What is biblical authority...?

[Saint Steven]

So in the Greek ending of verse 12, "καὶ κριτικὸς ἐνθυμήσεων καὶ ἐννοιῶν καρδίας", literally, "and judges thoughts and intentions of heart". So using "it" to refer back to "logos to Theou", word of God, works grammatically in English. Since Paul (at least Orthodox refer to the author of Hebrews as Paul), is using Logos, I'm making the assumption that the author is intending the usage of Logos as a philosophical term of "rational thought" as opposed to "lexi" which is just simply "a word", which is why the Logos is alive and active.

Thanks.
So, that would be to say, The logic (of the word of God/Jesus) is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. ???

Does that fit your understanding of this?

Saint Steven said: ↑
That's a very interesting point. (the word of God = Jesus)
I certainly agree that it is not a reference to the NT canon which wasn't assembled/approved until the 4th century.

Not sure if it is a translation issue, but the NIV uses the pronoun "it" in reference to "the word of God". What do you make of that?


Hebrews 4:12-13 NIV
For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. 13 Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

I'm remembering something now about there being no pronouns in the NT Greek. So, they need to choose one when needed in the translation. Unfortunately, in this case it makes a thing out of a person. Which seems to me to be MORE misleading than using a generic "he". The proof is in the pudding. What is the standard interpretation? That this is a reference to the canon. (wrong)

Logos would be an "it" grammatically. Using He could be borderline interpretation. However, "wisdom" in Greek is Sophia and uses feminine endings, so wisdom sometimes gets anthropomorphized as "she".

 

[GreekOrthodox]

Thanks.
So, that would be to say, The logic (of the word of God/Jesus) is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. ???

Does that fit your understanding of this?

Right, Logos was first used in pre-Socratic Greek philosophy by Heraclitus. It was adopted by the Jewish philosopher, Philo of Alexandria, as "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".

It is in Philo's light that John writes about "In the beginning was the Logos".

 

[Saint Steven]

Right, Logos was first used in pre-Socratic Greek philosophy by Heraclitus. It was adopted by the Jewish philosopher, Philo of Alexandria, as "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".

It is in Philo's light that John writes about "In the beginning was the Logos".

Thanks.
So, to unpack this a bit further, could we say that John was declaring that the logic (reason) for all this (the advent of Christ) was with God in the beginning and actually was God (the Son). ???

Does that fit what you are saying? I don't want to put words in your mouth.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

The Prologue of John is a philosophical discourse.

1 In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God.
14 Now the Logos became flesh and took up residence among us.

John here is taking Philo's use of Logos and making it a Christian distinction. He sets up that Jesus, the Logos made flesh, was "en arche", "In origin", (which is the opening of Genesis, "In origin"). The Logos was "with", and in the Greek, "pros" does mean with but it also carries with it the meaning movement towards something. Basically, John states in a philosophical way that both Jews and Greeks would understand that the Rational Word of God IS God, and not a creation of God. This is what makes John's prologue so powerful of a statement.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

'm remembering something now about there being no pronouns in the NT Greek.

Yes the gender like many European languages comes from the ending, and words have an innate gender regardless of what they describe, like pneuma spirit is feminine etc.

The proof is in the pudding. What is the standard interpretation? That this is a reference to the canon. (wrong)

I think the general interpretation is that it is something of a double or maybe triple entendre, between the Bible, the general word / will of God and Christ.