The greek word logos means

This article is about the Greek term logos in philosophy, etc. For the term specifically in Christianity, see Logos (Christianity). For the graphic mark, emblem, or symbol used for identification derived from this Greek term^[1], see Logo.

Logos (, ; Ancient Greek: λόγος, romanized: lógos, lit. ‘word, discourse, or reason’) is a term used in Western philosophy, psychology and rhetoric and refers to the appeal to reason that relies on logic or reason, inductive and deductive reasoning. Aristotle first systemised the usage of the word, making it one of the three principles of rhetoric. This specific use identifies the word closely to the structure and content of text itself. This specific usage has then been developed through the history of western philosophy and rhetoric.

The word has also been used in different senses along with rhema. Both Plato and Aristotle used the term logos along with rhema to refer to sentences and propositions. It is primarily in this sense the term is also found in religion.

Background[edit]

Ancient Greek: λόγος, romanized: lógos, lit. ‘word, discourse, or reason’ is related to Ancient Greek: λέγω, romanized: légō, lit. ‘I say’ which is cognate with Latin: Legus, lit. ‘law’. The word derives from a Proto-Indo-European root, *leǵ-, which can have the meanings «I put in order, arrange, gather, choose, count, reckon, discern, say, speak». In modern usage, it typically connotes the verbs «account», «measure», «reason» or «discourse».^[2][3]. It is occasionally used in other contexts, such as for «ratio» in mathematics.^[4]

The Purdue Online Writing Lab clarifies that logos is the appeal to reason that relies on logic or reason, inductive and deductive reasoning.^[5] In the context of Aristotle’s Rhetoric, logos is one of the three principles of rhetoric and in that specific use it more closely refers to the structure and content of the text itself.^[6]

Origins of the term[edit]

Logos became a technical term in Western philosophy beginning with Heraclitus (c.  535 – c.  475 BC), who used the term for a principle of order and knowledge.^[7] Ancient Greek philosophers used the term in different ways. The sophists used the term to mean discourse. Aristotle applied the term to refer to «reasoned discourse»^[8] or «the argument» in the field of rhetoric, and considered it one of the three modes of persuasion alongside ethos and pathos.^[9] Pyrrhonist philosophers used the term to refer to dogmatic accounts of non-evident matters. The Stoics spoke of the logos spermatikos (the generative principle of the Universe) which foreshadows related concepts in Neoplatonism.^[10]

Within Hellenistic Judaism, Philo (c.  20 BC – c.  50 AD) integrated the term into Jewish philosophy.^[11]
Philo distinguished between logos prophorikos («the uttered word») and the logos endiathetos («the word remaining within»).^[12]

The Gospel of John identifies the Christian Logos, through which all things are made, as divine (theos),^[13] and further identifies Jesus Christ as the incarnate Logos. Early translators of the Greek New Testament, such as Jerome (in the 4th century AD), were frustrated by the inadequacy of any single Latin word to convey the meaning of the word logos as used to describe Jesus Christ in the Gospel of John. The Vulgate Bible usage of in principio erat verbum was thus constrained to use the (perhaps inadequate) noun verbum for «word»; later Romance language translations had the advantage of nouns such as le Verbe in French. Reformation translators took another approach. Martin Luther rejected Zeitwort (verb) in favor of Wort (word), for instance, although later commentators repeatedly turned to a more dynamic use involving the living word as used by Jerome and Augustine.^[14] The term is also used in Sufism, and the analytical psychology of Carl Jung.

Despite the conventional translation as «word», logos is not used for a word in the grammatical sense—for that, the term lexis (λέξις, léxis) was used.^[15] However, both logos and lexis derive from the same verb légō (λέγω), meaning «(I) count, tell, say, speak».^[2][15][16]

Ancient Greek philosophy[edit]

Heraclitus[edit]

The writing of Heraclitus (c. 535 – c. 475 BC) was the first place where the word logos was given special attention in ancient Greek philosophy,^[17] although Heraclitus seems to use the word with a meaning not significantly different from the way in which it was used in ordinary Greek of his time.^[18] For Heraclitus, logos provided the link between rational discourse and the world’s rational structure.^[19]

This logos holds always but humans always prove unable to ever understand it, both before hearing it and when they have first heard it. For though all things come to be in accordance with this logos, humans are like the inexperienced when they experience such words and deeds as I set out, distinguishing each in accordance with its nature and saying how it is. But other people fail to notice what they do when awake, just as they forget what they do while asleep.

For this reason it is necessary to follow what is common. But although the logos is common, most people live as if they had their own private understanding.

— Diels–Kranz, 22B2

Listening not to me but to the logos it is wise to agree that all things are one.

— Diels–Kranz, 22B50^[20]

What logos means here is not certain; it may mean «reason» or «explanation» in the sense of an objective cosmic law, or it may signify nothing more than «saying» or «wisdom».^[21] Yet, an independent existence of a universal logos was clearly suggested by Heraclitus.^[22]

Aristotle’s rhetorical logos[edit]

Following one of the other meanings of the word, Aristotle gave logos a different technical definition in the Rhetoric, using it as meaning argument from reason, one of the three modes of persuasion. The other two modes are pathos (πᾰ́θος, páthos), which refers to persuasion by means of emotional appeal, «putting the hearer into a certain frame of mind»;^[23] and ethos (ἦθος, êthos), persuasion through convincing listeners of one’s «moral character».^[23] According to Aristotle, logos relates to «the speech itself, in so far as it proves or seems to prove».^[23][24] In the words of Paul Rahe:

For Aristotle, logos is something more refined than the capacity to make private feelings public: it enables the human being to perform as no other animal can; it makes it possible for him to perceive and make clear to others through reasoned discourse the difference between what is advantageous and what is harmful, between what is just and what is unjust, and between what is good and what is evil.^[8]

Logos, pathos, and ethos can all be appropriate at different times.^[25] Arguments from reason (logical arguments) have some advantages, namely that data are (ostensibly) difficult to manipulate, so it is harder to argue against such an argument; and such arguments make the speaker look prepared and knowledgeable to the audience, enhancing ethos.^{[citation needed]} On the other hand, trust in the speaker—built through ethos—enhances the appeal of arguments from reason.^[26]

Robert Wardy suggests that what Aristotle rejects in supporting the use of logos «is not emotional appeal per se, but rather emotional appeals that have no ‘bearing on the issue’, in that the pathē [πᾰ́θη, páthē] they stimulate lack, or at any rate are not shown to possess, any intrinsic connection with the point at issue—as if an advocate were to try to whip an antisemitic audience into a fury because the accused is Jewish; or as if another in drumming up support for a politician were to exploit his listeners’s reverential feelings for the politician’s ancestors».^[27]

Aristotle comments on the three modes by stating:

Of the modes of persuasion furnished by the spoken word there are three kinds.
The first kind depends on the personal character of the speaker;
the second on putting the audience into a certain frame of mind;
the third on the proof, or apparent proof, provided by the words of the speech itself.

Stoics[edit]

Stoic philosophy began with Zeno of Citium c. 300 BC, in which the logos was the active reason pervading and animating the Universe. It was conceived as material and is usually identified with God or Nature. The Stoics also referred to the seminal logos («logos spermatikos«), or the law of generation in the Universe, which was the principle of the active reason working in inanimate matter. Humans, too, each possess a portion of the divine logos.^[29]

The Stoics took all activity to imply a logos or spiritual principle. As the operative principle of the world, the logos was anima mundi to them, a concept which later influenced Philo of Alexandria, although he derived the contents of the term from Plato.^[30] In his Introduction to the 1964 edition of Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations, the Anglican priest Maxwell Staniforth wrote that «Logos … had long been one of the leading terms of Stoicism, chosen originally for the purpose of explaining how deity came into relation with the universe».^[31]

Isocrates’ logos[edit]

Public discourse on ancient Greek rhetoric has historically emphasized Aristotle’s appeals to logos, pathos, and ethos, while less attention has been directed to Isocrates’ teachings about philosophy and logos,^[32] and their partnership in generating an ethical, mindful polis. Isocrates does not provide a single definition of logos in his work, but Isocratean logos characteristically focuses on speech, reason, and civic discourse.^[32] He was concerned with establishing the «common good» of Athenian citizens, which he believed could be achieved through the pursuit of philosophy and the application of logos.^[32]

In Hellenistic Judaism[edit]

Philo of Alexandria[edit]

Philo (c. 20 BC – c. 50 AD), a Hellenized Jew, used the term logos to mean an intermediary divine being or demiurge.^[11] Philo followed the Platonic distinction between imperfect matter and perfect Form, and therefore intermediary beings were necessary to bridge the enormous gap between God and the material world.^[33] The logos was the highest of these intermediary beings, and was called by Philo «the first-born of God».^[33]
Philo also wrote that «the Logos of the living God is the bond of everything, holding all things together and binding all the parts, and prevents them from being dissolved and separated».^[34]

Plato’s Theory of Forms was located within the logos, but the logos also acted on behalf of God in the physical world.^[33] In particular, the Angel of the Lord in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) was identified with the logos by Philo, who also said that the logos was God’s instrument in the creation of the Universe.^[33]

Targums[edit]

The concept of logos also appears in the Targums (Aramaic translations of the Hebrew Bible dating to the first centuries AD), where the term 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.^[35]

Christianity[edit]

In Christology, the Logos (Koinē Greek: Λόγος, lit. ‘word, discourse, or reason’)^[3] is a name or title of Jesus Christ, seen as the pre-existent second person of the Trinity. The concept derives from John 1:1, which in the Douay–Rheims, King James, New International, and other versions of the Bible, reads:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.^[36][37][38]

Gnosticism[edit]

According to the Gnostic scriptures recorded in the Holy Book of the Great Invisible Spirit, the Logos is an emanation of the great spirit that is merged with the spiritual Adam called Adamas.^{[39][better source needed]}

Neoplatonism[edit]

Neoplatonist philosophers such as Plotinus (c. 204/5 – 270 AD) used logos in ways that drew on Plato and the Stoics,^[40] but the term logos was interpreted in different ways throughout Neoplatonism, and similarities to Philo’s concept of logos appear to be accidental.^[41] The logos was a key element in the meditations of Plotinus^[42] regarded as the first neoplatonist. Plotinus referred back to Heraclitus and as far back as Thales^[43] in interpreting logos as the principle of meditation, existing as the interrelationship between the hypostases—the soul, the intellect (nous), and the One.^[44]

Plotinus used a trinity concept that consisted of «The One», the «Spirit», and «Soul». The comparison with the Christian Trinity is inescapable, but for Plotinus these were not equal and «The One» was at the highest level, with the «Soul» at the lowest.^[45] For Plotinus, the relationship between the three elements of his trinity is conducted by the outpouring of logos from the higher principle, and eros (loving) upward from the lower principle.^[46] Plotinus relied heavily on the concept of logos, but no explicit references to Christian thought can be found in his works, although there are significant traces of them in his doctrine.^{[citation needed]} Plotinus specifically avoided using the term logos to refer to the second person of his trinity.^[47] However, Plotinus influenced Gaius Marius Victorinus, who then influenced Augustine of Hippo.^[48] Centuries later, Carl Jung acknowledged the influence of Plotinus in his writings.^[49]

Victorinus differentiated between the logos interior to God and the logos related to the world by creation and salvation.^[50]

Augustine of Hippo, often seen as the father of medieval philosophy, was also greatly influenced by Plato and is famous for his re-interpretation of Aristotle and Plato in the light of early Christian thought.^[51] A young Augustine experimented with, but failed to achieve ecstasy using the meditations of Plotinus.^[52] In his Confessions, Augustine described logos as the Divine Eternal Word,^[53] by which he, in part, was able to motivate the early Christian thought throughout the Hellenized world (of which the Latin speaking West was a part)^[54] Augustine’s logos had taken body in Christ, the man in whom the logos (i.e. veritas or sapientia) was present as in no other man.^[55]

Islam[edit]

The concept of the logos also exists in Islam, where it was definitively articulated primarily in the writings of the classical Sunni mystics and Islamic philosophers, as well as by certain Shi’a thinkers, during the Islamic Golden Age.^[56][57] In Sunni Islam, the concept of the logos has been given many different names by the denomination’s metaphysicians, mystics, and philosophers, including ʿaql («Intellect»), al-insān al-kāmil («Universal Man»), kalimat Allāh («Word of God»), haqīqa muḥammadiyya («The Muhammadan Reality»), and nūr muḥammadī («The Muhammadan Light»).

ʿAql[edit]

One of the names given to a concept very much like the Christian Logos by the classical Muslim metaphysicians is ʿaql, which is the «Arabic equivalent to the Greek νοῦς (intellect).»^[57] In the writings of the Islamic neoplatonist philosophers, such as al-Farabi (c. 872 – c. 950 AD) and Avicenna (d. 1037),^[57] the idea of the ʿaql was presented in a manner that both resembled «the late Greek doctrine» and, likewise, «corresponded in many respects to the Logos Christology.»^[57]

The concept of logos in Sufism is used to relate the «Uncreated» (God) to the «Created» (humanity). In Sufism, for the Deist, no contact between man and God can be possible without the logos. The logos is everywhere and always the same, but its personification is «unique» within each region. Jesus and Muhammad are seen as the personifications of the logos, and this is what enables them to speak in such absolute terms.^[58][59]

One of the boldest and most radical attempts to reformulate the neoplatonic concepts into Sufism arose with the philosopher Ibn Arabi, who traveled widely in Spain and North Africa. His concepts were expressed in two major works The Ringstones of Wisdom (Fusus al-Hikam) and The Meccan Illuminations (Al-Futūḥāt al-Makkiyya). To Ibn Arabi, every prophet corresponds to a reality which he called a logos (Kalimah), as an aspect of the unique divine being. In his view the divine being would have for ever remained hidden, had it not been for the prophets, with logos providing the link between man and divinity.^[60]

Ibn Arabi seems to have adopted his version of the logos concept from neoplatonic and Christian sources,^[61] although (writing in Arabic rather than Greek) he used more than twenty different terms when discussing it.^[62] For Ibn Arabi, the logos or «Universal Man» was a mediating link between individual human beings and the divine essence.^[63]

Other Sufi writers also show the influence of the neoplatonic logos.^[64] In the 15th century Abd al-Karīm al-Jīlī introduced the Doctrine of Logos and the Perfect Man. For al-Jīlī, the «perfect man» (associated with the logos or the Prophet) has the power to assume different forms at different times and to appear in different guises.^[65]

In Ottoman Sufism, Şeyh Gâlib (d. 1799) articulates Sühan (logos—Kalima) in his Hüsn ü Aşk (Beauty and Love) in parallel to Ibn Arabi’s Kalima. In the romance, Sühan appears as an embodiment of Kalima as a reference to the Word of God, the Perfect Man, and the Reality of Muhammad.^{[66][relevant?]}

Jung’s analytical psychology[edit]

Carl Jung contrasted the critical and rational faculties of logos with the emotional, non-reason oriented and mythical elements of eros.^[67] In Jung’s approach, logos vs eros can be represented as «science vs mysticism», or «reason vs imagination» or «conscious activity vs the unconscious».^[68]

For Jung, logos represented the masculine principle of rationality, in contrast to its feminine counterpart, eros:

Woman’s psychology is founded on the principle of Eros, the great binder and loosener, whereas from ancient times the ruling principle ascribed to man is Logos. The concept of Eros could be expressed in modern terms as psychic relatedness, and that of Logos as objective interest.^[69]

Jung attempted to equate logos and eros, his intuitive conceptions of masculine and feminine consciousness, with the alchemical Sol and Luna. Jung commented that in a man the lunar anima and in a woman the solar animus has the greatest influence on consciousness.^[70] Jung often proceeded to analyze situations in terms of «paired opposites», e.g. by using the analogy with the eastern yin and yang^[71] and was also influenced by the neoplatonists.^[72]

In his book Mysterium Coniunctionis Jung made some important final remarks about anima and animus:

In so far as the spirit is also a kind of «window on eternity»… it conveys to the soul a certain influx divinus… and the knowledge of a higher system of the world, wherein consists precisely its supposed animation of the soul.

And in this book Jung again emphasized that the animus compensates eros, while the anima compensates logos.^[73]

Rhetoric[edit]

Author and professor Jeanne Fahnestock describes logos as a «premise». She states that, to find the reason behind a rhetor’s backing of a certain position or stance, one must acknowledge the different «premises» that the rhetor applies via his or her chosen diction.^[74] The rhetor’s success, she argues, will come down to «certain objects of agreement…between arguer and audience». «Logos is logical appeal, and the term logic is derived from it. It is normally used to describe facts and figures that support the speaker’s topic.»^[75] Furthermore, logos is credited with appealing to the audience’s sense of logic, with the definition of «logic» being concerned with the thing as it is known.^[75]

Furthermore, one can appeal to this sense of logic in two ways. The first is through inductive reasoning, providing the audience with relevant examples and using them to point back to the overall statement.^[76] The second is through deductive enthymeme, providing the audience with general scenarios and then indicating commonalities among them.^[76]

Rhema[edit]

The word logos has been used in different senses along with rhema. Both Plato and Aristotle used the term logos along with rhema to refer to sentences and propositions.^[77][78]

The Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek uses the terms rhema and logos as equivalents and uses both for the Hebrew word dabar, as the Word of God.^[79][80][81]

Some modern usage in Christian theology distinguishes rhema from logos (which here refers to the written scriptures) while rhema refers to the revelation received by the reader from the Holy Spirit when the Word (logos) is read,^{[82][83][84][85]} although this distinction has been criticized.^[86][87]

See also[edit]

• -logy
• Dabar
• Dharma
• Epeolatry
• Imiaslavie
• Logic
• Logocracy
• Logos (Christianity)
• Logotherapy
• Nous
• Om
• Parmenides
• Ṛta
• Shabda
• Sophia (wisdom)

References[edit]

External links[edit]

• The Apologist’s Bible Commentary Archived 2015-09-10 at the Wayback Machine
• Logos definition and example Archived 2016-06-25 at the Wayback Machine
• «Logos» . Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 16 (11th ed.). 1911. pp. 919–921.

The Greek word λόγος, or logos, is a word with various meanings. It is often translated into English as «Word,» but can also mean thought, speech, meaning, reason, proportions, principle, standard, or logic, among other things. In religious contexts, it can indicate the divine Word, wisdom, or truth. It is also used widely with varied meanings in the fields of philosophy, analytical psychology, and rhetoric.

Similar concepts are found in non-western traditions, such as Dao (Tao), the Vedic notion of rta, and the Hindu and Buddhist conception of dharma and Aum. These concepts in diverse traditions are based upon the common insight that certain principles regulate the orders of existence in both the universe and human reason.

Overview

The Greek word «logos» means «order,» «word,» and «reason.» It indicates a rational explanation in contrast to a mythological explanation. Among Greek philosophers, the first philosopher who used the term is Heraclitus. By using the term logos, he meant the principle of the cosmos that organizes and orders the world that had the power to regulate the birth and decay of things in the world. The cosmos was, as he saw it, constantly changing, and he conceived logos as the organizing principle of change. In the context of Ancient Greek philosophy, logos was a divine principle which transcended the world of mortals.

The Stoics developed the notion of logos and conceived it as the principle that gave life and order to all beings in the universe. In their view, logos existed both in the human soul and the universe, and identified justice within the life of a man who lived according to this order of the universe.

The Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria (Philo Judaeus) tried to explain the relationship between God and the world by applying the Stoic concept of logos. Logos was the most universal among all things in the world, an intermediary between the transcendent God and the created world. He developed the idea that God created the world with logos as the intermediate being. In Christianity, various doctrines about logos were also developed.

Ancient Greek philosophy

In ancient philosophy, Logos was used by Heraclitus, a Pre-Socratic Greek philosopher. He used the term logos to describe the universal Law, or the principle that inherently ordered the cosmos and regulated its phenomena. Some fragments ascribed to Heraclitus read:

The Law (of the universe) is as here explained; but men are always incapable of understanding it, both before they hear it, and when they have heard it for the first time. For though all things come into being in accordance with this Law, men seem as if they had never met with it, when they meet with words (theories) and actions (processes) such as I expound, separating each thing according to its nature and explaining how it is made.^[1]

Therefore one must follow (the universal Law, namely) that which is common (to all). But although the Law is universal, the majority live as if they had understanding peculiar to themselves.

Heraclitus also used the term Logos to mean the undifferentiated material substrate from which all things came: «Listening not to me but to the Logos it is wise to agree that all [things] are one.» In this sense, Logos is Heraclitus’ answer to the Pre-Socratic question of what the arche is of all things. Logos, therefore, designates both the material substrate itself and the universal, mechanical, «just» way in which this substrate manifests itself in, and as, individual things. What this means is, it encompasses within itself the later Platonic distinction (in Timaeus) between «form» and «matter.»

By the time of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, logos was the term established to describe the faculty of human reason and the knowledge men had of the known world and of other humans. Plato allowed his characters to engage in the conceit of describing logos as a living being in some of his dialogues. The development of the Academy with hypomnemata brought logos closer to the literal text. Aristotle, who studied under Plato and who was much more of a practical thinker, first developed the concept of logic as a depiction of the rules of human rationality.

The Stoics understood Logos as the animating power of the universe, (as it is also presently understood today in Theosophical terms) and by the Rosicrucians in their «conception of the cosmos,» which further influenced how this word was understood later on (in twentieth century psychology, for instance).

Rhetoric

In rhetoric, logos is one of the three modes of persuasion (the other two are pathos, emotional appeal; and ethos, the qualification of the speaker). Logos refers to logical appeal, and in fact the term logic evolves from it. Logos normally implies numbers, polls, and other mathematical or scientific data.

Christianity

In Christianity, the prologue of the Gospel of John calls Jesus «the Logos» (usually translated as «the Word» in English bibles, such as the King James Version) and plays a central role in establishing the doctrine of Jesus’ divinity and the Trinity. The opening verse in the KJV reads: «In the beginning was the Word [Logos], and the Word [Logos] was with God, and the Word [Logos] was God.»

Some scholars of the Bible have suggested that John made creative use of double meaning in the word «Logos» to communicate to both Jews, who were familiar with the Wisdom tradition in Judaism, and Hellenists, especially followers of Philo. Each of these two groups had its own history associated with the concept of the Logos, and each could understand John’s use of the term from one or both of those contexts. Especially for the Hellenists, however, John turns the concept of the Logos on its head when he claimed «the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us» (v. 14).

Gordon Clark famously translated Logos as «Logic» in the opening verses of the Gospel: «In the beginning was the Logic, and the Logic was with God and the Logic was God.» He meant to imply by this translation that the laws of logic were contained in the Bible itself and were therefore not a secular principle imposed on the Christian worldview.

On April 1, 2005, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (who would later become Pope Benedict XVI) referred to the Christian religion as the religion of the Logos:

From the beginning, Christianity has understood itself as the religion of the Logos, as the religion according to reason. … It has always defined men, all men without distinction, as creatures and images of God, proclaiming for them … the same dignity. In this connection, the Enlightenment is of Christian origin and it is no accident that it was born precisely and exclusively in the realm of the Christian faith. … It was and is the merit of the Enlightenment to have again proposed these original values of Christianity and of having given back to reason its own voice … Today, this should be precisely [Christianity’s] philosophical strength, in so far as the problem is whether the world comes from the irrational, and reason is not 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. … 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.^[2]

He referred to this concept again in a controversial speech, in September 2006.

Similar concepts

Within Eastern religions, there are ideas with varying degrees of similarity to the philosophical and Christian uses of the term logos. Five concepts with some parallels to Logos are the Tao, the Vedic notion of rta, the Hindu and Buddhist conception of dharma, Aum (from Hindu cosmology), and the Egyptian Maat. These are all iconic terms of various cultures that have the meaning that Logos has: The order and orderliness of the world. At the same time, the material source of the world is the word as well.

In New Age mysticism, the Odic force is sometime described as «the physical manifestation of the creative Logos.»

In ancient Egyptian mythology, Hu was the deification of the word spoken to create existence. Maàt was the concept, and goddess, of divine order.

In Surat Shabd Yoga, Shabda is considered to be analogous to the Logos as representative of the supreme being in Christianity.

Notes

References

ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

• Buxton, R. G. A. 1999. From Myth to Reason? Studies in the Development of Greek Thought. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0585159998
• Carson, D.A. 1991. The Gospel According to John. ISBN 0-85111-749-X
• Freeman, K., & H. Diels, 1948. Ancilla to the Pre-Socratic Philosophers: A Complete Translation of the Fragment in Diels, Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Heidegger, M. 1975. Early Greek Thinking. New York: Harper & Row. ISBN 0060638583
• Morris, Leon. 1995. The Gospel According to John (New International Commentary on the New Testament). ISBN 0-8028-2504-4
• Ong, W. J. 1967. The Presence of the Word; Some Prolegomena for Cultural and Religious History. The Terry lectures. New Haven: Yale University Press.

External links

All links retrieved November 3, 2022.

• Entries related to Logos, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

General Philosophy Sources

• Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
• The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
• Paideia Project Online.
• Project Gutenberg.

Logos (λόγος) is a Greek word that means «word,» «speech,» «reason» or «account». It became a technical term in philosophy beginning with Heraclitus (ca. 535–475 BC), who used the term for a principle of order and knowledge.^[1] H. P. Blavatsky defined it as, «The manifested deity with every nation and people; the outward expression, or the effect of the cause which is ever concealed.»^[2] In her writings, the concealed cause of the logos is frequently referred to as the «unmanifested logos,» and there are also references to a semi-manifested logos.

General description

H. P. Blavatsky talks about three Logoi: «the unmanifested ‘Father,’ the semi-manifested ‘Mother’ and the Universe, which is the third Logos of our philosophy or Brahmâ.»^[3] These three Logoi can be seen as «the personified symbols of the three spiritual stages of Evolution.»^[4] Yet all the three Logoi are one.^[5]

There is no differentiation with the First Logos; differentiation only begins in latent World-Thought, with the Second Logos, and receives its full expression, i. e., becomes the «Word» made flesh—with the Third.^[6]

The point within the circle which has neither limit nor boundaries, nor can it have any name or attribute. This first unmanifested Logos is simultaneous with the line drawn across the diameter of the Circle. The first line or diameter is the Mother-Father; from it proceeds the Second Logos, which contains in itself the Third Manifested Word.^[7]

There seems to be great confusion and misunderstanding concerning the First and Second Logos. The first is the already present yet still unmanifested potentiality in the bosom of Father-Mother; the Second is the abstract collectivity of creators called “Demiurgi” by the Greeks or the Builders of the Universe. The third logos is the ultimate differentiation of the Second and the individualization of Cosmic Forces, of which Fohat is the chief; for Fohat is the synthesis of the Seven Creative Rays or Dhyan Chohans which proceed from the third Logos.^[8]

First Logos

The First Logos is unmanifested, and it is the first stage in the process of reawakening of the cosmos from the rest in pralaya. It is the Pre-Cosmic Ideation that radiates from (or in) the Absolute. This Logos is frequently depicted as a white «potential» point in a black circle.^[9]

When the first Logos radiates through primordial and undifferentiated matter there is as yet no action in Chaos. “The last vibration of the Seventh Eternity” is the first which announces the Dawn, and is a synonym for the First or unmanifested Logos. There is no Time at this stage. There is neither Space nor Time when beginning is made; but it is all in Space and Time, once that differentiation sets in.^[10]

Associated to the unmanifested Logos is the idea of a «ray» that flashes out from it, and begins the differentiation in matter:

The Ray [is] periodical. Having flashed out from this central point and thrilled through the Germ, the Ray is withdrawn again within this point and the Germ develops into the Second Logos, the triangle within the Mundane Egg.^[11]

Second Logos

The concept of the Second Logos is somewhat problematic. It is frequently seen as a bridge between the unmanifested and the manifested Logoi, «the Second Logos partaking of both the essences or natures of the first and the last.^[12] Because of this, this Logos is sometimes said to be semi-manifested: «the three Logoi [are] the unmanifested “Father,” the semi-manifested “Mother” and the Universe, which is the third Logos of our philosophy or Brahmâ».

Because of its dual nature, the second Logos is sometimes spoken of as unmanifested, and in other occasions as being manifested. Besides, sometimes Blavatsky talks of only two Logoi: the unmanifested and the manifested, assimilating the semi-manifested Logos to these two. In these instances, when she speaks of the «second Logos» she is referring to the manifested one, that is, the Third Logos in the three-fold classification.

The word «mother» is not always associated to the second Logos. Most frequently we find that of Father-Mother:

At the time of the primordial radiation, or when the Second Logos emanates, it is Father-Mother potentially, but when the Third or manifested Logos appears, it becomes the Virgin-Mother.^[13]

The ray that comes from the first Logos begins the process of differentiation in the pre-cosmic substance, and this produces the Second Logos. If we consider the first Logos as a potential point, the second is seen as the first real (or maybe, dimensional) point:

The first stage is the appearance of the potential point in the circle—the unmanifested Logos. The second stage is the shooting forth of the Ray from the potential white point, producing the first point, which is called, in the Zohar, Kether or Sephira. The third stage is the production from Kether of Chochmah, and Binah, thus constituting the first triangle, which is the Third or manifested Logos.^[14]

In fact, the «point» of the second Logos is in the «mundane egg», and is said to be an abstract triangle :

The Point in the Circle is the Unmanifested Logos, the Manifested Logos is the Triangle. . . . It is this ideal or abstract triangle which is the Point in the Mundane Egg, which, after gestation, and in the third remove, will start from the Egg to form the Triangle. This is Brahmâ-Vâch-Virâj in the Hindu Philosophy and Kether-Chochmah-Binah in the Zohar.^[15]

The point in the Circle is the Unmanifested Logos, corresponding to Absolute Life and Absolute Sound. The first geometrical figure after the Circle or the Spheroid is the Triangle. It corresponds to Motion, Color and Sound. Thus the Point in the Triangle represents the Second Logos, “Father-Mother,” or the White Ray which is no color, since it contains potentially all colors. It is shown radiating from the Unmanifested Logos, or the Unspoken Word. Around the first Triangle is formed on the plane of Primordial Substance in this order (reversed as to our plane).^[16]

Origin of the Dhyāni-Buddhas

The second Logos in the «Arupa world» is said to emanate the Dhyāni-Buddhas:

This is the second logos of creation, from whom emanate the seven (in the exoteric blind the five) Dhyani Buddhas, called the Anupadaka, “the parentless.” These Buddhas are the primeval monads from the world of incorporeal being, the Arupa world, wherein the Intelligences (on that plane only) have neither shape nor name, in the exoteric system, but have their distinct seven names in esoteric philosophy.^[17]

However, they seem to be emanated from the unmanifested aspect of this Logos:

The former [Dhyāni-Buddhas] only are called Anupadaka, parentless, because they radiated directly from that which is neither Father nor Mother but the unmanifested Logos.^[18]

«That which is neither Father nor Mother» is probably refers to this Logos in its character of «Father-Mother».

Third Logos

This is the manifested Logos, called The Secret Doctrine the “luminous sons of manvantaric dawn”.^[19] Mme. Blavatsky wrote:

When the hour strikes for the Third Logos to appear, then from the latent potentiality there radiates a lower field of differentiated consciousness, which is Mahat, or the entire collectivity of those Dhyan-Chohans of sentient life of which Fohat is the representative on the objective plane and the Manasaputras on the subjective.^[20]

Then, at the first radiation of dawn, the “Spirit of God” (after the First and Second Logos were radiated), the Third Logos, or Narayan, began to move on the face of the Great Waters of the “Deep.”^[21]

Some synonyms in other traditions are Mahat (Hinduism), Adam Kadmon (Kabbalah),^[22] Protogonos (Greek/Orphic)^[23], Brahmā (Hinduism), among others.

First manifested Logos

In some passages Mme. Blavatsky speaks of a manifested «First Logos». For example, she says:

The first is the Mother Goddess [ Mūlaprakṛti ], the reflection of the subjective root [ Parabrahman ], on the first plane of Substance. Then follows, issuing from, or rather residing in, this Mother Goddess, the unmanifested Logos, he who is both her Son and Husband at once, called the “concealed Father.” From these proceeds the first-manifested Logos, or Spirit, and the Son from whose substance emanate the Seven Logoi, whose synthesis, viewed as one collective Force, becomes the Architect of the Visible Universe.^[24]

The First Manifested Logos is the Potentia, the unrevealed Cause; the Second, the still latent thought; the Third, the Demiurgus, the active Will evolving from its universal Self the active effect, which, in its turn, becomes the cause on a lower plane.^[25]

The Ah-hi are the primordial seven rays, or Logoi, emanated from the first Logos, triple, yet one in its essence.^[26]

This First Logos, «triple» in essence, cannot be the First unmanifested Logos which admits not plurality:

Moreover, in Occult metaphysics there are, properly speaking, two “ONES”—the One on the unreachable plane of Absoluteness and Infinity, on which no speculation is possible, and the Second “One” on the plane of Emanations. The former can neither emanate nor be divided, as it is eternal, absolute, and immutable. The Second, being, so to speak, the reflection of the first One (for it is the Logos, or Eswara, in the Universe of Illusion), can do all this. It emanates from itself . . . the seven Rays or Dhyan Chohans.^[27]

Âkâsa [is] the Universal Space in which lies inherent the eternal Ideation of the Universe in its ever-changing aspects on the planes of matter and objectivity, and from which radiates the First Logos, or expressed thought.^[28]

It is possible that the manifested Logos also undergoes the stages of first, second and third, on the manifested plane.

Divine Thought

«Divine Thought» is a phrase frequently used by Mme. Blavatsky, for the «Cosmic Ideation»,^[29] and considered it as «the Logos, or the male aspect of the Anima Mundi, Alaya».^[30] In it «lies concealed the plan of every future Cosmogony and Theogony».^[31] The Upadhi of Divine Thought is Akasha, the Primordial Substance.^[32]

Talking about the lotus as a symbol, Mme. Blavatsky wrote:

The underlying idea in this symbol is very beautiful, and it shows, furthermore, its identical parentage in all the religious systems. Whether in the lotus or water-lily shape it signifies one and the same philosophical idea—namely, the emanation of the objective from the subjective, divine Ideation passing from the abstract into the concrete or visible form. For, as soon as DARKNESS—or rather that which is “darkness” for ignorance—has disappeared in its own realm of eternal Light, leaving behind itself only its divine manifested Ideation, the creative Logoi have their understanding opened, and they see in the ideal world (hitherto concealed in the divine thought) the archetypal forms of all, and proceed to copy and build or fashion upon these models forms evanescent and transcendent.
At this stage of action, the Demiurge is not yet the Architect. Born in the twilight of action, he has yet to first perceive the plan, to realise the ideal forms which lie buried in the bosom of Eternal Ideation, as the future lotus-leaves, the immaculate petals, are concealed within the seed of that plant.^[33]

The Cosmos is fashioned by the Builders, following the plan traced out for them in the Divine Thought.^[34] This thought impregnates matter,^[35] and can be perceived «by the numberless manifestations of Cosmic Substance in which the former is sensed spiritually by those who can do so».^[36]

It is important to keep in mind that the phrase «Divine Thought» neither implies the idea of a Divine thinker^[37] nor of a process of thinking:

It is hardly necessary to remind the reader once more that the term “Divine Thought,” like that of “Universal Mind,” must not be regarded as even vaguely shadowing forth an intellectual process akin to that exhibited by man.^[38]

Female Logos

Mme. Blavatsky stated that female deities such as Vāc, Isis, Mout, Shekinah (Sephira), Kwan-Yin, etc. represent the female aspect of the creator:

They are all the symbols and personifications of Chaos, the “Great Deep” or the Primordial Waters of Space, the impenetrable veil between the incognisable and the Logos of Creation. “Connecting himself through his mind with Vach, Brahma (the Logos) created the primordial waters.” In the Kathaka Upanishad it is stated still more clearly: “Prajapati was this Universe. Vach was a second to him. He associated with her . . . she produced these creatures and again re-entered Prajapati.”* (* This connects Vâch and Sephira with the goddess Kwan-Yin, the «merciful mother», the divine VOICE of the soul even in Exoteric Buddhism; and with the female aspect of Kwan-Shai-yin, the Logos, the verbum of Creation, and at the same time with the voice that speaks audibly to the Initiate, according to Esoteric Buddhism. Bath Kol, the filia Vocis, the daughter of the divine voice of the Hebrews, responding from the mercy seat within the veil of the temple is—a result).^[39]

Kwan-Yin, [is] the “Divine Voice” literally. This “Voice” is a synonym of the Verbum or the Word: “Speech,” as the expression of thought. Thus may be traced the connection with, and even the origin of the Hebrew Bath-Kol, the “daughter of the Divine Voice,” or Verbum, or the male and female Logos, the “Heavenly Man” or Adam Kadmon, who is at the same time Sephira. The latter was surely anticipated by the Hindu Vâch, the goddess of Speech, or of the Word. For Vâch—the daughter and the female portion, as is stated, of Brahmâ, one “generated by the gods”—is, in company with Kwan-Yin, with Isis (also the daughter, wife and sister of Osiris) and other goddesses, the female Logos, so to speak, the goddess of the active forces in Nature, the Word, Voice or Sound, and Speech. If Kwan-Yin is the “melodious Voice,” so is Vâch; “the melodious cow who milked forth sustenance and water” (the female principle)—“who yields us nourishment and sustenance,” as Mother-Nature. She is associated in the work of creation with the Prajâpati. She is male and female ad libitum [«as you desire»], as Eve is with Adam. And she is a form of Aditi—the principle higher than Ether—in Akâsa, the synthesis of all the forces in Nature; thus Vâch and Kwan-Yin are both the magic potency of Occult sound in Nature and Ether—which “Voice” calls forth Sien-Tchan, the illusive form of the Universe out of Chaos and the Seven Elements.^[40]

The female logoi are many times regarded as triple: the mother, wife, and daughter of the male Logos.^[41] This has to be interpreted in a cosmic sense, where «mother, wife and daughter» are different stages of differentiation of the primordial matter in which develops the Logos:

There is certainly a cosmic, not a physiological meaning attached to the Indian allegory, since Vâch is a permutation of Aditi and Mulaprakriti (Chaos), and Brahmâ a permutation of Naràyana, the Spirit of God entering into, and fructifying nature; therefore, there is nothing phallic in the conception at all.^[42]

The Army of the Voice

In Stanza IV.4 there is a mention to «the Army of the Voice». Mme. Blavatsky wrote:

This Sloka gives again a brief analysis of the Hierarchies of the Dhyan Chohans, called Devas (gods) in India, or the conscious intelligent powers in Nature. To this Hierarchy correspond the actual types into which humanity may be divided; for humanity, as a whole, is in reality a materialized though as yet imperfect expression thereof. The “army of the Voice” is a term closely connected with the mystery of Sound and Speech, as an effect and corollary of the cause—Divine Thought.^[43]

The “Army of the Voice”, is the prototype of the “Host of the Logos,” or the “WORD” of the Sepher Jezirah, called in the Secret Doctrine “the One Number issued from No-Number”—the One Eternal Principle. The esoteric theogony begins with the One, manifested, therefore not eternal in its presence and being, if eternal in its essence; the number of the numbers and numbered—the latter proceeding from the Voice, the feminine Vâch, Satarupa “of the hundred forms,” or Nature. It is from this number 10, or creative nature, the Mother (the occult cypher, or “nought,” ever procreating and multiplying in union with the Unit “1,” one, or the Spirit of Life), that the whole Universe proceeded.^[44]

Ancient Greek philosophy

The 6th-century-BC philosopher from Ephesus, Heraclitus, seems to be the first to pay special attention to the concept of logos. He defined the logos as «that universal principle which animates and rules the world.» The logos behind cosmic process was similar to the reasoning power in human beings. The logos is an eternal law or principle governing the cosmos, bringing rational order and purpose to it. Galen, the influential Greek philosopher and physician of the Roman empire, described the Logos in a pantheistic way, stating that he «did not make the world as an artisan does his work, but it is by wholly penetrating all matter that he is the demiurge of the universe.»^[45]

Stoics also saw the logos as an active spiritual principle that permeated and animated reality. They identified this logos with reason and God, and regarded it to be indestructible. The other fundamental principle conforming nature was a passive one, representing substance or matter (the four classical elements of earth, water, fire, and air).

Among Neoplatonists, the term Logos was interpreted in different ways. In one meaning, it was an inherent formative principle that guides the form and function of different organisms. In another meaning logos (as divine reason) binds the elements of the trinity composed of the soul (psyche), the intellect (nous), and the One (monas).

Christianity

In Christianity, the word logos (Latin «verbum,» English «word») is use as a name or title of Jesus Christ, seen as the pre-existent second person of the Trinity. This comes from the Gospel of John, 1:1–18, which states:

«In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.»

However, following the original Greek more closely, some scholars argue that the correct translation should be:

«In the beginning was the logos, and the logos was with God (theos), and the logos was a god (theon).»^[46]

Online resources

Articles

• Logos at Theosopedia
• The Three Logoi by Ingmar de Boer

Notes

Logos – Longer definition: The Greek word logos (traditionally meaning word, thought, principle, or speech) has been used among both philosophers and theologians. …

Logos is a Greek word meaning “word, discourse, or reason,” and it’s the root of logic.

What does the prefix logos mean?

Logos, (Greek: “word,” “reason,” or “plan”) plural logoi, in ancient Greek philosophy and early Christian theology, the divine reason implicit in the cosmos, ordering it and giving it form and meaning.

What kind of word is logos?

Logos is a greek word with a variety of different meanings including, “reason,” “discourse,” and “plea,” among others. Greek philosopher Aristotle provided a definition of logos in his work Rhetoric, where he used logos to mean “reasoned discourse”, specifically in the realm of public speaking.

What are the 7 types of logos?

The different kinds of logos can be placed into seven categories: emblems, pictorial marks, logotypes, lettermarks, abstract logos, mascot logos, and combination logos.

Is logos the written word of God?

Both logos and rhema are the Word of God, but the former is God’s Word objectively recorded in the Bible, while the latter is the word of God spoken to us at a specific occasion. According to Nee a passage of the logos can move into being rhema if it becomes shown to apply to the specific individual.

What is the ancient Greek word for God?

Greek “θεός ” (theos) means god in English. It is often connected with Greek “θέω” (theō), “run”, and “θεωρέω” (theoreō), “to look at, to see, to observe”, Latin feriae “holidays”, fanum “temple”, and also Armenian di-k` “gods”.

Why is Jesus called the logos?

As the Logos, Jesus Christ is God in self-revelation (Light) and redemption (Life). Jesus Christ not only gives God’s Word to us humans; he is the Word. The Logos is God, begotten and therefore distinguishable from the Father, but, being God, of the same substance (essence).

What does Rhema stand for?

utterance

What is the Greek word for word in John 1?

John 1:1 is the first verse in the opening chapter of the Gospel of John in the New Testament of the Christian Bible. “Word”, a translation of the Greek λόγος (logos), is widely interpreted as referring to Jesus, as indicated in other verses later in the same chapter.

What is the Hebrew word for word?

The word dabar (Hebrew: דָּבָר‎) means “word”, “talk” or “thing” in Hebrew. Dabar occurs in various contexts in the Hebrew Bible. Modern languages adopt the term “Word”, although it is often used transliterated but untranslated in theological discourse.

Is Ramah in the Bible?

Biblical accounts Ramah is mentioned in 1 Samuel 8:4 in reference to a meeting place during Samuel’s rule. A voice is heard in Ramah, mourning and great weeping, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more (Jeremiah 31:15 NIV).

Where is Nazareth now?

Israel

What prophet said out of Egypt I called my son?

This verse contains Matthew’s third direct quote from the Old Testament. This brief line is from Hosea 11:1, referring to God’s call to Israel as his firstborn son (cf. Exodus 4:22) ‘out of Egypt at the time of Exodus’.

Is Galilee in Israel or Palestine?

Galilee, Hebrew Ha-galil, northernmost region of ancient Palestine, corresponding to modern northern Israel. Its biblical boundaries are indistinct; conflicting readings leave clear only that it was part of the territory of the northern tribe of Naphtali.

Who ruled Galilee in Jesus time?

Herod Antipas

What is Nazareth called today?

Nazareth, Arabic an-Nāṣira, Hebrew Naẕerat, historic city of Lower Galilee, in northern Israel; it is the largest Arab city of the country. The only site in Nazareth that can be definitely identified as dating back to New Testament times is the town well, now called St. …

What is Judea called today?

After Herod’s death the country was ruled alternately by Herod’s direct descendants and by Roman procurators. As a result of the Jewish revolt that broke out in ad 66, the city of Jerusalem was destroyed (ad 70). The name Judaea is still used to describe approximately the same area in modern Israel.

Are Samaria and Israel the same?

The territory, excluding East Jerusalem, is also known within Israel by its biblical names, Judaea and Samaria.

Where is Judea and Samaria today?

The name Judea, when used in Judea and Samaria, refers to all of the region south of Jerusalem, including Gush Etzion and Har Hebron. The region of Samaria, on the other hand, refers to the area north of Jerusalem.

What is difference between Judah and Israel?

The Kingdom of Israel, Northern Kingdom or Samaria, existed as an independent state until 722 BCE, when it was conquered by the Assyrian Empire. The Kingdom of Judah, or Southern Kingdom, existed as an independent state until 586 BCE, when it was conquered by the Neo-Babylonian Empire.

Who was the first king of Israelites?

Saul

Which son of Jacob did Jesus come from?

Matthew 1:1–17 begins the Gospel, “A record of the origin of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham: Abraham begot Isaac.” and continues on until “… Jacob begot Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

Is Jerusalem in Judah or Israel?

As long as this temple stood, Jerusalem was the capital of the kingdom of Judah (briefly also of the united kingdom of Israel, i.e., of Northern and Southern tribes united by David). This period ends with the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 by the Neo-Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar.

Why did Judah split from Israel?

According to the Hebrew Bible, the Kingdom of Judah resulted from the break-up of the United Kingdom of Israel (1020 to about 930 BCE) after the northern tribes refused to accept Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, as their king.

Where are the 10 lost tribes of Israel today?

Conquered by the Assyrian King Shalmaneser V, they were exiled to upper Mesopotamia and Medes, today modern Syria and Iraq. The Ten Tribes of Israel have never been seen since.

Why is the tribe of Judah so important?

The tribe of Judah settled in the region south of Jerusalem and in time became the most powerful and most important tribe. Not only did it produce the great kings David and Solomon but also, it was prophesied, the Messiah would come from among its members.

Why is God called the Lion of Judah?

The biblical Judah (in Hebrew: Yehuda) is the eponymous ancestor of the Tribe of Judah, which is traditionally symbolized by a lion. The Lion of Judah was used as a Jewish symbol for many years, and as Jerusalem was the capital of the Kingdom of Judah, in 1950 it was included in the Emblem of Jerusalem.

Who is the 13th tribe of Israel?

The Thirteenth Tribe is a 1976 book by Arthur Koestler, in which the author advances the thesis that Ashkenazi Jews are not descended from the historical Israelites of antiquity, but from Khazars, a Turkic people….The Thirteenth Tribe.

What did God reveal to Moses?

YHWH

What is the Logos?

Logos is broadly defined as the Word of God, or principle of divine reason and creative order, identified in the Gospel of John with the second person of the Trinity incarnate in Jesus Christ.

«In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” John 1:1

The concept of the Logos has had a crucial and far-reaching influence upon philosophical and Christian thought. The term has a long history, and the development of the idea it embodies is really the unfolding of man’s conception of God. To understand the relationship of the Deity to the world has been the goal of all religious philosophy. While diverging views as to the Divine manifestation have been conceived, the Greek word logos has been used with a certain degree of agreement by a series of thinkers to express and define the nature and form of God’s revelation.

Logos means in classical Greek both «reason» and «word.» The translation «thought» is probably the best equivalent for the Greek term, since it indicates, on the one hand, the faculty of reason, or the thought inwardly conceived in the mind; and, on the other hand, the thought outwardly expressed through the vehicle of language. The two ideas thought and speech, are indubitably blended in the term logos; and in every employment of the word, in philosophy and Scripture, both concepts of thought and its outward expression are closely connected.

Logos in the Bible

According to gotquestions.org, In the New Testament, the Gospel of John begins, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was at the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men” (John 1:1-4). Here it is clear that the “Word” or Logos is a reference to Jesus Christ. 

The Gospel of John 1:1-14 — The Word Became Flesh

«In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. There was a man sent from God whose name was John. He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God. The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth»

John argues that Jesus, the Word or Logos, is eternal and is God. Further, all creation came about by and through Jesus, who is presented as the source of life. Amazingly, this Logos came and lived among us: “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14).

John’s Gospel begins by using the Greek idea of a “divine reason” or “the mind of God” as a way to connect with the readers of his day, who mostly spoke Greek, and introduce Jesus to them as God. Greek philosophy may have used the word in reference to divine reason, but John used it to note many of the attributes of Jesus. In John’s use of the Logos concept, we find that

-Jesus is eternal (“In the beginning was the Word”) Jesus was with God prior to coming to earth (“the Word was with God”)

-Jesus is God (“the Word was God.”) Jesus is Creator (“All things were made through him”)

-Jesus is the Giver of Life (“In him was life”) Jesus became human to live among us (“the Word became flesh and dwelt among us”)

The Meaning and Significance of Logos 

In reference to the history and development of Logos, the Gospel of John mentions two phases: creation and revelation. The Word reveals Himself through the mediation of objects of sense and also manifests Himself directly. Therefore, in this part of the prologue (John 1:3-5), a threefold distinction also occurs.

(i) He is the Creator of the visible universe. «All things were made through him»—a phrase which describes the Logos as the origin of the entire creative activity of God and excludes the idea favored by Plato and Philo that God was only the architect who formed the cosmos from previously existing matter. 

(ii) The Logos is also the source of the intellectual, moral and spiritual life of man. «In him was life, and the life was the light of men.» He is the light as well as the life—the fountain of all the various forms of being and thought in and by whom all created things live, and from whom all obtain understanding. 

(iii) The climax of Divine revelation is expressed in the statement, The Word became flesh,» which implies, on the one hand, the reality of Christ’s humanity, and, on the other, the voluntariness of His incarnation, but excludes the notion that in becoming a man the Logos ceased to be God. Though clothed in flesh, the Logos continues to be the self-manifesting God, and retains, even in human form, the character of the Eternal One. In physical creation, the power of God is revealed. In the bestowal of light to mankind, His wisdom is chiefly manifested. But in the third especially is His love unveiled. All the perfections of the Deity are focused and made visible in Christ—the «glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth» (John 1:14).

How Is Jesus the Logos (the Word)?

In Greek philosophy, the logos remains an impersonal force, a lifeless and abstract philosophical concept that is a necessary postulate for the cause of order and purpose in the universe. In Hebrew thought, the Logos is personal. He indeed has the power of unity, coherence, and purpose, but the distinctive point is that the biblical Logos is a He, not an it.

All attempts to translate the word Logos have suffered from some degree of inadequacy. No English word is able to capture the fullness of John’s Logoswhen he declared that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Attempts have been made by philosophers to translate Logos as logic, act, or deed—all of which are inadequate definitions.

God’s Logos does include action. The Logos is the eternal Word in action. But it is no irrational action or sheer expression of feeling. It is the divine Actor, acting in creation and redemption in a coherent way, who is announced in John’s Gospel.

That the Word became flesh and dwelt among us is the startling conclusion of John’s prologue. The cosmic Christ enters our humanity. It is the supreme moment of visitation of the eternal with the temporal, the infinite with the finite, the unconditioned with the conditioned.

Excerpt from «Interpreting the Logos» 

Sources

BibleStudyTools.com: Logos Definition and Meaning — Bible Dictionary

GotQuestions.org: What is the Logos?

This article is about Logos (plural: logoi) in philosophy, rhetoric, and theology. For the plural of «logo», see Logo. For other uses, see Logos (disambiguation).

Logos (Template:Pron-en or /ˈlɒgɒs/; Greek Template:Polytonic logos) is an important term in philosophy, analytical psychology, rhetoric and religion. Originally a word meaning «word,» «account,» or «reason,»^[1] it became a technical term in philosophy, beginning with Heraclitus (ca. 535–475 BC), who used the term for the principle of order and knowledge in the universe.^[2]

The sophists used the term to mean discourse, and Aristotle applied the term to rational discourse. The Stoic philosophers identified the term with the divine animating principle pervading the universe.
After Judaism came under Hellenistic influence, Philo (ca. 20 BC–40 AD) adopted the term into Jewish philosophy.^[3] The Gospel of John identifies the Logos, through which all things are made, as divine (theos),^[4] and further identifies Jesus as the incarnation of the Logos.

In current use, Logos may refer to any of these senses. Outside academic discussions, the Christian sense, identifying Jesus with the Word of God, is perhaps the most common use.

Etymology[]

In ordinary, non-technical Greek, logos had a semantic field extending beyond «word» to notions such as, on the one hand, language, talk, statement, speech, conversation, tale, story, prose, speech, proposition, and principle; and on the other hand, thought, reason, account, consideration, esteem, due relation, proportion, and analogy.^[1]

Despite the conventional translation as «word», it is not used for a word in the grammatical sense; instead, the term lexis (λέξις) was used.^[5] However, both logos and lexis derive from the same verb legō (λέγω), meaning «to count, tell, say, speak».^[1][5]

In English, logos is the root of «logic,» and of the «-ology» suffix (e.g., geology).^[6]

Use in Greek philosophy[]

Heraclitus[]

The writing of Heraclitus was the first place where the word logos was given special attention in ancient Greek philosophy.^[7] Although Heraclitus seems to use the word with a meaning not significantly different from the way it was used in ordinary Greek of his time,^[8] an independent existence of a universal logos is already suggested:^[9]

This LOGOS holds always but humans always prove unable to understand it, both before hearing it and when they have first heard it. For though all things come to be in accordance with this LOGOS, humans are like the inexperienced when they experience such words and deeds as I set out, distinguishing each in accordance with its nature and saying how it is. But other people fail to notice what they do when awake, just as they forget what they do while asleep. (Diels-Kranz 22B1)

For this reason it is necessary to follow what is common. But although the LOGOS is common, most people live as if they had their own private understanding. (Diels-Kranz 22B2)

Listening not to me but to the LOGOS it is wise to agree that all things are one. (Diels-Kranz 22B50)^[10]

Aristotle’s rhetorical logos[]

Template:Unreferenced section
Following one of the other meanings of the word, Aristotle gave logos a different technical definition as argument from reason, one of the three modes of persuasion (the other two modes are pathos (Template:Lang-el), persuasion by means of emotional appeal, and ethos, persuasion through convincing listeners of one’s moral competence).^{[citation needed]}

Arguments from reason (logical arguments) have some advantages, namely that data are (ostensibly) difficult to manipulate, so it is harder to argue against such an argument; and such arguments make the speaker look prepared and knowledgeable to the audience, enhancing ethos.^{[citation needed]}

The Stoics[]

In Stoic philosophy, which began with Zeno of Citium c. 300 BC, the logos was the active reason pervading the universe and animating it. It was conceived of as material, and is usually identified with God or Nature. The Stoics also referred to the seminal logos, («logos spermatikos«) or the law of generation in the universe, which was the principle of the active reason working in inanimate matter. Humans, too, each possess a portion of the divine logos.^[11]

Philo of Alexandria[]

Philo (20 BC — 50 AD), a Hellenized Jew, used the term Logos to mean an intermediary divine being, or demiurge.^[3] Philo followed the Platonic distinction between imperfect matter and perfect idea, and therefore intermediary beings were necessary to bridge the enormous gap between God and the material world.^[12] The Logos was the highest of these intermediary beings, and was called by Philo «the first-born of God.»^[12]
Philo also wrote that «the Logos of the living God is the bond of everything, holding all things together and binding all the parts, and prevents them from being dissolved and separated.»^[13]

The Platonic Ideas were located within the Logos, but the Logos also acted on behalf of God in the physical world.^[12] In particular, the Angel of the Lord in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) was identified with the Logos by Philo, who also said that the Logos was God’s instrument in the creation of the universe.^[12]

Use in Christianity[]

Christ the Logos[]

Main article: Logos (Christianity)

The Christian concept of the Logos is derived from the first chapter of the Gospel of John, where the Logos (often translated as “Word”) is described in terms that resemble, but go well beyond, the ideas of Philo:^[14]

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.^[15]

John also explicitly identifies the Logos with Jesus:

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only,[a] who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, «This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’ «^[16]

Christians who profess belief in the Trinity often consider John 1:1 to be a central text in their belief that Jesus is God, in connection with the idea that the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are equals.

The Fourth Gospel may give answers to three groups: Jews, Gnostics, and followers of John the Baptist.

• Jews. To the rabbis who spoke of the Torah (Law) as preexistent, as God’s instrument in creation, and is the source of light and life, John replied that these claims apply rather to the Logos.

• Gnostics. To the Gnostics who would deny a real incarnation, John’s answer was most emphatic: «the Word became flesh.»Template:Bibleref2c

• Followers of John the Baptist. To those who stopped with John the Baptist, he made it clear that John was not the Light but only witness to the Light. Template:Bibleref2c

Although the term Logos is not retained as a title beyond the prologue, the whole book of John presses these basic claims. As the Logos, Jesus Christ is God in self-revelation (Light) and redemption (Life). He is God to the extent that he can be present to man and knowable to man. The Logos is God,Template:Bibleref2c and the risen Christ is worshiped by Thomas, who fell at his feet saying, «My Lord and my God.»Template:Bibleref2c-nb Yet the Logos is in some sense distinguishable from God, for «the Logos was with God.»Template:Bibleref2c-nb God and the Logos are not two beings, and yet they are also not simply identical. In contrast to the Logos, God can be conceived (in principle at least) also apart from his revelatory action─although we must not forget that the Bible speaks of God only in his revelatory action. The paradox that the Logos is God and yet it is in some sense distinguishable from God is maintained in the body of the Gospel. That God as he acts and as he is revealed does not «exhaust» God as he is, is reflected in sayings attributed to Jesus: I and the Father are one»Template:Bibleref2c and also, «the Father is greater than I.»Template:Bibleref2c-nb The Logos is God active in creation, revelation, and redemption. Jesus Christ not only gives God’s Word to us humans; he is the Word.Template:Bibleref2c-nb Template:Bibleref2c-nb He is the true word─ultimate reality revealed in a Person. The Logos is God, distinguishable and thought yet not separable in fact.

– Frank Stagg, New Testament Theology.^[17]

«God» or «a god»[]

Main article: John 1:1

The last four words of John 1:1 (θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος, literally «God was the Logos,» or «God was the Word») have been a particular topic of debate within Christianity. In this construct, the subject (the Logos) and the complement (God) both appear in the nominative case, and the complement is therefore usually distinguished by dropping any article, and moving it before the verb.^[18][19] Grammatically, the phrase could therefore read either «the Word was God» or «the Word was a god.» Early New Testament manuscripts did not distinguish upper and lower case,^[18] so that pre-existing beliefs about the Trinity have influenced translation, although many scholars see the movement of «God» to the front of the clause as indicating an emphasis more consistent with «the Word was God.»^{[20][21][22][23]} Some translations, such as An American Translation^[24] and Moffatt, New Translation,^[25] preserve a sense of ambiguity with «the Word was divine.» Related translations have also been suggested, such as «what God was the Word also was.»^[26]

While «the Word was God» is by far the most common English translation,^[27] non-Trinitarian groups such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses (in their Emphatic Diaglott and New World Translation) and Unitarians (in Thomas Belsham‘s modification^[28] of William Newcome‘s version) translate «the Word was a god.»

Early Christian writers[]

Following John 1, the early Christian apologist Justin Martyr (c 150) identified Jesus as the Logos.^[29][30] Like Philo, Justin also identified the Logos with the Angel of the Lord, and used this as a way of arguing for Christianity to Jews:

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;^[31]

In his First Apology, Justin used the Stoic concept of the Logos 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.^[29] However, Justin does not go so far as to articulate a fully consistent doctrine of the Logos.^[29]

Modern Christian writers[]

On April 1, 2005, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (who would become Pope Benedict XVI just over two weeks later) referred to the Christian religion as the religion of the Logos:

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.^[32]

Jung’s analytical psychology[]

In Carl Jung‘s analytical psychology, logos is used for the masculine principle of rationality, in contrast to its female counterpart, eros:

Woman’s psychology is founded on the principle of Eros, the great binder and loosener, whereas from ancient times the ruling principle ascribed to man is Logos. The concept of Eros could be expressed in modern terms as psychic relatedness, and that of Logos as objective interest.^[33]

See also[]

• Christianity
• Logocracy
• Nous
• Parmenides
• Rhema
• Shabda
• Sophia
• Spirituality

Notes[]

External links[]

• The Apologist’s Bible Commentary

ar:لوغوس
bs:Logos
br:Logos
ca:Logos
cs:Logos
cy:Logos
da:Appelform
de:Logos
et:Logos
es:Logos
eo:Logos
eu:Logos
fr:Logos
ko:로고스
hr:Logos
it:Logos
he:לוגוס
lt:Logosas
nl:Logos
ja:ロゴス
no:Logos
nn:Logos
pl:Logos (filozofia)
pt:Logos
ru:Логос
sk:Logos
sl:Logos
ckb:لۆگۆس
sr:Логос
fi:Logos
sv:Logos
tr:Logos
uk:Логос
zh:邏各斯