Compare Logos V Wisdom Proverbs 8

[FreeInChrist]

For Anyone interested . Not exactly Trin material but kind of.

When I posted about Logos/Word from the 3 Ai sources that are now living on this machine I saw this and so I read it and is a different angle in a way.

Please compare Logos vs Wisdom (Prov 8) in detail.

Gladly. This comparison is exactly where many of the real disagreements sit, so I’ll be careful, detailed, and fair to both sides.
I’ll move in layers: text, function, personhood, creation, and how John relates to Proverbs 8.

---

1. The texts themselves​

Logos — John 1:1–3, 14​

• “In the beginning was the Logos”
• “The Logos was with God”
• “The Logos was God”
• “All things were made through him”
• “The Logos became flesh”

Key features:

• Explicit pre-existence
• Clear distinction and unity with God
• Direct agency in creation
• Personal pronouns (“him”)
• Historical incarnation

---

Wisdom — Proverbs 8:22–31​

• Wisdom speaks in the first person (poetic personification)
• “The LORD qanah me at the beginning of His work”
• “I was beside Him, like a master workman”
• Rejoicing before God during creation

Key features:

• Poetic genre
• Metaphorical speech
• Strong creation imagery
• No incarnation
• No explicit claim of being God

---

2. Genre matters (this is often overlooked)​

Proverbs 8 is poetry.
John 1 is theological narrative/prologue.
That alone does not settle everything—but it strongly affects how claims function.

• Proverbs personifies Wisdom the way Scripture personifies:
  • sin (Gen 4:7)
  • death (Prov 1)
  • righteousness (Rom 6)

Wisdom speaks because wisdom must be heard, not because she is a separate divine being.
John, by contrast:

• anchors Logos in historical time
• names a human person (Jesus)
• claims the Logos “became flesh”

This is not how biblical poetry works.

---

3. Creation role: parallel but not identical​

Wisdom in Proverbs 8​

• Present during creation
• “Beside Him” (Heb. ʿimmo)
• Rejoicing, delighting
• Associated with order and skill

Wisdom functions as:

• God’s skill
• God’s design principle
• God’s ordering intelligence

But Wisdom never creates independently.
God creates; Wisdom is with Him.

---

Logos in John 1​

• “All things were made through him”
• “Apart from him nothing was made”

The Logos is not merely present;
He is the active agent.
This is a crucial distinction.

---

4. Personhood: metaphor vs identity​

Wisdom​

• Feminine grammatical gender (Hebrew)
• Speaks in first person
• Never addressed as God
• Never worshiped
• Never incarnated
• Never said to be eternal in essence

Even Second Temple Jews who loved Proverbs 8 did not pray to Wisdom.

---

Logos​

• Masculine pronouns (Greek grammar aligns with personal agent)
• Explicit relational language (“with God”)
• Explicit deity claim (“was God”)
• Enters history as a man
• Receives worship (John 20:28)

John is not extending a metaphor.
He is identifying a person.

---

5. The controversial verb in Prov 8:22 (“created” vs “possessed”)​

This matters because it’s often used against John 1.
Hebrew qanah can mean:

• acquire
• possess
• beget
• establish

The Septuagint (Greek OT) translates it as ektisen (“created”).
Early debates:

• Arians leaned heavily on this verse
• Nicene theologians responded:
  • Proverbs is poetic
  • Wisdom is not a literal divine being
  • John explicitly denies creation of the Logos (John 1:3)

Importantly:

John says nothing that was made was made without the Logos.

That logically includes Wisdom if Wisdom were a created thing.

---

6. How John relates to Wisdom (not replaces it)​

John does not deny Wisdom theology—he reframes it.
Notice:

• Wisdom brings life → Logos brings life
• Wisdom gives light → Logos is the Light
• Wisdom calls people → Logos calls disciples
• Wisdom dwells among men (Prov 8 imagery) → Logos literally dwells (σκηνόω)

John takes Wisdom language and says:

What Israel spoke of poetically
has now appeared personally.

---

7. Why John chose Logos, not Sophia​

Three reasons:

1. Avoids literalizing poetry
   Calling Jesus “Wisdom” could imply Jesus was a metaphor.
2. Preserves monotheism
   Logos is God’s self-expression, not a goddess figure.
3. Explains incarnation
   A “word” can proceed from a speaker and yet remain of the same being.

---

8. Bottom line comparison​

Category	Wisdom (Prov 8)	Logos (John 1)
Genre	Poetry	Theological narrative
Role	Present at creation	Agent of creation
Ontology	Personification	Personal divine identity
Relation to God	With Him	With Him and is God
Creation status	Ambiguous / poetic	Explicitly uncreated
Incarnation	No	Yes
Worship	No	Yes

---

9. Fair conclusion (important)​

A non-Trinitarian can reasonably say:

Proverbs 8 is poetic personification and should not be literalized.

A Trinitarian can reasonably say:

John deliberately uses Wisdom themes but claims they are fulfilled in a real divine person.

What cannot be done cleanly is:

• using Proverbs 8 to deny John 1 without flattening genre and context.

 

[TibiasDad]

For Anyone interested . Not exactly Trin material but kind of.

When I posted about Logos/Word from the 3 Ai sources that are now living on this machine I saw this and so I read it and is a different angle in a way.

Please compare Logos vs Wisdom (Prov 8) in detail.

Gladly. This comparison is exactly where many of the real disagreements sit, so I’ll be careful, detailed, and fair to both sides.
I’ll move in layers: text, function, personhood, creation, and how John relates to Proverbs 8.

---

1. The texts themselves​

Logos — John 1:1–3, 14​

• “In the beginning was the Logos”
• “The Logos was with God”
• “The Logos was God”
• “All things were made through him”
• “The Logos became flesh”

Key features:

• Explicit pre-existence
• Clear distinction and unity with God
• Direct agency in creation
• Personal pronouns (“him”)
• Historical incarnation

---

Wisdom — Proverbs 8:22–31​

• Wisdom speaks in the first person (poetic personification)
• “The LORD qanah me at the beginning of His work”
• “I was beside Him, like a master workman”
• Rejoicing before God during creation

Key features:

• Poetic genre
• Metaphorical speech
• Strong creation imagery
• No incarnation
• No explicit claim of being God

---

2. Genre matters (this is often overlooked)​

Proverbs 8 is poetry.
John 1 is theological narrative/prologue.
That alone does not settle everything—but it strongly affects how claims function.

• Proverbs personifies Wisdom the way Scripture personifies:
  • sin (Gen 4:7)
  • death (Prov 1)
  • righteousness (Rom 6)

Wisdom speaks because wisdom must be heard, not because she is a separate divine being.
John, by contrast:

• anchors Logos in historical time
• names a human person (Jesus)
• claims the Logos “became flesh”

This is not how biblical poetry works.

---

3. Creation role: parallel but not identical​

Wisdom in Proverbs 8​

• Present during creation
• “Beside Him” (Heb. ʿimmo)
• Rejoicing, delighting
• Associated with order and skill

Wisdom functions as:

• God’s skill
• God’s design principle
• God’s ordering intelligence

But Wisdom never creates independently.
God creates; Wisdom is with Him.

---

Logos in John 1​

• “All things were made through him”
• “Apart from him nothing was made”

The Logos is not merely present;
He is the active agent.
This is a crucial distinction.

---

4. Personhood: metaphor vs identity​

Wisdom​

• Feminine grammatical gender (Hebrew)
• Speaks in first person
• Never addressed as God
• Never worshiped
• Never incarnated
• Never said to be eternal in essence

Even Second Temple Jews who loved Proverbs 8 did not pray to Wisdom.

---

Logos​

• Masculine pronouns (Greek grammar aligns with personal agent)
• Explicit relational language (“with God”)
• Explicit deity claim (“was God”)
• Enters history as a man
• Receives worship (John 20:28)

John is not extending a metaphor.
He is identifying a person.

---

5. The controversial verb in Prov 8:22 (“created” vs “possessed”)​

This matters because it’s often used against John 1.
Hebrew qanah can mean:

• acquire
• possess
• beget
• establish

The Septuagint (Greek OT) translates it as ektisen (“created”).
Early debates:

• Arians leaned heavily on this verse
• Nicene theologians responded:
  • Proverbs is poetic
  • Wisdom is not a literal divine being
  • John explicitly denies creation of the Logos (John 1:3)

Importantly:

That logically includes Wisdom if Wisdom were a created thing.

---

6. How John relates to Wisdom (not replaces it)​

John does not deny Wisdom theology—he reframes it.
Notice:

• Wisdom brings life → Logos brings life
• Wisdom gives light → Logos is the Light
• Wisdom calls people → Logos calls disciples
• Wisdom dwells among men (Prov 8 imagery) → Logos literally dwells (σκηνόω)

John takes Wisdom language and says:

---

7. Why John chose Logos, not Sophia​

Three reasons:

1. Avoids literalizing poetry
   Calling Jesus “Wisdom” could imply Jesus was a metaphor.
2. Preserves monotheism
   Logos is God’s self-expression, not a goddess figure.
3. Explains incarnation
   A “word” can proceed from a speaker and yet remain of the same being.

---

8. Bottom line comparison​

Category	Wisdom (Prov 8)	Logos (John 1)
Genre	Poetry	Theological narrative
Role	Present at creation	Agent of creation
Ontology	Personification	Personal divine identity
Relation to God	With Him	With Him and is God
Creation status	Ambiguous / poetic	Explicitly uncreated
Incarnation	No	Yes
Worship	No	Yes

---

9. Fair conclusion (important)​

A non-Trinitarian can reasonably say:

A Trinitarian can reasonably say:

What cannot be done cleanly is:

• using Proverbs 8 to deny John 1 without flattening genre and context.

Thank you for this detailed comparison; it is well done and very helpful, as well as interesting.

I would comment that Wisdom cannot be created , for that implies a time wherein it didn’t exist. But God has always existed, and he was never lacking in wisdom. Thus, “possessed” is the only logical meaning for qanah.

(I can see the meaning of qanah as “acquiring” in the sense of ‘I wanted to write a story, so I acquired my pen and paper from my briefcase and began to write.’ This doesn’t mean creating ‘pen and paper’ but retrieving them for the purpose of writing a story. God utilizes his wisdom to accomplish his purpose.)


Doug

 

[Keiw1]

For Anyone interested . Not exactly Trin material but kind of.

When I posted about Logos/Word from the 3 Ai sources that are now living on this machine I saw this and so I read it and is a different angle in a way.

Please compare Logos vs Wisdom (Prov 8) in detail.

Gladly. This comparison is exactly where many of the real disagreements sit, so I’ll be careful, detailed, and fair to both sides.
I’ll move in layers: text, function, personhood, creation, and how John relates to Proverbs 8.

---

1. The texts themselves​

Logos — John 1:1–3, 14​

• “In the beginning was the Logos”
• “The Logos was with God”
• “The Logos was God”
• “All things were made through him”
• “The Logos became flesh”

Key features:

• Explicit pre-existence
• Clear distinction and unity with God
• Direct agency in creation
• Personal pronouns (“him”)
• Historical incarnation

---

Wisdom — Proverbs 8:22–31​

• Wisdom speaks in the first person (poetic personification)
• “The LORD qanah me at the beginning of His work”
• “I was beside Him, like a master workman”
• Rejoicing before God during creation

Key features:

• Poetic genre
• Metaphorical speech
• Strong creation imagery
• No incarnation
• No explicit claim of being God

---

2. Genre matters (this is often overlooked)​

Proverbs 8 is poetry.
John 1 is theological narrative/prologue.
That alone does not settle everything—but it strongly affects how claims function.

• Proverbs personifies Wisdom the way Scripture personifies:
  • sin (Gen 4:7)
  • death (Prov 1)
  • righteousness (Rom 6)

Wisdom speaks because wisdom must be heard, not because she is a separate divine being.
John, by contrast:

• anchors Logos in historical time
• names a human person (Jesus)
• claims the Logos “became flesh”

This is not how biblical poetry works.

---

3. Creation role: parallel but not identical​

Wisdom in Proverbs 8​

• Present during creation
• “Beside Him” (Heb. ʿimmo)
• Rejoicing, delighting
• Associated with order and skill

Wisdom functions as:

• God’s skill
• God’s design principle
• God’s ordering intelligence

But Wisdom never creates independently.
God creates; Wisdom is with Him.

---

Logos in John 1​

• “All things were made through him”
• “Apart from him nothing was made”

The Logos is not merely present;
He is the active agent.
This is a crucial distinction.

---

4. Personhood: metaphor vs identity​

Wisdom​

• Feminine grammatical gender (Hebrew)
• Speaks in first person
• Never addressed as God
• Never worshiped
• Never incarnated
• Never said to be eternal in essence

Even Second Temple Jews who loved Proverbs 8 did not pray to Wisdom.

---

Logos​

• Masculine pronouns (Greek grammar aligns with personal agent)
• Explicit relational language (“with God”)
• Explicit deity claim (“was God”)
• Enters history as a man
• Receives worship (John 20:28)

John is not extending a metaphor.
He is identifying a person.

---

5. The controversial verb in Prov 8:22 (“created” vs “possessed”)​

This matters because it’s often used against John 1.
Hebrew qanah can mean:

• acquire
• possess
• beget
• establish

The Septuagint (Greek OT) translates it as ektisen (“created”).
Early debates:

• Arians leaned heavily on this verse
• Nicene theologians responded:
  • Proverbs is poetic
  • Wisdom is not a literal divine being
  • John explicitly denies creation of the Logos (John 1:3)

Importantly:

That logically includes Wisdom if Wisdom were a created thing.

---

6. How John relates to Wisdom (not replaces it)​

John does not deny Wisdom theology—he reframes it.
Notice:

• Wisdom brings life → Logos brings life
• Wisdom gives light → Logos is the Light
• Wisdom calls people → Logos calls disciples
• Wisdom dwells among men (Prov 8 imagery) → Logos literally dwells (σκηνόω)

John takes Wisdom language and says:

---

7. Why John chose Logos, not Sophia​

Three reasons:

1. Avoids literalizing poetry
   Calling Jesus “Wisdom” could imply Jesus was a metaphor.
2. Preserves monotheism
   Logos is God’s self-expression, not a goddess figure.
3. Explains incarnation
   A “word” can proceed from a speaker and yet remain of the same being.

---

8. Bottom line comparison​

Category	Wisdom (Prov 8)	Logos (John 1)
Genre	Poetry	Theological narrative
Role	Present at creation	Agent of creation
Ontology	Personification	Personal divine identity
Relation to God	With Him	With Him and is God
Creation status	Ambiguous / poetic	Explicitly uncreated
Incarnation	No	Yes
Worship	No	Yes

---

9. Fair conclusion (important)​

A non-Trinitarian can reasonably say:

A Trinitarian can reasonably say:

What cannot be done cleanly is:

• using Proverbs 8 to deny John 1 without flattening genre and context.

Satan can sure twist it all. No wonder Jesus teaches-99.9% are being mislead to destruction, same as in Noah's day( Luke 17:26)

So please explain to us since Jesus' truth at Luke 17:26 assures 99.9% will be destroyed at Harmageddon. Why Clergy's are lying to 2 billion humans telling them they are saved? 99.9% leaves about 9 million humans surviving= The Few who have found the road that leads off into life. All the other false religions are telling their flocks they go to a higher plain as well basically.
Is it anything less than murder?

 

[Runningman]

Satan can sure twist it all. No wonder Jesus teaches-99.9% are being mislead to destruction, same as in Noah's day( Luke 17:26)

So please explain to us since Jesus' truth at Luke 17:26 assures 99.9% will be destroyed at Harmageddon. Why Clergy's are lying to 2 billion humans telling them they are saved? 99.9% leaves about 9 million humans surviving= The Few who have found the road that leads off into life. All the other false religions are telling their flocks they go to a higher plain as well basically.
Is it anything less than murder?

Yes, one could argue that triniatarians are at war with Christianity, but also the world. Think about it. Trinitarians are going around trying to deceive people, but what is the end result according to the Bible? Their doctrines are going to get people lost and, eventually, destroyed in the lake of fire. Different means to the same end.

This is the trinitarian church as described by Peter.

2 Peter 2
1Now there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2Many will follow in their depravity, and because of them the way of truth will be defamed. 3In their greed, these false teachers will exploit you with deceptive words. The longstanding verdict against them remains in force, and their destruction does not sleep.

 

[Keiw1]

Yes, one could argue that triniatarians are at war with Christianity, but also the world. Think about it. Trinitarians are going around trying to deceive people, but what is the end result according to the Bible? Their doctrines are going to get people lost and, eventually, destroyed in the lake of fire. Different means to the same end.

This is the trinitarian church as described by Peter.

2 Peter 2
1Now there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2Many will follow in their depravity, and because of them the way of truth will be defamed. 3In their greed, these false teachers will exploit you with deceptive words. The longstanding verdict against them remains in force, and their destruction does not sleep.

Yes their translations are products of Catholicism translating-Catholicism=2Thess 2:3--

 

[FreeInChrist]

So let me get this straight… all Bible translations are supposedly “Catholic products” (2 Thess 2:3, cue ominous music), except the one produced in-house by a single religious organization?


That is convenient.


Most major English translations were done by large, multi-denominational committees working directly from Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts. Protestants, evangelicals, Anglicans—and yes, sometimes even Jewish scholars on the OT—checking each other’s work. Hardly a Vatican smoke-filled room.

Meanwhile, the New World Translation was produced by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, with translators kept anonymous for decades. Why? Because humility? Or because anonymity is really useful when credentials are… thin?

When testimony later identified Frederick Franz as the primary translator, we learned:

No formal Hebrew training
About two years of college Greek
Not a recognized textual scholar
Failed basic Hebrew translation under oath

Yet somehow this lone, unqualified translator managed to “correct” every major manuscript tradition and every other translation committee on the planet—all without peer review.

So yes, I’m curious too:
Was this done by divine inspiration?
Because it certainly wasn’t done by linguistic consensus.


And those charts claiming “all translations can’t be trusted”? Classic sleight of hand. Scholarly disagreement among independent translators is not the same thing as systematically altering the text to fit pre-decided doctrine.

The bottom line is this.....
1. Multiple independent translations is not Catholic conspiracy
2. Anonymous translators offer no credibility
3. Rewriting Christological texts is not faithfulness

If the argument is “everyone is corrupt except us,” that’s not discernment—that’s a red flag.
Yes their translations are products of Catholicism translating-Catholicism=2Thess 2:3--Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,

 

[Keiw1]

So let me get this straight… all Bible translations are supposedly “Catholic products” (2 Thess 2:3, cue ominous music), except the one produced in-house by a single religious organization?


That is convenient.


Most major English translations were done by large, multi-denominational committees working directly from Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts. Protestants, evangelicals, Anglicans—and yes, sometimes even Jewish scholars on the OT—checking each other’s work. Hardly a Vatican smoke-filled room.

Meanwhile, the New World Translation was produced by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, with translators kept anonymous for decades. Why? Because humility? Or because anonymity is really useful when credentials are… thin?

When testimony later identified Frederick Franz as the primary translator, we learned:

No formal Hebrew training
About two years of college Greek
Not a recognized textual scholar
Failed basic Hebrew translation under oath

Yet somehow this lone, unqualified translator managed to “correct” every major manuscript tradition and every other translation committee on the planet—all without peer review.

So yes, I’m curious too:
Was this done by divine inspiration?
Because it certainly wasn’t done by linguistic consensus.


And those charts claiming “all translations can’t be trusted”? Classic sleight of hand. Scholarly disagreement among independent translators is not the same thing as systematically altering the text to fit pre-decided doctrine.

The bottom line is this.....
1. Multiple independent translations is not Catholic conspiracy
2. Anonymous translators offer no credibility
3. Rewriting Christological texts is not faithfulness

If the argument is “everyone is corrupt except us,” that’s not discernment—that’s a red flag.
Yes their translations are products of Catholicism translating-Catholicism=2Thess 2:3--Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,

Actually God corrected his translation here in these last days. Otherwise none could accomplish this-John 4:22-24
Yes the apostasy-Created a trinity god at their councils in the 4th century= recorded history undeniable fact of life. Twisted translation to fit those false council teachings. Removed Gods name against his will by satans will to mislead.