Mary,
.
I actually like your reading here -- moreover, I LOVE your willingness to take on one of the most difficult texts in all of Western Philosophy -- despite all the spit-wads from the bleachers.
.
I certainly don't wish to insist on my interpretation beyond the naked fact that Hegel speaks of God in his System as a central concept. On this point you have consistently agreed with my interpretation, so I'm delighted. You've seen how rare that is on this eList.
.
I'm grateful that you're sticking with this slow-read of Hegel's LPR, Concept, Mary.
.
I'm also delighted that Stephen Theron has decided to join us. His objections to my interpretation sometimes mirror yours, so you may well have the superior reading.
.
All best,
--Paul
.

--------------------------------------------

On Tue, 4/26/16, Mary josephson45r@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [hegel] Hegel’s LPR - Vol. 1 - Concept (Cb)
To: "hegel@yahoogroups.com" <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, April 26, 2016, 1:42 PM

Paul,

I’m content to give myself an INC for this section, but I’ve spent an adequate amount of time reading and re-reading Section C. and others’ contributions in order to proceed to Section D. I will only add that where you comment on p. 232…

Hegel uses the term, "unfolding itself in God," to recognize the ubiquitous Antitheses and Synthesis of this Divine development -- so that Nature and Ideas appear to be fully OPPOSITE to each other -- yet both Finite sides are expressions of the same Infinite Creator. Thus, this Antithesis is to be Synthesized according to the synthetic nature of God.

Again, these two sides: God's internal Self-development and Nature's Evolution, are not ultimately different. God is the Truth; God is the Substance of the Cosmos, and not merely the Abstract Other. Both Idea and Nature comprise the same Divine Substance. The life of Nature is identical with the Divine life, except that the life of Nature is only Appearance, while the Divine life is Eternal. Everything, ultimately, is a MOMENT of the Eternal.

...supports comments from my March 16 post in which I claimed the co-development of God and man. We seem to agree on at least this one of my contentions.

“God’s internal self-development has thus the same logical necessity as the development of the universe, and the latter is implicitly divine only to the extent that, at each of its stages, it is the development of this form [necessity]...But further, these two sorts of material [content]—the internal self-development of God and the development of the universe—are not so absolutely different. God is the truth, the substance of the universe, not merely an abstract other. Thus it is the same material [content]. It is the intelligible divine world, the divine life within itself, that develops. But these spheres—the activity of the divine life—are the same as the life of the world. The world’s life, however, is only appearance while the divine life is eternal…” (p. 231-232).

The appearance of other may be the second moment as you claimed in your response, but I still maintain this is essential for God’s self-consciousness. Spirit is co-development. Infinite spirit was proven with Hegel’s speculatively reconceived PEGs as the ground of finite spirit, but without alienated or externalized finite spirit Infinite Spirit to sublate or synthesize, it is not spirit or process. If finite spirit were not mediated by its own ground and our activity of following finitude into self-sublation, Infinite Spirit would not become self-conscious. It would forever be simply conscious of its other. Spirit becomes.

Respectfully,
Mary