Logos標識

General Information 一般資料

The word logos (from the root of the Greek verb lego, "to say") figures prominently in a number of Greek and Christian philosophical doctrines.字標識(從根本的希臘語發音讀" ,說" )的數字突出,在一些古希臘和基督教的哲學學說。 Although the word's earliest meaning probably was "connected discourse," by the classical period it already had a wide variety of other meanings: "argument," "rational principle," "reason," "proportion," "measure," and others.雖然這個詞最早的意思大概是"有連系的話語, "古典時期,它已經產生了各種各樣的其他含義: "論據" , "理性原則" , "理由" , "比例" , "措施"等。 For this reason, it is difficult to interpret the logos doctrines of philosophers and dangerous to assume a single history for these doctrines.基於這個原因,是很難解釋的標識學說的哲學家和危險的假設一個單一的歷史,為這些教條。

Heraclitus was the earliest Greek thinker to make logos a central concept.赫拉克利特是最早希臘思想家作出標識一個核心概念。 He urges us to pay attention to the logos, which "governs all things" and yet is also something we "encounter every day."他敦促我們要注意標識,其中"管了所有的東西" ,但也是我們的"每日" 。 We should probably emphasize the linguistic connections of logos when interpreting Heraclitus's thought.我們或許應強調語言連接的標識詮釋時,赫拉克利特的思想。 In our efforts to understand the world, we should look to our language and the order embodied in it, rather than to scientific or religious views that neglect this.在我們努力了解世界,我們必須注意我們的語言和秩序體現在它,而不是科學或宗教觀點忽視這一點。

BELIEVE Religious Information Source web-site相信宗教信息來源
Our List of 2,300 Religious Subjects我們所列出的2300名宗教科目
E-mail電子郵件
In the 3d century BC the proponents of Stoicism borrowed the idea of logos from Heraclitus (neither Plato nor Aristotle had given the term prominence) and used it for the immanent ordering principle of the universe - represented, at the level of language, by humankind's ordered discourse.在三維世紀公元前倡議者的生活儉樸借來的概念標識從赫拉克利特(既不是柏拉圖,也沒有亞里士多德曾一詞突出) ,並用它為上蒼序原理的宇宙-代表,在這一級別的語言,是由人類的命令話語。 Nature and logos are often treated as one and the same; but logos is nature's overall rational structure, and not all natural creatures have logos, or reason, within them.性質和標識,是通常被視作是同一個,但標識是大自然的整體結構合理,而且並非所有的天然生物標識,或理由,他們的。 Humans are urged to "live consistently with logos."人類呼籲, "活始終與標識" 。

In the New Testament, the Gospel According to Saint John gives a central place to logos; the biblical author describes the Logos as God, the Creative Word, who took on flesh in the man Jesus Christ. Many have traced John's conception to Greek origins - perhaps through the intermediacy of eclectic texts like the writings of Philo of Alexandria.在新約聖經福音據聖約翰給人一個中央位置,以標識; 聖經作者描述了標識作為神,創造性一句話,誰上台對肉在人耶穌基督有不少亦追查約翰的構想,以希臘語淵源-也許是通過intermediacy的折衷主義文本一樣的著述斐洛亞歷山大。 More recently, however, scholars have emphasized that the Old Testament contains a doctrine of the Word of God; and in Aramaic paraphrases the "Word of God" takes on some of the functions of God. Later Christian thinkers clearly did incorporate the Stoic logos doctrine; logos was associated particularly with Christ and later, in Arianism, no longer identified with God.但是,最近,學者們強調說,舊約包含一個學說的上帝的話,而且在阿拉姆語段是"上帝的話"上的部分職能,上帝後來基督教思想家顯然沒有把斯多葛標識學說;標識相關,特別是與基督後,在arianism ,不再認定與上帝。

Martha C Nussbaum瑪莎c Nussbaum機構

Bibliography 參考書目
J Carey, Kairos and Logos (1978); WJ Ong, Presence of the Word (1967). j凱里,巴解和標識( 1978年) ; WJ通信公司王景榮,在場字( 1967 ) 。


Logos標識

General Information 一般資料

Logos (Greek, "word,""reason,""ratio"), in ancient and especially in medieval philosophy and theology, the divine reason that acts as the ordering principle of the universe.徽標(希臘文" ,文字" , "理由" , "比" ) ,在古代,尤其是在中世紀的哲學和神學,神聖理性充當序原理的宇宙。

The 6th-century BC Greek philosopher Heraclitus was the first to use the term Logos in a metaphysical sense.第六屆世紀公元前希臘哲學家赫拉克利特是第一個使用該詞標識在形而上的意義。 He asserted that the world is governed by a firelike Logos, a divine force that produces the order and pattern discernible in the flux of nature.他宣稱,世界是由firelike標識,神的力量產生的秩序和格局可辨,在熱流的性質。 He believed that this force is similar to human reason and that his own thought partook of the divine Logos.他表示相信,這股力量是類似人類理性,並認為他的想法完全partook的神聖標誌。

In Stoicism, as it developed after the 4th century BC, the Logos is conceived as a rational divine power that orders and directs the universe; it is identified with God, nature, and fate.在生活儉樸,因為它發達後4世紀公元前,標識,是作為一個理性的神聖權力,命令和指示,宇宙,它是確定與上帝,自然,與命運。 The Logos is "present everywhere" and seems to be understood as both a divine mind and at least a semiphysical force, acting through space and time.該標識是"無處不在" ,似乎可以理解為既是一種神聖的態度,並至少具有semiphysical武力,通過空間和時間。 Within the cosmic order determined by the Logos are individual centers of potentiality, vitality, and growth.與宇宙秩序的決心所標識,是個人中心的發展潛力,充滿活力,和增長。 These are "seeds" of the Logos (logoi spermatikoi).這些都是"種子"的標識( logoi spermatikoi ) 。 Through the faculty of reason, all human beings (but not any other animals) share in the divine reason.通過學院的,因此,所有的人(而不是任何其他動物)的份額在神聖的理由。 Stoic ethics stress the rule "Follow where Reason [Logos] leads"; one must therefore resist the influence of the passions-love, hate, fear, pain, and pleasure.斯多葛倫理學強調法治"跟著那裡的理由[標識]線索" ;之一,因此必須抵制的影響,激情-愛,恨,恐懼,痛苦和快樂。

The 1st-century AD Jewish-Hellenistic philosopher Philo Judaeus employed the term Logos in his effort to synthesize Jewish tradition and Platonism.首屆跨世紀專案猶太-希臘哲學家斐洛judaeus聘用任期標識在他的努力合成猶太傳統和柏拉圖。 According to Philo, the Logos is a mediating principle between God and the world and can be understood as God's Word or the Divine Wisdom, which is immanent in the world.據斐洛,標識是一個調解原則,在神和世界之間,並可以被理解為上帝的話語或神的智慧,這是內在的,在世界上。

At the beginning of the Gospel of John, Jesus Christ is identified with the Logos made incarnate, the Greek word logos being translated as "word" in the English Bible: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us . . ."在一開始的福音的約翰,耶穌基督是確定與標識作了肉身,希臘字標識被翻譯為"字" ,在英文聖經說: "在開始時是言行一致,這個詞是與神,並這個詞是上帝… … 。等字成了血肉和白景富在我們中間… … 。 " (John 1:1-3, 14). (約翰福音1:1-3 , 14 ) 。 John's conception of Christ was probably influenced by Old Testament passages as well as by Greek philosophy, but early Christian theologians developed the conception of Christ as the Logos in explicitly Platonic and Neoplatonic terms (see Neoplatonism).約翰的構想基督的,可能是受舊約通道,以及由古希臘哲學,但早期基督教神學家發展觀,以基督為標誌,在明確柏拉圖和neoplatonic條款(見neoplatonism ) 。 The Logos, for instance, was identified with the will of God, or with the Ideas (or Platonic Forms) that are in the mind of God.該標識,例如,被認定與上帝的意志,或與想法(或柏拉圖式表格) ,這是在他心中的上帝。 Christ's incarnation was accordingly understood as the incarnation of these divine attributes.基督的化身,因此被理解為化身,這些神聖的屬性。

Robert S. Brumbaugh羅伯特S brumbaugh


Logos標識

Advanced Information 先進的信息

The most usual Greek term for "word" in the NT: occasionally with other meanings (eg, account, reason, motive); specifically in the prologue to the Fourth Gospel (John 1:1, 14) and perhaps in other Johannine writings (I John 1:1; Rev. 19:13) it is used of the second person of the Trinity.最通常的希臘來說, "字"在新台幣:偶爾會與其它的含義(例如,帳戶,因此,動機) ;具體來說,在開場白至第四福音(約翰1:1 , 14 ) ,並可能在其他johannine著作(約翰1:1牧師19:13 ) ,它是用的第二人的三位一體。 In ordinary Greek parlance it also means reason.在普通希臘語裡,這也意味著原因。

Johannine Usage johannine用法

According to John 1:1-18 the Logos was already present at the creation ("in the beginning" relates to Gen. 1:1), in the closest relationship with God ("with" = pros, not meta or syn).據約翰1:1-18標識,是目前已經在創作( "一開始"涉及上將1:1 ) ,在最親密的關係,與神( "與" =利弊,而不是梅塔或合成) 。 Indeed, the Logos was God (not "divine," as Moffatt, the anarthrous predicate is grammatically required but may also indicate a distinction between the persons).的確,標識是上帝(而不是"神" ,作為moffatt , anarthrous始發文法要求,但也可能顯示區分人) 。 This relationship with God was effective in the moment of creation (1:2).這與天主的關係,有效地在這個時刻,創作( 1:2 ) 。 The entire work of creation was carried out through ("by" =dia, vs. 3) the Logos.整個工作的創造是通過(下稱" ,由" =直徑,比3 )標誌。 The source of life (1:4, probable punctuation) and light of the world (cf. 9:5) and of every man (1:9, probable punctuation), and still continuing (present tense in 1:5) this work, the Logos became incarnate, revealing the sign of God's presence and his nature (1:14).生命之源( 1:4 ,可能標點符號) ,為世界之光(參見9時05分) ,以及每一個男人( 1時09分,概率標點符號) ,並仍在繼續(目前緊張1:5 ) ,這方面的工作,標識成了肉身,揭示跡象上帝的存在和他的本性( 1:14 ) 。

The prologue thus sets out three main facets of the Logos and his activity: his divinity and intimate relationship with the Father; his work as agent of creation; and his incarnation.序幕就此提出了三個主要的層面進行標識和他的活動:他的神性和親密的關係,與父親,他的工作,作為代理人的藝術創作;和他的化身。

In I John 1:1 "the Logos of life," seen, heard, and handled, may refer to the personal Christ of the apostolic preaching or impersonally to the message about him.在約翰1:1 "標識的生活" ,看到,聽到,並處理了,可能是指以個人基督的使徒的說教或客觀至信息約他。 Rev. 19:12 pictures Christ as a conquering general called the Logos of God.牧師19時12分拍照基督作為一個征服了一般所謂的徽號的上帝。 As in Heb.在希伯來書。 4:12, it is the OT picture of the shattering effects of God's word (cf. the imagery of vs. 15) which is in mind. 4時12分,它是城市旅遊局了解該破滅的影響,神的話語(參見意象主場迎戰15 ) ,這是一點。

Background of the Term背景任期

OT職能治療

Diverse factors give some preparation for John's usage.多種因素使一些準備,為約翰的用法。 God creates by the word (Gen. 1:3; Ps. 33:9) and his word is sometimes spoken of semipersonally (Ps. 107:20; 147:15, 18); it is active, dynamic, achieving its intended results (Isa. 50:10-11).神造的,由字(創1:3 ;聚苯乙烯。 33:9 )和他的字有時口語的semipersonally (詩篇107:20 ; 147:15 , 18 ) ,它是積極的,動態的,取得了意想的結果(以賽亞書50:10-11 ) 。 The wisdom of God is personified (Prov. 8, note especially vss. 22ff. on wisdom's work in creation).上帝的智慧是人格化( prov. 8 ,特別注意到VSS的。 22ff 。智慧的工作,在創建) 。 The angel of the Lord is sometimes spoken of as God, sometimes as distinct (cf. Judg. 2:1).天使的耶和華是有時口語的,因為神,有時作為獨特(參見judg 。 2:1 ) 。 God's name is semipersonalized (Exod. 23:21; I Kings 8:29).上帝的名字是semipersonalized ( exod. 23時21分,我的國王8時29分) 。

Palestinian Judaism巴勒斯坦猶太教

Besides the personification of wisdom (cf. Ecclus. 24), the rabbis used the word me'mra,' "word," as a periphrasis for "God."除了人格化的智慧(參見ecclus 24 ) ,拉比用字me'mra ' " ,一句話, "作為一個periphrasis為"上帝" 。 This usage occurs in the Targums.這種用法發生在targums 。

Greek Philosophy希臘哲學

Among the philosophers the precise significance of Logos varies, but it stands usually for "reason" and reflects the Greek conviction that divinity cannot come into direct contact with matter.其中哲學家的確切意義的標識不一,但它通常是"理性" ,反映了希臘的信念,即神不能直接接觸到的事。 The Logos is a shock absorber between God and the universe, and the manifestation of the divine principle in the world.徽標是一個減振器之間的上帝和宇宙的,並體現了神聖的原則,在世界上。 In the Stoic tradition the Logos is both divine reason and reason distributed in the world (and thus in the mind).在斯多葛傳統標識是既神聖理性和理智,分佈於世界(因此在他心中) 。

Hellenistic Judaism希臘化猶太教

In Alexandrian Judaism there was full personification of the word in creation (Wisd. Sol. 9:1; 16:12).在亞歷山大猶太教有充分的人格化字的創作( wisd.溶膠。 9:1 ; 16:12 ) 。 In the writings of Philo, who, though a Jew, drank deeply from Platonism and Stoicism, the term appears more than 1300 times.在該著作的斐洛,他雖然是猶太人,喝了深深從柏拉圖生活儉樸,長遠看來更超過1300次。 The Logos is "the image" (Col. 1:15); the first form (protogonos), the representation (charakter, cf. Heb. 1:3), of God; and even "Second God" (deuteros theos; cf. Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica vii. 13); the means whereby God creates the world from the great waste; and, moreover, the way whereby God is known (ie, with the mind. Closer knowledge could be received directly, in ecstasy).該標識是"形象" (歌1:15 ) ;第一表格( protogonos ) ,代表( charakter ,參以弗所書1:3 ) ,上帝甚至"二神" ( deuteros theos ;比照。尤西比烏斯, praeparatio evangelica七, 13 ) ;手段,即上帝創造世界,從很大的浪費; ,此外,這樣才是上帝是眾所周知的(即與頭腦。緊密的知識,可以直接收到的,在搖頭丸) 。

Hermetic Literature氣密文學

Logos occurs frequently in the Hermetica.標識經常出現在hermetica 。 Though post-Christian, these are influenced by hellenistic Judaism.雖然後基督徒,這些都是受希臘化猶太教。 They indicate the Logos doctrine, in something like Philonic terms, in pagan mystical circles.它們表明標識學說認為,在像philonic計算,在異教神秘的圈子。

Sources of John's Doctrine來源約翰的學說

John 1 differs radically from philosophic usage.約翰一有根本的不同,從哲學的使用率。 For the Greeks, Logos was essentially reason; for John, essentially word.為希臘人,標識基本上是原因;約翰,從根本上一句話。 Language common to Philo's and the NT has led many to see John as Philo's debtor.共同的語言,以斐洛的和新台幣已經導致許多人見John作為斐洛的債務人。 But one refers naturally to Philo's Logos as "It," to John's as "He."但是,一指自然斐洛的標識" , "約翰的"他" 。 Philo came no nearer than Plato to a Logos who might be incarnate, and he does not identify Logos and Messiah.斐洛來到臨近,沒有比柏拉圖的一個標誌可能是肉身,他也並不確定標誌和彌賽亞。 John's Logos is not only God's agent in creation; He is God, and becomes incarnate, revealing, and redeeming.約翰的標誌不僅是上帝的代理人在藝術創作;他是上帝,並成為肉身,揭示了,挽救的。

The rabbinic me'mra,' hardly more than a reverent substitution for the divine name, is not sufficiently substantial a concept; nor is direct contact with Hermetic circles likely.該rabbinic me'mra , '難多reverent替代,為神聖的名字,是不是夠可觀一個概念,也不是直接接觸密封界可能。

The source of John's Logos doctrine is in the person and work of the historical Christ.源,約翰的標識學說,是在人與工作的歷史基督。 "Jesus is not to be interpreted by Logos: Logos is intelligible only as we think of Jesus" (WF Howard, IB, VIII, 442). "耶穌是不被解讀為標誌:標誌是理解,只有當我們想到耶穌" ( WF號霍華德,興業,第八條, 442 ) 。 Its expression takes its suitability primarily from the OT connotation of "word" and its personification of wisdom.主要體現在它的適宜性主要來自城市旅遊局的內涵, "字" ,其人格化的智慧。 Christ is God's active Word, his saving revelation to fallen man.耶穌是上帝的積極一句話,他的儲蓄啟示倒下的人。 It is not accidental that both the gospel and Christ who is its subject are called "the word."這不是偶然的,無論是福音和基督誰是它的主題是所謂的"字" 。 But the use of "Logos" in the contemporary hellenistic world made it a useful "bridge" word.但使用"標識" ,在當代希臘化世界作出這是一種有益的"橋"字。

In two NT passages where Christ is described in terms recalling Philo's Logos, the word Logos is absent (Col. 1:15-17; Heb. 1:3).在兩個通道新台幣,耶穌基督是用語描述回顧斐洛的標識,字標識是缺席(歌1:15-17 ;以弗所書1:3 ) 。 Its introduction to Christian speech has been attributed to Apollos.它的引入,以基督教的講話被歸於apollos 。

Logos in Early Christian Use標識在早期基督教使用

The apologists found the Logos a convenient term in expounding Christianity to pagans.該辯護士發現標識方便的任期在闡述基督教異教徒。 They used its sense of "reason," and some were thus enabled to see philosophy as a preparation for the gospel.他們用自己的責任感"的理由" ,有的人因而得以見到哲學作為籌備福音。 The Hebraic overtones of "word" were under-emphasized, though never quite lost.該hebraic色彩的"字"下強調的,雖然從來沒有遺失。 Some theologians distinguished between the Logos endiathetos, or Word latent in the Godhead from all eternity, and the logos prophorikos, uttered and becoming effective at the creation.某些神學家區分標識endiathetos ,或Word潛伏在神的源頭從所有永恆,並標識prophorikos ,這些說詞,並成為有效的,在創作風格。 Origen seems to have used Philo's language of the deuteros theos.淵源似乎已用於斐洛的語言之一deuteros theos 。 In the major Christological controversies, however, the use of the term did not clarify the main issues, and it does not occur in the great creeds.在主要的基督論的爭議,但是,使用該詞未澄清的主要問題,並沒有出現在大信條。

AF Walls自動對焦牆
(Elwell Evangelical Dictionary) ( Elwell宣布了福音字典)

Bibliography 參考書目
RG Bury, The Logos Doctrine and the Fourth Gospel; CH Dodd, The Fourth Gospel; WF Howard, Christianity According to St. John; Commentaries on John by BF Westcott, JH Bernard, CK Barrett; RL Ottley, Doctrine of the Incarnation; A. Debrunner, TDNT, IV, 69ff.; H. Haarbeck et al., NIDNTT, III, 1078ff.; FE Walton, The Development of the Logos Doctrine in Greek and Hebrew Thought.麗晶花園掩埋,標識學說和第四個福音;甲烷多德,第四福音; WF號霍華德,基督教據聖約翰;評論約翰由高爐westcott , JH的伯納德,對照貝瑞特;研究部主管ottley ,中庸思想的化身; 。 debrunner , tdnt ,四, 69ff 。 ;每小時哈爾貝克等人, nidntt ,三, 1078ff 。 ;鐵沃爾頓,發展標識學說,在希臘文和希伯來思想。


The Word

Advanced Information 先進的信息

The Word (Gr. Logos), is one of the titles of our Lord, found only in the writings of John (John 1:1-14; 1 John 1:1; Rev. 19: 13).字( gr.標識) ,就是其中的職稱因為我們的上帝,只有在著作的約翰(約翰1:1-14 ;約翰一1:1牧師19 : 13 ) 。 As such, Christ is the revealer of God.這樣,基督是revealer的上帝。 His office is to make God known.他的辦公室是讓上帝眾所周知的。 "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him" (John 1: 18). "任何人都不祂所看到神在任何時間;獨生子,這是在胸的父親,他祂所宣布他" (約翰福音1 : 18 ) 。 This title designates the divine nature of Christ.這個稱號指定的神性的基督。 As the Word, he "was in the beginning" and "became flesh."作為這個詞,他"是在開始" , "道成肉身" 。 "The Word was with God " and "was God," and was the Creator of all things (comp. Ps.33: 6; 107:20; 119:89; 147:18; Isa. 40:8). "這個詞是與神"與"上帝" ,是造物主的一切事物( comp. ps.33 : 6名; 107:20 ; 119:89 ; 147:18 ;伊薩。 40:8 ) 。

(Easton Illustrated Dictionary) (伊斯頓說明字典)


The Logos標識

Catholic Information 天主教資訊

The word Logos is the term by which Christian theology in the Greek language designates the Word of God, or Second Person of the Blessed Trinity.這個詞的標識是由任期,其中基督教神學在希臘語指定上帝的話,或第二人的祝福三一。 Before St. John had consecrated this term by adopting it, the Greeks and the Jews had used it to express religious conceptions which, under various titles, have exercised a certain influence on Christian theology, and of which it is necessary to say something.前聖約翰曾consecrated這個詞,通過它,希臘人和猶太人曾用它來表達宗教觀念,根據不同的職稱,有行使一定的影響,對基督教神學,其中有必要說幾句話。

I. THE LOGOS IN HELLENISM一,標識在希臘

It is in Heraclitus that the theory of the Logos appears for the first time, and it is doubtless for this reason that, first among the Greek philosophers, Heraclitus was regarded by St. Justin (Apol. I, 46) as a Christian before Christ.它是在赫拉克利特說,理論的標識出現,為第一次,它無疑是基於這個原因,其中首先希臘哲學家赫拉克利特就被聖賈斯汀( apol.我, 46歲)身為基督徒在基督之前。 For him the Logos, which he seems to identify with fire, is that universal principle which animates and rules the world.他的標識,而他似乎認同火災,是普遍的原則,其中以動畫和規則的世界。 This conception could only find place in a materialistic monism.這個構想只能找到地方,在功利主義的一元論。 The philosophers of the fifth and fourth centuries before Christ were dualists, and conceived of God as transcendent, so that neither in Plato (whatever may have been said on the subject) nor in Aristotle do we find the theory of the Logos.哲學家的第五和第四世紀前基督人的二元論,並構想了上帝的超越,因此,無論是在柏拉圖(不論是什麼可能已表示,關於這個問題) ,也不在亞里士多德這樣做,我們找到了理論的標誌。

It reappears in the writings of the Stoics, and it is especially by them that this theory is developed.它再現,在著作的stoics ,它尤其是他們說,這種理論是發達。 God, according to them, "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" (Galen, "De qual. incorp." in "Fr. Stoic.", ed. von Arnim, II, 6); He penetrates the world "as honey does the honeycomb" (Tertullian, "Adv. Hermogenem", 44), this God so intimately mingled with the world is fire or ignited air; inasmuch as He is the principle controlling the universe, He is called Logos; and inasmuch as He IS the germ from which all else develops, He is called the seminal Logos (logos spermatikos).上帝,據他們說, "並沒有使世界作為一個工匠是否他的工作,但它是由全穿透所有的事,他是demiurge的宇宙" (加蘭, "德質量。 incorp " , "神父。斯多葛"外,教育署。馮阿爾尼姆,二,六) ;他穿透了世界"作為蜂蜜是否蜂窩" (戴爾都良, "副hermogenem " , 44 ) ,這個神關係密切,一睹世界是火災或點燃空氣;因為他的原則,是控制宇宙,他是所謂的標識,以及因為他是胚芽從哪個一切的發展,他是被稱為精液標識(標誌spermatikos ) 。 This Logos is at the same time a force and a law, an irresistible force which bears along the entire world and all creatures to a common end, an inevitable and holy law from which nothing can withdraw itself, and which every reasonable man should follow willingly (Cleanthus, "Hymn to Zeus" in "Fr. Stoic." I, 527-cf. 537).這個標誌是在同一時間,一支部隊和一個法律,一個不可阻擋的力量,熊沿整個世界和所有的動物,以一個共同的目的,是一個必然的和神聖的法律,其中沒有任何東西可以撤回自己,是每一個理性的人應該遵循心甘情願( cleanthus , "聖歌,以宙斯" , "神父斯多葛"我, 527 -比照537 ) 。 Conformably to their exegetical habits, the Stoics made of the different gods personifications of the Logos, eg of Zeus and above all of Hermes. conformably其訓詁習慣, stoics作出了不同的神擬人的標識,如:對宙斯和上述所有的赫爾梅斯。 At Alexandria, Hermes was identified with Thoth, the god of Hermopolis, known later as the great Hermes, "Hermes Trismegistus", and represented as the revealer of all letters and all religion.在亞歷山德里亞, Hermes的鑑定與透特,神赫爾莫普利斯,眾所周知,後來偉大Hermes的, "赫爾梅斯trismegistus " ,並派代表作為revealer的所有信件和所有宗教。 Simultaneously, the Logos theory conformed to the current Neoplatonistic dualism in Alexandria: the Logos is not conceived of as nature or immanent necessity, but as an intermediary agent by which the transcendent God governs the world.同時,標識理論符合當前neoplatonistic二元亞歷山大:標識,是不是構思的,因為性質或內在必要性,但作為一個中介,其中超越上帝管世界。 This conception appears in Plutarch, especially in his "Isis and Osiris"; from an early date in the first century of the Christian era, it influenced profoundly the Jewish philosopher Philo.這種觀念出現在普魯塔克,尤其是在他的" ISIS和攝" ,從早日在第一世紀的基督教時代,它深刻地影響了猶太哲學家斐洛。

II.二。 THE WORD IN JUDAISM這個詞在猶太教

Quite frequently the Old Testament represents the creative act as the word of God (Genesis 1:3; Psalm 32:9; Sirach 42:15); sometimes it seems to attribute to the word action of itself, although not independent of Jahveh (Isaiah 55:11, Zechariah 5:1-4; Psalm 106:20; 147:15).相當頻繁,舊約代表的創意行為,因為上帝的話(創1:3 ;詩篇32:9 ;西拉奇42:15 ) ;有時看來屬性,以字的行動本身,雖然不是獨立的jahveh (以賽亞書55:11 , zechariah 5:1-4 ;詩篇106:20 ; 147:15 ) 。 In all this we can see only bold figures of speech: the word of creation, of salvation, or, in Zacharias, the word of malediction, is personified, but is not conceived of as a distinct Divine hypostasis.在所有這一切中,我們可以看到,只有大膽的修辭格:這個詞的創造,救贖,或在撒迦利亞,這個詞的malediction ,是人格化的,但並非所構思的是一個獨特的神聖本質。 In the Book of Wisdom this personification is more directly implied (xviii, 15 sq.), and a parallel is established (ix, 1, 2) between wisdom and the Word.在該書中的智慧,這是人格化更直接暗示(十八, 15平方) ,以及一個平行的,是既定的(九, 1 , 2 )之間的智慧和字。

In Palestinian Rabbinism the Word (Memra) is very often mentioned, at least in the Targums: it is the Memra of Jahveh which lives, speaks, and acts, but, if one endeavour to determine precisely the meaning of the expression, it appears very often to be only a paraphrase substituted by the Targumist for the name of Jahveh.在巴勒斯坦rabbinism字(為門拉)是很常提到的,至少在targums :它是為門拉的jahveh其中生活,講話時,和行為,但是,如果一個力求準確確定含義的表達,它似乎很往往也只能是意譯取代由targumist為名稱的jahveh 。 The Memra resembles the Logos of Philo as little as the workings of the rabbinical mind in Palestine resembled the speculations of Alexandria: the rabbis are chiefiy concerned about ritual and observances; from religious scruples they dare not attribute to Jahveh actions such as the Sacred Books attribute to Him; it is enough for them to veil the Divine Majesty under an abstract paraphrase, the Word, the Glory, the Abode, and others.該為門拉相似的標識的斐洛少的工作猶太教記在巴勒斯坦類似於猜測亞歷山大:拉比是chiefiy關心的儀式和慶祝活動,從宗教顧忌,他們不敢屬性,以jahveh行動,例如神聖的書籍屬性他說,這是足以讓他們面紗神聖陛下下一個抽象的意譯,一句話,榮耀,居留權等。 Philo's problem was of the philosophic order; God and man are infinitely distant from each other, and it is necessary to establish between them relations of action and of prayer; the Logos is here the intermediary.斐洛的問題,當時的哲學秩序;人與上帝是無限遠,互相借鑒,並有必要建立它們之間的關係的行動和祈禱;徽標的是這裡的中介。

Leaving aside the author of the Book of Wisdom, other Alexandrian Jews before Philo had speculated as to the Logos; but their works are known only through the rare fragments which Christian authors and Philo himself have preserved.撇開本書的作者的智慧,其他亞歷山大猶太人之前斐洛曾推測,以標識,但他們的作品是眾所周知的,只有通過難得的片段,其中基督教作家和斐洛本人保存。 Philo alone is fully known to us, his writings are as extensive as those of Plato or Cicero, and throw light on every aspect of his doctrine; from him we can best learn the theory of the Logos, as developed by Alexandrian Judaism.斐洛單是完全以我們所知,他的著作廣泛那些柏拉圖或西塞羅,並揭示各個方面,他的學說,從他我們才能最好地學習理論的標識,作為制定亞歷山大猶太教。 The character of his teaching is as manifold as its sources:性格他的教學是由於多方面的,因為它的來源:

sometimes, influenced by Jewish tradition, Philo represents the Logos as the creative Word of God ("De Sacrific. Ab. et Cain"; cf. "De Somniis", I 182; "De Opif. Mundi", 13);有時,受猶太傳統,斐洛代表標識的創意上帝的話( "時點的犧牲。上訴。內皮素該隱" ;比照"德somniis "時,我是182 , "德opif 。世界之" , 13 ) ;

at other times he describes it as the revealer of God, symbolized in Scripture by the angel of Jahveh ("De Somniis", I, 228-39, "De Cherub.", 3; "De Fuga", 5; "Quis rer. divin. haeres sit", 201-205).在其他時候,他把它描述為在revealer上帝的,其標誌是在經文中,由天使jahveh ( "時點somniis " ,我想, 228-39 , "德與Cherub " , 3 ; "德風雅" , 5 " ;什麼匯率。 divin 。 haeres靜坐" , 201-205 ) 。

Oftener again he accepts the language of Hellenic speculation; the Logos is then, after a Platonistic concept, the sum total of ideas and the intelligible world ("De Opif. Mundi", 24, 25; "Leg. Alleg.", I, 19; III, 96), oftener他又接受了語言的希臘投機活動;標識,然後,經過platonistic概念,總和的想法和理解世界(下稱"德opif 。世界之" , 24 , 25 , "一站。 alleg 。 " ,我想, 19 ;三, 96 ) ,

or, agreeably to the Stoic theory, the power that upholds the world, the bond that assures its cohesion, the law that determines its development ("De Fuga", 110; "De Plantat. Noah," 8-10; "Quis rer. divin. haeres sit", 188, 217; "Quod Deus sit immut.", 176; "De Opif. Mundi", 143).或者, agreeably向斯多葛理論,電力維護世界,債券,保證其凝聚力,使法律決定了它的發展( "時點風雅" , 110 " ;德plantat 。挪亞, " 8-10 "什麼匯率。 divin 。 haeres靜坐" , 188 , 217 " ,並且deus坐在immut " , 176 " ;德opif 。世界之" ,第143頁) 。

Throughout so many diverse concepts may be recognized a fundamental doctrine: the Logos is an intermediary between God and the world; through it God created the world and governs it; through it also men know God and pray to Him ("De Cherub.", 125; "Quis rerum divin. haeres sit", 205-06.) In three passages the Logos is called God ("Leg. Alleg.", III, 207; "De Somniis", I, 229; "In Gen.", II, 62, cited by Eusebius, "Praep. Ev.", VII, 13); but, as Philo himself explains in one of these texts (De Somniis), it is an improper appellation and wrongly employed, and he uses it only because he is led into it by the Sacred Text which he comments upon.全國各地有這麼多的多樣性概念有可能確認的一項基本原則:徽標是一個中介神和世界之間,通過它上帝創造了世界,執政;透過它還男人知道上帝和祈禱,以他(指"與Cherub德" , 125 ; "什麼rerum divin 。 haeres靜坐" , 205-06 ) ,在3個通道,標識,是所謂的神( "腿。 alleg " ,三, 207 , "德somniis " ,我想,第229條; "將軍"第一,二, 62 ,引用尤西比烏斯" , praep 。電動汽車" ,第七章, 13條) ;但是,正如斐洛自己解釋,在其中的文本(德somniis ) ,這是一種不正當的稱謂,並錯誤地聘請的,他用只因為他是率領到它的神聖文本,他的評論。 Moreover, Philo does not regard the Logos as a person; it is an idea, a power, and, though occasionally identified with the angels of the Bible, this is by symbolic personification.此外,斐洛並不把標識作為一個人,這是一個想法,一個大國,雖然偶爾確定與天使的聖經,這是由具有象徵意義的人格化。

III.三。 THE LOGOS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT標識,在新約聖經

The term Logos is found only in the Johannine writings: in the Apocalypse (19:13), in the Gospel of St. John (1:1-14), and in his First Epistle (1:1; cf. 1:7 - Vulgate).任期標識是只有在johannine著作:在啟示錄( 19:13 ) ,在福音的聖約翰( 1:1-14 ) ,並在他的第一書信( 1:1 ;比照1時07分-v ulgate) 。 But already in the Epistles of St. Paul the theology of the Logos had made its influence felt.不過,已經在教會中的聖保祿二世的神學的標識已經作出了自己的影響力。 This is seen in the Epistles to the Corinthians, where Christ is called "the power of God, and the wisdom of God" (1 Corinthians 1:24) and "the image of God" (2 Corinthians 4:4); it is more evident in the Epistle to the Colossians (1:15 sqq.); above all in the Epistle to the Hebrews, where the theology of the Logos lacks only the term itself, that finally appears in St. John.這是出現在書信向科林蒂安,而基督是所謂"上帝的力量和智慧,以神之名" (哥林多前書1:24 )和"的形象,以神之名" (哥林多4時04分) ,它是更明顯地體現在書信向歌羅西書( 1:15 sqq ) ;以上都在希伯來人書中說,那裡的神學標識欠缺,只有一詞本身而言,終於出現在聖約翰。 In this epistle we also notice the pronounced influence of the Book of Wisdom, especially in the description which is given of the relations between the Son and the Father: "the brightness of his glory, and the figure of his substance" (cf. Wisdom 7:26).在這書信,我們也看到了明顯的影響,這本書的智慧,尤其是在描述,這是由於該關係的兒子和父親說: "亮度為他的榮耀,以及人物,他的實質" (見智慧7時26分) 。 This resemblance suggests the way by which the doctrine of the Logos entered into Christian theology; another clue is furnished by the Apocalypse, where the term Logos appears for the first time (19:13), and not apropos of any theological teaching, but in an apocalyptic vision, the content of which has no suggestion of Philo but rather recalls Wisdom 18:15.這種相似性暗示的方式,其中學說的標誌進入基督教神學;另一個線索是由其啟示,凡任期內的標識出現,為第一時間( 19:13 ) ,不附任何神學教學,但在一種世界末日的視野,內容,其中沒有任何的建議,斐洛而是回憶智慧18:15 。

In the Gospel of St. John the Logos appears in the very first verse without explanation, as a term familiar to the readers, St. John uses it at the end of the prologue (i, 14), and does not mention it again in the Gospel.在福音的聖約翰標識出現在第一首詩沒有作出任何解釋,作為一個任期熟悉的讀者,聖約翰用途,它在去年底的序幕(一, 14 ) ,並沒有提到它再次在福音。 From this Harnack concludes that the mention of the Word was only a starting-point for the Evangelist, and that he passed directly from this Hellenic conception of the Logos to the Christian doctrine of the only Son ("Ueber das Verhältniss des Prologs des vierten Evangeliums zum ganzen Werk" in "Zeitschrift fur Theol. und Kirche", II, 1892, 189-231).從這個的Harnack得出結論認為,一提到這個詞,只是一個起點,為傳道者一樣,他通過直接從這個希臘概念的標識,以基督教教義的獨生子( " ueber之verhã ¤ ltniss萬prologs萬vierten evangeliums zum ganzen werk "中的" : Zeitschrift毛皮theol 。 und kirche " ,第二章, 1892 , 189-231 ) 。 This hypothesis is proved false by the insistence with which the Evangelist comes back on this idea of the Word, it is, moreover, natural enough that this technical term, employed in the prologue where the Evangelist is interpreting the Divine mystery, should not reappear in the sequel of the narrative, the character of which might thus suffer change.這一假說,證明了假的堅持與該傳道回來這一思路的字,而且,自然不夠而這一技術來說,受聘在開場白那裡傳道,是詮釋神聖的神秘感,不應該捉獲在續集中的敘事,人物,其中可能因此蒙受的變化。

What is the precise value of this concept in the writings of St. John?什麼是確切的價值,這個概念在著作的聖約翰? The Logos has not for him the Stoic meaning that it so often had for Philo: it is not the impersonal power that sustains the world, nor the law that regulates it; neither do we find in St. John the Platonistic concept of the Logos as the ideal model of the world; the Word is for him the Word of God, and thereby he holds with Jewish tradition, the theology of the Book of Wisdom, of the Psalms, of the Prophetical Books, and of Genesis; he perfects the idea and transforms it by showing that this creative Word which from all eternity was in God and was God, took flesh and dwelt among men.標識已不是他斯多葛意義,它經常為斐洛:這是不是人性力量支撐世界,也沒有法律規管;我們也沒有發現在聖約翰platonistic概念的標識理想模型的世界;一詞,是由他上帝的話,從而他持有與猶太傳統中,神學書中的智慧的詩篇,該prophetical書籍,以及成因;他完善構想和變換它顯示出這種創造性的詞語從所有永恆是上帝是上帝,上台血肉白景富之間的男性。

This difference is not the only one which distinguishes the Johannine theology of the Logos from the concept of Philo, to which not a few have sought to liken it.這種差異並非是唯一的一個區別johannine神學的標識,從概念的斐洛,而不是少數人試圖比喻。 The Logos of Philo is impersonal, it is an idea, a power, a law; at most it may be likened to those half abstract, half-concrete entities, to which the Stoic mythology had lent a certain personal form.該徽標的斐洛是人性,這是一個想法,一個政權,一個法律;至多可比喻為那些半抽象半具體的實體,這是斯多葛神話曾借給某個人表格。 For Philo the incarnation of the Logos must have been absolutely without meaning, quite as much as its identification with the Messias.為斐洛的化身標識必須已完全沒有意義,相當之多,其身份與messias 。 For St. John, on the contrary, the Logos appears in the full light of a concrete and living personality; it is the Son of God, the Messias, Jesus.為聖約翰,與此相反,該標識出現在充分肯定的一個具體和生活個性,它是上帝的兒子, messias ,耶穌。 Equally great is the difference when we consider the role of the Logos.同樣很大的區別是,當我們考慮的角色,以及標識。 The Logos of Philo is an intermediary: "The Father who engendered all has given to the Logos the signal privilege of being an intermediary (methorios) between the creature and the creator . . . it is neither without beginning (agenetos) as is God, nor begotten (genetos) as you are [mankind], but intermediate (mesos) between these two extremes "(Quis rer. divin. haeres sit, 205-06).該徽標的斐洛是中介說: "爸爸,他們都產生了給予該標識的信號的特權,作為一個中介機構( methorios )與造物與造物者… … 。這樣做既沒有開始( agenetos )是上帝,也不是造物主( genetos )如你[人類] ,但中間( mesos )這兩種極端之間" (什麼匯率。 divin 。 haeres靜坐, 205-06 ) 。 The Word of St. John is not an intermediary, but a Mediator; He is not intermediate between the two natures, Divine and human, but He unites them in His Person; it could not be said of Him, as of the Logos of Philo, that He is neither agenetos nor genetos, for He is at the same time one and the other, not inasmuch as He is the Word, but as the Incarnate Word (St. Ignatius, "Ad Ephes.", vii, 2).這個詞的聖約翰不是一個中介,而是一個調停人,他是不是中間兩間性質的,神和人,但他團結他們,在他的人,這不能說他的,因為該徽標的斐洛說,他既不是agenetos也不genetos ,因為他是在同一時間,是一個與其他的,而不是因為他是這個詞,但隨著肉身字(聖伊格"專案ephes " ,第七章, 2 ) 。

In the subsequent history of Christian theology many conflicts would naturally arise between these rival concepts, and Hellenic speculations constitute a dangerous temptation for Christian writers.在隨後的歷史上的基督教神學的許多衝突,自然會出現這些競爭對手的觀念和希臘的揣測構成一種危險的誘惑,為基督教作家。 They were hardly tempted, of course, to make the Divine Logos an impersonal power (the Incarnation too definitely forbade this), but they were at times moved, more or less consciously, to consider the Word as an intermediary being between God and the world.他們難以誘惑的,當然,使神聖的標誌,一種非人格的力量(化身,也絕對不容許這點) ,但他們有時會提出,因此,較多或較少自覺,要考慮這個詞作為中介機構正神和世界之間。 Hence arose the subordinationist tendencies found in certain Ante-Nicene writers; hence, also, the Arian heresy (see NICAEA, COUNCIL OF).因此產生了subordinationist傾向發現,在某些前廳nicene作家,因此,此外,阿里安異端(見的尼西亞,安理會的) 。

IV.四。 THE LOGOS IN ANCIENT CHRISTIAN LITERATURE標識在古代基督教文學

The Apostolic Fathers do not touch on the theology of the Logos; a short notice occurs in St. Ignatius only (Ad Magn. viii, 2).使徒父親,不涉及對神學的標識;短期通知發生在聖伊格只(公元磁第八節, 2 ) 。 The Apologists, on the contrary, develop it, partly owing to their philosophic training, but more particularly to their desire to state their faith in a way familiar to their readers (St. Justin, for example, insists strongly on the theology of the Logos in his "Apology" meant for heathens, much less so in his "Dialogue with the Jew Tryphon").該辯護士,與此相反,發展它,這部分是由於它們的哲學訓練,但更特別,他們渴望國家,他們的信仰的方式,以熟悉他們的讀者(聖賈斯汀,舉例來說,堅持強,對神學的徽標在他的"道歉"的意思heathens ,少得多,所以在他的"對話與猶太人tryphon " ) 。 This anxiety to adapt apologetic discussion to the circumstances of their hearers had its dangers, since it was possible that in this way the apologists might land well inside the lines of their adversaries.這種焦慮,以適應抱歉討論的情況下,他們hearers有其危險性,因為它有可能是這樣,辯護士可能土地以及內部線路的敵人。 As to the capital question of the generation of the Word, the orthodoxy of the Apologists is irreproachable: the Word was not created, as the Arians held later, but was born of the very Substance of the Father according to the later definition of Nicaea (Justin, "Dial.",128, Tatian, "Or.", v, Athenagoras, "Legat." x-xviii, Theophilus, "Ad Autolyc.", II, x; Tertullian "Adv. Prax.", vii).至於資本的問題,產生了一句話,正統的辯護士,是無可指責的:這個詞是沒有創造,作為arians在隨後舉行的,但出生在日本非常實質的父親根據後來的定義中的尼西亞(賈斯汀, "撥號" , 128 , tatian " ,或者" ,五, athenagoras , "勒加"的X十八,西奧菲勒斯, "專案autolyc "第一,第二,第十;戴爾都良的"副普拉克斯" ,第七章) 。 Their theology is less satisfactory as regards the eternity of this generation and its necessity; in fact, they represent the Word as uttered by the Father when the Father wished to create and in view of this creation (Justin, "II Apol.", 6; cf. "Dial.",6162; Tatian, "Or.", v, a corrupt and doubtful text; Athenagoras, "Legat.", x; Theophilus, "Ad Autolyc.", II, xxii; Tertullian, "Adv. Prax.", v-vii).他們的神學是較令人滿意至於永恆的這一代和其必要性;實際上,他們所代表的字作為說詞,父親當父親希望創造並鑑於這個創舉(賈斯汀, "二apol " , 6 ;比照"撥號" , 6162年; tatian " ,或者" ,第五,一個腐敗和可疑文本; athenagoras , "勒加" ,第十;西奧菲勒斯, "專案autolyc "第一,二,二十二;戴爾都良, "副。普拉克斯。 " ,第五章至第七) 。 When we seek to understand what they meant by this "utterance", it is difficult to give the same answer for all Athenagoras seems to mean the role of the Son in the work of creation, the syncatabasis of the Nicene Fathers (Newman, "Causes of the Rise and Successes of Arianism" in "Tracts Theological and Ecclesiastical", London, 1902, 238), others, especially Theophilus and Tertullian (cf. Novatian, "De Trinit.", xxxi), seem quite certainly to understand this "utterance" as properly so called.當我們設法了解他們的意思,這種"放話" ,這是很難給予同樣的答案,所有athenagoras似乎意味的角色,以及兒子的工作,創造, syncatabasis的nicene父親(紐曼, "原因的崛起和成功, arianism "中的"大片神學和宗教" ,倫敦, 1902年, 238頁) ,其他人,尤其是西奧菲勒斯和戴爾都良(參見窪天, "德trinit " ,三十一) ,似乎頗為肯定,要理解這點"話語" ,因為適當的,所以所謂的。 Mental survivals of Stoic psychology seem to be responsible for this attitude: the philosophers of the Portico distinguished between the innate word (endiathetos) and the uttered word (prophorikos) bearing in mind this distinction the aforesaid apologists conceived a development in the Word of God after the same fashion.心理生存斯多葛心理似乎是負責這項工作的態度:哲學家的Portico的區分先天字( endiathetos )和說詞字( prophorikos )銘記這一區分上述辯護士構思的發展,在上帝的話後,同時時裝。 After this period, St. Irenæus condemned very severely these attempts at psychological explanation (Adv. Haeres., II, xiii, 3-10, cf. II, xxviii, 4-6), and later Fathers rejected this unfortunate distinction between the Word endiathetos and prophorikos [Athanasius (?), "Expos. Fidei", i, in PG, XXV, 201-cf.在此之後,聖irenæus譴責非常嚴重,這些嘗試心理的解釋( adv. haeres 。第一,二,十三, 3-10 ,比照二,二十八, 4-6 ) ,後來父親拒絕了這個不幸的區分詞endiathetos和prophorikos [ athanasius ( ? ) , "世界博覽會。信" ,我想,在編號,二十五, 201 - CF的。 "Orat.", II, 35, in PG, XXVI, 221; Cyril of Jerusalem "Cat.", IV, 8, in PG, XXXIII, 465-cf. " orat 。 " ,第二章, 35條,在編號,二十六中,有221人;西里爾耶路撒冷的"貓" ,四,八,在編號,三十三, 465 - CF的。 "Cat.", XI, 10, in PG, XXXIII, 701-cf. "貓" ,喜年, 10年,在編號,三十三, 701 - CF的。 Council of Sirmium, can.安理會的錫爾繆姆,可以的。 viii, in Athan., "De Synod.", 27-PG, XXVI.第八,在athan , "德主教" , 27 - PG的,二十六。

As to the Divine Nature of the Word, all apologists are agreed but to some of them, at least to St. Justin and Tertuilian, there seemed to be in this Divinity a certain subordination (Justin, "I Apol.", 13-cf. "II Apol.", 13; Tertullian, "Adv. Prax.", 9, 14, 26).至於為神性的字眼,所有的支持者都同意,但他們中的一些人,至少在聖賈斯汀和tertuilian ,看來大家在這神一定從屬(賈斯汀, "我apol " , 13 -比照"二apol " , 13歲;戴爾都良, "副普拉克斯" , 9 , 14 , 26 ) 。

The Alexandrian theologians, themselves profound students of the Logos doctrine, avoided the above mentioned errors concerning the dual conception of the Word (see, however, a fragment of the "Hypotyposes", of Clement of Alexandria, cited by Photius, in PG, CIII, 384, and Zahn, "Forschungen zur Geschichte des neutest. Kanons", Erlangen, 1884, xiii 144) and the generation in time; for Clement and for Origen the Word is eternal like the Father (Clement "Strom.", VII, 1, 2, in PG, IX, 404, 409, and "Adumbrat. in Joan.", i, 1, in PG, IX, 734; Origen, "De Princip.", I, xxii, 2 sqq., in PG, XI, 130 sqq.; "In Jer. Hom.", IX, 4, in PG, XIII, 357, "In Jo. ', ii, 32, in PG, XIV, 77; cf. Athanasius, "De decret. Nic. syn.", 27, in PG, XXV, 465). As to the nature of the Word their teaching is less sure: in Clement, it is true, we find only a few traces of subordinationism ("Strom.", IV, 25, in PG, VIII, 1365; "Strom.", VII, 3, in PG, IX, 421; cf. "Strom.", VII, 2, in PG, IX, 408); elsewhere he very explicitly affirms the equality of the Father and the Son and the unity (" Protrept.", 10, in PG, VIII 228, "Paedag.", I, vi, in PG, VIII, 280; I, viii, in PG, VIII, 325 337 cf. I, ix, in PG, VIII, 353; III, xii, in P. d., V*I, 680). Origen, on the contrary, frequently and formally defended subordinationist ideas (" De Princip.", I, iii, 5, in PG, XI, 150; IV, xxxv, in PG, XI, 409, 410; "In Jo." ii, 2, in PG, XIV, 108, 109; ii, 18, in PG, XIV, 153, 156; vi, 23, in PG, XIV, 268; xiii, 25, in PG, XIV, 44144; xxxii, 18, in PG, XIV, 817-20; "In Matt.", xv, 10, in PG, XIII, 1280, 1281; "De Orat.", 15, in PG, XI,464, "Contra Cels.", V, xi, in PG, XI,1197); his teaching concerning the Word evidently suffered from Hellenic speculation: in the order of religious knowledge and of prayer, the Word is for him an intermediary between God and the creature.該亞歷山大神學家,自己深刻的學生標識學說,是可以避免上述的錯誤有關雙重概念的詞(見,不過,片段的" hypotyposes " ,克萊門特的亞歷山德里亞,引用photius ,編號, ciii 383,384 ,並zahn , " forschungen zur歷史館萬neutest 。 kanons " ,埃爾蘭根, 1884年, 13 144 )和發電時間;克萊門特和淵源一詞是永恆像父親(克萊門特" strom " ,第七章1 , 2 ,在編號,第九, 404 , 409 ,及" adumbrat在鄧務滋女士" ,我, 1 ,在編號,第九章, 734 ;淵源, "德原理" ,我, 22 , 2 sqq ,在編號,第十一, 130 sqq 。 ; "在哲。磡" ,第九,第4 ,在編號,十三中,有357 " ,然後' ,二, 32 ,在編號,第十四條, 77條;比照athanasius , "德decret 。網卡。順" , 27 ,在編號,二十五, 465頁) ,至於性質的字眼,他們的教學是較肯定的是:在克萊門特,這是事實,我們發現,只有少數的痕跡subordinationism ( " strom 。 " ,第四章, 25 ,在編號,第八, 1365 " ; strom " ,第七章, 3 ,在編號,第九章, 421 ;比照" strom " ,第七章, 2 ,在編號,第九, 408 ) ;別處他非常明確地肯定了平等的父親和兒子和團結( " protrept " , 10日,在編號,第八章第228號, " paedag " ,我,六,在編號,第八, 280 ,我,八,在編號,第八, 325337比照我,第九,在編號,第八條, 353 ;三,第十二章,在體育教學中四,五*本人, 680頁) 。淵源,與此相反,經常和正式辯護subordinationist思路(下稱"德原理" ,一,三,五,在編號,第十一, 150 ;四,第三十五卷,在編號,第十一, 409 , 410 " ,然後將"二,二,在編號, 14章, 108條, 109條;二, 18 ,在編號, 14章, 153條, 156 ;六, 23 ,在編號, 14章, 268 ; 13 , 25 ,在編號,第十四條, 44144 ;三十二, 18日,在編號,第十四條, 817-20 " ,在馬特。 " , 15年, 10年,在編號,十三, 1280 , 1281 , "德orat " , 15日,在編號,第十一, 464 ,成了" Contra cels " ,第五,第十一,在編號,喜, 1197 ) ;他的教學關於這個詞,顯然遭受了來自希臘的猜測:在常規的宗教知識和祈禱,這個詞是由他一個中介之間的上帝和造物。

Amid these speculations of apologists and Alexandrian theologians, elaborated not without danger or without error, the Church maintained her strict dogmatic teaching concerning the Word of God.在這些猜測的辯護士和亞歷山大神學家,闡釋不無危險或無誤差,教會她保持著嚴格的教條式的教學關於上帝的話。 This is particularly recognizable in the works of those Fathers more devoted to tradition than to philosophy, and especially in St. Irenæus, who condemns every form of the Hellenic and Gnostic theory of intermediary beings (Adv. Haer., II, xxx, 9; II, ii, 4; III, viii, 3; IV, vii, 4, IV, xx, 1), and who affirms in the strongest terms the full comprehension of the Father by the Son and their identity of nature (Adv. Haer., II, xvii, 8; IV, iv, 2, IV, vi, 3, 6).這是特別辨認的,在工程的那些父親更投入比傳統哲學,特別是在聖irenæus ,他譴責一切形式的希臘與諾斯替理論中介的人( adv. haer 。第一,二,三十, 9歲;二,二,四;三,第八條, 3 ;四,七,四,四,二十, 1 ) ,並申明誰最強烈的措詞充分理解父親,由兒子和自己的身份的性質( adv. haer 。第一,二,第十七章,第8節;四,四,二,四,六, 3日, 6日) 。 We find it again with still greater authority in the letter of Pope St. Dionysius to his namesake, the Bishop of Alexandria (see Athan., "De decret. Nic. syn.", 26, in PG, XXV,461-65): "They lie as to the generation of the Lord who dare to say that His Divine and ineffable generation is a creation. We must not divide the admirable and Divine unity into three divinities, we must not lower the dignity and sovereign grandeur of the Lord by the word creation, but we must believe in God the Father omnipotent, in Christ Jesus His Son, and in the Holy Ghost, we must unite the Word to the God of the universe, for He has said: 'I and the Father are one', and again: 'I am in the Father, and the Father in me'. Thus we protect the Divine Trinity, and the holy avowal of the monarchy [unity of God]."我們再次找到它與更大的權力在信中的教宗聖狄奧尼修斯,以他的名字,這位主教亞歷山大(見athan , "德decret 。網卡。順" , 26 ,在編號,二十五,461 - 65 )說: "他們的謊言,以生成主敢說他的神和無法形容的一代,是一個創造,我們絕不能分裂,令人欽佩和神聖的團結分為三個神,我們決不能降低尊嚴和主權的轟轟烈烈的主由詞創作的,但我們必須相信上帝無所不能,在基督耶穌裡,他的兒子,並在聖靈,我們必須團結起來一詞,以上帝的宇宙人,因為他說: '我與父一' ,並說: '我在父內,父在我' ,因此,我們保護神三一,與聖座聲明的君主[團結天災] " 。 The Council of Nicaea (325) had but to lend official consecration to this dogmatic teaching.理事會的尼西亞( 325 ) ,但對貸款的官方consecration這種教條式的教學。

V. ANALOGY BETWEEN THE DIVINE WORD AND HUMAN SPEECH五,比喻與神的Word和人類講話

After the Council of Nicaea, all danger of Subordinationism being removed, it was possible to seek in the analogy of human speech some light on the mystery of the Divine generation; the Greek Fathers especially refer to this analogy, in order to explain how this generation is purely spiritual and entails neither diminution nor change: Dionysius of Alexandria (Athan., "De Sent. Dion.", 23, in PG, XXV, 513); Athanasius ("De decret. Nic. syn.", 11, in PG, XXV, 444); Basil ("In illud: In principio erat Verbum", 3, in PG, XXXI, 476-77); Gregory of Nazianzus ("Or.", xxx,20,inP.G., XXXVI, 128-29) Cyril of Alexandria (" Thes." iv, in PG, LXXV, 56; cf. 76, 80; xvi, ibid., 300; xvi, ibid., 313; "De Trinit.", dial. ii, in PG, LXXV, 768 69), John Damasc.經過理事會的尼西亞,所有的危險subordinationism被遣送離境,有可能尋求在比喻的人講話輕一些關於奧秘的神聖一代;希臘教父尤其是指這個比喻,是為了解釋如何我們這一代是純粹的精神,使得既不減弱也不能改變:狄奧尼修斯的亞歷山德里亞( athan. , "德派。席琳迪翁" , 23日,在編號,二十五, 513 ) ; athanasius ( "時點decret 。網卡。順" , 11 ,在編號,二十五, 444 ) ;羅勒(下稱"中通諭: principio erat拉丁文字語言" , 3 ,在編號,三十一, 476-77 ) ;格雷戈里的nazianzus ( "或" ,三十,二十, inp.g. ,第三十六, 128-29 )西里爾亞歷山大( " thes " 。四,在編號, lxxv , 56項;比照76 , 80 ;十六,同上, 300個;十六,同上, 313 , "德trinit " ,撥號。二,編號, lxxv 768 69 ) ,約翰damasc 。 ("De Fide Orthod.", I, vi, in PG, XCIV, 804). ( "時點正當orthod " ,我,六,在編號, xciv , 804 ) 。

St. Augustine studied more closely this analogy between the Divine Word and human speech (see especially "De Trinit.", IX, vii, 12 sq., in PL, XLII, 967, XV, x, 17 sq., ibid., 1069), and drew from it teachings long accepted in Catholic theology.聖奧古斯丁的研究更加緊密地這個比喻之間神聖的字眼和人類講話(見,特別是"德trinit " ,第九章,第七章, 12平方米,在特等,四十二, 967 ,十五,十, 17平方米,同上, 1069人) ,並提請,由它的教義,只要接受了天主教神學。 He compares the Word of God, not to the word spoken by the lips, but to the interior speech of the soul, whereby we may in some measure grasp the Divine mystery; engendered by the mind it remains therein, is equal thereto, is the source of its operations.他把上帝的話,而不是這個詞所講的嘴唇,但對內部講話的靈魂,讓我們可以在一定程度上把握神聖的奧秘;造成的心靈,它仍然是那裡的,是平等時,是來源,其運作。 This doctrine was later developed and enriched by St. Thomas, especially in "Contra Gent.", IV, xi-xiv, opusc.這一理論後來被發展,豐富了由聖托馬斯,特別是在"矛盾根特" ,四,十一,十四, opusc 。 "De natura verbi intellectus"; "Quaest. disput. de verit." "時點的Natura verbi intellectus " , " quaest 。 disput 。德verit " 。 iv, "De potent.", ii-viii, 1, "Summa Theol.", II, xxvii, 2; xxxiv.四, "德烈性" ,第二至第八, 1 , "總結theol 。 " ,第二章,二十七,二;三十四。 St. Thomas sets forth in a very clear way the identity of meaning, already noted by St. Augustine (De Trinit., VII, ii, 3), between the terms Son and Word: "eo Filius quo Verbum, et eo Verbum quo Filius" ("Summa Theol.", II, xxvii, 2, "Contra Gent.", IV, xi).聖托馬斯提出了一個非常明確的路的身份意義,已經注意到,由聖奧古斯丁(德trinit ,七,二,三) ,術語之間的兒子和詞: "僱傭條例filius現狀拉丁文字語言等僱傭條例拉丁文字語言現狀filius " (下稱"總結theol 。 " ,第二章,二十七,二, "矛盾根特" ,四,十一) 。 The teaching of St. Thomas has been highly approved by the Church especially in the condemnation of the Synod of Pistoia by Pius VI (Denzinger, "Enchiridion", 1460).教學中的聖托馬斯一直高度批准的教會,特別是在譴責主教的皮斯托亞由比約六(登青格" , enchiridion " , 1460 ) 。 (See JESUS CHRIST; TRINITY.) (見耶穌基督;三一) 。

Publication information Written by J. Lebreton.出版信息寫了J.勒布雷頓。 Transcribed by Joseph P. Thomas.轉錄由約瑟夫體育托馬斯。 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IX.天主教百科全書,體積九。 Published 1910. 1910年出版。 New York: Robert Appleton Company.紐約:羅伯特Appleton還公司。 Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1910. nihil obstat , 1910年10月1日。 Remy Lafort, Censor.人頭馬lafort ,檢查員。 Imprimatur. imprimatur 。 +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York +約翰米farley ,大主教紐約


This subject presentation in the original English language本主題介紹在原來的英文


Send an e-mail question or comment to us: E-mail發送電子郵件的問題或意見給我們:電子郵箱

The main BELIEVE web-page (and the index to subjects) is at主要相信網頁(和索引科目),是在