Word of God

{{Biblenav}}
Depending on who you are and what you believe in, the '''Word of God''' could mean Jesus, the ''Bible'', the ''Qur'an'', 
the kama sutra
, ''Dianetics'', anything the pope says ''ex cathedra'', the ''Book of Mormon'', the ''Tanakh'' and ''Talmud'', the lyrics of [[Ye]], the teachings of David Koresh, the commands of the Pharaohs, the commands of the Sapa Inca, the sayings of the Dalai Lama, the ''Avesta'', the ''Yoga Sutras of Patanjali'', anything on the {{wpl|Missionary Church of Kopimism|internet|,}} the ''Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster'', or {{trope|WordOfGod|Main|an Author confirming something about their work outside of it|,}} to mention just a few. This page is primarily going to focus on the Judaeo-Christian ''Word of God''.

== Lexicology of "The Word" ==
The word which Christianity translates into "The Word" in the Bible is the Greek word ''logos'' (λόγος). This can be seen in Bible passages such as John 1:1 
{{cquote|En archē ēn ho '''Lógos''', kaì ho '''Lógos''' ēn pròs tòn Theón, kaì Theòs ēn ho '''Lógos'''.|||John 1:1 in its original Greek.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_1:1</ref>}}

{{cquote|In the beginning was the '''Word''', and the '''Word''' was with God, and the '''Word''' was God.|||John 1:1 translated into English}}

A better translation for ''logos'' would be "The Reason" or "The Account",<ref>
Whether "account" implies "story/narrative" or something produced by an accountant ... is left as an exercise for the reader.
</ref>
as the Greek word ''logos'' doesn’t usually translate into the English word "word". Rather, the Greek word ''lexis'' is what translates to "word". The root of ''lexis'' crops up in English-language words like "lexicon", which is all the ''words'' that make up an area of knowledge, or like "dyslexia", which is a learning disorder that involves difficulty in learning to read or interpret ''words''. It is also the root for "lexicology", which is the study of ''words''. (Incidentally, {{wpl|Lexicology}} was what was just done.) The Greek word ''logos'', on the other hand, manifests the Greek root from which we get the English word "[[logic]]".

Logos is g3056 in Strong's Concordance.<ref>[https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?t=kjv&strongs=g3056 Logos]</ref>

==Pre-Christian origins of logos (λόγος)==
{{cquote|Philo’s doctrine of the Logos is blurred by his mystical and religious vision, but his Logos is clearly the second individual in one God as hypostatization of God’s Creative Power – Wisdom.
|||Marian Hillar<ref>”[http://www.socinian.org/religion.html The Logos and Its Function in the Writings of Philo of Alexandria: Greek Interpretation of the Hebrew Myth and Foundations of Christianity]“. Published in A Journal from The Radical Reformation. A Testimony to Biblical Unitarianism, Vol. 7, No. 3 Spring 1998, Part I pp. 22-37; Vol. 7, No. 4 Summer 1998, Part II pp. 36-53.</ref><ref>Schäfer, Peter (2011). ''The Origins of Jewish Mysticism''. Princeton University Press. p. 159. ISBN 0-691-14215-7. "[As a personified god] Wisdom (Greek sophia) plays a prominent role in Philo as well and is yet another power among the divine powers that acts as an agent of creation. Whereas the Logos, as we have seen, is responsible for the intelligible world, Wisdom would seem to be responsible for the world perceived by the senses."</ref>}}

The philosophical importance of {{wpl|Logos}} can be traced to the pre-Socratic philosopher {{wpl|Heraclitus||.}} While none of his original writings have survived in their entirety, we do have fragments of his philosophy, and some of these fragments describe his belief in logos. One such fragment is DKB2 where Heraclitus says ''Though the logos is common, the many live as if they had a wisdom of their own.''<ref>[http://www.heraclitusfragments.com/files/ge.html DKB2]</ref> This reference makes clear that Heraclitus believes in an independent existence of a universal logos. Another fragment from him reiterates this belief. ''It is wise, listening not to me but to the logos, to agree that all things are one.''<ref>[https://www.swarthmore.edu/classics/heraclitus-and-divine DK50]</ref>

Stoic philosophers would use Heraclitus's idea of a universal logos in their model of the universe. {{wpl|Eusebius}} describes the stoic conception of the universe in the following passage:

{{cquote|They (the stoics) say, like Heraclitus, that the element of the existing world is fire… moreover, they say that at certain predestined and definite times the whole world is consumed by fire, and afterwards reorganized again. The primordial fire, however, is as it were just a seed, containing the reasons and causes of all things past, present, and future: and that the combination and sequence of these constitute fate, and knowledge, and truth, and the law of all being, from which there is no escape or avoidance.|||''Praeparatio Evangilica'' Book 15 Chapter 14.<ref name=Eusebius>[http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/index.htm#Praeparatio_Evangelica_(The_Preparation_of_the_Gospel) ''Praeparatio Evangilica'']</ref>}}

The primordial fire Eusebius referred to is a stoic concept called logos spermatikos (λόγος σπερματικός). According to the Stoics, logos spermatikos was the generative principle of the universe which created and took back all things. The word logos by itself was the ordering principle in the cosmos.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_Stoicism_terms</ref>

{{wpl|Diogenes_Laërtius}} would describe logos spermatikos in the following passage:

{{cquote|God is one and the same with Reason, Fate, and Zeus… '''God, who is''' the seminal reason (logos '''sperm'''atikos)
{{efn|The root for spermatikos, sperma, means the seed of plants, also of animals. The English word sperm is derived from the Greek word sperma.}} of the universe, '''remains''' behind '''in the moisture''' as such an agent, adapting matter to himself with a view to the '''next stage of creation.'''|||''Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers'' Book 7 135-136<ref>[http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0258%3Abook%3D7%3Achapter%3D1 ''Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers'']</ref>}}

The stoic conception of the universe and logos would continue well into the Roman era. For example, {{wpl|Seneca the Younger||,}} a Roman stoic who lived from around 4 BCE to CE 65, described God as creative reason (logos).  
{{cquote|Now, however, I am searching for the first, the general cause; this must be simple, inasmuch as matter, too, is simple. Do we ask what cause is? It is surely Creative Reason – in other words, God.||| ''Epistulae Morales ad Lucilium'' LXV 12<ref>[https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Moral_letters_to_Lucilius/Letter_65#cite_ref-9 ''Epistulae Morales ad Lucilium'']</ref>}}

==Pre-Christian origins of dabar (וַיֹּ֥אמֶר)==
The Jews had a different concept of the ‘word’ called dabar (h1697).  Dabar is used in passages such as {{bible|Joshua|1|18}} to describe Yahweh's words. Dabar is also used to describe the words exchanged between two individuals such as in {{bible|Genesis|27|34}}.<ref>[https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?t=kjv&strongs=h1697 Dabar]</ref>  Dabar was not used to describe Yahweh’s use of speech to create things such as in {{bible|Genesis|1|3}} where “God said, Let there be light: and there was light.” For that the word amar (h559) was used.<ref>[https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H559&t=KJV Amar]</ref> When the Hebrew scriptures were translated into Greek to create the Septuagint, the Hebrew words dabar and amar were translated into the Greek word logos. While the words are similar in terms of their literal meaning, philosophically the words are quite different. Greek logos is best descried as a metaphysical concept of a transcendent god whereas dabar and amar are better characterized as the divine utterances or actions of an anthropomorphic god.<ref name=FromLogos>[https://books.google.com/books?id=DMQgAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA185&lpg=PA185&dq=justin+martyr+numenius+marian+hillar&source=bl&ots=_lpy0eLFIS&sig=Bjm0YdxHlqj_5H0GQtp9GUzbqUI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjojbTF7PzYAhVCIqwKHUhUBi8Q6AEIRDAF#v=onepage&q=justin%20martyr%20numenius%20marian%20hillar&f=false ''From Logos to Trinity'' Marian Hillar (page 36-39)]</ref>

The Greek philosophical concepts of logos and [[Holy_Spirit|pneuma]] and their Hebrew equivalents were identified with God by the author(s) of psalms.  
{{cquote|By the word (dabar) of the LORD were the heavens  made; and all the host of them by the breath (ruach) of his mouth.|||{{bible|Psalm|33|6}}}}

==Hellenistic Judaism and logos==
{{cquote|Philo of Alexandria (c25BCE to c50CE) is the foremost example of the input of Greek ideas into Jewish thought, a phenomenon which produced an important type of philosophy and culture during this period, called "Hellenistic Judaism."|||{{wpl|Earl Doherty}}<ref>{{cite book|last=Doherty|first=Earl|title=Jesus: Neither God Nor Man - The Case for a Mythical Jesus|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=KD6wQQAACAAJ|year=2009|publisher=Age of Reason Publications|location=Ottawa|isbn=978-0-9689259-2-8|quote=New edition, Revised and Expanded, Originally published under the title: ''The Jesus Puzzle: Did Christianity Begin with a Mythical Christ? - Challenging the Existence of an Historical Jesus''|page=723, n. 40, 41}}</ref>}}

After Alexander the Great created his empire, the Greek culture was heavily influential throughout the region controlled by the Greeks. This influence  is referred to as 'Hellenism' and the Hellenistic influence was particularly strong among Jews living in the city of Alexandria. This was the city where the Hebrew scriptures were translated into Greek to create the {{wpl|Septuagint}}{{efn|Ptolemy II Philadelphus asked seventy-two Jewish scholars to translate the Torah from Biblical Hebrew into Greek, for inclusion in the Library of Alexandria.}} It was also the city where Jewish philosophers combined traditional Jewish belief with Greek philosophy.  One of the first people to do this was {{wpl|Aristobulus_of_Alexandria}} and one of the ideas he promoted was the belief that Plato and Pythagoras drew upon Mosaic Law ''before'' the Septuagint was created.  

{{cquote|It is evident that Plato closely followed our (Mosaic) legislation… for others before Demetrius of Phalerus (350 -280 BCE), and prior to the supremacy of Alexander and the Persians, have translated the exodus… and the exposition of the whole law… also Pythagoras transferred many of our precepts and inserted them in his own system of doctrines.|||''Praeparatio Evangelica'' xiii. 12.<ref name=Eusebius/>}}

There are no known Greek versions of Mosaic law before Cyrus and Alexander the Great conquered the places Jews lived<ref>[http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/3269-bible-translations, Bible Translations, ''Jewish Encyclopedia'']</ref> or any evidence that Pythagoras and Plato were aware of Jewish thought. Nonetheless, that was what Aristobulus believed and he was influential among the Hellenistic Jews.  
Aristobulus also appears to have made an attempt to incorporate logos into Judaism when he argued that God’s words denoted His activates.<ref>[http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/1773-aristobulus-of-paneas Aristobulus, ''Jewish Encyclopedia'']</ref>

{{cquote|For we must understand the voice of God not as words spoken, but as construction of works, just as Moses in the Law has spoken of the whole creation of the world as words of God. For he constantly says of each work, “And God said, and it was so.”|||''Praeparatio Evangelica'' xiii. 12.<ref name=Eusebius/>}}

The next major Hellenistic philosopher to incorporate the concept of logos into Judaism was {{wpl|Philo|Philo of Alexandria}} (c. 20 BCE – c. 50 CE).   One of the cultural themes among both the Greek and Jewish cultures during the Hellenistic period was allegorical interpretation of their theological works. One example of this was the Heraclitus who wrote ''Homeric Problems''.  In this work, {{wpl|Heraclitus (commentator)|Heraclitus Homericus}} explained that when Homer spoke of Aphrodite’s infidelity with Ares, he was talking about one of two things.  Either Ares was a metaphor for strife and Aphrodite was a metaphor for love and their infidelity represented how ‘these old adversaries (give) up their former contention and (come) together in concord.’  Or Ares was a metaphor for iron, Hephaestus (Aphrodite’s husband) was a metaphor for fire, and Aphrodite represented the craftsmanship needed to turn the iron softened by fire into things like swords.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books/about/Heraclitus.html?id=pLf2PNEy53AC Heraclitus ''Heraclitus: Homeric Problems'' page 111]</ref> 

In Philo’s case, he applied allegorical interpretation to the Hebrew Scriptures in order to explain their meaning.   One passage that Philo applied this technique on was {{bible|Genesis|1|27}} which states “So God created man in his own image, in the image God created he him.” This passage was a theological problem in Hellenistic Judaism as the metaphysical versions of God promoted by the Greek philosophers conflicted with the more anthropomorphic version of God found in Genesis.  In essence, the problem was “If God lacks a body, then how could God make man in his own image?”  Philo’s solution was to argue that mankind was modeled after God’s logos, which meant creative reason in Hellenistic culture. This allegorical interpretation can be found in passages of Philo’s work such as the following.

{{cquote|No mortal thing could have been formed on the similitude of the supreme Father of the universe, but only after the pattern of the second deity, who is the Word (Logos) of the Supreme Being.|||''Questions and Answers on Genesis II'', 62<ref>[http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/yonge/book42.html ''Questions and Answers on Genesis II'']</ref>}}

Philo would also incorporate the concept of logos into his metaphysical triad. Philo’s idea of how God was organized can be found in the following passage.  

{{cquote|The one in the middle is the father of the universe, who in the sacred scriptures is called by his proper name, I am that I am; and the beings on each side are those most ancient powers which are always close to the living God, one of which is called his creative power (logos), and the other his royal power. And the creative power is God, for it is by this that he made and arranged the universe; and the royal power is the Lord, for it is fitting that the Creator should lord it over and govern the creature.|||''On Abraham'', Chp. xxiv 121<ref>[http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/yonge/book22.html ''On Abraham'']</ref>}}

Early Christians such as Justin Martyr would continue the philosophy begun by Hellenistic Jewish philosophers.  Like Aristobulus and his idea that Plato and Pythagoras had borrowed their ideas from Moses, Justin would argue that Socrates and Heraclitus of Ephesus were unknowingly Christian.<ref>[http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm  The First Apology (St. Justin Martyr): Chapter 5 and 46]</ref>    And like Philo, Justin would create his own version of a [[Trinity|metaphysical triad]] that incorporated God’s logos.

==Logos as Christos==
There was another religious movement that was occurring during the same time Philo was promoting the idea that humankind was modeled after God's logos. In Roman Judea, a series of Jewish rebels were claiming to be the Jewish [[messiah]].  The first of these was {{wpl|Simon of Peraea}} and he led a revolt that burnt the royal palace at Jericho.  This occurred shortly after Herod died ([[Josephus|4 BCE]]).  Another interesting rebel leader was an [[messiah|Egyptian]] who led a revolt at the Mount of Olives before many of his followers were killed mad he mysteriously disappeared (approximately 52-58 CE).  When the Hebrew word for messiah (mashiach)<ref name=h4899>[http://biblehub.com/hebrew/4899.htm mashiach]</ref> was translated into Greek it became christos<ref name=h5477>[http://biblehub.com/greek/5547.htm christos]</ref>. The author(s) of John incorporated the idea that logos becomes flesh.  
{{cquote|And the Word (logos) was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.|||{{bible|John|1|14}}}}
The idea that {{wpl|Logos_(Christianity)|Christ was logos}} has been maintained in Christianity ever since.   

==The Bible as the Word of God==
While the Greek concept of logos is still maintained by Christians as 'creative reason' remains a part of their trinity, there is a different notion among Christians that the [[Bible]] is literally the Word of God.  They will often use the Word as justification for [[Divine command theory]] which for Christians is the position that Biblical injunctions are the only possible basis for morals, ethics, and law.  

The idea that the Bible is the word of God presupposes several assumptions:

# There is a (single, unique - or indeed any) God 
# God uses expressions of ordinary (human) language to express its will, intentions, commands, etc.
# A literal reading of this language is both necessary and sufficient for establishing moral/ethical/legal precepts

One can take issue with all three assumptions.

==== 1 - Uniqueness of the Word of God ====

Counterargument - Even strong belief in a (unique) supreme being (as seen in all monotheistic religions) is insufficient to establish the God of the Bible as this (unique) being

The greatest problem with the first assumption is that the same "word of God" argument can be used to justify in turn the Old Testament system, the New Testament system, the system of [[Islam]]ic law, the system of Latter Day Saints rules and regulations, and so forth. To the extent that these systems contradict each other in significant aspects, it is clear that they can't all be the same word of the same God. This, in spite of the contrary intention of those using this phrase as an argument in favor of their particular brand of orthodoxy, opens the door to moral relativism.

==== 2- Verbal revelation ====

Counterargument - An equally broad secular mystic tradition asserts that God uses mathematics to lay down the law

The second assumption, that God directly communicated his intentions to the humans who wrote down the Scriptures, looks hopelessly naive. The problem is not just that the idea is naive, for there may be naive ideas that turn out to be right, but rather that we lack evidence. To the extent there is evidence (and we can, for the sake of the argument, admit a broad class of evidence including fables and traditions) the same evidence of divine inspiration is also available for the [[Buddha]], for [[Confucius]], and for other sages outside scriptural bounds. In this respect too, the "word of God" line of argumentation opens the door to moral relativism.

==== 3- Literalism ====
Counterargument - As with any writing of great antiquity, the philological and conceptual difficulties in establishing a literal reading are immense.

The final assumption (which usually takes the form that [[King James Only | the King James Version of the Bible is all one needs to study]]) is contradicted by a mountain of scholarship, both religious and secular.  Internal evidence in various parts of the Bible credit the Word of God as also the word of (for example) Saint Matthew, Saint Mark, Saint Luke, Saint John, Saint Paul and Saint Peter.  Tradition adds other writers: Moses and Ezra, to name but two. Different emphases, different original languages and different styles distinguish different passages. Various religious traditions regard various sets of text as biblically canonical. The revealed Word of God emerges as a Word for all seasons.  Moreover, as Thomas Paine pointed out in the ''Age of Reason'' the [[Biblical_contradictions|bible contradicts]] itself thus violating the {{wpl|Law_of_noncontradiction}}.  Note further that the natural growth of the [[halakha]] (and other biblically grounded forms of law over the millennia) proves that those interested in maintaining a biblical system of justice do not find the word of God sufficient as it is.  It is also highly debatable whether a religious (let alone Biblical) foundation of morals/ethics/law is necessary.

==God's Word®==
God's Word® is a registered trademark of God's Word to the Nations of Orange Park, [[FL]].<ref>https://www.godsword.org/site/contact-us/</ref>

==See also==
*[[The Bible Code]]
*[[Bible translations]]

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=note}}

==References==
{{reflist|3}}

{{biblebox}}
{{apolbox}}

[[Category:Bible analysis]]
[[Category:Religious terms]]

Categories: Bible analysis, Religious terms