Abrir menu principal
Ambox rewrite.svg
Esta página precisa ser reciclada de acordo com o livro de estilo.
Sinta-se livre para editá-la para que esta possa atingir um nível de qualidade superior.
Editor: considere colocar o mês e o ano da marcação. Isso pode ser feito automaticamente, substituindo esta predefinição por {{subst:rec}}

Predefinição:God Demiurge (the Latinized form of Greek dēmiourgos, δημιουργός, literally "public or skilled worker", from dēmios "belonging to the people, public" + ergon "work"[1], and hence a "maker", "artisan" or "craftsman") in philosophical and religious language is a term for a creator deity, responsible for the creation of the physical universe.

In the sense of a divine creative principle as expressed in ergon or en-erg-y,[2] the word was first introduced by Plato in Timaeus, 41a (ca. 360 BC). It subsequently appears in a number of different religious and philosophical systems of Late Antiquity besides Platonic realism, most notably in Neoplatonism. In Neoplatonism Plotinus identified the demiurge as nous (divine mind), the first emanation of "the One" (see monad). Neoplatonists personified the demiurge as Zeus, the high god of the Greeks.[3]

The term also appears in Gnosticism in which the material universe is seen as evil or at least created by a lesser and or inferior creator deity. In Gnosticism, the Demiurge is a being that never should have come into existence, the result of Sophia emanating without her male counterpart.

The Gnostics attributed to the Demiurge much of the actions and laws that in the Tanach or Old Testament are attributed to the Hebrew God Yahweh (see the Sethians and Ophites). Alternative Gnostic names for the Demiurge, include Yaldabaoth, "Samael", "Saklas", and "Kosmokrator", and several other variants.[carece de fontes?] He is known as Ptahil in Mandaeanism. The figures of the "Angel of YHWH" and the "Angel of Death" may have contributed to the Gnostic view of the Demiurge.[carece de fontes?]

Platonism and NeoplatonismEditar


Plato has the speaker Timaeus refer to the demiurge frequently in the Socratic dialogue Timaeus circa 360 BCE. The title character refers to the demiurge as the entity who “fashioned and shaped” the material world. Timaeus describes the Demiurge as unreservedly benevolent and hence desirous of a world as good as possible. The world remains allegedly imperfect, however, because the demiurge had to work on pre-existing chaotic, indeterminate matter.

Plato's Timaeus is a fleshing out of Hesiod's cosmology, from Hesiod's work Theogony reconcilling Hesiod to Homer,[4][5][6] in a dialectical discourse between Timaeus and the other guests at a gathering, in the dialog of Timaeus (see also Plato's Symposium). The concept of artist or creator and even the Platonist conflict between the poet as cultural historian and philosopher (see Plato's The Republic) has a link in Plato's expression of the demiurge in his works.

For Neoplatonists like Plotinus, however, the demiurge represents a second cause (see Dyad) which is a critical component of the ontological construct of human consciousness as contained within Substance theory. The first and highest aspect of God is the One, the source or the Monad (Plato describes this concept as the Good above the demiurge). The Monad emanated the Nous (consciousness) from its "indeterminate" vitality due to the monad being so abundant that it overflowed back onto itself causing self reflection.[7] This self reflection of the indeterminate vitality Plotinus referred to as the demiurge or creator, the principle of organization in reflection to the nonsentient force or dunamis, which is the one or the Monad. The dyad is energy emanated by the force that is then by the motion or force organized into the material world. Plotinus also elucidates the equation of matter with nothing or non-being in his Enneads[8] which is to express the concept of idealism or that nothing exists outside of the "mind". This Platonic idealism is in connection with the nous or contemplative faculty within man which orders the force (dunamis) and energy (energeia) it perceives into conscious reality.[9] In this he claimed to reveal Plato's true meaning, a doctrine he learned from Platonic tradition that did not appear outside the academy or in Plato's text. This tradition of creator God as nous (the manifestation of consciousness), can be validated in the works of pre-Plotinus philosophers such as Numenius. As well as a connection between Hebrew cosmology and the Hellenic Platoistic one (see also Philo).[10]

The Demiurge of Neoplatonism is the Nous (mind of God), and is one of the three ordering principles:

  • arche (Gr. "beginning") - the source of all things,
  • logos (Gr. "word") - the underlying order that is hidden beneath appearances,
  • harmonia (Gr. "harmony") - numerical ratios in mathematics.

Before Numenius of Apamea and Plotinus' Enneads, no Platonic works ontologically clarified the Demiurge from the allegory in Plato's Timaeus. The idea of Demiurge was, however, addressed before Plotinus in the works of Christian writer Justin Martyr who built his understanding of the demiurge on the works of Numenius.[11] Later Neoplatonist Iamblichus changed the role of the one which by proxy then changed the role of the demiurge as second case or dyad, this is one of the reasons that Iamblichus and his teacher Porphryr were in conflict with one another.



The figure of the Demiurge also emerges in the theoretic of Iamblichus, a Neoplatonist, in which it acts to conjoin the transcendent, incommunicable “One” or Source that resides at the summit of the system with the demiurge or material realm via the process of henosis (see Theurgy, Iamblichus and henosis). Iamblichus describes the One, a monad whose first principle or emanation is intellect (nous), and then among "the many" that follow it a second, super-existent "One" that is the producer of intellect or soul ("psyche").

The first and superior "One" is further separated into spheres of the intelligible and the intellective; the latter sphere is the domain of thought, while the former comprises the objects of thought. Thus, a triad is formed of the intelligible nous, the intellective nous, and the psyche in order to reconcile further the various Hellenistic philosophical schools of Aristotle's actus and potentia of the unmoved mover and Plato's demiurge.

Then within this intellectual triad Iamblichus assigns the third rank to the Demiurge and identifies it with the perfected or Divine nous, the intellectual triad being promoted to a hebdomad.

As in the theoretic of Plotinus, nous produces nature by the mediation of the intellect, so here the intelligible gods are followed by a triad of psychic gods.


A lion-faced deity found on a Gnostic gem in Bernard de Montfaucon’s L’antiquité expliquée et représentée en figures may be a depiction of the Demiurge.

Gnosticism also presents a distinction between the highest, unknowable God and the demiurgic “creator” of the material. In contrast to Plato, several systems of Gnostic thought present the demiurge as antagonistic to the will of the Supreme Being: his act of creation occurs in unconscious semblance of the divine model, and thus is fundamentally flawed, or else is formed with the malevolent intention of entrapping aspects of the divine in materiality. Thus, in such systems, the demiurge acts as a solution to the problem of evil. In the Apocryphon of John circa 200 AD, the demiurge has the name “Yaldabaoth,” and proclaims himself as God:

"Now the archon (ruler) who is weak has three names. The first name is Yaltabaoth, the second is Saklas (“fool”), and the third is Samael. And he is impious in his arrogance which is in him. For he said, ‘I am God and there is no other God beside me,’ for he is ignorant of his strength, the place from which he had come."[12]


Gnostic myth recounts that Sophia (Greek, literally meaning "wisdom"), the Demiurge’s mother and a partial aspect of the divine Pleroma or “Fullness,” desired to create something apart from the divine totality, and without the receipt of divine assent. In this abortive act of separate creation, she gave birth to the monstrous Demiurge and, being ashamed of her deed, she wrapped him in a cloud and created a throne for him within it. The Demiurge, isolated, did not behold his mother, nor anyone else, and thus concluded that only he himself existed, being ignorant of the superior levels of reality that were his birth-place.

The Gnostic myths describing these events are full of intricate nuances portraying the declination of aspects of the divine into human form; this process occurs through the agency of the Demiurge who, having stolen a portion of power from his mother, sets about a work of creation in unconscious imitation of the superior Pleromatic realm. Thus Sophia’s power becomes enclosed within the material forms of humanity, themselves entrapped within the material universe: the goal of Gnostic movements was typically the awakening of this spark, which permitted a return by the subject to the superior, non-material realities which were its primal source. (See Sethian Gnosticism.)

Under the name of Nebro (rebel), Yaldabaoth is called an angel in the apocryphal Gospel of Judas. He is first mentioned in "The Cosmos, Chaos, and the Underworld" as one of the twelve angels to come "into being [to] rule over chaos and the [underworld]". He comes from heaven, his "face flashed with fire and whose appearance was defiled with blood". Nebro creates six angels in addition to the angel Saklas to be his assistants. These six in turn create another twelve angels “with each one receiving a portion in the heavens.”


Samael” literally means “Blind God” or “God of the Blind” in Aramaic (Syriac sæmʕa-ʔel). This being is considered not only blind, or ignorant of its own origins, but may in addition be evil; its name is also found in Judaica as the Angel of Death and in Christian demonology. This leads to a further comparison with Satan.


Another alternative title for the Demiurge, “Saklas,” is Aramaic for “fool” (Syriac sækla “the foolish one”).


Some Gnostic teachers (notably Marcion of Sinope) seem to have directly identified the evil Demiurge with Yahweh, the God of the Old Testament, in opposition and contrast to the God of the New Testament. "YHWH" is not used as a name of the demiurge in extant Gnostic texts; instead, he appears as a subordinate offspring of the chief Archon:

"And the chief archon seduced her and he begot in her two sons; the first and the second (are) Eloim and Yave. Eloim has a bear-face and Yave has a cat-face. The one is righteous but the other is unrighteous. (Eloim is righteous but Yave is unrighteous.) Yave he set over the fire and the wind, and Eloim he set over the water and the earth."[13]

Yaldabaoth is unlikely to be derived "YHWH Sabaoth" as Yaldabaoth has an "L" at the end of "ya", suggesting the name of an angel is the origin of the term as the names of most angels of Jewish origin end with the syllable "el".[carece de fontes?] On the other hand, some angels were called by some YHWH because they represented God's power and authority.[carece de fontes?] This was especially true of the supreme angel that represented God, who was sometimes called the "lesser YHWH", in the Rabbinic tradition called Metatron. A Jewish sect of first century B.C., called the Maghariyyah, held that angels organized the world and ordained the Law.[carece de fontes?] Such views may have been part of the origin of Gnostic Christian belief in the Demiurge and his archons.[carece de fontes?]


Still others equated the being with Satan. Catharism apparently inherited their idea of Satan as the creator of the evil world directly or indirectly from Gnosticism.

"The god of this world" is mentioned by Paul in 2 Corinthians 4:4; John states that "the whole world lies in the grip of the Wicked One" (1 John 5:19). While the Gnostics saw this as a reference to the Demiurge (and, by association, to Satan), this vilification of the Creator of the material world was inimical to both orthodox Christianity and orthodox Judaism. Rather than presenting Satan as the creator and ruler of the world as we know it, Irenaeus, an early Christian opponent of Gnosticism, held that Satan's role was only to lead humanity astray:[14]

Earthly rule, therefore, has been appointed by God for the benefit of nations, and not by the devil, who is never at rest at all, nay, who does not love to see even nations conducting themselves after a quiet manner. [...] As, then, "the powers that be are ordained of God," it is clear that the devil lied when he said, "These are delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will, I give them." [...] Just as if any one, being an apostate, and seizing in a hostile manner another man's territory, should harass the inhabitants of it, in order that he might claim for himself the glory of a king among those ignorant of his apostasy and robbery; so likewise also the devil [...] becoming envious of man, was rendered an apostate from the divine law: for envy is a thing foreign to God.

Neoplatonism and GnosticismEditar

Gnosticism attributed falsehood, fallen or evil, to the concept of a Creator (see Zeus and Prometheus), though sometimes the creator is from a fallen, ignorant or lesser rather than evil perspective (in some Gnosticism traditions) such as that of Valentinius. The Neoplatonic philosopher Plotinus addressed within his works what he saw as un-Hellenic and blasphemous to the demiurge or creator of Plato.

Neoplatonic CriticismEditar

Gnosticism's conception of the Demiurge was criticised by the Neoplatonist philosopher Plotinus. Plotinus is noted as the founder of Neoplatonism (along with his teacher Ammonius Saccas),[15] His criticism is contained in the ninth tractate of the second of the Enneads. Therein, Plotinus criticizes his opponents for their appropriation of ideas from Plato:

From Plato come their punishments, their rivers of the underworld and the changing from body to body; as for the plurality they assert in the Intellectual Realm—the Authentic Existent, the Intellectual-Principle, the Second Creator and the Soul—all this is taken over from the Timaeus. (Ennead 2.9.vi; emphasis added from A. H. Armstrong's introduction to Ennead 2.9)

Of note here is the remark concerning the second hypostasis or Creator and third hypostasis or World Soul within Plotnius. Plotinus criticizes his opponents for “all the novelties through which they seek to establish a philosophy of their own” which, he declares, “have been picked up outside of the truth”; they attempt to conceal rather than admit their indebtedness to ancient philosophy, which they have corrupted by their extraneous and misguided embellishments. Thus their understanding of the Demiurge is similarly flawed in comparison to Plato’s original intentions.

Whereas Plato's demiurge is good wishing good on his creation, gnosticism contends that the demiurge is not only the originator of evil but is evil as well. Hence the title of Plotinus' refutation "Enneads" The Second Ennead, Ninth Tractate - Against Those That Affirm the Creator of the Kosmos and the Kosmos Itself to be Evil: [Generally Quoted as "Against the Gnostics"]. Plotinus marks his arguments with the disconnect or great barrier that is created between the nous or mind's noumenon (see Heraclitus) and the material world (phenomenon) by believing the material world is evil.

The majority view tends to understand Plotinus’ opponents as being a Gnostic sect—certainly, (specifically Sethian) several such groups were present in Alexandria and elsewhere about the Mediterranean during Plotinus’ lifetime, and several of his criticisms bear specific similarity to Gnostic doctrine (Plotinus pointing to the gnostic doctrine of Sophia and her emission of the Demiurge is most notable among these similarities).

However, Christos Evangeliou has contended that Plotinus’ opponents might be better described as simply “Christian Gnostics”, arguing that several of Plotinus’ criticisms are as applicable to orthodox Christian doctrine as well. Also, considering the evidence from the time, Evangeliou felt the definition of the term “Gnostics” was unclear. Thus, though the former understanding certainly enjoys the greatest popularity, the identification of Plotinus’ opponents as Gnostic is not without some contention. Of note here is that while Plotinus' student Porphyry names Christianity specifically in Porphyry's own works, and Plotinus is to have been a known associate of the Christian Origen, none of Plotinus' works mention Christ or Christianity. Whereas Plotinus specifically addresses his target in the Enneads as the gnostics.

A. H. Armstrong identified the “Gnostics” that Plotinus was attacking as Jewish and Pagan in his introduction to the tract in his translation of the Enneads. Armstrong alluding to Gnosticism being a Hellenic philosophical heresy of sorts, which later engaged Christianity and Neoplatonism.

John D. Turner professor of religious studies at the University of Nebraska and famed translator and editor of the Nag Hammadi library stated that the text Plotinus and his students read was Sethian gnosticism which predates Christianity. It appears that Plotinus attempted to clarify how the philosophers of the academy had not arrived at the same erroneous conclusions (such as Dystheism or misotheism for the creator God as an answer to the problem of evil) as the targets of his criticism.

Christian heresiesEditar


According to the heresy of Cerinthus (who shows Ebionite influence), the ancient Hebrew term Elohim, the “uni-plural name,” a name of God throughout Genesis 1, can be interpreted as indicating that a hierarchy of ancient spirits (angels or gods) were co-creators with a Supreme Being, and were partially responsible for creation within the context of a “master plan” exemplified theologically by the Greek word Logos.[carece de fontes?] Psalm 82.1 describes a plurality of gods (ʔelōhim), which an older version in the Septuagint calls the “assembly of the gods”; however, it does not indicate that these gods were co-actors in creation.

Also, an abstract similarity can be found between the Logos (as applied to Jesus in the Gospel according to St John) and Plato’s Demiurge, as in John 1:1, which reads: “in the beginning was the Word (Logos), and the Word was with God and the Word was God”. Predefinição:OrHowever, typical Christian theology identifies Jesus as the second person in the holy and undivided Trinity, thus rejecting the notion that the world was created by an ignorant or even malevolent demiurge in co-action with a separate, higher and unknowable god.

Non-Western ViewsEditar


A figure which closely appears to resemble the Platonic Demiurge in Hinduism inasmuch as the Demiurge is the creator, is Brahma, a member of the Hindu Trinity (Trimurti), who figures as the creator god of the universe in all of Hindu mythology. The Demiurge Brahma is a mortal with a lifespan of over 300 trillion years in comparison to the eternal, transcendent, immanent, and ineffable Brahman. Ishvara is Brahman as a personal God and supreme controller of the cosmos.

In the Matsya Purana of Hindu mythology, the actual act of creating the current material universe is performed by Manu after its last version is destroyed in pralaya while he is rescued by Vishnu. Manu then sings/chants the universe into existence and creates the various gods along the way.

Pirahã CosmologyEditar

Among the Pirahã of Amazonas, Brazil, the demiurge Igagai recreated the world after its destruction in a cataclysm that came about when the moon was destroyed. In the cataclysm, all the animals died and all light disappeared from the world, and the higher levels of the cosmos almost fell on top of the earth. Igagai restored the structure of the cosmos, and created the animals that the Pirahã know today.[16]

Chinese ReligionEditar

Pangu can be interpreted as another creator deity. In the beginning there was nothing in the universe except a formless chaos. However this chaos began to coalesce into a cosmic egg for eighteen thousand years. Within it, the perfectly opposed principles of yin and yang became balanced and Pangu emerged (or woke up) from the egg. Pangu is usually depicted as a primitive, hairy giant with horns on his head (like the Greek Pan) and clad in furs. Pangu set about the task of creating the world: he separated Yin from Yang with a swing of his giant axe, creating the Earth (murky Yin) and the Sky (clear Yang). To keep them separated, Pangu stood between them and pushed up the Sky. This task took eighteen thousand years, with each day the sky grew ten feet higher, the Earth ten feet wider, and Pangu ten feet taller. In some versions of the story, Pangu is aided in this task by the four most prominent beasts, namely the Turtle, the Qilin, the Phoenix, and the Dragon.

After the eighteen thousand years had elapsed, Pangu was laid to rest. His breath became the wind; his voice the thunder; left eye the sun and right eye the moon; his body became the mountains and extremes of the world; his blood formed rivers; his muscles the fertile lands; his facial hair the stars and milky way; his fur the bushes and forests; his bones the valuable minerals; his bone marrows sacred diamonds; his sweat fell as rain; and the fleas on his fur carried by the wind became human beings all over the world. The distance from Earth and Sky at the end of the 18,000 years would have been 65,700,000 feet, or over 12,443 miles. The first writer to record the myth of Pangu was Xu Zheng (徐整) during the Three Kingdoms (三國) period.

References in popular cultureEditar

Se(c)ções de curiosidades são desencorajadas pelas políticas da Wikipédia.
Ajude a melhorar este artigo, integrando ao corpo do texto os itens relevantes e removendo os supérfluos ou impróprios.
  • In the novel Deus Irae (by Philip K. Dick and Roger Zelazny) there are implicit references to the architect of the Third World War, Carleton Leufteufel, as a demiurge, with his death resultant in temporary reversion of the desolate landscape of post-apocalyptic America. In Dick's Valis, there is a more explicit acknowledgement of gnostic theological concepts, such as the demiurge and Sophia.
  • In Jack Womack's novel Elvissey, an alternate history Elvis Presley is abducted by the Machiavellian DryCo so that he can become a messiah figure for a 21st Century religion that views the original popular entertainer as an avatar of the divine. Unfortunately for DryCo and the alternate Elvis, Valentinian gnosticism is the dominant theological framework in its Southern United States, not evangelical Christianity. Resultantly, this Elvis regards DryCo's intended role as a messianic impersonator for him as equating him with the flawed demiurge creator of the material world.
  • In the 1996 LucasArts game Afterlife, the player is referred to as the Demiurge. The goal of the game is to build and manage both a Heaven and a Hell to provide rewards and punishments for the inhabitants of the local planet.
  • In the animated series Æon Flux, the Demiurge is a god-like entity that Aeon Flux and the Monican resistance want to release into space in order to free the planet from its influence while Trevor Goodchild hopes to use the Demiurge to bring "peace" to the world in his own image. All the while, the Demiurge is using supernatural delusion to pit the two sides against each other.
  • Michael Demiurgos is a principal character in the DC/Vertigo comic book series Lucifer. In this depiction, Michael was created by Yahweh with the demiurgic power to enable the physical creation of the universe. Michael was eventually taken outside of creation by Lucifer, where he released his demiurgic power, allowing Lucifer to create a second universe. Later, Michael's daughter Elaine Belloc became the demiurge.
  • Demiurg (Демиург in Russian) is one of the primary characters of "Overburdened with Evil" (Отягощенные злом, 1988), a novel by Arkady and Boris Strugatsky. The origin of the name is referred to a Gnostic belief system, in which Demiurge is an entity that produces matter which is inherently overburdened with evil.
  • Demiurge is a central concept in the role-playing game Nine Worlds. Players portray Archons, mortals with special powers whose actions as a group represent the will of the Demiurge.
  • In the role-playing game Kult, the Demiurge is an evil being who imprisoned humanity in a world of illusions in order to keep them ignorant of their true nature and power, so that he might rule over them. At the time where the game takes place, the Demiurge has vanished and as a result the illusion-prison is crumbling.
  • Marvel Comics has an entity known as the Demiurge that was responsible for creating the Magic on Earth. Mating with Gaea during a demon crisis, Demiurge fathered Atum, who in turn destroyed or defeated many evil primordial gods such as Set and Chthon.
  • At the conclusion of Gary Gygax's final Gord the Rogue novel Dance of Demons, the protagonist's mentor Gellor is given the role of demiurge.
  • In the DC Comics Hawkman Special from August 2008, an entity that identified itself as the Demiurge abducted Hawkman from the planet Rann in the midst of the Rann-Thanagar Holy War. The being explained that it had a connection to Hawkman's future and revealed that the myriad past lives and convoluted origin of Hawkman may be a deception perpetrated by an unknown source. He claims to have inspired Plato's writing somehow, inspiring the knowledge of himself into him.
  • In the song "Original Sinsuality" from the album "The Beekeeper," Tori Amos references Yaldabaoth, Saklas, Samael and Sophia.


  1. Online Etymology Dictionary [1]
  2. Neoplatonism and Gnosticism By Richard T. Wallis, Jay Bregman, International Society for Neoplatonic Studies Published by SUNY Press, 1992 ISBN 0791413373 "Plotinus is also willing to say that the Nous is unlimited (seeIII,8,8, 46) but not in the same way as the One. The One is infinite because of his indeterminate nature: and for this reason only dynamis, never energeia (which implies determination, limit and form), can apply to him. The Nous, however, is determinate, energeia and thus can not be infinite in its very nature. Nonetheless, Nous is in one respect unlimited like the One: in that Nous is the productive source of potentially innumerable logoi".pg 183[2]
  3. In Fourth Tractate 'Problems of the Soul' The Demiurge is identified as Zeus.10."When under the name of Zeus we are considering the Demiurge we must leave out all notions of stage and progress, and recognize one unchanging and timeless life."
  4. Python: A Study of Delphic Myth and Its Origin By Joseph Eddy Fontenrose pg 226 http://books.google.com/books?id=h56ansk4SyQC&pg=PA226&dq=theogony+timaeus&lr=&sig=GZCR7p87-IJEGh8JmQlbHLx7J_s http://books.google.com/books?id=h56ansk4SyQC&pg=PA226&dq=theogony+timaeus&lr=&sig=GZCR7p87-IJEGh8JmQlbHLx7J_s
  5. Chorology: On Beginning in Plato's Timaeus By John Sallis pg 86 ISBN 0253213088 http://books.google.com/books?id=gS_9aQ5mYKgC&pg=PA86&dq=theogony+timaeus&sig=pq-zk6XaQB5zvRp-Ek202rHFeTo
  6. The mythology of ancient Greece and Italy By Thomas Keightley Whittaker pg 44 Oxford University http://books.google.com/books?id=lWAEAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA42&lpg=PA42&dq=theogony+timaeus&source=web&ots=Ky1QUcicnt&sig=h-hUAq6p24pQmBXRsfSwV71asgI
  7. Neoplatonism and Gnosticism By Richard T. Wallis, Jay Bregman, International Society for Neoplatonic Studies[3]
  8. Plotinus "Matter is therefore a non-existent" Ennead 2, Tractate 4 Section 16
  9. Schopenhauer wrote of this Neoplatonist philosopher: "With Plotinus there even appears, probably for the first time in Western philosophy, idealism that had long been current in the East even at that time, for it taught (Enneads, iii, lib. vii, c.10) that the soul has made the world by stepping from eternity into time, with the explanation: 'For there is for this universe no other place than the soul or mind' (neque est alter hujus universi locus quam anima), indeed the ideality of time is expressed in the words: 'We should not accept time outside the soul or mind' (oportet autem nequaquam extra animam tempus accipere)." (Parerga and Paralipomena, Volume I, "Fragments for the History of Philosophy," § 7)Similarly, professor Ludwig Noiré wrote: "For the first time in Western philosophy we find idealism proper in Plotinus (Enneads, iii, 7, 10), where he says, "The only space or place of the world is the soul," and "Time must not be assumed to exist outside the soul." [5] It is worth noting, however, that like Plato but unlike Schopenhauer and other modern philosophers, Plotinus does not worry about whether or how we can get beyond our ideas in order to know external objects.
  10. Numenius of Apamea was reported to have asked “What else is Plato than Moses speaking Greek?” Fr. 8 Des Places
  11. "Plato is just the Greeks Moses Numenius", Frag. 8 (Des Places) The Neoplatonic Writings of Numenius Translated by Kenneth Guthrie Selene Books ISDN 0-933601-03-4
  12. The Nag Hammadi Library (see Nag Hammadi)
  13. "Apocryphon of John," translation by Frederik Wisse in the The Nag Hammadi Library. Accessed online at gnosis.org
  14. St. Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses Book V, Chapter 24.
  15. Neoplatonism[4]
  16. Gonçalves, Marco Antonio. 2001. O mundo inacabado. Ação e criação em uma cosmologia amazônica: Etnografia Pirahã. Rio de Janeiro: Editora da UFRJ. [pp. 39-41]

See alsoEditar

Ligações externasEditar


Personification of wisdom (in Greek, "Σοφία" or "Sophia") at the Celsus Library in Ephesus, Turkey.

Sophia (Σoφíα, Greek for "wisdom") is a central term in Hellenistic philosophy and religion, Platonism, Gnosticism, Orthodox Christianity, Esoteric Christianity, as well as Christian mysticism. Sophiology is a philosophical concept regarding wisdom, as well as a theological concept regarding the wisdom of God.

In PlatonismEditar

Sofya is one of the four cardinal virtues of Plato's Protagoras. The Pythian Oracle reportedly answered the question of "who is the wisest man of Greece?" with "Socrates!" Socrates defends this verdict in his Apology to the effect that he, at least, knows that he knows nothing.

In Hebrew textsEditar

Sophia is adopted as the term in the Septuagint for Hebrew חכמות Ḥokmot. In Judaism, Chokhmah appears alongside the Shekhinah, 'the Glory of God', a figure who plays a key role in the cosmology of the Kabbalists as an expression of the feminine aspect of God. It is a central topic in the "sapiential" books (i.e., the eponymous Book of Wisdom as well as Ecclesiastes and Proverbs). A key passage which personifies Wisdom/Sophia in the Hebrew Bible is Proverbs 8:22-31.

Philo and the LogosEditar

Philo, a Hellenized Jew writing in Alexandria, attempted to harmonize Platonic philosophy and Jewish scripture. He used the term Logos for the role and function of Wisdom, a concept later adapted by John and applied to Jesus.[1]

In the New TestamentEditar

Paul refers to the concept, notably in 1 Corinthians, but obscurely, deconstructing worldly wisdom:

"Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?" (1 Corinthians 1:20)

Paul sets worldly wisdom against a higher wisdom of God:

"But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory." (1 Corinthians 2:7)

In ChristianityEditar

Russian Icon, Sophia, the Holy Wisdom, 1812.


In Christian theology, "wisdom" (Hebrew: Chokhmah, Greek: Sophia, Latin: Sapientia) describes an aspect of God, or the theological concept regarding the wisdom of God.

Eastern OrthodoxyEditar

In the mystical theology of the Eastern Orthodox Church wisdom is understood as the Divine Logos who became incarnate as Jesus Christ.[2] In the Holy Family, Sophia is often seen as being represented by the Theotokos (Virgin Mary). Sophia is expressed as the Holy Wisdom of God and the saints, obtained through humility, and Mary the Theotokos is the first and greatest of all saints. In Eastern Orthodoxy humility is the highest wisdom and is to be sought more than any other virtue. It is humility that cultivates not only the Holy Wisdom, but humility (in contrast to knowledge) is the defining quality that grants people salvation and entrance into Heaven.[3] The Hagia Sophia or Holy Wisdom church in Constantinople was the religious center of the Eastern Orthodox Church for nearly a thousand years.

Exterior view of the Hagia Sophia or the Holy Wisdom, 2004.

In the liturgy of the Orthodox Church, the exclamation Sophia! or in English Wisdom! will be proclaimed by the deacon or priest at certain moments, especially before the reading of scripture, to draw the congregation's attention to sacred teaching.

The concept of Sophia has been championed as a key part of the Godhead by some Eastern Orthodox religious thinkers. These included Vladimir Solovyov, Pavel Florensky, Nikolai Berdyaev, and Sergei Bulgakov whose book Sophia: The Wisdom of God is in many ways the apotheosis of Sophiology. For Bulgakov, the Sophia is co-existent with the Trinity, operating as the feminine aspect of God in concert with the three masculine principles of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Vladimir Lossky rejects Solovyev and Bulgakov's teachings as error. Lossky states that Wisdom as an energy of God (just as love, faith and grace are also energies of God) is not to be ascribed to be the true essence of God, to do so is to deny the apophatic and incomprehesiblity of God as God's essence.[4] This is contrary to the official view of the Orthodox Church, and Bulgakov's work was denounced by the Russian Orthodox authorities as heretical.[2][5]

Hildegard of Bingen's art depicting Ecclesia and Sophia.

Roman Catholic mysticismEditar

In Roman Catholic mysticism, Hildegard of Bingen celebrated Sophia as a cosmic figure in both her writing and her art.[6]

Protestant mysticismEditar

Virgin Sophia design on a Harmony Society doorway in Harmony, Pennsylvania, carved by Frederick Reichert Rapp in 1809.

Within the Protestant tradition in England, Jane Leade, 17th-century Christian mystic, Universalist, and founder of the Philadelphian Society, wrote copious descriptions of her visions and dialogues with the "Virgin Sophia" who, she said, revealed to her the spiritual workings of the Universe.[7]

Leade was hugely influenced by the theosophical writings of 16th Century German Christian mystic Jakob Böhme, who also speaks of the Sophia in works such as The Way to Christ.[8] Jakob Böhme was very influential to a number of Christian mystics and religious leaders, including George Rapp and the Harmony Society.[9]

Sophia can be described as the wisdom of God, and, at times, as a pure virgin spirit which emanates from God. The Sophia is seen as being expressed in all creation and the natural world as well as, for some of the Christian mystics mentioned above, integral to the spiritual well-being of humankind, the church, and the cosmos. The Virgin is seen as outside creation but compassionately interceding on behalf of humanity to alleviate its suffering by illuminating true spiritual seekers with wisdom and the love of God.

The main difference between the concept of Sophia found in most traditional forms of Christian mysticism and the one more aligned with the Gnostic view of Sophia is that to many Christian mystics she is not seen as fallen or in need of redemption. Conversely, she is not as central in most forms of established Christianity as she is in Gnosticism, but to some Christian mystics the Sophia is a very important concept.

An interfaith spiritual community currently has its center at what it calls Sancta Sophia Seminary located in Tahlequah, Oklahoma.[10]

In GnosticismEditar

A mystical depiction of Sophia from Geheime Figuren der Rosenkreuzer, Altona, 1785.

A feminine figure, analogous to the human soul but also simultaneously one of the Feminine aspects of God and the Bride of Christ, she is considered to have fallen from grace in some way, in so doing creating or helping to create the material world.[carece de fontes?]

In Gnostic tradition, the term Sophia refers to the final and lowest emanation of God. In most if not all versions of the Gnostic religion, Sophia brings about an instability in the Pleroma, in turn bringing about the creation of materiality. Thus a positive or negative view of materiality depends a great deal on the interpretations of Sophia's actions in the myths. She is occasionally referred to by the Hebrew equivalent of Achamoth (this is a feature of Ptolemy's version of the Valentinian Gnostic myth).[carece de fontes?] For the Gnostics, the drama of the redemption of the Sophia through Christ or the Logos is the central drama of the universe. The Sophia resides in all of us as the Divine Spark. According to the Pistis Sophia, Christ is sent from the Godhead in order to bring Sophia back into the fullness of Pleroma following her repentance.

Almost all Gnostic systems of the Syrian or Egyptian type taught that the universe began with an original, unknowable God, referred to as the Parent or Bythos, or as the Monad by Monoimus. It can also be equated to the concept of Logos in stoic, esoteric, or theosophical terms (The 'Unknown Root') as well as the Ein Sof of the Kabbalah and Brahman in Hinduism. It is also known as the first Æon by still other traditions. From this initial unitary beginning, the One spontaneously emanated further Æons, being pairs of progressively 'lesser' beings in sequence. The lowest of these pairs were Sophia and Christ. The Æons together made up the Pleroma, or fullness, of God, and thus should not be seen as distinct from the divine, but symbolic abstractions of the divine nature.

Nag HammadiEditar

In the Nag Hammadi, Sophia is the lowest Æon, or anthropic expression of the emanation of the light of God. She is the syzygy of Jesus Christ (i.e. she forms a unity with Christ, being cojoined with him), and Gnostics believed that she was the Holy Spirit of the Trinity. Sophia is depicted as the creator of the material universe in On the Origin of the World. Furthermore, the planet Earth and everything on it was indeed created by the Old Testament God, but he is depicted as fundamentally corrupt. Because Sophia created the material universe and its god (also known as Yaldabaoth, Samael, and Demiurge) either without her syzygy Jesus Christ or, in another tradition, because she tried to breach the barrier between herself and the unknowable Bythos.

Furthermore, she is also depicted as the destroyer of both this material universe, and Yaldabaoth and all his Heavens. Later in "On the Origin of the World," it states:

She [Sophia] will cast them down into the abyss. They [the Archons] will be obliterated because of their wickedness. For they will come to be like volcanoes and consume one another until they perish at the hand of the prime parent. When he has destroyed them, he will turn against himself and destroy himself until he ceases to exist. And their heavens will fall one upon the next and their forces will be consumed by fire. Their eternal realms, too, will be overturned. And his heaven will fall and break in two. His [...] will fall down upon the [...] support them; they will fall into the abyss, and the abyss will be overturned. The light will [...] the darkness and obliterate it: it will be like something that never was.

The fall of SophiaEditar

Sophia's fear and anguish of losing her life (just as she lost the light of the One) caused confusion and longing to return to it. Because of these longings, matter (Greek: hyle, ‘υλη) and soul (Greek: psyche, ψυχή) accidentally came into existence through the four elements: fire, water, earth, and air. The creation of the lion-faced Demiurge is also a mistake made during this exile, according to some Gnostic sources as a result of Sophia trying to emanate on her own, without her male counterpart. The Demiurge proceeds to create the physical world in which we live, ignorant of Sophia, who nevertheless managed to infuse some spiritual spark or pneuma into the creation of the Demiurge.

After this the savior (Christ) returns and lets her see the light again, bringing her knowledge of the spirit (Greek: pneuma, πνευμα). Christ was then sent to earth in the form of the man Jesus to give men the gnosis needed to rescue themselves from the physical world and return to the spiritual world. Note that, in Gnosticism, the Gospel story of Jesus is itself allegorical: it is the Outer Mystery, used as an introduction to Gnosis, rather than being literally true in a historical context.

In Valentinian cosmology, the three sensations experienced by Sophia create three correspondent types of humans:

  • Hylics (who bond to matter, the principle of evil)
  • Psychics (who bond to the soul and are partly saved from evil)
  • Pneumatics who can return to the Pleroma if they achieve gnosis and can behold the world of light. The Gnostics regarded themselves as members of this group.

The analogy of the fall and recovery of Sophia is echoed (to a varying degree) in many different myths and stories (see Damsel in distress). Among these are:

See alsoEditar


  1. Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. "John" p. 302-310
  2. a b Pomazansky, Protopresbyter Michael (1963, in Russian), Orthodox Dogmatic Theology: A Concise Exposition, ISBN 0938635-69-7, Platina CA: St Herman of Alaska Brotherhood (publicado em 1994, Eng. Tr. Hieromonk Seraphim Rose), pp. 357 ff  Verifique data em: |ano=, |data-publicacao= (ajuda) Text available online [5]
  3. St. Nikitas Stithatos (1999), «"On the Practice of the Virtues", and also "On the Inner Nature of Things"», The Philokalia: The Complete Text, ISBN 057119382X, Four, London: Faber and Faber 
  4. This was the basis of the theological development of Fr. Bulgakov, and also his fundamental error: for he sought to see in the energy of Wisdom (Sophia), which he identified with the essence, the very principle of the Godhead. In fact, God is not determined by any of his attributes: all determinations are inferior to Him, logically posterior to His being in itself, in its essence. pgs 80-81 The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, by Vladimir Lossky SVS Press, 1997. (ISBN 0-913836-31-1) James Clarke & Co Ltd, 1991. (ISBN 0-227-67919-9)
  5. Orthodoxwiki states this also as heresy [6]
  6. Painting by Hildegard of Bingen depicting Sophia.[7] Also, there's a CD of music written by Hildegard of Bingen entitled "Chants in Praise of Sophia".[8]
  7. Julie Hirst, Jane Leade: Biography of a Seventeenth-Century Mystic (2005) [9]
  8. Jakob Böhme, The Way to Christ (1622) [10]
  9. Arthur Versluis, "Western Esotericism and The Harmony Society", Esoterica I (1999) pp. 20-47 [11]
  10. Sancta Sophia Seminary website: http://www.sanctasophia.org/
  11. Plutarch, On the Worship of Isis and Osiris, LIV, 5-6


  • Caitlin Matthews, Sophia: Goddess of Wisdom (London: Mandala, 1991) ISBN 0044405901
  • Brenda Meehan, ‘Wisdom/Sophia, Russian identity, and Western feminist theology’, Cross Currents, 46(2), 1996, pp149–168
  • Thomas Schipflinger, Sophia-Maria (in German: 1988; English translation: York Beach, ME: Samuel Wiser, 1998) ISBN 1578630223
  • Arthur Versluis, Theosophia: hidden dimensions of Christianity (Hudson, NY: Lindisfarne Press, 1994) ISBN 0940262649
  • Arthur Versluis, Wisdom’s children: a Christian esoteric tradition (Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 1999) ISBN 0791443302
  • Arthur Versluis (ed.) Wisdom’s book: the Sophia anthology (St.Paul, Min: Paragon House, 2000) ISBN 1557787832
  • Priscilla Hunt, "The Wisdom Iconography of Light: The Genesis, Meaning and Iconographic Realization of a Symbol" due to appear in “'Spor o Sofii' v Khristianskoi Kul’ture", V.L. Ianin, A.E. Musin, ed., Novgorodskii Gos. Universitet, forthcoming in 2008
  • Priscilla Hunt, "Confronting the End: The Interpretation of the Last Judgment in a Novgorod Wisdom Icon", Byzantino-Slavica, 65, 2007, 275-325
  • Priscilla Hunt, "The Novgorod Sophia Icon and 'The Problem of Old Russian Culture' Between Orthodoxy and Sophiology", Symposion: A Journal of Russian Thought, vol. 4-5, (2000), 1-41
  • Priscilla Hunt "Andrei Rublev’s Old Testament Trinity Icon in Cultural Context", The Trinity-Sergius Lavr in Russian History and Culture: Readings in Russian Religious Culture, vol. 3, Deacon Vladimir Tsurikov, ed., Jordanville, NY: Holy Trinity Seminary Press, 2006, 99-122

Ligações externasEditar



Esta página precisa ser reciclada de acordo com o livro de estilo.
Sinta-se livre para editá-la para que esta possa atingir um nível de qualidade superior.
Editor: considere colocar o mês e o ano da marcação. Isso pode ser feito automaticamente, substituindo esta predefinição por {{subst:rec}}

Logos (pronúncia em inglês: [ˈloʊɡɒs]; Greek Predefinição:Polytonic logos) is an important term in philosophy, analytical psychology, rhetoric and religion.

Heraclitus (ca. 535475 BCE) established the term in Western philosophy as meaning both the source and fundamental order of the cosmos. The sophists used the term to mean discourse, and Aristotle applied the term to rational discourse. The Stoic philosophers identified the term with the divine animating principle pervading the universe. After Judaism came under Hellenistic influence, Philo adopted the term into Jewish philosophy. The Gospel of John identifies Jesus as the incarnation of the Logos, through which all things are made. The gospel further identifies the Logos as divine (theos).[1] Second-century Christian Apologists, such as Justin Martyr, identified Jesus as the Logos or Word of God, a distinct intermediary between God and the world.[2]

In current use, Logos may refer to the Christian sense, identifying Jesus with the Word of God, though in academic discussions the term is more directly used in a rhetorical discussion.


In ordinary, non-technical Greek, logos had two overlapping meanings. One meaning referred to an instance of speaking: "sentence, saying, oration"; the other meaning was the antithesis of ἔργον ergon or ἐνέργεια energeia ("action" or "work"), which was commonplace. Despite the conventional translation as "word", it is not used for a word in the grammatical sense; instead, the term λέξις lexis is used. However, both logos and lexis derive from the same verb λέγω. It also means the inward intention underlying the speech act: "hypothesis, thought, grounds for belief or action." [3]

It derives from the verb λέγω legō "to count, tell, say, speak".[4] The primary meaning of logos is: something said; by implication a subject, topic of discourse, or reasoning. Secondary meanings such as logic, reasoning, etc. derive from the fact that if one is capable of λέγειν (infinitive) i.e. speech, then intelligence and reason are assumed.

Its semantic field extends beyond "word" to notions such as "thought, speech, account, meaning, reason, proportion, principle, standard", or "logic". In English, the word is the root of "logic," and of the "-ology" suffix (e.g., geology).[5]

Use in ancient philosophyEditar


The writing of Heraclitus (ca. 535–475 BCE) was the first place where the word logos was given special attention in ancient Greek philosophy.[6] Though Heraclitus "quite deliberately plays on the various meanings of logos",[7] there is no compelling reason to suppose that he used it in a special technical sense, significantly different from the way it was used in ordinary Greek of his time.[8]

This LOGOS holds always but humans always prove unable to understand it, both before hearing it and when they have first heard it. For though all things come to be in accordance with this LOGOS, humans are like the inexperienced when they experience such words and deeds as I set out, distinguishing each in accordance with its nature and saying how it is. But other people fail to notice what they do when awake, just as they forget what they do while asleep. (Diels-Kranz 22B1)

For this reason it is necessary to follow what is common. But although the LOGOS is common, most people live as if they had their own private understanding. (Diels-Kranz 22B2)

Listening not to me but to the LOGOS it is wise to agree that all things are one. (Diels-Kranz 22B50)[9]

Aristotle's rhetorical logosEditar

Aristotle defined logos as argument from reason, one of the three modes of persuasion. The other two modes are pathos (em grego: πάθος), persuasion by means of emotional appeal, and ethos, persuasion through convincing listeners of one's moral competence. An argument based on logos needs to be logical, and in fact the term logic derives from it. Logos normally implies numbers, polls, and other mathematical or scientific data.

Logos has some advantages:

  • Data are (ostensibly) difficult to manipulate, so it is harder to argue against a logos argument.
  • Logos makes the speaker look prepared and knowledgeable to the audience, enhancing ethos.

The StoicsEditar

In Stoic philosophy, which began with Zeno of Citium c. 300 BCE, the logos was the active reason pervading the universe and animating it. It was conceived of as material, and is usually identified with God or Nature. The Stoics also referred to the seminal logos, ("logos spermatikos") or the law of generation in the universe, which was the principle of the active reason working in inanimate matter. Humans, too, each possess a portion of the divine logos.[10]

Philo of AlexandriaEditar

Philo (20 BC - 50 AD), a Hellenized Jew, used the term logos to mean the creative principle. Philo followed the Platonic distinction between imperfect matter and perfect idea. The logos was necessary, he taught, because God cannot come into contact with matter. He sometimes identified logos as divine wisdom. He taught that the Logos was the image of God, after which the human mind (νοῦς) was made. He calls the Logos the "archangel of many names," "taxiarch" (corps-commander), the "name of God," also the "heavenly Adam", [11] the "man, the word of the eternal God." The Logos is also designated as "high priest," in reference to the exalted position which the high priest occupied after the Exile as the real center of the Jewish state. The Logos, like the high priest, is the expiator of sins, and the mediator and advocate for men: ἱκέτης ("Quis Rerum Divinarum Heres Sit," § 42 [i. 501], and παράκλητος ("De Vita Mosis," iii. 14 [ii. 155]).[12] “The Logos is the first-born and the eldest and chief of the angels.” [13]

Use in ChristianityEditar


Logos is usually translated as "the Word" in English Bibles such as the KJV.

Gordon Clark (1902 - 1985), a Calvinist theologian and expert on pre-Socratic philosophy, famously translated Logos as "Logic": "In the beginning was the Logic, and the Logic was with God and the Logic was God." He meant to imply by this translation that the laws of logic were contained in the Bible itself and were therefore not a secular principle imposed on the Christian world view.

The notorious question of how to translate logos is treated in Goethe's Faust, with Faust finally opting for die Tat ("deed/action"). But this interpretation differs from the Christian tradition.

Some Chinese translations have used the word "Tao (道)".[14]

The term Logos also reflects the term dabar Yahweh ("Word of God") in the Hebrew Bible.

John 1:1Editar

 Ver artigo principal: John 1:1

The author of John adapted Philo's concept of the Logos, identifying Jesus as an incarnation of the divine Logos that formed the universe.[15] The Gospel of John begins with a Hymn to the Word, which identifies Jesus as the Logos and the Logos as divine. Traditionally, the first verse has been translated as declaring the Logos to be God. Various contemporary translations make the Logos out to be "a god" or divine.[16]

John's placement of the Word at creation reflects Genesis, in which God (Elohim) speaks the world into being, beginning with the words "Let there be light."

Translation A ("God") Translation B ("a god," "divine")
  • 1808 "and the word was a god" — The New Testament, in An Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop William Newcome's New Translation: With a Corrected Text, London.
  • 1864 "and a god was the Word" — Emphatic Diaglott (J21, interlinear reading), by Benjamin Wilson, New York and London.
  • 1935 "and the Word was divine" — The Bible—An American Translation, by J. M. Powis Smith and Edgar J. Goodspeed, Chicago.
  • 1950 "and the Word was a god" — New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (version of the Jehovah's Witnesses), Brooklyn.
  • 1998 "and it [the divine word] was what God was" - Scholar's Version, meant to convey general meaning rather than literal translation, from the Jesus Seminar.

Christ the LogosEditar

 Ver artigo principal: Christ the Logos

Christians who profess belief in the Trinity often consider John 1:1 to be a central text in their belief that Jesus is the Divine Son of God, in connection with the idea that Father and Jesus are equals.[carece de fontes?]

Christian apologist Justin Martyr (c 150) identified Jesus as the Logos. He portrayed Jesus not as "the Maker of all things" but as "the Angel of the Lord", subject to the Maker of all things.[18] Justin wrote that the Logos had distributed truth to all people, that it had taken human form in Jesus to teach the truth and to redeem humanity from demons, and that Jesus was therefore worthy of worship as on in second place to God.[19]

Early Christians who opposed the concept of Jesus as the Logos c 170 were known as alogi.

In Roman CatholicismEditar

On April 1, 2005, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (who would become Pope Benedict XVI just over two weeks later) referred to the Christian religion as the religion of the Logos:

Christianity must always remember that it is the religion of the "Logos." It is faith in the "Creator Spiritus," in the Creator Spirit, from which proceeds everything that exists. Today, this should be precisely its philosophical strength, in so far as the problem is whether the world comes from the irrational, and reason is not, therefore, other than a "sub-product," on occasion even harmful of its development or whether the world comes from reason, and is, as a consequence, its criterion and goal. The Christian faith inclines toward this second thesis, thus having, from the purely philosophical point of view, really good cards to play, despite the fact that many today consider only the first thesis as the only modern and rational one par excellence. However, a reason that springs from the irrational, and that is, in the final analysis, itself irrational, does not constitute a solution for our problems. Only creative reason, which in the crucified God is manifested as love, can really show us the way. In the so necessary dialogue between secularists and Catholics, we Christians must be very careful to remain faithful to this fundamental line: to live a faith that comes from the "Logos," from creative reason, and that, because of this, is also open to all that is truly rational.[20]

Catholics can use logos to refer to the moral law written in human hearts. This comes from Jeremiah 31:33 (prophecy of new covenant): "I will write my law on their hearts." St. Justin wrote that those who have not accepted Christ but follow the moral law of their hearts (logos) follow God, because it is God who has written the moral law in each person's heart. Though man may not explicitly recognize God, he has the spirit of Christ if he follows Jesus' moral laws, written in his heart.

Jung's analytical psychologyEditar

In Carl Jung's analytical psychology, the logos is the masculine principle of rationality and consciousness. Its female counterpart, eros (Greek, love), represents interconnectedness. Carl Jung used the term for the masculine principle of rationality. A form of government where 'words' are the most important thing is called logocracy.

Similar conceptsEditar

In modern philosophyEditar

Early 20th century movements towards specificity of operational definitions have developed an analog to logos in the concept of world view (or worldview) when used as Weltanschauung (Predefinição:Pronounced) meaning a "look onto the world." It implies a concept fundamental to German philosophy and epistemology and refers to a wide world perception. Additionally, it refers to the framework of ideas and beliefs through which an individual interprets the world and interacts in it. The German word is also in wide use in English, as well as the translated form world outlook. (Compare with ideology). Weltanschauung is the conceptualization that all ideology, beliefs and political movements are both limited and defined by this schemata of common linguistic understanding.

Goethe has his Faust translate John's logos as "Will".

The idea is similar to Apollinarism.

Contemporary referencesEditar

See alsoEditar

  A Wikipédia tem os portais:
  • Philosophy
  • The_Thinker_Musee_Rodin.jpg



  1. May, Herbert G. and Bruce M. Metzger. The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha. 1977.
  2. "Christology." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005
  3. LSJ s. logos, lexis.
  4. see entries for "λόγος" and jdm "λέγω (B)" in Liddell, Henry and Robert Scott. 1996. A Greek-English Lexicon. Revised by H.S. Jones and R. McKenzie. Ninth edition, with revised supplement. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  5. Oxford Dictionary definition: -logy repr. F. -logie, medL. -logia, Gr. -logíā, which is partly f. lógos discourse, speech, partly f. log-, var. of leg-, légein speak; hence derivs. in -logia mean either
  6. F.E. Peters, Greek Philosophical Terms, New York University Press, 1967.
  7. K.F. Johansen, "Logos" in Donald Zeyl (ed.), Encyclopedia of Classical Philosophy, Greenwood Press 1997.
  8. pp. 419ff. , W. K. C. Guthrie, A History of Greek Philosophy, vol. 1, Cambridge University Press, 1962.
  9. Translations from Richard D. McKirahan, Philosophy before Socrates, Hackett, 1994.
  10. Tripolitis, A., Religions of the Hellenistic-Roman Age, pages 37-38. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.
  11. comp. "De Confusione Linguarum," § 11 [i. 411]
  12. http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=281&letter=P#1061
  13. http://www.iep.utm.edu/p/philo.htm#H11
  14. http://web.me.com/isomorpheus/Site/Li_files/Ineffably%20Ineffable.pdf
  15. Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. "John" p. 302-310
  16. Ernst Haenchen, in a commentary on the Gospel of John (chapters 1-6), takes note of the absence of a definite article: Predefinição:Blockquote After giving as a translation of John 1:1c "and divine (of the category divinity) was the Word," Haenchen goes on to state: "In this instance, the verb 'was' ([en]) simply expresses predication. And the predicate noun must accordingly be more carefully observed: [the·os′] is not the same thing as [ho the·os′] ('divine' is not the same thing as 'God')." Other scholars, such as Philip B. Harner elaborate on the grammatical construction found here (Journal of Biblical Literature, 1973, pp. 85, 87).
  17. May, Herbert G. and Bruce M. Metzger. The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha. 1977. p. 1286
  18. In the account of the Angel of the Lord who visited Gideon (Judges 6), the visitor is alternately spoken of as "the Angel of the Lord" and as "the Lord". Similarly, in Judges 13:13, the Angel of the Lord appears, and both Manoah and his wife exclaim: "We shall certainly die because we have seen God. Justin interpreted as Christ the angel who spoke with Abraham in [[:s:Tradução Brasileira da Bíblia//Erro: tempo inválido#Genesis:18| Genesis:18]], and argued for the divinity of Christ by saying: "(T)here is ... another God and Lord subject to the Maker of all things; who is also called an Angel, because He announces to men whatsoever the Maker of all things — above whom there is no other God — wishes to announce to them" (Dialogue with Trypho, 56). For a detailed study of the significance Justin saw in the title of "Angel" given to the Messiah in the Septuagint version of Isaiah 9:6, the then most widely known version of that text, see Günther Juncker, "Christ As Angel: The Reclamation Of A Primitive Title", Trinity Journal 15:2 (Fall 1994): 221–250.
  19. "Justin Martyr." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005
  20. Cardinal Ratzinger on Europe's crisis of culture, retrieved from http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/politics/pg0143.html

pt:Logos -->