Updated: 2013.09.18
The origin of λογος traces back to Heraclitus (ca. B.C.E. 535–475), who used the term for the principle of [spoken] order and knowledge (Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy (2nd ed): Heraclitus, 1999), in other words, intellectual oral discourse. Aristotle, similarly, used λογος in the sense of reasoned oral (rhetorical) discourse (Paul Anthony Rahe, Republics Ancient and Modern: The Ancien Régime in Classical Greece, University of North Carolina Press, 1994, ISBN 080784473X, p. 21.).
λογος is a key term in Christianity (but not in Judaism) that derives not from the original Hebrew
Jewish, and subsequent Christian, Hellenist theology generates from, and orbits, the term λογος. This path to assimilation was blazed by Φιλων (B.C.E. 20–50 C.E.), an Egyptian Hellenized Jew, who reformed the term to describe a λογος to mean an intermediary divine being, or demiurge (i.e., a man-god; Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy (2nd ed): Philo Judaeus, 1999). This Hellenist λογος demiurge was subsequently adopted as the centerpiece of Christianity.
"The Stoics conceived of a single λογος σπερματικος [a seminal Saying] manifesting itself in innumerable λογοι σπερματικοι [seminal Sayings], which give things their form." (On the Creation XIII §43; Philo, translated by F.G. Colson and G.H. Whitaker, Loeb Classical Library, (Vol. I,; Appendix p. 475). Φιλων equated οι λογοι with the Stoic concept of λογοι σπερματικοι. Thus, "the λογος" became, in Φιλων's Hellenist philosophy, the life force of all creation.
Φιλων paraphrases bᵊ-Reish•itꞋ 2.4 as: This "τελειος λογος" [ultimate Saying], moving in accord with the number 7, is the primal origin both of mind ordering itself after the original patterns, and of sense-perception in the domain of mind ordering itself after these originals. βιβλιον is the name of θεου λογον…" (Allegorical Interpretation I.19; Philo, Vol. I, p. 158-9).
"Since λογος [argument from reason as defined by Aristotle] is at war with παθει…" (Allegorical Interpretation III.xxxix.116; Philo, Vol. I, p. 378-9).
Φιλων deduces from (LXX Γενεσις) bᵊ-Reish•itꞋ 25.29 that it was λογος that convicted and defeated the κακια and παθος of Ei•sauꞋ (The Sacrifices of Abel and Cain §81-82; Philo, Vol. II, p. 156-57).
Φιλων is explicit that λογος refers to oral speech (The Posterity and Exile of Cain §108; Philo, Vol. II, p. 388-9).
"[in, at, with, by, to, for] the high and heavenly λογω" (Noah's Work as a Planter §52; Philo, Vol. III, p. 238-39). Here, Φιλων implies that the λογος is divine.
"of/from divine and holy λογων… who are, by moral custom, called angels" (The Confusion of Tongues §28; Philo, Vol IV, p. 26-27). Here, Φιλων explicitly states that plural "λογος-es" are divine.
the Father, Who is not mortal but immortal—ανθρωπον θεου, Who, being the λογος of the Eternal must needs Himself be Imperishable" (The Confusion of Tongues §41; Philo, Vol IV, p. 32-33). Here, Φιλων explicitly identifies the λογος, previously described as divine, as the "man of God."
"FIrst-born of θεου, λογον… And many names are His, for He is called, "the Beginning," and the Name of θεου, and λογος, and the Man, and the Seer, shall Israel call [him]." (The Confusion of Tongues §146; Philo, Vol IV, p. 89-91). Φιλων can hardly be referring to anything other than the Mâ•shiꞋakh.
"His invisible image, the most holy λογου, for the λογος is the eldest-born image of θεου" (The Confusion of Tongues §147; Philo, Vol IV, p. 90-91). Φιλων certainly refers to the Mâ•shiꞋakh.
"the High Priest, the λογον" (The Migration of Abraham §102; Philo, Vol IV, p. 190-91). Φιλων seems to suggest that the λογος, previously implied to be the Mâ•shiꞋakh, absorbs also the position of Ko•heinꞋ Gâ•dolꞋ (as prophesied of the Mâ•shiꞋakh).
"the creative and kingly powers are represented by the winged Cherubim [sic] that rest upon [the Mercy Seat]. The Divine λογος, Who is high above all these, has not been visibly portrayed… Nay, He is Himself the Icon of θεου, chiefest of all Beings, intellectually perceived, placed nearest, with no intervening distance, to the Alone truly existent One. For we read [Shᵊm•otꞋ 25.21]: I will talk with you [Φιλων assumes the λογος] from above the Mercy Seat, between the two Cherubim [sic]." (On Flight and Finding §101; Philo, Vol V, p. 64-65). Note that to Greek and Roman Hellenist readers, the "winged chariot" was the chariot upon which Zeus rode (Plato, Phaedrus 246, cf. On Dreams ii §294; Philo, Vol. V, p. 611.).
To 1st century Jews, even 1st century Hellenist Jews, λογος–the Oral Word–was the Hellenist Greek translation of Tor•âhꞋ shë-Bᵊ•alꞋ pëh. Thanks in no small part to Φιλων, the term became distorted and transformed by Hellenist Roman gentiles, through the lens of their idolatrous Hellenist theology, into "the Divine Word," an anthropomorphic metonym for their deified (idolatrous) demiurge (man-god).
This native Hellenist, idolatrous concept was explicated in their Hellenized (Christianized, redacted) "gospel" of St. John 1.1-2, 14 (translated from the earliest Greek rather than copied from the KJ/V English): " 1 In the beginning was the λογος, and the λογος was προς τον θεον (theon acc. m.s.; god), and θεος was the λογος. 2 The same was προς τον θεον in the beginning… 14 And the λογος became flesh and pitched-tent among us, and we gaze at his glory, glory as the only-begotten beside the Father, full of grace and truth." To Hellenist Roman gentiles, λογος was a metonym for Jesus.
What Yokhâ•nânꞋ would have explicated, if it were authentic, would have been: "In the beginning was the Oral Law = Tor•âhꞋ shë-Bᵊ•alꞋ pëh = Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ [since Yokhâ•nânꞋ, being a tal•midꞋ of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, was a pᵊrush•iꞋ. This is self-evident since é--ä spoke–Orally verbalized–everything into existence.] "And the Oral Law was 'ìä, and the Oral Law was [the Oral Voice of] é--ä. The same was with é--ä in the beginning."
Qum•rânꞋ Dead Sea Scroll 4Q MMT (Miq•satꞋ Ma•as•ëhꞋ ha-Tor•âhꞋ) documents that 1st century Jews believed–and still believe today–that the Oral Law is the innermost core of Tor•âhꞋ.
 |
|
 |