|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| In [[Christianity]], the '''Logos''' ([[Greek (disambiguation)|Greek]]: Λόγος, <small>[[Literal translation|lit.]] </small>'word, discourse, or reason') is a name or title of [[Jesus Christ]], seen as the [[Pre-existence of Christ|pre-existent]] [[God the Son|second person]] of the [[Trinity]]. In the [[Douay–Rheims]], [[King James Version|King James]], [[New International Version|New International]], and other versions of the [[Bible]], the first verse of the [[Gospel of John]] reads:<blockquote>In these translations, ''Word'' is used for Λόγος, although the term is often used [[transliterated]] but untranslated in theological discourse.</blockquote>According to [[Irenaeus|Irenaeus of Lyon]] (c.130–202), a student of [[Polycarp]] (c. pre-69–156), [[John the Apostle]] wrote these words specifically to refute the teachings of [[Cerinthus]], who both resided and taught at [[Ephesus]], the city John settled in following his return from [[John of Patmos|exile on Patmos]]. While Cerinthus claimed that the world was made by "a certain Power far separated from ... Almighty God", John, according to Irenaeus, by means of , presented Almighty God as the Creator "by His Word." And while Cerinthus made a distinction between the man Jesus and "the Christ from above", who descended on the man Jesus at his [[baptism]], John, according to Irenaeus, presented the pre-existent ''Word'' and Jesus Christ as one and the same. | | In [[Christianity]], the '''Logos''' ([[Greek (disambiguation)|Greek]]: Λόγος, <small>[[Literal translation|lit.]] </small>'word, discourse, or reason') is a name or title of [[Jesus Christ]], seen as the [[Pre-existence of Christ|pre-existent]] [[God the Son|second person]] of the [[Trinity]]. In the [[Douay–Rheims]], [[King James Version|King James]], [[New International Version|New International]], and other versions of the [[Bible]], the first verse of the [[Gospel of John]] reads:<blockquote>In these translations, ''Word'' is used for Λόγος, although the term is often used [[transliterated]] but untranslated in theological discourse.</blockquote>According to [[Irenaeus|Irenaeus of Lyon]] (c.130–202), a student of [[Polycarp]] (c. pre-69–156), [[John the Apostle]] wrote these words specifically to refute the teachings of [[Cerinthus]], who both resided and taught at [[Ephesus]], the city John settled in following his return from [[John of Patmos|exile on Patmos]]. While Cerinthus claimed that the world was made by "a certain Power far separated from ... Almighty God", John, according to Irenaeus, by means of , presented Almighty God as the Creator "by His Word." And while Cerinthus made a distinction between the man Jesus and "the Christ from above", who descended on the man Jesus at his [[baptism]], John, according to Irenaeus, presented the pre-existent ''Word'' and Jesus Christ as one and the same. |
|
| |
|
| A figure in the [[Book of Revelation]] is called "The Word of God", being followed by "the armies which are in heaven" (Rev 19:13–14). | | A figure in the [[Book of Revelation]] is called "The Word of God", being followed by "the armies which are in heaven" (). |
| | |
| ==Bible==
| |
| | |
| ===Johannine literature===
| |
| [[Stephen L. Harris]] claims that John adapted [[Philo]]'s concept of the Logos, identifying Jesus as an incarnation of the divine [[Logos]] that formed the universe.<ref name="Harris John">[[Stephen L Harris|Harris, Stephen L.]], ''Understanding the Bible''. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. "John" pp. 302–310</ref>[[File:Prologus Ioanni - Vulgata Clementina (Verlag Friedrich Pustet, 1922, p. 197).jpg|thumb|''In principio erat verbum'', [[Latin (language)|Latin]] for ''In the beginning was the Word'', from the [[Clementine Vulgate]], [[Gospel of John]], 1:1–18]]
| |
| | |
| While is generally considered the first mention of the Logos in the [[New Testament]], arguably, the first reference occurs in the book of Revelation. In it the Logos is spoken of as "the Word of God", who at the [[Second Coming]] rides a white horse into the [[Armageddon|Battle of Armageddon]] wearing many crowns, and is identified as King of Kings, and Lord of Lords:<ref>{{bibleverse|REV|19:11-16|NASB|Revelations 19:11-16}}</ref>
| |
| | |
| 's subject is developed in the [[First Epistle of John]] (1 John). Similar to , also refers to ''the beginning'' ({{lang|grc|[[archē]]}}) and to ''the Word'' ({{lang|grc|ho lógos}}). does not refer to the creation (see ) but expands on two other concepts found in , namely that of ''life'' and of ''light'' (, ). It therefore seems as if only the first clause of "What was from the beginning" refers to the pre-incarnate Word. The rest of describes the incarnate Word:
| |
| | |
| ======
| |
| Like , also refers to ''the beginning'' and to ''the word'':
| |
| | |
| {{Blockquote| ... compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning ({{lang|grc|archē}}) were eyewitnesses and servants of the word ({{lang|grc|lógos}}).| (NASB)}}
| |
| | |
| [[David Lyle Jeffrey]]<ref>Jeffrey, David L. ''A Dictionary of biblical tradition in English literature''. 1992. p. 460 "in his reference to 'eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word' () he is certainly speaking of the person as well as the words"</ref> and [[Leon Morris]]<ref>[[Leon Morris|Morris, Leon]]. ''The Gospel according to John''. 1995. p. 124 "when Luke speaks of those who were 'eyewitnesses and servants of the word' (), it is difficult to escape the impression that by 'the word' he means more than the teaching."</ref> have seen in "the word" a reference to Jesus Christ. However, this reference did not depict the same significant theology of the Logos as depicted in the gospel of John. In context, it is referring to the gospel message about Jesus and his teaching, rather than his title or identity.<ref name="Green">Joel B., Jeanne K. Brown & Nicholas Perrin. ''Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels''. InterVarsity Press, 2013, p. 524.</ref><ref name="Dunn">Dunn, James D. G. "Neither Jew nor Greek: Christianity in the Making, Volume 3" Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2015, p. 355.</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://bible.org/seriespage/luke-1 |title= |last=Utley |first=Bob |date=2012 |website=bible.org |access-date= September 22, 2022}}{{Unreliable source?|reason=Excessively sectarian source.|date=April 2024}}</ref>
| |
| | |
| ===Septuagint===
| |
| Certain references to the term ''logos'' in the [[Septuagint]] in Christian theology are taken as prefiguring New Testament usage such as [[]]:6, which relates directly to the [[Genesis creation narrative]].{{efn|32:6 {{lang|grc|'''τῷ λόγῳ''' τοῦ κυρίου οἱ οὐρανοὶ ἐστερεώθησαν καὶ '''τῷ πνεύματι''' τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ πᾶσα ἡ δύναμις αὐτῶν}}}} [[Theophilus of Antioch]] references the connection in ''To Autolycus'' 1:7.<ref>Oskar Skarsaune. ''In the shadow of the temple: Jewish influences on early Christianity''. p. 342</ref>
| |
| | |
| [[Irenaeus|Irenaeus of Lyon]] explained as that the "One God, the Father, not made, invisible, creator of all things ... created the things that were made ... by [the] Word" and "adorned all things ... by [the] Spirit." He added, "fittingly is the Word called the Son, and the Spirit the Wisdom of God."<ref>Irenaeus, [https://www.ccel.org/ccel/irenaeus/demonstr.iv.html Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching], 5</ref>
| |
| | |
| [[Origen|Origen of Alexandria]] likewise sees in it the operation of the [[Trinity]], a mystery intimated beforehand by the Psalmist David.<ref>Origen, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/04121.htm ''De Principiis'', 1.3.7], [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/04124.htm 4.30]</ref> [[Augustine of Hippo]] considered that in both ''logos'' and ''[[pneuma]]'' were "on the verge of being personified".<ref>Augustine. ''The Trinity''. Edmund Hill, John E. Rotelle 1991. p. 35</ref>
| |
| {{Blockquote|{{lang|grc|Τῷ Λόγῳ τοῦ Κυρίου οἱ Οὐρανοὶ ἐστερεώθησαν, καὶ τῷ Πνεύματι τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ πᾶσα ἡ δύναμις Αὐτῶν}}
| |
| | |
| By the Word ({{lang|grc|Lógo}}) of the Lord were the Heavens established, and all the host of them by the Spirit ({{lang|grc|Pnéumati}}) of His mouth||multiline=y}}
| |
| | |
| ==Early Christianity==
| |
| | |
| === Ignatius of Antioch ===
| |
| The first extant Christian reference to the Logos found in writings outside of the New Testament belongs to John's disciple [[Ignatius of Antioch|Ignatius]] ({{circa}} 35–108), [[Bishop of Antioch]], who in his [[epistle to the Magnesians]], writes, "there is one God, who has manifested Himself by Jesus Christ His Son, who is His eternal Word, not proceeding forth from silence,"<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0105.htm|title=Epistle to the Magnesians, 8|last=Ignatius of Antioch}}</ref> (i.e., there was not a time when he did not exist). In similar fashion, he speaks to the Ephesians of the son being "possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first passible and then impassible".<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0104.htm|title=Epistle to the Ephesians, 7|last=Ignatius of Antioch}}</ref>
| |
| | |
| === Justin Martyr ===
| |
| Following , the early Christian [[apologist]] [[Justin Martyr]] (c. 150) identifies Jesus as the Logos.<ref name="Goodenough">Erwin R. Goodenough, ''The Theology of Justin Martyr'', 1923 (reprint on demand BiblioBazaar, LLC, pp. 139–175. {{ISBN|1-113-91427-0}})</ref><ref>[[Jules Lebreton]], 1910 [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08580c.htm Catholic Encyclopedia: St. Justin Martyr.]</ref><ref>Philippe Bobichon, "Filiation divine du Christ et filiation divine des chrétiens dans les écrits de Justin Martyr" in P. de Navascués Benlloch, M. Crespo Losada, A. Sáez Gutiérrez (dir.), ''Filiación. Cultura pagana, religión de Israel, orígenes del cristianismo'', vol. III, Madrid, pp. 337-378 [https://www.academia.edu/7279912/_Filiation_divine_du_Christ_et_filiation_divine_des_chr%C3%A9tiens_dans_les_%C3%A9crits_de_Justin_Martyr_Como_se_integra_el_tema_de_la_filiaci%C3%B3n_en_la_obra_y_en_el_pensamiento_de_Justino_ online]</ref> Like Philo, Justin also identified the Logos with the [[Angel of the Lord]], and he also identified the Logos with the many other [[Theophany|theophanies]] of the Old Testament, and used this as a way of arguing for Christianity to Jews:
| |
| {{blockquote|I shall give you another testimony, my friends, from the Scriptures, that God begot before all creatures a Beginning, [who was] a certain rational power [proceeding] from Himself, who is called by the Holy Spirit, now the Glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then God, and then Lord and Logos;<ref>[[Justin Martyr]], ''[http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/01285.htm Dialogue with Trypho]'', Chapter 61.</ref><ref>Greek critical edition by Philippe Bobichon [https://www.academia.edu/7280008/JUSTIN_MARTYR_Dialogue_avec_Tryphon_Dialogue_with_Trypho_%C3%A9dition_critique_VOLUME_I_Introduction_Texte_grec_Traduction_Coll_Paradosis_%C3%A9ditions_universitaires_de_Fribourg_Suisse_no_47_1_2003_563_pages dialogue online]</ref>}}
| |
| | |
| In his ''[[Dialogue with Trypho]]'', Justin relates how Christians maintain that the Logos,
| |
| | |
| {{blockquote|... is indivisible and inseparable from the Father, just as they say that the light of the sun on earth is indivisible and inseparable from the sun in the heavens; as when it sinks, the light sinks along with it; so the Father, when He chooses, say they, causes His power to spring forth, and when He chooses, He makes it return to Himself ... And that this power which the prophetic word calls God ... is not numbered [as different] in name only like the light of the sun but is indeed something numerically distinct, I have discussed briefly in what has gone before; when I asserted that this power was begotten from the Father, by His power and will, but not by abscission, as if the essence of the Father were divided; as all other things partitioned and divided are not the same after as before they were divided: and, for the sake of example, I took the case of fires kindled from a fire, which we see to be distinct from it, and yet that from which many can be kindled is by no means made less, but remains the same.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/01289.htm|title=Dialogue With Trypho, 128, 129|last=Justin Martyr}}</ref><ref>[https://www.academia.edu/7280008/JUSTIN_MARTYR_Dialogue_avec_Tryphon_Dialogue_with_Trypho_%C3%A9dition_critique_VOLUME_I_Introduction_Texte_grec_Traduction_Coll_Paradosis_%C3%A9ditions_universitaires_de_Fribourg_Suisse_no_47_1_2003_563_pages Greek edition Ph. Bobichon]</ref>}}
| |
| | |
| In his ''[[First Apology of Justin Martyr|First Apology]]'', Justin used the [[Stoicism|Stoic]] concept of the Logos to his advantage as a way of arguing for Christianity to non-Jews. Since a Greek audience would accept this concept, his argument could concentrate on identifying this Logos with Jesus.<ref name="Goodenough" />
| |
| | |
| === Theophilus of Antioch ===
| |
| [[File:TheophilusofAntioch.png|thumb|120px|[[Theophilus of Antioch]] ]]
| |
| [[Theophilus of Antioch|Theophilus, the Patriarch of Antioch]] (died {{circa|180}}) in his ''Apology to Autolycus'' also identifies the Logos as the Son of God, who was at one time internal within the Father, but was begotten by the Father before creation:
| |
| | |
| <blockquote>And first, they taught us with one consent that God made all things out of nothing; for nothing was coeval with God: but He being His own place, and wanting nothing, and existing before the ages, willed to make man by whom He might be known; for him, therefore, He prepared the world. For he that is created is also needy; but he that is uncreated stands in need of nothing. God, then, having His own Word internal within His own bowels, begot Him, emitting Him along with His own wisdom before all things. He had this Word as a helper in the things that were created by Him, and by Him He made all things ... Not as the poets and writers of myths talk of the sons of gods begotten from intercourse [with women], but as truth expounds, the Word, that always exists, residing within the heart of God. For before anything came into being He had Him as a counsellor, being His own mind and thought. But when God wished to make all that He determined on, He begot this Word, uttered, the first-born of all creation, not Himself being emptied of the Word [Reason], but having begotten Reason, and always conversing with His Reason.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02042.htm|title=To Autolycus, 2.10, 22|last=Theophilus of Antioch}}</ref></blockquote>
| |
| | |
| He sees in the text of the operation of the Trinity, following the early practice as identifying the Holy Spirit as the Wisdom ([[Sophia (wisdom)|sophía]]) of God{{efn|His contemporary, Irenaeus of Lyon, citing this same passage, writes, {{blockquote|By the word of the Lord were the heavens established, and by his spirit all their power. Since then the Word establishes, that is to say, gives body and grants the reality of being, and the Spirit gives order and form to the diversity of the powers; rightly and fittingly is the Word called the Son, and the Spirit the Wisdom of God. (Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching, 5)}}
| |
| | |
| This is in contrast with later Christian writings, where ''Wisdom'' came to be more prominently identified as the Son.}} when he writes that "God by His own Word and Wisdom made all things; for by His Word were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the Spirit of His mouth"<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02041.htm|title=To Autolycus, 1.7|last=Theophilus of Antioch}}</ref> So he expresses in his second letter to Autolycus, "In like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity, of God, and His Word, and His wisdom."<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02042.htm|title=To Autolycus, 2.15|last=Theophilus of Antioch}}</ref>
| |
| | |
| === Athenagoras of Athens ===
| |
| By the third quarter of the second century, persecution had been waged against Christianity in many forms. Because of their denial of the [[Roman gods]], and their refusal to participate in sacrifices of the [[Roman imperial cult|Imperial cult]], Christians were suffering persecution as "atheists".<ref>Athenagoras, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0205.htm Plea For the Christians, 4]</ref> Therefore the early Christian apologist [[Athenagoras of Athens|Athenagoras]] ({{circa|133}}{{snd}}{{circa|190}}), in his ''Embassy'' or ''Plea''<ref>{{Cite web |last=Athenagoras |title=Church Fathers: A Plea for the Christians |url=https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0205.htm |access-date=2023-11-07 |website=www.newadvent.org}}</ref> to the emperors [[Marcus Aurelius]] and his son [[Commodus]] in defense of Christianity (c. 176), makes an expression of the Christian faith against this claim. As a part of this defense, he articulates the doctrine of the Logos, expressing the paradox of the Logos being both the Son of God as well as God the Son, and of the Logos being both the Son of the Father as well as being one with the Father,<ref>See also ''Plea'', 24: "For, as we acknowledge God, and the Logos his Son, and a Holy Spirit, united in power—the Father, the Son, the Spirit, because the Son is the Intelligence [{{lang|grc|Nous}}], Word [{{lang|grc|Logos}}], Wisdom [{{lang|grc|Sophia}}] of the Father, and the Spirit an effluence, as light from a fire". Adapted from the translation of B. P. Pratten, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 2, being corrected according to the original Greek.</ref> saying,
| |
| | |
| <blockquote>Who, then, would not be astonished to hear men called atheists who speak of God the Father, and of God the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and who declare both their power in union and their distinction in order? ... the Son of God is the Word [{{lang|grc|Logos}}] of the Father, in idea and in operation; for after the pattern of Him and by Him were all things made, the Father and the Son being one. And, the Son being in the Father and the Father in the Son, in oneness and power of spirit, the understanding [{{lang|grc|Nous}}] and reason [{{lang|grc|Logos}}] of the Father is the Son of God. But if, in your surpassing intelligence, it occurs to you to inquire what is meant by the Son, I will state briefly that He is the first product of the Father, not as having been brought into existence (for from the beginning, God, who is the eternal mind [{{lang|grc|Nous}}], had the Word in Himself, being from eternity rational [{{lang|grc|Logikos}}]; but inasmuch as He came forth to be the idea and energizing power of all material things, which lay like a nature without attributes, and an inactive earth, the grosser particles being mixed up with the lighter...<ref>Athenagoras, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0205.htm Plea for the Christians], 10</ref></blockquote>
| |
| | |
| Athenagoras further appeals to the joint rule of the [[Roman emperor]] with his son Commodus, as an illustration of the Father and the Word, his Son, to whom he maintains all things are subjected, saying,
| |
| | |
| <blockquote>For as all things are subservient to you, father and son, who have received the kingdom from above (for "the king's soul is in the hand of God," says the prophetic Spirit), so to the one God and the Word proceeding from Him, the Son, apprehended by us as inseparable from Him, all things are in like manner subjected.<ref>Athenagoras, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0205.htm Plea for the Christians], 18</ref></blockquote>
| |
| | |
| In this defense he uses terminology common with the philosophies of his day ({{lang|grc|Nous, Logos, Logikos, Sophia}}) as a means of making the Christian doctrine relatable to the philosophies of his day.
| |
| | |
| === Irenaeus of Lyon ===
| |
| [[Irenaeus]] (c. 130–202), a student of the Apostle John's disciple, [[Polycarp]], identifies the Logos as Jesus, by whom all things were made,<ref name="Against Heresies, 3.8.3">Irenaeus, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103308.htm ''Against Heresies'', 3.8.3]</ref> and who before his [[Incarnation (Christianity)|incarnation]] appeared to men in the [[theophany]], conversing with the pre-Mosaic [[Patriarchs (Bible)|Patriarchs]],<ref>Irenaeus, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103311.htm Against Heresies, 3.11.8], "And the Word of God Himself used to converse with the ante-Mosaic patriarchs, in accordance with His divinity and glory ... Afterwards, being made man for us, He sent the gift of the celestial Spirit over all the earth, protecting us with His wings"</ref> with [[Moses]] at the burning bush,<ref>Irenaeus, [https://www.ccel.org/ccel/irenaeus/demonstr.iv.html Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching], 2</ref> with [[Abraham]] at [[Mamre]],<ref>Irenaeus, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103306.htm Against Heresies, 3.6.1]</ref> and elsewhere,<ref>Irenaeus, [https://www.ccel.org/ccel/irenaeus/demonstr.iv.html Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching], 43–47</ref> manifesting to them the unseen things of the Father.<ref>Irenaeus, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103230.htm Against Heresies, 2.30.9]</ref> After these things, the Logos became man and suffered the death of the cross.<ref>Irenaeus, [https://www.ccel.org/ccel/irenaeus/demonstr.iv.html Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching], 53</ref> In his ''Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching'', Irenaeus defines the second point of the faith, after the Father, as this:
| |
| | |
| <blockquote>The Word of God, Son of God, Christ Jesus our Lord, who was manifested to the prophets according to the form of their prophesying and according to the method of the dispensation of the Father: through whom all things were made; who also at the end of the times, to complete and gather up all things, was made man among men, visible and tangible, in order to abolish death and show forth life and produce a community of union between God and man.<ref>Irenaeus, [https://www.ccel.org/ccel/irenaeus/demonstr.iv.html Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching], 6</ref></blockquote>
| |
| | |
| Irenaeus writes that Logos is and always has been the Son, is uncreated, eternally-coexistent<ref>Irenaeus, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103230.htm ''Against Heresies'', 2.30.9.] (see also, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103225.htm 2.25.3] and [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103406.htm 4.6.2]):
| |
| | |
| "He is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ: through His Word, who is His Son, through Him He is revealed and manifested to all to whom He is revealed; for those [only] know Him to whom the Son has revealed Him. But the Son, eternally co-existing with the Father, from of old, yea, from the beginning, always reveals the Father to Angels, Archangels, Powers, Virtues, and all to whom He wills that God should be revealed."</ref> and one with the Father,<ref>Irenaeus, ''[https://www.ccel.org/ccel/irenaeus/demonstr.iv.html Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching]'', 45–47</ref><ref>Irenaeus, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103405.htm ''Against Heresies'', 4.5.2]</ref><ref name="Against Heresies, 3.8.3" /><ref>Irenaeus, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103522.htm Against Heresies, 5.22.1], "But the Word of God is the superior above all, He who is loudly proclaimed in the law: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord your God is one God{{'"}}</ref> to whom the Father spoke at creation saying, "Let us make man."<ref>Irenaeus, ''[https://www.ccel.org/ccel/irenaeus/demonstr.iv.html Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching]'', 55</ref> As such he distinguishes between creature and creator, so that
| |
| | |
| <blockquote>He indeed who made all things can alone, together with His Word, properly be termed God and Lord: but the things which have been made cannot have this term applied to them, neither should they justly assume that appellation which belongs to the Creator.<ref>Irenaeus, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103308.htm Against Heresies, 3.8.3]</ref></blockquote>
| |
| | |
| Again, in his fourth book against heresies, after identifying Christ as the Word, who spoke to Moses at the burning bush, he writes, "Christ Himself, therefore, together with the Father, is the God of the living, who spoke to Moses, and who was manifested to the fathers."<ref>Irenaeus, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103405.htm ''Against Heresies'', 4.5.2]</ref>
| |
| | |
| According to Irenaeus, John wrote to refute errors proclaimed by Cerinthus.<ref name=":0">Irenaeus. ''Against Heresies''. (Book III, Chapter 11.1)</ref> The latter taught "that the world was not made by the primary God, but by a certain Power far separated from him. ... He represented Jesus as having not been born of a virgin, but as being the son of Joseph and Mary according to the ordinary course of human generation."<ref name=":1">Irenaeus. ''Against Heresies''. (Book I, Chapter 26.1)</ref> Furthermore, Cerinthus made a distinction between "Jesus, the Son of the Creator" and "the Christ from above" and said that "after [Jesus'] baptism, Christ descended upon him in the form of a dove from the Supreme Ruler." But, after "Christ departed from Jesus ... Jesus suffered and rose again."<ref name=":1" />
| |
| | |
| Irenaeus wrote that John wrote these verses to refute these errors and to state:
| |
| | |
| <blockquote>"That there is one Almighty God, who made all things by His Word,"<ref name=":0" /> and "That by the Word, through whom God made the creation, He also bestowed salvation on the men."<ref name=":0" /></blockquote>
| |
| | |
| Therefore, while Cerinthus claimed that the world was made by "a certain Power far separated from" an almighty God, John, according to Irenaeus, by means of ,<ref name=":0" /> presented Almighty God as the Creator{{snd}}"by His Word." And while Cerinthus made a distinction between the man Jesus and "the Christ from above," who descended on the man Jesus at his baptism, John, according to Irenaeus, presented the pre-existent ''Word'' and Jesus Christ as one and the same.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103311.htm |title=Against Heresies, 3.11.1 |last=Irenaeus}}</ref>
| |
| | |
| === Alexandria ===
| |
| | |
| The mixing of pagan and Christian thought was characteristic of Alexandrian learning and featured in the works of [[Cyril of Alexandria]] and [[Didymus the Blind]].<ref>Garth Fowden. (1993). ''The Egyptian Hermes : a historical approach to the late Pagan mind''. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. pp. 178–182. {{ISBN|0691024987}}.</ref>
| |
| | |
| In the [[Holy Book of the Great Invisible Spirit]] (also known as the Gospel of the Egyptians), a text from early Christian [[Gnosticism]], the Logos appears as a divine emanation or [[Aeon (Gnosticism)|aeon]] of the great spirit or [[Monad (Gnosticism)|Monad]] and mingles with the [[Adam Kadmon#Gnosticism|primordial Adam]].<ref>{{cite book|author1=Alexander Böhlig|author2=Frederik Wisse|title=Nag Hammadi Codices III, 2 and IV, 2 - The Gospel of the Egyptians (the Holy Book of the Great Invisible Spirit) - Volumes 2-3|url=http://gnosis.org/naghamm/goseqypt.html|publisher=[[Brill Publishers|Brill]]|year=1975|access-date=2021-10-20}}</ref>
| |
| | |
| == Post-Nicene Christianity ==
| |
| {{Further|Neoplatonism and Christianity}}
| |
| The [[First Council of Constantinople]] of 381 decreed that the Logos is God, begotten and therefore distinguishable from the Father, but, being God, of the [[Consubstantiality|same substance]] (essence).{{citation needed|date=September 2021}}
| |
| | |
| [[Photinus]] denied that the Logos as the Wisdom of God had an existence of its own before the birth of Christ.<ref>C. W. Wolfskeel. ''Introduction to De immortalitate animae of Augustine: text, translation and commentary''. 1977. p. 19</ref>
| |
| | |
| Post-apostolic Christian writers struggled with the question of the identity of Jesus and the Logos, but the Church's doctrine never changed its claim that Jesus was the Logos. Each of the first six [[ecumenical council]]s defined Jesus Christ as fully God and fully human, from the [[First Council of Nicea]] (325) to the [[Third Council of Constantinople]] (680–681).<ref>New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia: ''The 21 Ecumenical Councils'', available at [http://www.newadvent.org/library/almanac_14388a.htm 14388].</ref> Christianity did not accept the [[Platonism|Platonic]] argument that the spirit is good and the flesh is evil, and that therefore the man Jesus could not be God. Neither did it accept any of the Platonic beliefs that would have made Jesus something less than fully God and fully human at the same time. The original teaching of John's gospel is, "In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God. ... And the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us."<ref>; NIV with Greek inserted.</ref> The final [[Christology of Chalcedon]] (confirmed by the [[Third Council of Constantinople]]) was that Jesus Christ is both God and man, and that these two natures are inseparable, indivisible, unconfused, and unchangeable.<ref>[[Donald Macleod (theologian)|Macleod, Donald]]. ''The Person of Christ''. Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press. 1998. p. 185.</ref>
| |
| | |
| ==Modern references==
| |
| On April 1, 2005, [[Cardinal (Catholic Church)|Cardinal]] Joseph Ratzinger (who became [[Pope Benedict XVI]] just over two weeks later) referred to the Christian religion as the religion of the Logos:
| |
| | |
| <blockquote>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.<ref>{{cite web
| |
| | url = https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/culture/catholic-contributions/cardinal-ratzinger-on-europe-s-crisis-of-culture.html
| |
| | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20181203190058/https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/culture/catholic-contributions/cardinal-ratzinger-on-europe-s-crisis-of-culture.html
| |
| | archive-date = December 3, 2018
| |
| | title = Cardinal Ratzinger On Europe's Crisis of Culture
| |
| | last = Ratzinger
| |
| | first = Joseph
| |
| | date = April 1, 2005
| |
| | website = Catholic Education Resource Center
| |
| }}</ref></blockquote>
| |
| | |
| Catholics may use Logos to refer to the moral law written in human hearts.{{citation needed|date=September 2021}} This meaning comes from (prophecy of new covenant): "I will write my law on their hearts." Saint 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. Although man may not explicitly recognize God, he has the spirit of Christ if he follows Jesus' moral laws, written in his heart.{{citation needed|date=September 2021}}
| |
| | |
| [[Michał Heller|Michael Heller]] has argued "that Christ is the logos implies that God's immanence in the world is his rationality".<ref>Heller, Michael. ''Creative Tension: Essays on Religion and Science''. Philadelphia, PA: Templeton Foundation Press, 2003. {{ISBN|1-932031-34-0}}.</ref>
| |
| | |
| ==Nontrinitarianism==
| |
| For [[Fausto Sozzini]], Christ was the Logos, but he denied his [[pre-existence of Christ|pre-existence]]; He was the Word of God as being His Interpreter ({{langx|la|interpres divinae voluntatis}}).<ref>The [[Catholic Encyclopedia]]{{Full citation needed|date=November 2023}}</ref> [[Nathaniel Lardner]] and [[Joseph Priestley]] considered the Logos a personification of God's wisdom.<ref>[[Isabel Rivers]], David L. Wykes. ''Joseph Priestley, scientist, philosopher, and theologian''. 2008. p. 36 "As historians have pointed out, it does seem surprising that Priestley should have been influenced to change his opinions at this date by A Letter ... Concerning ... the Logos by the Biblical scholar Nathaniel Lardner (1684–1768)"</ref>
| |
| | |
| ==Translation==
| |
| The [[Koine Greek]] term {{lang|grc|logos}} is translated in the [[Vulgate]] with the [[Latin]] {{lang|la|[[Dei verbum#Contents of Dei verbum|verbum]]}}. Both {{lang|grc|logos}} and {{lang|la|verbum}} are used to translate {{Script/Hebrew|דבר}} ({{lang|hbo|[[dabar (Hebrew word)|dabar]]}}) in the [[Hebrew Bible]].
| |
| | |
| The translation of the last four words of ({{lang|grc|θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος}}) has been a particular topic of debate in [[Western Christianity]] in the modern period. The debate mostly centers over the usage of the [[Article (grammar)|article]] {{lang|grc|ὁ}} within the clause, where some have argued that the absence of the article before {{lang|grc|[[θεός]]}} ('God') makes it indefinite and should therefore result in the translation, "and the Word was ''a god''". This translation can be found in the [[New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures|New World Translation]] of the [[Jehovah's Witnesses]],<ref>[http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/bl/r1/lp-e?q=john%201%3A (New World Translation)]</ref> and the [[Unitarianism|Unitarian]] [[Thomas Belsham]]'s 1808 revision of [[William Newcome]]'s translation.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://archive.org/details/newtestamentinim00newc|title=The New Testament: in an improved version upon the basis of Archbishop Newcome's new translation, with a corrected text, and notes critical and explanatory|access-date=2012-03-14}}</ref>{{efn|For problems with this translation, see Bruce M. Metzger, "The Jehovah's Witnesses and Jesus Christ: A Biblical and Theological Appraisal", Theology Today 10/1 (April 1953), pp. 65–85.}} Greek scholars such as [[Jason BeDuhn]] have also argued against the traditional translation, going as far as to state that:
| |
| | |
| <blockquote>Grammatically, is not a difficult verse to translate. It follows familiar, ordinary structures of Greek expression. A lexical ([[interlinear]]) translation of the controversial clause would read: "And a god was the Word." A minimal literal ([[formal equivalence]]) translation would rearrange the word order to match proper English expression: "And the Word was a god." The preponderance of evidence, from Greek grammar, from literary context, and from cultural environment, supports this translation, of which "the Word was divine" would be a slightly more polished variant carrying the same basic meaning. Both of these renderings are superior to the traditional translation which goes against these three key factors that guide accurate translation. The NASB, NIV, NRSV, and NAB follow the translation concocted by the KJV translators. This translation awaits a proper defense, since no obvious one emerges from Greek grammar, the literary context of John, or the cultural environment in which John is writing. (Jason BeDuhn, ''Truth in translation'')</blockquote>
| |
| | |
| Others, ignoring the function of the article altogether, have proposed the translation, "and God was the Word", confusing{{Weasel inline|date=November 2023}} [[Subject (grammar)|subject]] and [[Predicate (grammar)|predicate]]. [[Colwell's rule]] dictates that in this construct, involving an equative verb as well as a [[predicate nominative]] in the emphatic position, the article serves to distinguish subject (the Word) from the predicate (God). In such a construction, the predicate, being in the emphatic position, is not to be considered indefinite.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament|last=Wallace|first=Daniel|publisher=Zondervan|year=1996|pages=40–43; 256–262}}</ref><ref>E. C. Colwell. "A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek New Testament," ''Journal of Biblical Literature'', LII (1933), 13, 21; 12–21 for full duscussion. See also B. M. Metzger, "On the Translation of John i. 1". ''Expository Times'', LXIII (1951–1952), 125 f., and C. F. D. Moule, ''The Language of the New Testament'', Inaugural Lecture, delivered at Cambridge University on May 23, 1952, pp. 12–14.</ref> Therefore, the most common English translation is, "the Word was God",<ref>appears in the [[King James Version]], [[Revised Standard Version]], [[New American Standard Bible]], [[New International Version]], [[New Living Translation]], [[English Standard Version]], and [[Young's Literal Translation]]</ref> although even more emphatic translations such as "the Word was God Himself" ([[Amplified Bible]]) or "the Word ... was truly God" ([[Contemporary English Version]]) also exist. According to the Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible translation, "and the Word was [what] God [was]", the footnote for this verse explains the difficulty:<blockquote>This second {{lang|grc|theos}} could also be translated 'divine' as the construction indicates "a qualitative sense for theos". The Word is ''not'' God in the sense that he is the ''same person'' as the {{lang|grc|theos}} mentioned in 1:1a; he is not [[God the Father]] (God absolutely as in common [[New Testament|NT]] usage) or the [[Trinity]]. The point being made is that the Logos is of the ''same uncreated nature'' or essence as [[God the Father]], with whom he eternally exists. This verse is echoed in the [[Nicene Creed]]: "[[God the Son|God]] (qualitative or derivative) from God (personal, the Father), Light from Light, True God from True God ... ''[[homoousion]]'' with the Father."<ref>Eastern Orthodox Bible, [https://web.archive.org/web/20090206004221/http://www.orthodox-church.info/eob/download/nt6x9.pdf New Testament], 2009, p. 231.</ref></blockquote>
| |
| | |
| Although ''word'' is the most common translation of the noun {{lang|grc|logos}}, other less accepted translations have been used, which have more or less fallen by the grammatical wayside as understanding of the Greek language has increased in the Western world.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament|last=Wallace|first=Daniel|publisher=Zondervan|year=1996|isbn=0-310-21895-0|pages=258}}</ref><ref>E. C. Colwell. "A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek New Testament," ''Journal of Biblical Literature'', LII (1933), 12-21. See also B. M. Metzger, "On the Translation of John i. 1." ''Expository Times'', LXIII (1951–1952), 125 f., and C. F. D. Moule, ''The Language of the New Testament'', Inaugural Lecture, delivered at Cambridge University on May 23, 1952, pp. 12–14.</ref> [[Gordon Clark]] (1902–1985), for instance, a [[Calvinist]] theologian and expert on [[pre-Socratic philosophy]], famously translated {{lang|grc|logos}} as 'logic': "In the beginning was the Logic, and the Logic was with God and the Logic was God."<ref>Daniel B. Wallace and M. James Sawyer (eds), ''Who's Afraid of the Holy Spirit?'', Biblical Studies Press, 2005, p. 269, {{ISBN|0-7375-0068-9}}.</ref> He meant to imply by this translation that the laws of logic were derived from God and formed part of creation, and were therefore not a [[secular]] principle imposed on the Christian [[world view]].{{citation needed|date=September 2021}}
| |
| | |
| Some other translations, such as [[An American Translation]] (1935)<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.innvista.com/culture/religion/bible/versions/an-american-translation-smith-goodspeed/ |title=An American Translation (Smith-Goodspeed) |publisher=Innvista |access-date=2015-04-27}}</ref> and [[Moffatt, New Translation]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.innvista.com/culture/religion/bible/versions/mnt.htm |title=Moffatt, New Translation |publisher=Innvista |access-date=2012-03-14 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120314133944/http://www.innvista.com/culture/religion/bible/versions/mnt.htm |archive-date=2012-03-14 }}</ref> render it as "the Word was divine".<ref>Francis J. Moloney and Daniel J. Harrington, ''The Gospel of John'', Liturgical Press, 1998, p. 35. {{ISBN|0-8146-5806-7}}.</ref>
| |
| | |
| The question of how to translate Logos is also treated in [[Goethe's Faust|Goethe's ''Faust'']], with lead character Heinrich Faust finally opting for [[:de:Faust I#Studierzimmer – Pudelszene: Faust, Mephisto|{{lang|de|die Tat}}]], ('deed' or 'action'). This interpretation owes itself to the Hebrew {{lang|hbo|דָּבָר}} ({{lang|hbo|dabar}}), which not only means 'word', but can also be understood as a deed or thing accomplished: that is, "the ''word'' is the highest and noblest function of man and is, for that reason, identical with his action. 'Word' and 'Deed' are thus not two different meanings of ''{{lang|hbo|dabar}}'', but the 'deed' is the consequence of the basic meaning inherent in ''{{lang|hbo|dabar}}''."<ref>{{Cite book |title=Hebrew Thought Compared with Greek |last=Boman |first=Thorleif |year=1960 |publisher=W. W. Norton & Company |isbn=978-0-393-00534-9 |pages=65–66}}</ref>
| |
| | |
| The concept of Logos also appears in the [[Targum]]s ([[Aramaic]] translations of the Hebrew Bible dating to the first centuries [[AD]]), where the term {{Lang|arc|memra}} (Aramaic for 'word') is often used instead of 'the Lord', especially when referring to a manifestation of God that could be construed as [[anthropomorphic]].<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|last1=Kohler|first1=Kauffman|date=1901–1906|title=Memra ("Ma'amar" or "Dibbur", "Logos")|editor1-last=Singer|editor1-first=Isidore|editor1-link=Isidore Singer|editor2-last=Funk|editor2-first=Isaac K.|editor2-link=Isaac K. Funk|editor3-last=Vizetelly|editor3-first=Frank H.|encyclopedia=Jewish Encyclopedia|location=New York|publisher=Funk & Wagnalls|volume=8|pages=464–465|url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10618-memra}}</ref>
| |
|
| |
|
| == See also == | | == See also == |
| * [[Asha]]
| |
| * [[Brahman]]
| |
| * [[In the beginning (phrase)]]
| |
| * [[Kalam]]
| |
| * [[Knowledge of Christ]] | | * [[Knowledge of Christ]] |
| * [[Last Adam]] | | * [[Last Adam]] |
| Line 150: |
Line 9: |
| * [[Perfection of Christ]] | | * [[Perfection of Christ]] |
| * [[Pre-existence of Christ]] | | * [[Pre-existence of Christ]] |
| * [[Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite|Pseudo-Dionysius]]
| |
| * [[Shabda]]
| |
| * [[Tao]]
| |
|
| |
|
| == Notes == | | == Notes == |
