If we have previously defined human logos as a the language(s) in which we are fluent, but also as a gift from our creator, where further the gift is an image bearer or ‘imaged pattern’ from our creator (who is God)—then from this firm ground it should not be hard to sort out what Mr. Langan means when he intimates that the CTMU has been called the ‘Logos.’

He of course does not mean that the CTMU is Christ ‘in-himself.’ But rather if we take it that human logos, human language, can come to a more and more refined description of what ‘Reality’ is. Then In our acquired/enlightened lingo, models, and theories: which is all of metaphysics, natural sciences (including most prominently physics), information theories, mathematical models, reality theory, cybernetics, logic, and philosophic descriptors; we can come to an Ultimate Descriptor of Reality from the perspective of our human logos.

When Langan says that others have called the CTMU the ‘Logos,’ this is the best of what he means. That the CTMU is the Ultimate Descriptor of Reality from our enlightened human perspective, the best of what our ‘logos’ can arrive at. As Langan has stated, he would still have to be humble in the presence of God. As far as we are concerned, what then is the utility of our ‘logos’ as arrived at by the CTMU?

Greg M. Wilford

The CTMU as ‘Logos,’ a Concept of…

Keep reading with a 7-day free trial