John 1:1

[Gorgias]

Logos does not =word.

You’re asking us to be precise in our thought; I would ask the same of you…

I didn’t say “logos = word”; rather, “the word ‘logos’ = the word ‘word’”. This is a valid statement.

“word” refers to the concept" signifier.

Word can refer to the concept ‘signifier’. In a theological context, in which the Word of God has a specific meaning, it does not carry that connotation.

"Logos refers to an animating principle, metaphorically speaking the substance behind the form,the principle of rationality behind a rational syllogism. Logos does not refer to a particular syllogism.

This sounds like something akin to Platonic theology. Is that what you’re asserting – that the Bible needs to embrace a Platonic theology in its hermeneutic of Scriptural translation?

Of course, in a Thomistic framework, the ‘animating principle’ would be the soul (nous) not the word (logos).

So, you’re going to need to flesh out your argument a bit, providing a justification of your case, rather than just freely asserting it…

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Here is a Catholic Encyclopedia article on the Logos.

newadvent.org/cathen/09328a.htm