LOFTINESS.—The adj. ‘lofty’ is used literally as in Is 577 ‘upon a lofty and high mountain’ ; and also metaphorically when it means ‘ hangitty,: as Is 24 ‘The lofty looks of man shall be humbled’; so the adv. which occurs only in Ps
738 ‘They speak loftily’ (a22, RVm ‘from on high’). Loftiness is only metaphorical, haughti-
ness, Is 2!7 ‘the loftiness of man shall be bowed down’ (o7x7 mna3), and Jer 48” ‘his loftiness’ (i723). Cf. Shaks. Love’s Labour’s Lost, v. i. 11— ‘His humour is lofty, his discourse peremptory’ ; Sandys, Sermons, 107, ‘ Another exposition is, to make this a proper mean to keep and conserve unity, rather than a way only to diminish lofti- ness and pride.’ J. HASTINGS.
LOG.—See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
LOGOS (ὁ λόγος) signified in classical Greek beth Word (verbum, sermo, oratio) and Reason (ratio), but in biblical Greek is used only in the former sense, except in a few passages where it means ‘account’ (e.g. Mt 18%, Ro 14, Ac 20%), and a few brief phrases in which the sense of ‘reason’ more plainly appears (Ac 10” τίνι λόγῳ, ‘for what reason’; 18 ‘reason would’ κατὰ λόγον ; 2 Mac 455, 3 Mac 78 παρὰ λόγον). By the LXX it is used to tr. 123 (word) and its poetic synonyms 7>& and προ, In NT it signifies a verbal utterance, then discourse, speech, instruction, narrative, and, when applied to God, either a specific divine utterance, or revela- tion in general, or tne Scriptures as the communi- cation of God’s mind und will. Finally, it ἃ
LOGOS
LOGOS 133
employed by St. John to denominate the Son of | the idea that they are not to be taken literally
God, both before and after His incarnation. This latter use gives the doctrine of the Logos which the present article is to describe.
St. John’s peculiar use of Logos is found six times, namely, Gospel 1} (three times) and 1", where we read simply ‘the Word,’ 1 Jn 1! ‘the Word of life,’ Rev 1913 ‘the Word of God.’ [1 Jn 57 of TR and AV isspurious]. In Rev 19! the term is applied to the conquering Christ, since His progress is the triumph of the divine revelation, of which He is both agent and substance. The title naturally associates itself with the author’s Logos doctrine, either exhibiting an approach to it or an applica- tion of it, according to the dates we assign to the Gospel and the Apoc.; for in the Gospel the Logos is identified with the historical Christ (115), and in the Apoc. Christ is affirmed to be the divine agent of revelation and redemption (e.g. 15: δ. 17 56 21°53 9918), The reference of 1 Jn 1} to the
ersonal Logos is disputed (e.g. Westcott, Comm.) ; ut the verbs used, the parallelism with the pro- logue of the Gospel, and the clear reference of v.” to the incarnation, indicate that here also Logos means the personal Word (so Haupt, Schmid, Weiss, ete.), although the subject of the Epistle is not the person of the Logos, but the life which He ossesses and has manifested. It is, however, rom the prologue of the Gospel that we must derive St. wouite doctrine of the Logos. Yet the prologue is illuminated by many passages of both the Gospel and the first Ep.; for, though with historical fidelity St. John does not impute to Christ his own Logos terminology, the latter was evidently meant to be supported by Christ's self- testimony which the Gospel records and the Epistle implies. Nowhere else in NT is the term Logos certainly applied to Christ. He 4’ has often been so understood, while others (6.9. Késtlin, Bleek, Delitzsch) see in it, at least, an approach to the Johannean usage;* but the context and adjectives used have led most commentators to refer the phrase to revelation, written or un- written. Neither should 1 P 1% nor 2 P 3° be understood of the personal Logos.
We shall first state St. John’s doctrine, and then discuss the reason for his peculiar terminology.
I. Sv. JOHN’s DOCTRINE is that Jesus Christ is the real incarnation of an eternally divine person (elsewhere called by him ‘ the only-begotten Son’ of God, Jn 114-18 336-28] Jn 4°; a term which declares His Sonship to be unique; in Jn 118 Tregelles and WH with much force prefer the reading ‘only- begotten God’), who has ever been the medium through whom God (called ὁ θεός in antithesis to the Logos, and ‘ Father’ in antithesis to the ‘ Son’) has exercised His activity in relation to the finite universe, and who, as the perfect manifestation of God’s nature and will, is called the Word (Logos). In vv.!-* of the prologue the relation of the Logos to God is stated. ‘In the beginning’ of all finite, temporal existence—a phrase suggested doubtless by Gn l}—the Logos was. He belongs, therefore, to the superfinite category of being, and is an eternal person. His existence is then more specifi- eally defined as to both His personality and essential Deity. ‘The Logos was with (πρός, towards) God (τὸν θεόν), i.e. eternally in relation to God, and, therefore, a distinct personalit from ὁ θεός, but in intimate communion with Him (πρός). ‘The Logos was God (θεός), i.e. in His essential nature He was Deity. The formality of these condensed statements, as well as the emphatic repetition, ‘the same was in the beginning with God,’ forbid