Using AI to respond to bible discussion

[360watt]

Using AI may seem like a logical response to bible questions, but there are key problems with this:

AI would probably come up with the greatest things about being an atheist if you asked what is great about being an atheist. It's just input output.

AI does not have the Holy Spirit illuminating it's understanding.

AI does not necessarily draw from the best contextual reasoning of scripture. I'm not sure how it analyzes scripture.

Expound on scripture YOURSELF... don't ask AI!

 

[Johann]

Using AI may seem like a logical response to bible questions, but there are key problems with this:

AI would probably come up with the greatest things about being an atheist if you asked what is great about being an atheist. It's just input output.

AI does not have the Holy Spirit illuminating it's understanding.

AI does not necessarily draw from the best contextual reasoning of scripture. I'm not sure how it analyzes scripture.

Expound on scripture YOURSELF... don't ask AI!

Allow me to prove you wrong


Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος
Morphology:
Ἐν (G1722) – preposition, dative case, meaning “in” or “at.”

ἀρχῇ (G746) – noun, dative singular feminine of ἀρχή, meaning “beginning,” “origin,” or “first cause.”

ἦν (G1510, impf. ind. act. 3rd sing.) – imperfect tense of εἰμί (“to be”), indicating ongoing existence in past time, not a point of origin.

ὁ Λόγος (G3056) – nominative masculine singular; ὁ is the article, Λόγος is “Word,” used in the philosophical, theological, and creative sense.

Syntax & Exegesis:
The phrase Ἐν ἀρχῇ parallels Genesis 1:1 LXX: “ἐν ἀρχῇ ἐποίησεν ὁ Θεός...” It invokes the eternal pre-existence of the Logos before all creation.

The verb ἦν (imperfect) emphasizes continuous existence — “already was” the Word in the beginning, not came to be (ἐγένετο would have implied a beginning or creation).
Thus:

“In the beginning [already] was the Word...”
This asserts the Logos’s eternality and ontological distinction from created things.

2. καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν
Morphology:
καὶ (G2532) – coordinating conjunction, “and.”

ὁ Λόγος – repeated subject, nominative masculine singular with article.

ἦν – as above, ongoing past existence.

πρὸς (G4314) – preposition meaning “toward,” “with,” but with nuance of personal orientation and relationship.

τὸν Θεόν (G2316) – accusative masculine singular, object of πρὸς, here referring to God the Father.

Syntax & Exegesis:
The preposition πρὸς with accusative implies face-to-face communion or intimate fellowship, not mere coexistence. This is not the common “meta” or “en” (“with”), but relational and directional.
It conveys that the Logos is distinct from yet in eternal relationship with the Father.
Thus:

“And the Word was with God [in intimate personal relationship].”

3. καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος
Morphology:
Θεὸς – anarthrous (without article), nominative masculine singular.

ἦν – again, imperfect of εἰμί, “was.”

ὁ Λόγος – the subject, “the Word,” with article.

Syntax & Exegesis:
This is not saying “the Word was the God” (ὁ Θεός ἦν ὁ Λόγος would suggest identity), nor “the Word was a god” (as some sects argue).
Rather, Theos is anarthrous and placed before the verb for emphasis. This word order stresses the quality or nature of the subject.

According to Colwell’s Rule, when a predicate nominative precedes the verb and lacks the article, it tends to express essence or nature, not identity.
Thus, this clause asserts that the Logos shares the essence of deity, not that He is the same person as the Father.

“And the Word was God [in nature].”



Clause Meaning
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος The Word existed eternally before all creation.
καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν The Word was in intimate, personal relationship with God the Father.
καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος The Word was fully divine in nature, distinct from the Father in person.

John 1:1
In the beginning (en archēi). Archē is definite, though anarthrous like our at home, in town, and the similar Hebrew be reshith in Gen_1:1. But Westcott notes that here John carries our thoughts beyond the beginning of creation in time to eternity. There is no argument here to prove the existence of God any more than in Genesis. It is simply assumed. Either God exists and is the Creator of the universe as scientists like Eddington and Jeans assume or matter is eternal or it has come out of nothing.
Was (ēn). Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of eimi to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence. Quite a different verb (egeneto, became) appears in Jhn_1:14 for the beginning of the Incarnation of the Logos. See the distinction sharply drawn in Jhn_8:58 “before Abraham came (genesthai) I am” (eimi, timeless existence).
The Word (ho logos). Logos is from legō, old word in Homer to lay by, to collect, to put words side by side, to speak, to express an opinion. Logos is common for reason as well as speech. Heraclitus used it for the principle which controls the universe. The Stoics employed it for the soul of the world (anima mundi) and Marcus Aurelius used spermatikos logos for the generative principle in nature. The Hebrew memra was used in the Targums for the manifestation of God like the Angel of Jehovah and the Wisdom of God in Pro_8:23. Dr. J. Rendel Harris thinks that there was a lost wisdom book that combined phrases in Proverbs and in the Wisdom of Solomon which John used for his Prologue (The Origin of the Prologue to St. John, p. 43) which he has undertaken to reproduce. At any rate John’s standpoint is that of the Old Testament and not that of the Stoics nor even of Philo who uses the term Logos, but not John’s conception of personal pre-existence. The term Logos is applied to Christ only in Jhn_1:1, Jhn_1:14; Rev_19:13; 1Jn_1:1 “concerning the Word of life” (an incidental argument for identity of authorship). There is a possible personification of “the Word of God” in Heb_4:12. But the personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul (2Co_8:9; Php_2:6.; Col_1:17) and in Heb_1:2. and in Jhn_17:5. This term suits John’s purpose better than sophia (wisdom) and is his answer to the Gnostics who either denied the actual humanity of Christ (Docetic Gnostics) or who separated the aeon Christ from the man Jesus (Cerinthian Gnostics). The pre-existent Logos “became flesh” (sarx egeneto, Jhn_1:14) and by this phrase John answered both heresies at once.
With God (pros ton theon). Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. Pros with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In 1Jn_2:1 we have a like use of pros: “We have a Paraclete with the Father” (paraklēton echomen pros ton patera). See prosōpon pros prosōpon (face to face, 1Co_13:12), a triple use of pros. There is a papyrus example of pros in this sense to gnōston tēs pros allēlous sunētheias, “the knowledge of our intimacy with one another” (M.&M., Vocabulary) which answers the claim of Rendel Harris, Origin of Prologue, p. 8) that the use of pros here and in Mrk_6:3 is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is Koiné, not old Attic. In Jhn_17:5 John has para soi the more common idiom.
And the Word was God (kai theos ēn ho logos). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying ho theos ēn ho logos. That would mean that all of God was expressed in ho logos and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (ho logos) and the predicate without it (theos) just as in Jhn_4:24 pneuma ho theos can only mean “God is spirit,” not “spirit is God.” So in 1Jn_4:16 ho theos agapē estin can only mean “God is love,” not “love is God” as a so-called Christian scientist would confusedly say. For the article with the predicate see Robertson, Grammar, pp. 767f. So in Jhn_1:14 ho Logos sarx egeneto, “the Word became flesh,” not “the flesh became Word.” Luther argues that here John disposes of Arianism also because the Logos was eternally God, fellowship of Father and Son, what Origen called the Eternal Generation of the Son (each necessary to the other). Thus in the Trinity we see personal fellowship on an equality.
Robertson.


Ancient Jewish writings—particularly the Aramaic Targums—depict the Memra (Aramaic for "Word") as a divine, personal agent, often equated with God Himself. These texts, predating or contemporaneous with the New Testament, provide a theological backdrop to the Gospel of John’s identification of Jesus as the Logos (Word).
TheBibleSays.com
+1
Berean Apologetics Ministry
+1

The Memra in the Targums: God's Personal Word
The Targums are Aramaic paraphrases of the Hebrew Scriptures, used in synagogues during the Second Temple period. In these texts, the Memra is not merely a linguistic substitute for God's name but is portrayed as an active, divine presence:

Genesis 1:1–3 (Targum Neofiti): "From the beginning with wisdom the Memra (Word) of the Lord created and perfected the heavens and the earth… And the Memra of the LORD said, ‘Let there be light’; and there was light by His Memra."
Berean Apologetics Ministry
+1
TheBibleSays.com
+1

Genesis 28:20–21 (Targum Onkelos): Jacob's vow, "If God will be with me... then the LORD will be my God," is rendered as, "If the Memra of the LORD will be my help... the Memra of the LORD shall be my God."
oneinmessiah.net

Isaiah 45:22 (Targum Jonathan): "Look unto My Memra and be saved," attributing salvation directly to the Memra.
oneinmessiah.net

These examples illustrate that the Memra functions as a divine entity, involved in creation, revelation, and salvation.
TheBibleSays.com

Philo of Alexandria: The Logos as Divine Mediator
Philo, a 1st-century Jewish philosopher, extensively discusses the Logos (Greek for "Word"), aligning with the Memra concept. He describes the Logos as:

The image of God through whom the world was created.

An intermediary between the transcendent God and the material world.

A divine being, yet distinct from God, acting as His agent.

Philo writes, "Man was made a likeness and imitation of the Word, when the Divine Breath was breathed into his face."
oneinmessiah.net

The Gospel of John: Jesus as the Divine Word
The Gospel of John opens with:

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

This prologue reflects the Memra tradition, presenting Jesus as:

Pre-existent and active in creation.

In intimate relationship with God.

Divine in nature, yet distinct in personhood.

John's portrayal of Jesus as the Logos resonates with both the Targumic Memra and Philo's philosophical Logos, bridging Jewish thought and Hellenistic philosophy.
oneinmessiah.net


Ancient Jewish writings, notably the Targums and Philo's works, present the Memra/Logos as a divine, personified agent of God. This conceptual framework underpins the New Testament's depiction of Jesus as the incarnate Word, affirming His divinity and pre-existence.
TheBibleSays.com

Thanks.

J.

 

[360watt]

Allow me to prove you wrong

View attachment 1721
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος
Morphology:
Ἐν (G1722) – preposition, dative case, meaning “in” or “at.”

ἀρχῇ (G746) – noun, dative singular feminine of ἀρχή, meaning “beginning,” “origin,” or “first cause.”

ἦν (G1510, impf. ind. act. 3rd sing.) – imperfect tense of εἰμί (“to be”), indicating ongoing existence in past time, not a point of origin.

ὁ Λόγος (G3056) – nominative masculine singular; ὁ is the article, Λόγος is “Word,” used in the philosophical, theological, and creative sense.

Syntax & Exegesis:
The phrase Ἐν ἀρχῇ parallels Genesis 1:1 LXX: “ἐν ἀρχῇ ἐποίησεν ὁ Θεός...” It invokes the eternal pre-existence of the Logos before all creation.

The verb ἦν (imperfect) emphasizes continuous existence — “already was” the Word in the beginning, not came to be (ἐγένετο would have implied a beginning or creation).
Thus:

“In the beginning [already] was the Word...”
This asserts the Logos’s eternality and ontological distinction from created things.

2. καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν
Morphology:
καὶ (G2532) – coordinating conjunction, “and.”

ὁ Λόγος – repeated subject, nominative masculine singular with article.

ἦν – as above, ongoing past existence.

πρὸς (G4314) – preposition meaning “toward,” “with,” but with nuance of personal orientation and relationship.

τὸν Θεόν (G2316) – accusative masculine singular, object of πρὸς, here referring to God the Father.

Syntax & Exegesis:
The preposition πρὸς with accusative implies face-to-face communion or intimate fellowship, not mere coexistence. This is not the common “meta” or “en” (“with”), but relational and directional.
It conveys that the Logos is distinct from yet in eternal relationship with the Father.
Thus:

“And the Word was with God [in intimate personal relationship].”

3. καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος
Morphology:
Θεὸς – anarthrous (without article), nominative masculine singular.

ἦν – again, imperfect of εἰμί, “was.”

ὁ Λόγος – the subject, “the Word,” with article.

Syntax & Exegesis:
This is not saying “the Word was the God” (ὁ Θεός ἦν ὁ Λόγος would suggest identity), nor “the Word was a god” (as some sects argue).
Rather, Theos is anarthrous and placed before the verb for emphasis. This word order stresses the quality or nature of the subject.

According to Colwell’s Rule, when a predicate nominative precedes the verb and lacks the article, it tends to express essence or nature, not identity.
Thus, this clause asserts that the Logos shares the essence of deity, not that He is the same person as the Father.

“And the Word was God [in nature].”



Clause Meaning
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος The Word existed eternally before all creation.
καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν The Word was in intimate, personal relationship with God the Father.
καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος The Word was fully divine in nature, distinct from the Father in person.

John 1:1
In the beginning (en archēi). Archē is definite, though anarthrous like our at home, in town, and the similar Hebrew be reshith in Gen_1:1. But Westcott notes that here John carries our thoughts beyond the beginning of creation in time to eternity. There is no argument here to prove the existence of God any more than in Genesis. It is simply assumed. Either God exists and is the Creator of the universe as scientists like Eddington and Jeans assume or matter is eternal or it has come out of nothing.
Was (ēn). Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of eimi to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence. Quite a different verb (egeneto, became) appears in Jhn_1:14 for the beginning of the Incarnation of the Logos. See the distinction sharply drawn in Jhn_8:58 “before Abraham came (genesthai) I am” (eimi, timeless existence).
The Word (ho logos). Logos is from legō, old word in Homer to lay by, to collect, to put words side by side, to speak, to express an opinion. Logos is common for reason as well as speech. Heraclitus used it for the principle which controls the universe. The Stoics employed it for the soul of the world (anima mundi) and Marcus Aurelius used spermatikos logos for the generative principle in nature. The Hebrew memra was used in the Targums for the manifestation of God like the Angel of Jehovah and the Wisdom of God in Pro_8:23. Dr. J. Rendel Harris thinks that there was a lost wisdom book that combined phrases in Proverbs and in the Wisdom of Solomon which John used for his Prologue (The Origin of the Prologue to St. John, p. 43) which he has undertaken to reproduce. At any rate John’s standpoint is that of the Old Testament and not that of the Stoics nor even of Philo who uses the term Logos, but not John’s conception of personal pre-existence. The term Logos is applied to Christ only in Jhn_1:1, Jhn_1:14; Rev_19:13; 1Jn_1:1 “concerning the Word of life” (an incidental argument for identity of authorship). There is a possible personification of “the Word of God” in Heb_4:12. But the personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul (2Co_8:9; Php_2:6.; Col_1:17) and in Heb_1:2. and in Jhn_17:5. This term suits John’s purpose better than sophia (wisdom) and is his answer to the Gnostics who either denied the actual humanity of Christ (Docetic Gnostics) or who separated the aeon Christ from the man Jesus (Cerinthian Gnostics). The pre-existent Logos “became flesh” (sarx egeneto, Jhn_1:14) and by this phrase John answered both heresies at once.
With God (pros ton theon). Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. Pros with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In 1Jn_2:1 we have a like use of pros: “We have a Paraclete with the Father” (paraklēton echomen pros ton patera). See prosōpon pros prosōpon (face to face, 1Co_13:12), a triple use of pros. There is a papyrus example of pros in this sense to gnōston tēs pros allēlous sunētheias, “the knowledge of our intimacy with one another” (M.&M., Vocabulary) which answers the claim of Rendel Harris, Origin of Prologue, p. 8) that the use of pros here and in Mrk_6:3 is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is Koiné, not old Attic. In Jhn_17:5 John has para soi the more common idiom.
And the Word was God (kai theos ēn ho logos). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying ho theos ēn ho logos. That would mean that all of God was expressed in ho logos and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (ho logos) and the predicate without it (theos) just as in Jhn_4:24 pneuma ho theos can only mean “God is spirit,” not “spirit is God.” So in 1Jn_4:16 ho theos agapē estin can only mean “God is love,” not “love is God” as a so-called Christian scientist would confusedly say. For the article with the predicate see Robertson, Grammar, pp. 767f. So in Jhn_1:14 ho Logos sarx egeneto, “the Word became flesh,” not “the flesh became Word.” Luther argues that here John disposes of Arianism also because the Logos was eternally God, fellowship of Father and Son, what Origen called the Eternal Generation of the Son (each necessary to the other). Thus in the Trinity we see personal fellowship on an equality.
Robertson.


Ancient Jewish writings—particularly the Aramaic Targums—depict the Memra (Aramaic for "Word") as a divine, personal agent, often equated with God Himself. These texts, predating or contemporaneous with the New Testament, provide a theological backdrop to the Gospel of John’s identification of Jesus as the Logos (Word).
TheBibleSays.com
+1
Berean Apologetics Ministry
+1

The Memra in the Targums: God's Personal Word
The Targums are Aramaic paraphrases of the Hebrew Scriptures, used in synagogues during the Second Temple period. In these texts, the Memra is not merely a linguistic substitute for God's name but is portrayed as an active, divine presence:

Genesis 1:1–3 (Targum Neofiti): "From the beginning with wisdom the Memra (Word) of the Lord created and perfected the heavens and the earth… And the Memra of the LORD said, ‘Let there be light’; and there was light by His Memra."
Berean Apologetics Ministry
+1
TheBibleSays.com
+1

Genesis 28:20–21 (Targum Onkelos): Jacob's vow, "If God will be with me... then the LORD will be my God," is rendered as, "If the Memra of the LORD will be my help... the Memra of the LORD shall be my God."
oneinmessiah.net

Isaiah 45:22 (Targum Jonathan): "Look unto My Memra and be saved," attributing salvation directly to the Memra.
oneinmessiah.net

These examples illustrate that the Memra functions as a divine entity, involved in creation, revelation, and salvation.
TheBibleSays.com

Philo of Alexandria: The Logos as Divine Mediator
Philo, a 1st-century Jewish philosopher, extensively discusses the Logos (Greek for "Word"), aligning with the Memra concept. He describes the Logos as:

The image of God through whom the world was created.

An intermediary between the transcendent God and the material world.

A divine being, yet distinct from God, acting as His agent.

Philo writes, "Man was made a likeness and imitation of the Word, when the Divine Breath was breathed into his face."
oneinmessiah.net

The Gospel of John: Jesus as the Divine Word
The Gospel of John opens with:

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

This prologue reflects the Memra tradition, presenting Jesus as:

Pre-existent and active in creation.

In intimate relationship with God.

Divine in nature, yet distinct in personhood.

John's portrayal of Jesus as the Logos resonates with both the Targumic Memra and Philo's philosophical Logos, bridging Jewish thought and Hellenistic philosophy.
oneinmessiah.net


Ancient Jewish writings, notably the Targums and Philo's works, present the Memra/Logos as a divine, personified agent of God. This conceptual framework underpins the New Testament's depiction of Jesus as the incarnate Word, affirming His divinity and pre-existence.
TheBibleSays.com

Thanks.

J.

What was AI asked here?

 

[Johann]

@360watt

The Memra of the Lord and the Logos are both Eternal.

The Memra is described as eternal, transcending time and existing forever:

“Forever, O LORD, Your Memra is established in the heavens."
(Targum Jonathan on Psalm 119:89)

The Logos existed before the beginning:


“In the beginning was the Word…”
(John 1:1a)

The Memra of the Lord and the Logos are both distinct from God.
God interacts with the Memra:

“The LORD said to His Memra, ‘Sit at My right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.’”
(Targum Jonathan. Psalm 110:1)

God was together with the Logos:

“… and the Word was with God…”
(John 1:1b)

The Memra of the Lord and the Logos are both identified as God.
Abraham equates the Lord’s Memra with God when he enters a covenant with Him:


“If the Memra of the Lord will be my support...then the Memra of the Lord shall be my God.”
(Targum Onkelos. Genesis 28:21)

John directly states that the Logos is God:


“…and the Word was God.”
(John 1:1c)

The Memra of the Lord and the Logos are both described as the Creator of the Universe.
The Memra of the Lord is directly identified as the Agent of creation, responsible for bringing the universe into existence:


“From the beginning, with wisdom, the Memra of the Lord created and perfected the heavens and the earth.”
(Targum Neofiti. Genesis 1:1)

“The dwelling of God who, from the beginning, through His Memra, created the world…”
(Targum Onkelos. Deuteronomy 33:27a)

“I am the LORD who made all things; I stretched out the heavens through My Memra…”
(Targum Jonathan. Isaiah 44:24)

“I through My Memra made the earth, and created man upon it…”
(Targum Jonathan. Isaiah 45:12)

“I through My Memra, made the earth, the men and the beasts on the face of the earth…”
(Targum Jonathan. Jeremiah 27:5)

The Logos is the Creator of all things:


“All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.”
(John 1:3)

“The world was made through Him…”
(John 1:10a)

The Memra of the Lord and the Logos are both the source of Life.
The Memra created man in His own image:

“And the Memra of the Lord created man in His own likeness; in the likeness of the Lord He created him…”
(Targum Neofiti. Genesis 1:27a)

The Memra directly imparts life to Adam and is humanity’s source of life:

“And the Memra of the Lord God created man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the breath became in the body of man a living soul.”
(Targum Neofiti. Genesis 2:7)

The Memra’s instruction is life-giving:

“Your Memra has given me life”
(Targum Jonathan. Psalm 119:50b)

Life is in the Logos:

“In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.”
(John 1:4a)

The Memra of the Lord and the Logos are both the source of Light.
The Memra of the Lord created light:

“Then the Memra of the LORD said, ‘Let there be light,” and there was light according to the decree of His Memra.”
(Targum Neofiti. Genesis 1:3)

The Memra guided Israel during the darkness of the night by providing light from the pillar of fire:

“The Memra of the Lord was going before them…in a pillar of fire by night to give them light, that they might travel by day and by night.”
(Targum Neofiti. Exodus 13:21)

The Logos is the Light that shines in the darkness:

“…and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.”
(John 1:4a-5)

The Memra of the LORD and the Logos both guide people who are lost.

The Memra led Israel through the wilderness in the pillar of cloud and the pillar of fire:

“And the Memra of the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them in the way, and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, so as to go by day and night.”
(Targum Onkelos. Exodus 13:21)

The Logos shines light in the darkness to every man:

“The Light shines in the darkness…the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man.”
(John 1:5a-9)

The Memra of the LORD and the Logos were both rejected by Israel.
Israel despised and did not receive the Memra:

“How long will this people despise My Memra? And how long will they not believe in Me, despite all the signs which I have performed among them?”
(Targum Neofiti. Numbers 14:11)

“But in this thing you did not believe in the Memra of the LORD your God.”
(Targum Onkelos. Deuteronomy 1:32)

Israel did not receive or believe the Logos:

“He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him.”
(John 1:11)

“You do not have His word abiding in you, for you do not believe Him whom He sent.”
(John 5:38)

Israel hated and condemned the Logos to death:

“they have both seen and hated Me…”
(John 15:24b)

“And he said to the Jews, ‘Behold, your King!’ So they cried out, ‘Away with Him, away with Him, crucify Him!’ Pilate said to them, ‘Shall I crucify your King?’ The chief priests answered, ‘We have no king but Caesar.’”
(John 19:14b-15)

The Memra of the LORD and the Logos both reconcile people to God through faith.
Abraham believed in the Memra and was considered righteous:

“And Abram believed in the Memra of the LORD, and it was counted to him as righteousness.”
(Targum Neofiti. Genesis 15:6)

God uses His Memra to establish relationship with people:

“My Memra will go among you and be your God and you will be My people.”
(Targum Neofiti. Leviticus 26:12)

“Return to My Memra, And I will return to you by My Memra, says the LORD of hosts.”
(Targum Jonathan. Malachi 3:7)

Through the Memra, Israel receives God’s name and belonging:

“So shall they put My name, My Memra, upon the children of Israel, and I, in My Memra, shall bless them…”
(Targum Neofiti. Numbers 6:27)

God gives people the right to be born into His family and become His children to all who believe in the name of the Logos:

“But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born…of God.”
(John 1:12-13)

The Memra of the LORD and the Logos are God’s Presence on Earth.
The Memra was present among Israel in the wilderness in a pillar of cloud and of fire:

“The Memra of the Lord was going before them in a pillar of cloud by day to lead them on the way, and in a pillar of fire by night to give them light, that they might travel by day and by night.”
(Targum Neofiti. Exodus 13:21)

The Memra spoke to Moses in the Tabernacle:

“When all the people saw the Pillar of Cloud, standing at the entrance of the tent; all the people rose and prostrated themselves, each man at the entrance of his tent.
The Memra of the Lord spoke with Moses face to face, just as a man speaks to his friend.”
(Targum Neofiti. Exodus 33:11)


The Logos tabernacled in human form among His people through Jesus Christ:


“And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us.”
(John 1:14a)

The Memra of the LORD and the Logos both personally reveal God’s Glory to the world.

The Memra will gloriously redeem Israel:

“I will appoint My Memra to be there for the sons of Israel, and it shall be consecrated by My glory…I will make My Shekinah [visible glorious presence] dwell in the midst of the sons of Israel and My Memra will be for them a redeeming God...so that the glory of My Shekinah might dwell among them; I am the LORD their God.”
(Targum Neofiti. Exodus 29:43-46)

The Memra manifests God’s glory to all humanity:

“And the glory of the Memra of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.”
(Targum Jonathan. Isaiah 40:5)

The Logos revealed God’s glory to humanity:

“And we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father.”
(John 1:14b)

12. The Memra of the LORD and the Logos are both described as incredibly Gracious.

The Memra will graciously bless Israel:

“You are a gracious and merciful God, slow to anger and abounding in grace through Your Memra.”
(Targum Jonathan. Jonah 4:2)

The Logos is described as having inexhaustible grace:


“For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace.”
(John 1:16)

13. The Memra of the LORD and the Logos are both the embodiment of Grace and Truth.

When the Memra covered Moses as the Lord passed by him, the Lord described Himself as abounding in lovingkindness and truth, as the source of divine truth:

“I will put you in a cave of the rock, and I will shelter you with My Memra until I pass by…The Lord made his Shechinah pass before him, and proclaimed: ‘The Lord, the Lord, Almighty, merciful and gracious, distancing anger, and making goodness and truth abound.’”
(Targum Onkelos. Exodus 33:22…34:6)

The Logos is described as the establisher and incarnation of grace and truth:


“Grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.”
(John 1:17)

14. The Memra of the LORD and the Logos are the Source of the Law.

The Memra gave the Law to Moses:

“Moses came and called for the elders of the people. He presented to them all these words which the Lord had commanded him. All the people responded in unison, and said, ‘All that the Memra of the Lord has spoken we will do!’”
(Targum Neofiti. Exodus 19:7-8)

The Memra gave the Ten Commandments to Moses:

“The Memra of the Lord spoke all these words [the Ten Commandments], saying…”
(Targum Neofiti. Exodus 20:1a)

When Moses recounts the Law to the people, he says he received the Law from the Memra:

“I was standing between the Memra of the Lord and you at that time, to tell you the Lord’s Memra…”
(Targum Onkelos & Targum Neofiti. Deuteronomy 5:5)

Notice how Memra is used twice in the Targum of Deuteronomy 5:5:

Memra is first used to describe the divine figure who delivered the Law to Moses.
Memra is used a second time as a synonym for the Law itself.
God, the Logos, gave the Law to Moses:

“For the Law was given through Moses;”
(John 1:17a)

Tough Topics | How Do Ancient Jewish Teachings and Greek Philosophy Converge in John’s Gospel?

This TBS article has three parts to it as it further explains what the Targums were, the concept of the Memra, and verse by verse comparison of what the Targums say of the Memra alongside what John says of the Logos in the prologue to his Gospel account.

thebiblesays.com

J.

 

[civic]

Using AI may seem like a logical response to bible questions, but there are key problems with this:

AI would probably come up with the greatest things about being an atheist if you asked what is great about being an atheist. It's just input output.

AI does not have the Holy Spirit illuminating it's understanding.

AI does not necessarily draw from the best contextual reasoning of scripture. I'm not sure how it analyzes scripture.

Expound on scripture YOURSELF... don't ask AI!

Amen

 

[Johann]

What was AI asked here?

Do you have a basic understanding of Grammar and the morphology of both Hebrew and Greek?

I used paint to post John 1.1 to prove your assertion flat out error using Scripture4All.

Bereshis (in the Beginning) was the Dvar Hashem [YESHAYAH 55:11; BERESHIS 1:1], and the Dvar Hashem was agav (along with) Hashem [MISHLE 8:30; 30:4], and the Dvar Hashem was nothing less, by nature, than Elohim! [Psa 56:11(10); Yn 17:5; Rev. 19:13]
Joh 1:2 Bereshis (in the Beginning) this Dvar Hashem was with Hashem [Prov 8:30].
Joh 1:3 All things through him came to be, and without him came to be not one thing which came into being. [Ps 33:6,9; Prov 30:4]
Joh 1:4 In him was Chayyim (Life) and the Chayyim (Life) was the Ohr (Light) of Bnei Adam. [TEHILLIM 36:10 (9)]
OJB.

You gave a warning NOT to use AI and now you want to know what was asked?! Are you interested?

What Bible software do YOU use in enhancing your studies?

If you are serious I will answer, but I will NOT be put to the test in a negative manner-this is now the 2nd time a thread on "warning" not to use AI and the 2nd time I'm proving it's usefulness.

Thanks.

J.

 

[360watt]

Do you have a basic understanding of Grammar and the morphology of both Hebrew and Greek?

I used paint to post John 1.1 to prove your assertion flat out error using Scripture4All.

Bereshis (in the Beginning) was the Dvar Hashem [YESHAYAH 55:11; BERESHIS 1:1], and the Dvar Hashem was agav (along with) Hashem [MISHLE 8:30; 30:4], and the Dvar Hashem was nothing less, by nature, than Elohim! [Psa 56:11(10); Yn 17:5; Rev. 19:13]
Joh 1:2 Bereshis (in the Beginning) this Dvar Hashem was with Hashem [Prov 8:30].
Joh 1:3 All things through him came to be, and without him came to be not one thing which came into being. [Ps 33:6,9; Prov 30:4]
Joh 1:4 In him was Chayyim (Life) and the Chayyim (Life) was the Ohr (Light) of Bnei Adam. [TEHILLIM 36:10 (9)]
OJB.

You gave a warning NOT to use AI and now you want to know what was asked?! Are you interested?

What Bible software do YOU use in enhancing your studies?

If you are serious I will answer, but I will NOT be put to the test in a negative manner-this is now the 2nd time a thread on "warning" not to use AI and the 2nd time I'm proving it's usefulness.

Thanks.

J.

Of course it is useful. I'm saying if someone is going to answer bible questions..AI isn't the best.

But I'm glad it was warned to not use it.

 

[Johann]

Of course it is useful. I'm saying if someone is going to answer bible questions..AI isn't the best.

But I'm glad it was warned to not use it.

See your contradictory statement?

Please exegete this for me-

Rom 5:12 ΔιὰG1223|PREP|Because of τοῦτοG3778|D-ASN|this, ὥσπερG5618|CONJ|just as δι᾽G1223|PREP|through ἑνὸςG1520|A-GSM|one ἀνθρώπουG444|N-GSM|man ἡG3588|T-NSF|- ἁμαρτίαG266|N-NSF|sin εἰςG1519|PREP|into τὸνG3588|T-ASM|the κόσμονG2889|N-ASM|world εἰσῆλθενG1525|G5627|V-2AAI-3S|entered, καὶG2532|CONJ|and διὰG1223|PREP|through τῆςG3588|T-GSF|- ἁμαρτίαςG266|N-GSF|sin, ὁG3588|T-NSM|- θάνατοςG2288|N-NSM|death; καὶG2532|CONJ|also οὕτωςG3779|ADV|thus εἰςG1519|PREP|to πάνταςG3956|A-APM|all ἀνθρώπουςG444|N-APM|men ὁG3588|T-NSM|- θάνατοςG2288|N-NSM|death διῆλθενG1330|G5627|V-2AAI-3S|passed, ἐφ᾽G1909|PREP|for ᾧG3739|R-DSN|that πάντεςG3956|A-NPM|all ἥμαρτονG264|G5627|V-2AAI-3P|sinned.

No?

Rom 5:12 because-of01 N1 This02 even-as03 through04 One05 Human06 The07 sin08 Into09 The10 world11 entered12 And13 through14 The15 sin16 The17 Death18 And19 Thus20 Into21 All22 Humans23 The24 Death25 passed-through26 On27 Which28 All29 sinned30

No?

Rom 5:12 δια τουτο ωσπερ δι ενος ανθρωπου η αμαρτια εις τον κοσμον εισηλθεν και δια της αμαρτιας ο θανατος και ουτως εις παντας ανθρωπους ο θανατος διηλθεν εφ ω παντες ημαρτον

No?

Rom 5:12 Because of Διὰ this, τοῦτο just as ὥσπερ - ἡ sin ἁμαρτία entered εἰσῆλθεν, into εἰς the τὸν world κόσμον through δι’ one ἑνὸς man, ἀνθρώπου and καὶ - ὁ death θάνατος, through διὰ - τῆς sin, ἁμαρτίας so οὕτως also καὶ - ὁ death θάνατος passed διῆλθεν, to εἰς all πάντας men, ἀνθρώπους because ἐφ’ . . . ᾧ all πάντες sinned. ἥμαρτον·

No?

Rom 5:12 On account of this, just as by one man sin entered into the world, and by means of sin, death; and so death passed through unto all men, because all ... sinned:

The Ultimate Cross Reference Treasury.

as by. Rom_5:19, *Gen_3:6, *Psa_51:5.
one man. Rom_5:14; Rom_5:17, Gen_3:6-18, 1Co_15:21-22; 1Co_15:45; 1Co_15:48, %2Co_11:3 x, %1Ti_2:14 x, Heb_7:9.
sin. Note: "the sin—the death;" where the article seems to point out the sin and the death, which by Adam’s transgression entered the world. Isa_43:27.
world. Gr. kosmos, +Mat_4:8.
and death. **Rom_6:23, +*Gen_2:17; *Gen_3:19; *Gen_3:22-24, +*Ezk_18:4, *1Co_15:21, **Jas_1:15, Rev_20:14-15.
so death. T144, Rom_5:17, Gen_5:5; Gen_6:17; Gen_50:24, Num_19:11, Hos_13:1, Luk_8:42, 1Co_15:22, *Heb_9:27.
passed upon all men. Rom_5:15 note, Rom_5:18, Gen_5:3, Lev_12:2, Num_27:3, Job_14:4, Psa_49:10; +*Psa_51:5, *Act_17:26, 1Co_15:22, *2Co_5:14, Heb_7:9; Heb_9:27.
for that. or, in whom. +*Psa_51:5, Isa_43:27, 2Co_5:4, Php_3:12; Php_4:10 g.
all. **Rom_3:23, Psa_14:1, +*Ecc_7:20, Gal_3:22, Eph_2:3, Jas_3:2, **1Jn_1:8-10.
have sinned. Aorist tense refers the sins of all to the act of Adam; it describes a past moment already referred to (grammatically as in 2Co_5:4; Php_3:12; Php_4:10) [Liddon]. FS15D, +Mrk_11:32, Rom_5:17; Rom_5:21, Rom_3:19-20; Rom_8:10, Num_27:3, Hos_13:1.


I'm not trying to be facetious, @360watt, but rather highlighting the inherent contradiction in your statement. Since this is an Apologetics forum, careful reasoning and consistency are essential.

With that in mind, how do you intend to exegete this passage, brother?

Shalom.

J.

 

[Dizerner]

Expound on scripture YOURSELF... don't ask AI!

It's no different than a commentary, and can help you with syntax.

Some people don't like commentaries I realize, you do have to be discerning with them.

 

[360watt]

It is different to a commentary when the commentator is led by the Holy Spirit.

I can see that it isn't different if it is assembling info from commentators.

But if it is reading scripture itself and saying what it means...without them..without Godly people empowered by the Holy Spirit.. then it's just like a dictionary trying to give a sermon.

 

[Dizerner]

The majority of commentator's aren't led by the Holy Spirit anyway.

That's why we should always be in prayer.

But if you just need to understand the language or consider possibilities, there's nothing ungodly about that.

 

[360watt]

See your contradictory statement?

Please exegete this for me-

Rom 5:12 ΔιὰG1223|PREP|Because of τοῦτοG3778|D-ASN|this, ὥσπερG5618|CONJ|just as δι᾽G1223|PREP|through ἑνὸςG1520|A-GSM|one ἀνθρώπουG444|N-GSM|man ἡG3588|T-NSF|- ἁμαρτίαG266|N-NSF|sin εἰςG1519|PREP|into τὸνG3588|T-ASM|the κόσμονG2889|N-ASM|world εἰσῆλθενG1525|G5627|V-2AAI-3S|entered, καὶG2532|CONJ|and διὰG1223|PREP|through τῆςG3588|T-GSF|- ἁμαρτίαςG266|N-GSF|sin, ὁG3588|T-NSM|- θάνατοςG2288|N-NSM|death; καὶG2532|CONJ|also οὕτωςG3779|ADV|thus εἰςG1519|PREP|to πάνταςG3956|A-APM|all ἀνθρώπουςG444|N-APM|men ὁG3588|T-NSM|- θάνατοςG2288|N-NSM|death διῆλθενG1330|G5627|V-2AAI-3S|passed, ἐφ᾽G1909|PREP|for ᾧG3739|R-DSN|that πάντεςG3956|A-NPM|all ἥμαρτονG264|G5627|V-2AAI-3P|sinned.

No?

Rom 5:12 because-of01 N1 This02 even-as03 through04 One05 Human06 The07 sin08 Into09 The10 world11 entered12 And13 through14 The15 sin16 The17 Death18 And19 Thus20 Into21 All22 Humans23 The24 Death25 passed-through26 On27 Which28 All29 sinned30

No?

Rom 5:12 δια τουτο ωσπερ δι ενος ανθρωπου η αμαρτια εις τον κοσμον εισηλθεν και δια της αμαρτιας ο θανατος και ουτως εις παντας ανθρωπους ο θανατος διηλθεν εφ ω παντες ημαρτον

No?

Rom 5:12 Because of Διὰ this, τοῦτο just as ὥσπερ - ἡ sin ἁμαρτία entered εἰσῆλθεν, into εἰς the τὸν world κόσμον through δι’ one ἑνὸς man, ἀνθρώπου and καὶ - ὁ death θάνατος, through διὰ - τῆς sin, ἁμαρτίας so οὕτως also καὶ - ὁ death θάνατος passed διῆλθεν, to εἰς all πάντας men, ἀνθρώπους because ἐφ’ . . . ᾧ all πάντες sinned. ἥμαρτον·

No?

Rom 5:12 On account of this, just as by one man sin entered into the world, and by means of sin, death; and so death passed through unto all men, because all ... sinned:

The Ultimate Cross Reference Treasury.

as by. Rom_5:19, *Gen_3:6, *Psa_51:5.
one man. Rom_5:14; Rom_5:17, Gen_3:6-18, 1Co_15:21-22; 1Co_15:45; 1Co_15:48, %2Co_11:3 x, %1Ti_2:14 x, Heb_7:9.
sin. Note: "the sin—the death;" where the article seems to point out the sin and the death, which by Adam’s transgression entered the world. Isa_43:27.
world. Gr. kosmos, +Mat_4:8.
and death. **Rom_6:23, +*Gen_2:17; *Gen_3:19; *Gen_3:22-24, +*Ezk_18:4, *1Co_15:21, **Jas_1:15, Rev_20:14-15.
so death. T144, Rom_5:17, Gen_5:5; Gen_6:17; Gen_50:24, Num_19:11, Hos_13:1, Luk_8:42, 1Co_15:22, *Heb_9:27.
passed upon all men. Rom_5:15 note, Rom_5:18, Gen_5:3, Lev_12:2, Num_27:3, Job_14:4, Psa_49:10; +*Psa_51:5, *Act_17:26, 1Co_15:22, *2Co_5:14, Heb_7:9; Heb_9:27.
for that. or, in whom. +*Psa_51:5, Isa_43:27, 2Co_5:4, Php_3:12; Php_4:10 g.
all. **Rom_3:23, Psa_14:1, +*Ecc_7:20, Gal_3:22, Eph_2:3, Jas_3:2, **1Jn_1:8-10.
have sinned. Aorist tense refers the sins of all to the act of Adam; it describes a past moment already referred to (grammatically as in 2Co_5:4; Php_3:12; Php_4:10) [Liddon]. FS15D, +Mrk_11:32, Rom_5:17; Rom_5:21, Rom_3:19-20; Rom_8:10, Num_27:3, Hos_13:1.


I'm not trying to be facetious, @360watt, but rather highlighting the inherent contradiction in your statement. Since this is an Apologetics forum, careful reasoning and consistency are essential.

With that in mind, how do you intend to exegete this passage, brother?

Shalom.

J.

I could look up my Strongs book and then look at the context of the passages in prayer.

That would be it.

 

[Dizerner]

Strong's is just a gloss, it's not very comprehensive and can even potentially be misleading.

If you can't buy a legit lexicon, at least use Thayer's and BDB, they are available free.