Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
It has been somewhat challenging for me to properly contextualize the choice of words in the Greek translation. Instances of "logos" appear quite often, one could argue almost systematic. This site has a helpful summary of all the occurrences of logos. These go a long way to show how wide the hermenuetic discussion may span, but a specific passage will be provided as well for the sake of scope.
One view is that "logos" was used expressly for the purpose of weaving in a neo/middle-platonist framework. The language and terms didn’t exist in a vacuum and so by using logos, the authors were, by their volition or not, inevitably inviting comparisons between the scripture and the philosophical corpus.
However, another view is that the meta-physical vocabulary that we have today was only just being formed at this time. And it would be more appropriate to attribute the overlap for words such as "logos" to the authors using what tools they had available to them to record the scripture as best they could — even if it meant leaning on the crutch of platonic/hermetic language. This would mean that platonic allusions would read as out of context or misleading.
Perhaps this passage (Gen 4:23) will be a good staring point:
εἶπεν δὲ Λαμεχ ταῖς ἑαυτοῦ γυναιξίν Αδα καὶ Σελλα ἀκούσατέ μου τῆς
φωνῆς γυναῖκες Λαμεχ ἐνωτίσασθέ μου τοὺς λόγους ὅτι ἄνδρα
ἀπέκτεινα εἰς τραῦμα ἐμοὶ καὶ νεανίσκον εἰς μώλωπα ἐμοί
Question
What is the academic consensus on logos in the Septuagint, on balance? And why?
