38
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 53:
Line 53: + +
Talk:John 1-7 (Translated) (view source)
Revision as of 13:48, October 23, 2009
, 13:48, October 23, 2009→Truth or word
::::::::: Wow, thanks for the insights. I'll change John 17:17 back as you say.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 07:59, 20 October 2009 (EDT)
::::::::: Wow, thanks for the insights. I'll change John 17:17 back as you say.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 07:59, 20 October 2009 (EDT)
After reading what Michael Back had to say about the logos, and doing some research, I have to wonder if John's is a gospel or a philosophical tract. Saying that John took the Greek concept of the logos, challenged it, and gave it a new meaning, would make it seem like a philosophical tract. All the attempts here to define logos mirrors a very old discourse. From reading Karl Jaspers' discussion of Heraclitus in his book on the great philosophers, logos "can neither be translated into any other term nor defined as a concept". "Logos can signify: word, discourse, content of discourse, meaning; reason, truth; law; even Being." Edward Hussey in his book on the Presocratics, states that by the time Heraclitus (b. 540 BC) really began using logos in his philosophy, "the sense of 'reason' or 'reasoning' appears to be well established" for the meaning of logos. And it would seem that logos was used in reference to "divine law" or the law of the universe. It also appears that the logos was the means by which God - since the mid sixth century BC, perhaps starting with Xenophanes, the idea of one God became known, from which the idea of the logos originated - brought order to the kosmos. The Stoics defined the logos in the same way. And for Philo, the logos "denotes the Thought of God expressed in a form that is, at least indirectly, accessible to men and knowable by them". (From Ronald Williamson's book on Philo, p. 105) So if John extended the meaning of logos, then this was in a long line of philosophers who struggled with the term and its meaning. If John then applied his understanding of the logos to Jesus, then we would have to wonder if equating the logos with Jesus is a true depiction, or a representation of his philosophizing. - Danielitld
== 1:2 ==
== 1:2 ==