Heidegger

Please forgive my eavesdropping in discussions almost completely
beyond me, but was not John doing the only thing that he could do –
which was; moving the discussion to a more intelligible,
contemporary, rational understanding of Jesus? In the beginning,
wasn’t Jesus first _the Way_ and eventually the Way AND the Word; and
by the time of John’s interpretation just _the Word_? It seems that
Logos was an ideal translatory term for John to use. I always thought
that it must have meant all the right things for him (more than just
‘word,’ as such) and moved the level of intelligibility right where
it was destined to go: into a detached and more Platonic understanding.

On Jul 7, 2007, at 6:56 PM, heidegger-request at an-archos.com wrote:

> Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 18:40:34 -0500
> From: allen scult
> Subject: Re: logos +
> To: Discussions pertaining to the philosophy of Martin Heidegger
>
> Message-ID:
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
>
> Oh, and one more thing. Such an extraordinary event could only
> happen bin itself, of itself, from out of itself. Perfectly placed
> in time and space to be what it is. The first phenomenon from which
> come all other phenomena come, at least as it is given to us to
> understand them. And so John’s correct misreading of Genesis One: “In
> the beginning was the word. . .,” or “God,” if you wish; it amounts
> to the same thing.
>
> Allen

Posted on Monday, July 9th, 2007 at 5:15 pm
comment | rss 2.0 | trackback