[quote=“ManiacalVesalius, post:53, topic:38581, full:true”]
As for the Greek Septuagint, again, you make the same mistake as we’ve seen before. The word ‘logion’ in Isaiah is not a reference to an actual being called the ‘Word’, but simply the word of God. [/quote]
THAT is a TRANSLATION, not a word-meaning. It is used exclusively in the New Testament to convey “ORACLES” - not “Word.” And in the Old Testament it is translated both “Word” and "ORACLE.
At NO time is it used to reference a person, because it is NOT a person.
“The Logos Of God” is the title of a concept in the mind of God, which was revealed by Paul long before John ever wrote a word. Paul said it is a mystery now revealed to the saints, and this mystery is “The Logos Of God”
Look at how Paul reports it:
In 48 a.d. Paul wrote “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me]: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.” [Gal 2:20]
And -
“But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. 6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. 7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.” [Gal 4:4-7]
Paul also said in that same letter - “My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,” [Gal 4:19]
So Paul had an expectation of seeing a change come over the newly converted as their Phileo (affection) turned to agape (devotion). In their proccess of growing to mature Christianity, a maturity that sometimes included giving up one’s life, the saints began to express, not in words, but by a new and living way that far exceeded all expectation as pertains to a changing of a lifestyle. The bold and sometimes brash became humble; the occasionally vulgar became pure of speech; the selfish became subtlely concerned for the downtrodden and the poor.
Why?
Because Christ lived in them, in their flesh, bringing about a change so obvious that when observed by others, it seemed as though, to those others, the original was replaced with a completely new person. It was as though one became a newly born only begotten son of God.
So Paul introduces a concept to the saints, of “Christ living in you;” but does not make any further defining remarks to the saints in Galatia.
Then, in In 55 a.d. paul, writing to the saints in Corinth, said -“Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you], except ye be reprobates?” [II Cor 13:5]
Paul begins to introduce some finer points of definition when in 60 a.d. he said he had “fully preached the Logos Of God” to the whole world, and explained what it is - “If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;”
“Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to (fully preach) fulfill ]The Logos Of God; 26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: 27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you , the hope of glory:” [Col 1:23,25-27]
So Paul tells us “Christ is in you” and further, he tells us there is a name for this phenomena, “The Logos Of God.” Now, “logos” is simply one of several words that carry the meaning of “word” or “message.” This becomes “The message of God” to you is “Let Christ take over your life.” Let him in. Let him completely renovate the dwelling he has discovered in you. Let him clean the inside and the outside, and make all things new as pertains to your identity, so that instead of the person you once were, is now replaced by that person you have become in Christ Jesus.
We need to remember several things that are explained by Paul; 1) there was a mystery hidden from ages and generations, 2) it is now to be made manifest to the saints; and 3) there is glory somehow connected to this “soon to be manifested” mystery; and 4) Paul tells us this mystery has a name “The Logos Of God;” and 5) further, he tells us that this mystery, this manifested “logos of God” is “Christ in you” and yet further again, 6)it constitutes for us “the hope of glory.” This is quite a mouthfull.
So, let’s see if this theme is picked up for verification anywhere else in scripture.
What we are looking for is some reference to “Christ in you” while you are “living” and “in your flesh,” and further, we are looking for some indication that this is available for a very long time, that this is not just for the saints of Paul’s day, to last only as long as he continues to preach it.
Paul expresses his exposition of a theme with - “But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. 6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. 7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.” [Gal 4:4-7]
So Paul jumps from the birth of a newborn baby, Jesus of Nazareth, to the complete transition of the saints to newly adopted full grown children of God, in one short phrase comprised of 4 verses.
Now I realize that much has been preached about the saints being adopted into God’s family as sons, thereby making Him our Father, and we his children. But that is not what scripture actually says. Scripture tells us we are adopted by Jesus Christ to himself, and since the saints are “baptized into” Christ, and have put on Christ, because He is 'God’s son, those who are adopted into Jesus, are “equal heirs” with him. “Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,” [Eph 1:5]
All of this ties together but it was not all written in the first book of the new testament. It began there, and morphed into the truth of the gospel, as it ws developed by Paul, limited only by the people’s state of preparedness, as they had to modify their lives so that they no longer were the focus and scope of what “living” means.
Finally, another Apostle picks up on the theme introduced and defined by Paul’s writings. It is John’s turn to talk about the saints in whom the spirit of Christ has been sent by God to dwell in the saints; (that “Logos Of God” which was introduced by Paul - “Christ living in me”) - John speaks of it this way: “He came unto his own, and his own received him not. 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the logos was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his (the one who received Christ) glory, the glory as of an only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” [John 1:11-14]
John does not say “as many as received him, them he made sons of God.” No, John says “as many as received him, to them gave he power to become(no article in the Greek) sons of God.” John is telling us there is something required beyond believing, to qualify one for being a son of God. And that requirement has been being spelled out by Paul the Apostle since Jesus ascended to the right hand of the Father, so many years ago.
Why does John fail to say “We beheld the glory of the only begotten son?” Instead, he says “We beheld his glory, glory as of an only begotten son.”
That little Greek expression “os” is what is called a “particle of comparison.” Why would John be comparing the glory of Jesus to the glory of Jesus? The truth is, he is not. He is comparing The glory of the saint in whom the logos of God is personified, with the glory of the only begotten son of God dwelling in that saint.
Jesus did not “become a man” in John 1:14. The only reason there is even a mention of Jesus at all in John’s first chapter, is because in 96 a.d., John tied his gospel to the person of Christ and to “the logos of God” referenced in Rev 3:12 and in 19:12-13 with reference to the new name he is to be given, as “the logos of God.”
Jesus was not “the logos of God” in 30 a.d; He was not “The logos of God” in 33 a.d. when he was ascended, and he was not “the Logos of God” when John prophecied about his gift-name, as of 69 a.d. it was still a future event.
In 96 a.d. John is speaking in 1:14 ofhis gospel, about an event in the life of a saint, a personification, and recalling his remarks he wrote in 69 a.d, about Jesus, and here ties the two events together.
But the personification of the logos of God takes place, according to Paul, everytime some saint or other, so lives his life that he can say “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.” [Gal 2:20]
When this saint aknowledges “Christ Jesus” in his life, the logos of God is personified in the life of that saint. And “we behold the glory as of an only begotten son of God” all over again, in that saint, through Christ living in him.
Paul spent a lifetime convincing the saints about this subject of “Jesus Christ living in me” and said, “My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,” [Gal 4:19]
So to recap what the Apostles have introduced and defined.
Paul introduced “Christ in you;” Paul defined “Christ in you” and said it is “the hope of Glory.” He also defined it as “The Logos Of God.”
Then John picked up on a new name which is to be given Jesus, and that new name is “The Logos of God;” Finally John brings together, in his prologue, the saints in whom can be said “Christ lives in you,” and “hope” and “glory” just as Paul had already introduced and defined. And John did not change a thing paul already said.
Jesus was born, at which time he received a name, “Jesus,” which served to identify him while he grew in wisdom and in stature, and in favour with God and men, and when he was fully grown, and had died, had been resurrected, and had ascended by 33 a.d., received a name, “The logos of God” between the time when it was published in 69 a.d., and 96 a.d. when John ties the personification of The Logos Of God in the saints, to Jesus, who received the name; but it was not who and what he was; it was a name received. Jesus was never “the logos of God” but was given the name after he successfully completed his mission and was extolled and made very high [Isa 52:13], and given a name above every name.[Phil 2:9-11][Eph 1:19-23]
People have him already pre-existing as “the logos of God” and recognized as the personification of “the logos of God” at his birth when in fact, the terminology did not even exist until 69 a.d.
When I look at a saint in whom Christ lives, I see the logos of God personified, and “behold the glory as of glory of an only begotten son of God.”
When John in his epistles [1st and 2nd John] speaks of “Jesus Christ came in flesh,” he is not speaking of the birth of Jesus, he is speaking of “Christ living in me, in my flesh” spoken of by Paul - “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.”[Gal 2:20]
There is no way you can find a place to separate Paul’s life in the flesh after his conversion to Christ, from Jesus Christ living in Paul.
Furthermore, John himself said “Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in flesh is of God:” [I John 4:2]
John did not use the article, and neither should we if we are going to understand exactly what John is saying. He is not speaking of Jesus own body of his flesh, for then he would have said “Jesus came in the flesh,” and everybody would be in agreement. But John did not say that , he said “Jesus Christ came in flesh,” which he did when he lived in Paul “in the flesh.”
And to show it is no mistake of language, John repeats in II John 7 “For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.”
In neither verse does John use either the aorist tense or imperfect verbs, which would be necessary if he was speaking of the life of Jesus in his flesh; but John used first, a perfect active participle when he said - “… Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in flesh is of God:” and second, he used a present middle verb which tells us it is not something Jesus actively does to take over your life, but it is something he is allowed by you, to do.
The significance of the “perfect active” [I John 4:2] is that Jesus has accomplished to the fullest, the fact of “com[”-ing"] in flesh" as he lives in the lives of the saints. It is not a reference to his having been born “in the flesh.”
This becomes significant when we consider Paul’s words -“For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.”[Rom 5:10]
The present participle in II Jn 7, which if you know anything about Greek participles, they are “-ing” words, and being present tense, means that in 85 - 90 a.d., John is saying Jesus is still com[“-ing”] in flesh. Check it out with any Greek scholar you wish, if he knows what he is doing, and is honest, he will lay aside all doctrinal bias and admit the truth of this.
This is the mystery of the kingdom of God, part of which Jesus began to teach his disciples as he walked and talked among the Jews of his day. He gave his disciples clues and hints that later, helped them understand as bits and pieces of the doctrine of “The Logos Of God” became fully developed under the capable hands of Paul the Apostle.
And John, in 96 a.d., wrote his gospel, alluding to this doctrine by writing, In the beginning (of the gospel) was the logos, and the logos was with God, and the logos was God, and the logos became flesh and dwelled among us; which Jesus did not do during his lifetime in Galilee and in Jerusalem of his day. He was often remote, and elusive, often sought by the crowds, which is not necessary if he is in fact “among” them. But later, after the “Logos Of God” was fully developed and lived by the saints, Christ indeed lived among the saints, as they were hauled off to the slaughter of the Roman Coliseum, to serve as sport for the masses.
And that, my friend, is the “Mystery of the ages” which Paul spoke of, to the whole world, then wrote of it for later generatons to discover for themselves, and understand and persue.
So until at least 69 a.d., the saints had no idea of Jesus being named “The word of God” at some future point in time. It was NEVER a first century issue.
Then, by the time John wrote his epistle in 96 a.d., and began with “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God,” There was absolutely NO issue of Jesus being the word of God, because it was already understood for over sixty years, that the saints, living so that it was not they who lived, but Christ living in them, was the personification of the word of God, and the word of God was personified in the saints, and dwelled among men. The logos concept was already understood prior to John’s gospel.
It was left to later generations, who studied the new testament from the standpoint of “life of Christ” FIRST, who began to understand John’s gospel to reference an preexistent Jesus who somehow became a human.
If the books are studied in the order in which they were revealed by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they CANNOT be understood to reference a preexistent Jesus.
How does it matter what order you use to study God’s word? Look at the vast difference in concept if you approach the meaning attached to “the logos of God, which is Christ living in me” by starting with the earliest books written, as opposed to beginning with the last book written.
The standard definition of the meaning ‘word’. The philosophical concept of the Logos emerged four centuries after Isaiah 28 was written, and therefore there can be no relevance between the texts you cited and the actual Logos. Again, the Logos is never mentioned in the Old Testament.
As for your denial that the logion preceded Logos, look to the original to see what else you have left out.
Totally false! Logion means "Oracle(s); Educated; "
Logos means thing, matter, word, message, something said, concept;