ok for 'Anthropic notion..' too :)] cheers
Isn't the plural "logoi"? It was just bugging me, but otherwise this whole talk was excellent!
Yes, but for some reason it is pronounced "lowggi"
Really? I had no idea. My ancient Greek pronunciation is usually limited to educated guesswork (I focus more on Latin generally).
In ancient attic Greek it is most certainly pronounced how it is written. It might be though that this is how the Byzantines and perhaps the modern Greeks pronounce it.
"Logoi" is pronounced as you suggest in ancient Greek, but almost exactly like Jonathan pronounces in modern Greek. Ancient Greek is not necessarily what fits best the orthodox speech, so I think he is correct.
It is "logoi" in both ancient and modern greek and it is pronounced like Jonathan pronounced it in both ancient and modern greek. The "oi" in any greek word is pronounced like "i" unless the "i" has a symbol on top of it ike the german umlaut. Same goes for "ai" which is pronouned "e". For example, the word "λόγοι" is pronounced "logi" but if it was written like this "λόγοϊ" it would be pronounced "logoi". The first English translators of ancient texts did not know this, probably because many ancient texts are written in capital letters, lower case is an invention of later times and that umlaut symbol was not existent in the capital case, so people woud have to just know the correct pronounciation by heart, and that caused some confusion to early translators.
This is the best explanation of the purpose of marriage!!!
Participating in the logos. Thank you.
Dear Jonathan. Please research more on the war between different logos. Logos of Apollo, Dionysius, and Cybella. As described in Noomahia by Aleksandr Dugin. Also the traces of Cybella logos in fairy tales as pointed out by Dugin. It would be nice to see your discussion with this Russian philosopher, professor at Moscow State University(MGU).
Elemental to the set of all intersecting sets.
Wonderfully expounded.
It's a personal journey. Travel your own path.
To follow the logos is to play the meta-game.
Christianity the prescription and embodiment of the Logos, through the God-man Jesus Christ.
Sure, but it's much more than that.
That word as 7:31 is “symbol” correct? To throw together
Bryan Gordy no :)
I love your videos....
I keep trying my best to explain to people that Logic is God; that, specifically, it is the firstborn of all Creation, that everything that exists came into existence by and through Logic, and that nothing came into existence without Logic. Yet, very few people really understand what I'm saying. Logic is King; Truth cannot be defeated. Any and all actions taken against Truth are simply the creation of more Truth. To try to escape from Truth simply creates the Truth of the attempted escape from Truth. Resistance to the Logos is futile; it is the action of a feeble, human mind.
The Father is Mind, the All-Seeing, All-Knowing Source from which the Logos emanated. The "only begotten Son" is Logic, the Logos, which came forth from the Mind that is the Father. The Holy Spirit is Love, which is the bond between the Knower and the Known, and it's the animating force of everything.
It's difficult to "see" the things that I see, yet be alone in my sight. I set out to identify the parts of the Trinity, because I was frustrated by the lack of understanding in people, as they couldn't identify those three parts of God in everyday language, and I have succeeded by the grace of God and Revelation, but I'm virtually alone here in the Revealed.
There is the internal, the external, and the movement of each. That is all that exists: the Knower, the Known, and the Love between the Two. So few understand me, and people try to make logical arguments against my claims frequently, as if Logic could somehow be defeated by Logic. What logical argument could one make to disprove the efficacy of Logic? It makes no sense. There is no way to oppose Logic without being illogical. The only way to oppose Truth is to be false. That is the Law, and the Law will stand for Eternity.
Andrew Boothe broooo I’ve recently been trying to understand the differences between the three. It’s a fun and challenging thing to think about. You’ll find those people who share those passions man. Make sure you keep living by truth. You have faith you have succeeded in this task of learning/identifying the Trinity. But keep at it brother, ya never know so keep making sure that everything you believe and everything you say is truth. Every thought to God. God bless
Thanks for the encouragement, @@sirspamerino8885. I'm someone who believes in the power of words, and it really bothers me that most of us don't know what these words mean. It does no good to throw a bunch of words around when people don't know the meanings of those words. What is this "God the Father"? What is the "only begotten Son"? What is the "Holy Spirit"? That's my primary contention with religion: emptiness.
What is a word if not a vessel for carrying meaning from one individual to another? It is a means of encapsulating a certain form of energy or essence to transfer it to others. If someone comes up to me speaking a foreign language that I don't know and understand, then it's just a bunch of unintelligible sounds that mean nothing to me.
If I say, "I love you," to another person, what I'm really trying to do is capture that feeling inside and put it into communicable language so that I can hopefully invoke that feeling of being loved within them.
I just feel like there are a lot of bumper-sticker platitudes used in common religion:
"Jesus is King."
"Jesus died for your sins."
"Christ is Salvation."
What do these things mean? I want to know, and I want to understand, but very few Christians can help me with that. It took a lot of research and studying for me to be able to figure out the meanings, mostly using definitions and etymology.
Etymology has become highly significant to me as a result. It's the study of the roots of words, but, more accurately, it's the study of their true meanings, before they became distorted over time. A great example of this distortion applies to the words "metaphysical" and "supernatural"; they don't actually mean what people think they mean. They mean "mind" or "things related to the mental plane," essentially. The brain/body is physical and natural, and visible, but the mind/heart is metaphysical and supernatural, and invisible; it's essentially the external versus the internal.
Everything unfolds from the inside out. God isn't separate from the Universe as some people tend to believe, and simple Logic proves that:
There can be nothing outside of everything; if there were something outside of everything, then it wouldn't be "everything".
Logic is the key; it leads to the existence of God, specifically the Eternal and Self-Existent nature of God. Logic demands that Causation cannot have an external Causation; if you try to place Causation outside of itself, then you open up a door into infinite regress: "What was the Cause of the Cause of the Cause of the Cause of the Cause..." That will go on forever unless Eternity/Self-Existence is accepted as a foundation.
I've seen the Core of Existence using Logic, and that Core is, "I am/It is." Everyone and everything that exists is connected to this Core of Logic. I have so much more that I could say, but most people don't like long comments, because they don't want to devote the time and attention to reading them unless they feel like it's in their self-interest, and it's difficult to show them that it is when they don't know it is.
As Sam Harris said, "If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument would you invoke to prove they should value logic?"
Your correct... 2+2 will NEVER equal six!!! The true fight is against indoctrination...
@@LordSplittawig ... You also have to take into consideration that all words are basically incantations... And the more you put together, the amplitude raises.
Now, the outcome of the incantation depends completely on the energy that is put into it (intentions of the creator of said words), and not the specific words themselves...
Hollow words with no intentions or feelings attached, are just hollow and dead.
After all... Anybody can teach a parrot to talk!!!
.
Same goes with receiving items or gifts...
@@LordSplittawig You noted the “emptiness” of religion. The emptiness is a lack of faith. See people have a misunderstanding of what faith means. In order to have faith, you must have knowledge. It’s an inseparable coupling. If you lack knowledge whatsoever of that in which you allegedly have faith, your faith is implicitly empty. In that case, you would lack faith … you don’t actually have any.
I also recommend looking into The CTMU if you haven’t found it already (Much of what you say is aligned with the worldview). One of the tautological principles (ARC) is stated as “If there were anything outside of reality that contributes to it or affects it in anyway, then by definition it is real and therefore inside of reality”. (That’s called “proof by contradiction”.) This points to your understanding of logic or “The Logos”. How logic is Gods essence and you can’t ever escape it. Just like you can’t escape reality or else it wouldn’t be real.
Anyways it was nice seeing your comment. You’re not alone my friend and I sense that your understanding is an exception.
if all goes well, our grandkids will learn about the “Canadian meaning makers of the early 21st century” in school
The description of love in the last minutes (coming together as one while maintaining the multiplicity) immediately made me think of E Pluribus Unum.
Is that the same concept?
Not to the point of eroding distinctions. Christianity is union without the loss of particularity.
Hi Jonathan, I have been following you with interest for some time now. You are a person with a lot of clarity and who knows what you are talking about when it comes to signs and symbols. To this comes my concern about the signifier of the linguistic sign Logo. I believe it was Heraclitus of Ephesus who is credited with having given meaning to the sign, he said, that he stood before the one truth, that he was the only one awake and the others were asleep, that he knew everything and the others nothing " listen not to me but to the Logos, it is wise to agree that all things are one." In John's Gospel, some say, the term Logos was changed - or changed to Word, making his first statement a substitution of the linguistic sign for another sign: In the beginning was the Logos, and the logos was with God, and the logos was God... and the logos became flesh" and replaced with the sign Word: saying, in the beginning was The Word, and the word was with God, and The Word was God... and The Word became flesh" my question: why did the linguistic sign change? By changing the linguistic sign, the pre-existing meaning of "The Word" does not affect the significant weight of Logo?
Not sure what you’re getting at here. Logos is Greek, Word is English.
I’ve heard it said that the issue is one of translation; there is no word in English that sufficiently encapsulates logos, and to choose any of the potential translations (word, beginning, end, self, other, being, etc) is to reduce the original meaning to redundancy or confusion
Is that jordan peterson in the right corner?
Yes
No
Maybe
You’re the dude from the Jordan Peterson video!
I counter-assert, that the LOGOS = SYMBOL is the expression of PSYCHE.
The PSYCHE = imaginary, an example is purpose, is made up FROM/ABOUT the real = PHYSIS but also FROM/ABOUT Logos via the observation process. And is being attributed TO the Physis, and TO the Logos respectively.
***!!! The symbol "logos" is merely re-symbolized in John1 !!!***
Physis is the PRIMARY Psyche-Source
Logos is the manmade- or SECONDARY Psyche-Source.
The most relevant LOGOI = secondary sources are: Law-texts, science-articles, holy scriptures.
See also: "Semiotic Triangle"
REFERENT = PHYSIS
REFERENCE = PSYCHE
*SYMBOL = LOGOS*
In my limited understanding of reality, there is matter and mind
Merci Jonathan ~
Im either too high to understand this, or not high enough to understand this.
"Phenomenological Categories".
7:36 koinonia?
Christian fellowship or communion, with God or, more commonly, with fellow Christians.
Isn't that Lo-go-i. It is Greek, after all. The essences of things, which Mr. Pageau is calling Logi, are the "universals" of modern philosophy. Universals are the concepts of qualities like up, down, soft, quick, etc. that have both material and spiritual meaning but different forms in different realms of Reality, and can be applied to many things: hot bread and heated arguments. The Logos is defined by most ancient authors as the universal order immanent in nature but transcending it.
I don't think logoi are descriptors of things. They aren't attributes. Though calling the Logos the "universal order" is much closer because that implies that it's what holds things together and orients them or directs them. In other words, it's the purpose all things point to
@@papercut7141 Thank you for your comment concerning my remarks. If I may clarify: a "universal" concept is formal concept of a universal attribution. That is, an attribute which is expressed by many different things. Tallness is a universal because many different kinds of things are tall. In fact, every quality expressed in or by any objector act has universal significance and is understood to be also attributable to whatever else may appear which also expresses it: high, low, up, down, wide, fast, gentle. crude, rough, sticky, hot, dark, weak etc. all apply to many things. All of these qualities also have spiritual significance in that they are in analogy to intellectual qualities: hard facts, rough patch of thinking, crude idea, high estimation, or something like the "arm" of God, etc. Universals connect material reality with spiritual (intellectual) reality by means of their innate analogical relations. The Logos is this universal language of concepts that unites these two orders of reality in Truth, howbeit by analogy. Because Truth is that by which all things are ordered, I think it is just to say that if the Logos orders and therefore holds all things together in intelligibility, we must follow the logical rule that if two things are like to a third thing in some respect, in that respect they are like to each other. If the Logos is the Truth about things and universals express this Truth, then universals are the language of the Logos. Because the universe was created by the Word of God, it is not a contradiction to our Faith to recognize this language of universals as the creation He has brought into being by His Word: the Logos. Christ himself is not the Logos per se, but the divine person who speaks the Logos into being which is altogether a reflection of who He is, our God, the Creator of the world.
one at the same time preserving the multiplicity
Is this the same idea as E Pluribus Unum?
I like how he described sin as a misuse of the world. When a person uses the things of the world in an improper manner, against their proper purpose.
He's simply repackaging Aristotle's teleology. Aristotle said what makes something "good" is if it fulfills it's function. A good table is one that effectively holds things on it's top. This concept of sin is nothing new and has literally been around for centuries.
Absolutely superb
Thanks Brother
Logos is divine order. Order is good law. Good is creating value. Law is systematic justice.
¿Yes?
Log horizon is real. Love Am. 😇
¿How big I am? 😶
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Brilliant.
Okay now I have to find that video on the metaphysics of Pepe the frog
That's crazy. God is a thought!
A wonderful explanation! Thank you!
Quite enjoyed the talk. Tell Jordan to get some sleep, he looks quite tired :)
Chi non crede in Dio si professa ateo e si fa rappresentare da un noto ATEO contemporaneo, nonché Presidente onorario dell' UAAR, che scrive "Affinché l'impresa scientifica abbia senso lo scienziato deve preventivamente affermare che la natura sia razionale... Nella Natura si manifesta dunque un ordine universale, che si chiama Lògos in greco, Ratio in latino e Ragione in italiano. Il che ci permette di dare un senso letterale al versetto 1,1 di Giovanni: "In principio era la Ragione, e la Ragione era presso Dio, e Dio era la Ragione". (Piergiorgio Odifreddi: "Un matematico ateo a confronto con il Papa teologo", 2011).
Wait a gosh darned second.
Is that Juden Peterstein in the corner?!
lmao
Suppose my wife had an expensive pair of Prada heels (alas, she does not). And suppose, through settling over time, a nail worked it's way loose in the drywall of my house. I didn't have a hammer so I decided to use my wife's expensive shoe to drive the nail. I would be abusing the logos of the shoe. Probably I would ruin the shoe, and also damage the drywall while driving the nail. This is why God is so specifically angered at homosexuality. Sex between a husband and a wife is one of the pinnacles of His design, weaving together ten thousand aspects of the two people and their relationship. Abusing that logos is a personal affront to God. It is Da Vinci, watching a vandal deface his paintings in the Sistine Chapel. It is the clay on the potter's wheel, raising its fist in defiance.
Ce que vous décrivez c'est l'holographie. ,'' le monde dans le plus petit grain de moutarde''
Je suis acupuncteur et je prends les pouls chinois pour me parler de l'ensemble du corps. je regarde aussi la langue et d'autres choses pour me confirmer l'image de la personne dans son équilibre des 5 éléments...Une petite partie complète qui reflète le grand ensemble
Le principe suivant c'est celui de regrouper les Logos en famille. 4 familles pour les occidentaux...
Le nouvelle intérêt en Chine pour le christianisme est que pour eux la traduction du mot Logos se dit TAO, 'je suis le chemin'. À partir de là Jésus a un sens pour eux et ils sont prêt défier le système et a mourir en son Nom parce qu’il est l'incarnation du Tao, le Tao fait chair..la continuité de la tradition. Le Tao, le Teh et le Ching qui sont 3 états du Tao.
Je vous conseille la lecture du livre de Hierominonk Damascene : Christ the eternal Tao. Il explique tout ça et parle des missions Orthodoxes en Chine. Si vous le voulez, quand vous êtes en Montréal, je vous le 'prêtre' en échange d'un café :)
Je connais bien ce livre. En fait, j'ai fabriqué deux croix pectorales pour P.Damascene. Pour le café, il faut plutôt faire l'effort de venir me voir à Ste-marthe-sur-le-lac.
Merci, pour votre réponse. Darn, je viens de perdre ma chance de me faire payer un café :)
Merci de la réponse, je viens de perdre ma chance de me faire payer un café :)
Ce livre a changé ma manière de pratiquer l'acupuncture. En fait il a confirmé ce que je travaillais en radiesthésie. Quand j'ai du temps, depuis quelques années, je change les concepts de 5 éléments orientaux de la médecine chinoise en 4 éléments occidentaux sur un plan cartésien.
J'y ai classé les vertus, les animaux, les nations, les aliments et plein d’autres choses en point sur des axes X et Y. Ça me permet de mieux comprendre les métaphores et les équivalences symboliques et diagnostiquer les situations de tout ordre ( hologramme) comme je le ferais d'un patient.
C'est un peu difficile à expliquer, je classe les choses en 4 saisons, il y a les qualités printemps, ses aliments, ses animaux, ses nations et ceux-ci sont en opposition à ceux de l'automne. En les classant dans un plan cartésien, on comprend mieux la nature des choses et la famille qui les entoure.
Ainsi le printemps est entre l'eau et l'air et est émotionnel, l'été entre l'air et le feu et est individualiste, l'automne entre le feu et la terre et est rationnel, et l'hiver entre la terre et l'eau et est communautaire. Chacune de ces familles a aussi un aspect positif et négatif représenté sur un axe Z. Ainsi socialement présentement nous sommes en période de printemps négatif ( émotions exagérées, communications toxiques, mensonges, irrationalité) avec des tendances vers un hiver négatif ou l'individu (été) est détruit vers un contrôle totalitaire par le groupe. La solution est la rationalité positive ( automne) ou le printemps positif l'humour (KEK, meme). Comme je dis, c'est un peu difficile a expliqué parce que ça fonctionne d'une manière différente de la pensée analytique ou on isole les choses une de l'autre. Cette manière de penser regroupe les choses et les compare à son milieu pour en comprendre sa nature. Je ne sais pas si c'est compréhensible, vous me le dirais. Vous me dires aussi si ça vous intéresse
D'un autre côté n’avez vous jamais entendu parler des ondes de formes ? C'est un autre excellent exemple d'holographie et de mesure qualitative de la nature des choses. C'est la classification des formes pour en connaitre leur nature. J'imagine en faisant de l'iconographie comme vous le faite ça vous a probablement intéressé. J'ai beaucoup d'ouvrage sur ce sujet. J'ai peut-être plus de chance de gagner un café par cette approche :)
Merci pour votre travail, je ne peux pas vous dire que j'écoute beaucoup par manque de temps, mais suis heureux que des personnes comme vous puissent nous apporter la lumière et nous sortir du discours irrationnel matérialiste dominant
@@JonathanPageau and you speak French too! Why aren't there men like you in Ireland
I'm the center. but it wouldn't matter you'd just think this was nothing.
I largely agree with what you say in how you describe the underlying structure of reality. but I disagree that Things *need* to be anything. The expectation of things needing to be a certain way. They can be what you say, and things may develop along the path you want if they do. But nothing *needs* to be a certain way. That's part the freedom we got when creation allowed us to forget who we are. We can always choose to go along a certain path, but the expectation was literally stripped away to allow a more diverse experience of creation.
Gestalt. The word you were looking for is gestalt.
It feels like we tried to use birth control to jenga out the logi of procreation, then the whole thing collapsed.
The evil creator, the villain. He punishes art and wisdom, he rewards cruelty because it reminds him of his own nature.
♾️ Infinity is a closed loop, because the beginning is the end and the end is the Beginning. God is the first and the last. The beginning and the end. The Alpha and the Omega. God is the singularity responsible for the Big bang and according to the many laws of conservation, that singularity had to be equal to or greater than ALL mass, energy, and information/intelligence in the universe combined and since things are neither created or destroyed but rather transferred or transformed, this means God became the universe. God is omnipresent omniscient and omnipotent.
God is everything everywhere.
5For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), 6yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live.
Jesus is God's only begotten son and through him all things were made by God.
Jesus will return after Jerusalem gets nuked by the abomination which causes desolation mentioned in Matthew 24.
This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy are those who have part of the first resurrection for the second death has no hold of them. They will reign with Christ for a thousand years.
After the 1000 years the rest of the Dead will be brought back to life. Then comes the end.
Jesus must reign until he has defeated all of his enemies. All Power, Dominion, and Authority then the last enemy that will be defeated is death itself. Then He will return the kingdom back to God.
God is not a man, that He should lie,
Nor a son of man, that He should repent.
Has He said, and will He not do?
Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?
God said, I will make a mortal more rare than fine gold,A man more than the golden wedge of Ophir.Therefore I will shake the heavens,And the earth will move out of her place.
The Earth is Hell in the future (2 Peter 3). It gets hit by an asteroid (Revelation 9) and pushed toward the sun (Isaiah 13-13).
In the future after death is defeated, an asteroid will strike the dark side of the Earth penetrating the planet deep and pushing it toward the Sun.
The Beautiful and Eternal New Jerusalem will take the best of humanity and the glory of the nations to a new Earth where righteousness dwells.
But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.
The cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.
For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.
Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
For we know that if our earthly [a]house, this tent, is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
Now He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who also has given us the Spirit as [c]a guarantee.
The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”
www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRCjXAwt/
I disagree that sex becomes a lie when it’s unitive purpose is expressed separately from procreation. We allow the elderly to get married. We allow the infertile to get married. Why not allow gay couples to get married? Who says the sex only fulfills it’s logos when procreation is possible? Biological that seems not to be the case.
Kyle Tyson it more of an accidental thing, it a product of the fall. If one attribute of the essence of something is off in some way, yet still points to the Divine in all others then it okay.
In the Orthodox faith what Jonathan says is our faith and our practice based on Tradition. Some couples choose to become celibate, or even live separately in monasteries we learn in our study of the lives of the saints.
Gay relationships, involving physical, sexual acts, are not in line with our faith.
Life in the Orthodox Church helps us to become more human, by helping us become closer to God. Biology is part of it, but not the beginning, nor the end.
Yeah let’s just conveniently forget that it explicitly condemns homosexuality in the bible.
All scripture was first written in Hebrew....they are Hebrew, the Torah is Hebrew, the Tanakh is Hebrew. Scripture tells us the Lord spoke Hebrew Acts 26:14 and Paul when he spoke to his fellow Hebrews he spoke Hebrew tongue Acts 21:40 and 22:2. Their names are Hebrew, they came from Israel which is the land of the Hebrews. Their fathers spoke Hebrew, David, Abraham and even Noah spoke Hebrew.....why oh why would they ever write the Holy Word of God in a gentile language? They wouldn't.
LOGOS originated in Greek mythology & philosophy. It teaches that 'divine, eternal reason pervades the universe. It predates Christianity by many centuries! The 'Logos', the WORD of John 1:1 had NOTHING TO DO with the greek definition. John simply called Jesus the "Word" because he came to earth with the word of his Father "What I teach is not mine, but belongs to Him who sent me" ( John 8:26). 'church Fathers' REINTRODUCED the philosophic 'Logos' into 'christianity in the 2nd century! its a fact!
The Logos is Greek and actually anti Hebraic in thought as well as in deed or application.
That's false. The term, as it is used in Christianity, actually has it's origin in the biblical wisdom literature as much as the Greek, philosophical tradition, being the concept of Divine Wisdom, through which God created all things, as well as in the concept of Memra', or the Word of God, which is highly similar to the Greek concept of Logos.
Think about Paul writing to the Greek Ephesians, or the opening of the gospel of John. What word would you rather?
Lucifer mimics the primary creator. He pre-programmed the order so it becomes a man, the logos, God was in a humanoid. So, this will be repeated, this dimension is the place, but better. That's your anti-christ, your Messiah in the place of the Jewish Messiah. The creator beat all other creators in advance, but science constantly moves the order to a mimic. However long it takes, it happens. Even if it requires many perpetual carnations, even millennia. The struggle. When followers of the messiah of Israel die from here, they beat everyone instantly. Forever. The struggle is, preserve the followers of the true God of earth. Sometimes they go blind, some follow the false messiah, who is alien here. But they are necessary, must be stolen from the creator, the psychopathic beast.
Russian Easter Orchestra!!!
The talk opens with a lie!
God created the universe with the logos. Logic. Duh.
Blah. What is he talking about?
It's actually painful to hear you trying to redefine Eros and the Feminine Principle as logi. Yes, Logos is patterns and facts and textbooks etc., but there is no Life in Logos without Eros. A friend said I should look you up, and I have, this being the first of your videos I've watched, so I will watch a few more, but here you seem to be missing the point. The word you were looking for is "coniunctio," which is the uniting of opposites. Here you're pretending to shave off part of one side of the opposites, and pretending that somehow it is the opposite, without addressing the other.
It is best to try to understand people on their own terms instead of trying to fit their thinking in your own categories. I read your comment and see nothing of what I either think or said in there. My definition of logos which is based on St-Maximos has to do with identity (analogous to light) and how identity is both the principle which makes something "one" and in a way the very process of gathering multiplicity into that "one". It is not so much about uniting opposites, more to do with communion and hierarchy. In the sense of sexual analogy, it could expressed as the manner in which the masculine seed, or the name, is the pattern which organizes feminine potentiality.
I see we have a very long way to go before we will understand one another. In the case of your final sentence, wouldn't it be fair to say that the DNA provided by the feminine side is just as organizing as the DNA provided by the masculine side? I know I have a Grand Daughter who looks just like my Brother at her age, but that DNA clearly came to her via my Daughter, and not her Father. That DNA was not "potential" when it joined with the DNA of her Father; it was a physical fact and it had a fundamentally organizing role.
I recognize that speaking as you do in your last sentence helps perpetuate the idea that men should be in charge, and women cannot have a role without a man, which is what all Logos all the time leads to, but I am persuaded that all Logos is a dead end, and that the paragon of Perfection of Logos (Yahweh) is not a man but a monster. I'll reference ¶621 of Dr. Jung's book _Answer to Job_ for my last remark.
...Moving from archetypal structures grounded in phenomenological experience to biochemical categories based on data from the laboratory without the blink of an eye. ...a long way indeed.
I don't see why that seems so long to you. They are both structures that govern our lives, and both are empirically demonstrable.
@jonathan
please do not let this guy represent Jungian thought for you. He is trying to start an argument with you where there is none and he seems to have some weird dogmatic view of jungian thought.
Dirt
He lost me when he referred to the bible.
Another Roman Catholic distortion of the truth based on human theology but why should we surprised.
Whenever one steps outside of the Hebraic understanding of the Scriptures, this is what happens.
Just because Yahuwah GOD allowed Adam to name the creatures He created DOESN'T mean Adam was involved in creation of anything. It's a deliberate deceptive means of conning one into believing their beliefs and the Roman Catholic Church excels at this.
Jonathan is not Roman Catholic, he is Eastern Orthodox, and besides that you are wrong.
@@sealevelbear You obviously have no understanding of the English language. I WROTE that any time anyone steps outside of the Hebraic understanding of the Scriptures, you loose all understanding of the Scriptures and I don't care who you are or what nationality or religion you profess, the truth remains the same for ALL man everywhere.
Christopher Laing OK Boomer
@@sealevelbear Just what I thought, following the teachings and traditions of men instead of the word of GOD. So you get what's coming to you
@@sealevelbear Exactly, but he's not Hebrew and he certainly doesn't understand Hebraic monotheism in which the whole of the Scriptures were written.
"Logi" is not the plural of "logos"...just use English words if you don't actually know Greek
I used to pronounce it "logoi" the way it was written, but then I head several scholars pronounce it "logi" so I switched. I don't know if it has to do with how modern Greek has changed.
Trash Talk. This guy is full of BS