Is the Logos meaningful, or meaningless? - Depends on your view of Logos.

[St. SteVen]

Ok for starters, God is not the Logos rather the Logos is an emination of God. This is why the Gnostics call the Hebrew Bible God the Demiurgus because the Hebrew Bible refers to God as the Logos. Which it is not.

The scripture, John 1:1, tells us (in its English translation) that the Logos was WITH God and that the Logos WAS God.
Well, which is it? WITH or WAS ???
Which is why I like your take on this. The Logos is not God. Or as you wrote, "God is not the Logos"

/

 

[St. SteVen]

Here is a great example of the Logos depicted in scripture as an allegory. Only a true initiate will see the veracity of what's being tought.

"He is ready to separate the chaff from the wheat with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, gathering the wheat into his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire.” - Matt 3:13

Separating the chaff from the wheat and throwing it into the never ending fire (deductive reasoning).

Gathering the wheat into his barn (inductive reasoning).

Sorry, I'm a bit thick-headed on this subject.

Why is "Separating the chaff from the wheat and throwing it into the never ending fire" not inductive reasoning too?
It's not actual wheat and chaff being referred to, right?

/

 

[Zachariah.]

The scripture, John 1:1, tells us (in its English translation) that the Logos was WITH God and that the Logos WAS God.
Well, which is it? WITH or WAS ???
Which is why I like your take on this. The Logos is not God. Or as you wrote, "God is not the Logos"

/

The Holy Spirit is an aspect of inductive reasoning. This is seen in the symboligy when Jesus is "inducted" or "initiated" through baptism. The dove lands on his head.

It's not so much that we recieve the Holy Spirit rather it is that we are recieved by her.

 

[Zachariah.]

Sorry, I'm a bit thick-headed on this subject.

Why is "Separating the chaff from the wheat and throwing it into the never ending fire" not inductive reasoning too?
It's not actual wheat and chaff being referred to, right?

/

The chaff is being removed (deducted). The wheat is being added (inducted).

Or better put the chaff is being rejected. The wheat recieved.

 

[APAK]

The scripture, John 1:1, tells us (in its English translation) that the Logos was WITH God and that the Logos WAS God.
Well, which is it? WITH or WAS ???
Which is why I like your take on this. The Logos is not God. Or as you wrote, "God is not the Logos"

/

Steve: you do realize that the common version and common translation of scripture you presented in John 1 is not the best, at all. In fact it is very misleading. So, where it is said 'with' God, it really means a part and facing or towards God...as an intrinsic divine quality. And where you have 'was' God it really suggests for the Greek that this same divine quality was DIVINE not God.

Just saying...logos is the inner divine voice, reason and expressions of God himself that forms ideas and plans and his spirit then executes them...as in the new Genesis then, the seed of immortality with his Son and then for believers The new Genesis if you will.

 

[St. SteVen]

The chaff is being removed (deducted). The wheat is being added (inducted).

Oh... that's a good way to remember which is which. (I think) - LOL

Taxes were deducted from my pay check. (removed)
My brother was inducted (added) to the military service.

Not sure if that is inductive and deductive reasoning though.

/

 

[St. SteVen]

Steve: you do realize that the common version and common translation of scripture you presented in John 1 is not the best, at all. In fact it is very misleading. So, where it is said 'with' God, it really means a part and facing or towards God...as an intrinsic divine quality. And where you have 'was' God it really suggests for the Greek that this same divine quality was DIVINE not God.

Just saying...logos is the inner divine voice, reason and expressions of God himself that forms ideas and plans and his spirit then executes them...as in the new Genesis then, the seed of immortality with his Son and then for believers The new Genesis if you will.

Agree.
I see the Logos as being something separate from God. The Logos (idea/reason/logic) became flesh.
Is that how you see it?

/

 

[Zachariah.]

Oh... that's a good way to remember which is which. (I think) - LOL

Taxes were deducted from my pay check. (removed)
My brother was inducted (added) to the military service.

Not sure if that is inductive and deductive reasoning though.

/

Look at it like this. A battery has a + and -. The battery is God. The energy is deducted from the battery through the +, it is then inducted back in through the -.

 

[APAK]

Agree.
I see the Logos as being something separate from God. The Logos (idea/reason/logic) became flesh.
Is that how you see it?

/

1. Logos by definition and Greek grammar cannot ever be a person. There is no precedence for it in the Greek language unless you force one, and religious orthodoxy did many centuries ago.
2. The logos (the voice or word of God - NOT a person) became embedded/inside a human being as we know, in Christ, not that the logos is that person or became actual flesh. Having the divine quality within a person to speak and voice the words of God Almighty does NOT make that person God or divine.
3. This is the issue and a major critical problem with those that have bought in to the Binitarian or Trinitarian view that makes zero honest sense, only the sense that scripture was deliberately abused for the sake of paganistic religionists. It happened by political and physical force. It's that simple and dead wrong.

So, you are of course at liberty to 'see' what you want, although if I were you, I would really know where I received this truth from of your past and what this truth actually means, to really re-examine it.

A human being is flesh, not the logos (idea/reason) OF God. Makes no logical and scriptural sense whatsoever. The logos or idea(s) OF GOD not a human being never became THE actual flesh. IT and it is an IT, was consciously embedded and then used by one special flesh, or person as we know, our Savior the Son OF God.

And John, who especially penned these words under study, along with the early believers of the 1st century, would never walk with religious folks of Greek paganism and religious persuasion of the 4th century and on, who would call the logos OF God, the same as the Son of God, for sure.

--------enough said, you either know this as truth and believe it or not---------

 

[Hillsage]

Here is a great example of the Logos depicted in scripture as an allegory. Only a true initiate will see the veracity of what's being tought.

"He is ready to separate the chaff from the wheat with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, gathering the wheat into his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire.” - Matt 3:13

Separating the chaff from the wheat and throwing it into the never ending fire (deductive reasoning).

Gathering the wheat into his barn (inductive reasoning).

Agree with the above, but taking it to another level.

Inductive is 'soulish thinking' and deductive is 'spiritual thinking'. In scripture this concept is pointed out with verses which stated things like "ADD" (addition) and "DIVIDED" (division).

LUK 12:25 And which of you with taking thought can add to his stature one cubit?
2PE 1:5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;
REV 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

MAT 12:26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?
SATAN'S KINGDOM IS DIVIDED AGAINST ITSELF AND THAT'S WHY IT IS DOOMED TO ULTIMATELY FALL.
LUK 12:52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.
1CO 12:10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: 11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.
"INTERPRETATION" IS NOT TRANSLATION. THE UN HAS TRANSLATORS (WORD FOR WORD) NOT INTERPRETERS (THOUGHT OR INTENT OF WHAT IS SAID) Differing bible translations are made upon this same principle. Some are 'word for word' and some are 'thought or intent'.

 

[St. SteVen]

So, you are of course at liberty to 'see' what you want, although if I were you, I would really know where I received this truth from of your past and what this truth actually means, to really re-examine it.

We seem to not be communicating.
I thought we were on the same page, but you don't see it that way.
Not sure if I am being thick-headed about some nuance in what you are writing or not.

Did you understand the OP? (did you you read it?) As in the whole post?

I am challenging the traditional view of "the Word" (Logos) being Jesus.
As I understand it, "the Word" (Logos) BECAME flesh. Which means it WASN'T Jesus prior.

/

 

[Zachariah.]

Agree with the above, but taking it to another level.

Inductive is 'soulish thinking' and deductive is 'spiritual thinking'. In scripture this concept is pointed out with verses which stated things like "ADD" (addition) and "DIVIDED" (division).

LUK 12:25 And which of you with taking thought can add to his stature one cubit?
2PE 1:5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;
REV 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

MAT 12:26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?
SATAN'S KINGDOM IS DIVIDED AGAINST ITSELF AND THAT'S WHY IT IS DOOMED TO ULTIMATELY FALL.
LUK 12:52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.
1CO 12:10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: 11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.
"INTERPRETATION" IS NOT TRANSLATION. THE UN HAS TRANSLATORS (WORD FOR WORD) NOT INTERPRETERS (THOUGHT OR INTENT OF WHAT IS SAID) Differing bible translations are made upon this same principle. Some are 'word for word' and some are 'thought or intent'.

Both generative principles are souls. Only one is redeemed and the other divided.

We can see the divided soul as the ego and the redeemed soul as the higher self.

 

[Hillsage]

Both generative principles are souls. Only one is redeemed and the other divided.

We can see the divided soul as the ego and the redeemed soul as the higher self.

I see only spirit as being regenerated, or saved via being 're-born' or 'born from above'. I see the soul salvation as being progressively saved/lost, but only if we are totally single minded in obedience to Christ. But if we are doubly minded we will go forward and backslide. I know that's how it works in my life. And as for my body being saved?...74 and not looking as saved as when it was in its 20's...50's. Looking like the law of sin and death....on the installment plan....should the Lord tarry.

YLT JAM 1:8 a two-souled man {is} unstable in all his ways.

 

[Zachariah.]

I see only spirit as being regenerated, or saved via being 're-born' or 'born from above'. I see the soul salvation as being progressively saved/lost, but only if we are totally single minded in obedience to Christ. But if we are doubly minded we will go forward and backslide. I know that's how it works in my life. And as for my body being saved?...74 and not looking as saved as when it was in its 20's...50's. Looking like the law of sin and death....on the installment plan....should the Lord tarry.

YLT JAM 1:8 a two-souled man {is} unstable in all his ways.

Yes, you see, your physical body is a reflective manifestation of your ego. It is subject to change and moving towards death.

 

[APAK]

We seem to not be communicating.
I thought we were on the same page, but you don't see it that way.
Not sure if I am being thick-headed about some nuance in what you are writing or not.

Did you understand the OP? (did you you read it?) As in the whole post?

I am challenging the traditional view of "the Word" (Logos) being Jesus.
As I understand it, "the Word" (Logos) BECAME flesh. Which means it WASN'T Jesus prior.

/

Well then I'm confused by your post #107 that I was directly responding to....

 

[St. SteVen]

Well then I'm confused by your post #107 that I was directly responding to....

Thanks. Let's try that again. Here's post #107. I'll elaborate some more. See if that helps.

Agree.
I see the Logos as being something separate from God. The Logos (idea/reason/logic) became flesh.
Is that how you see it?

The Logos was pre-existent as I understand it. But not as a person of the Godhead.
The Word (Logos) became flesh. Which means it was not flesh prior. Nor was it a person.
So, the Word (Logos - idea/reason/logic) became flesh.
We recognize that person as Jesus. Sent from God.

'

 

[Hillsage]

1. Logos by definition and Greek grammar cannot ever be a person. There is no precedence for it in the Greek language unless you force one, and religious orthodoxy did many centuries ago.

By "definition" from who? Certainly not by definition from the scriptures IMO.

John 4:24 "God IS SPIRIT"

I believe that this scripture defines WHAT the image or substance of the triune God IS in this verse. Therefore it seems fair to say; "in the beginning the WORD/LOGOS was spirit, along with 'the Father' and 'the Holy Spirit'. And it took all three to make 'the person' of God, which I think agrees with your above statement that the LOGOS wasn't 'the person' of God and neither was the LOGOS the person of Jesus. But what the LOGOS BECAME was the body of 'the triune person' Jesus. That is also confirmed by scripture.

JOH 1:14 And the Word/spirit became flesh and dwelt among us,....

Scripture does not say 'the Word' and 'the Holy Spirit' became Jesus. That's because the Holy Spirit birthed another spirit into the triune person of Jesusl. And that spirit was "the spirit of Christ". And it was 'that spirit' which Jesus sent to the hand of the Father from the cross. That allowed the sinless FLESH/LOGOS of Jesus to die.

So, now we have the triune man Jesus walking the face of the earth as the only GOD is spirit which became LOGOS/flesh. And when the vocal chords of that LOGOS/flesh body speaks the invisible thoughts of God into this earthly realm the LOGOS becomes a heard RHEMA/word.

JOH 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh (the carnate LOGOS) profiteth nothing: the words (RHEMA) that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

2. The logos (the voice or word of God - NOT a person) became embedded/inside a human being as we know, in Christ, not that the logos is that person or became actual flesh. Having the divine quality within a person to speak and voice the words of God Almighty does NOT make that person God or divine.

I disagree because as I believe I've supported scripturally that the 'logos is that which became actual flesh'.
But I do agree that the FLESH did not make that person divine. But I do think that the spirit of Christ in Jesus was divine and what made Jesus the Christ the SON of God.

Enough said I think. So rather than drag this out, I'm just going to say we probably disagree. But now you can hopefully can see why.

 

[APAK]

We recognize that person as Jesus. Sent from God.

'

What does your statement mean to you, above? This was and still is the confusing area as it is not clear whether you suddenly mean that Christ became the logos of God, of his Father...(I'm not a trinitarian by the way). Now if you mean God and his logos possessed Christ and Christ became the voice of his logos, then I do agree...

 

[APAK]

By "definition" from who? Certainly not by definition from the scriptures IMO.

John 4:24 "God IS SPIRIT"

I believe that this scripture defines WHAT the image or substance of the triune God IS in this verse. Therefore it seems fair to say; "in the beginning the WORD/LOGOS was spirit, along with 'the Father' and 'the Holy Spirit'. And it took all three to make 'the person' of God, which I think agrees with your above statement that the LOGOS wasn't 'the person' of God and neither was the LOGOS the person of Jesus. But what the LOGOS BECAME was the body of 'the triune person' Jesus. That is also confirmed by scripture.

JOH 1:14 And the Word/spirit became flesh and dwelt among us,....

Scripture does not say 'the Word' and 'the Holy Spirit' became Jesus. That's because the Holy Spirit birthed another spirit into the triune person of Jesusl. And that spirit was "the spirit of Christ". And it was 'that spirit' which Jesus sent to the hand of the Father from the cross. That allowed the sinless FLESH/LOGOS of Jesus to die.

So, now we have the triune man Jesus walking the face of the earth as the only GOD is spirit which became LOGOS/flesh. And when the vocal chords of that LOGOS/flesh body speaks the invisible thoughts of God into this earthly realm the LOGOS becomes a heard RHEMA/word.

JOH 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh (the carnate LOGOS) profiteth nothing: the words (RHEMA) that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.


I disagree because as I believe I've supported scripturally that the 'logos is that which became actual flesh'.
But I do agree that the FLESH did not make that person divine. But I do think that the spirit of Christ in Jesus was divine and what made Jesus the Christ the SON of God.

Enough said I think. So rather than drag this out, I'm just going to say we probably disagree. But now you can hopefully can see why.

Sorry, I'm not interested in going down any Trinitarian rabbit hole with you, especially on this critical area of scripture for the understanding and relationship of the Father and his son.

 

[St. SteVen]

What does your statement mean to you, above? This was and still is the confusing area as it is not clear whether you suddenly mean that Christ became the logos of God, of his Father...(I'm not a trinitarian by the way). Now if you mean God and his logos possessed Christ and Christ became the voice of his logos, then I do agree...

The Logos of God became Christ. (the Word became flesh)
For some reason Christ remembered being with God before He became flesh. (said he had seen the Father)

/