So, why insert conversation for word when translating logos? Generally, word is the accepted translation. I think yesterday's exercise points up the meaning of word; clarifies our understanding of it. I'd always thought of it as something static - a noun. In the beginning there was the word - plonk! Conversation implies something dynamic and participative. And so does word. What is the point of a word if it is not to communicate? In context, word must mean more than a word on the page or in speech. It implies a response. Word implies conversation, at least in this context.
Let's not be diverted into asking who the conversation was with. It is however interesting the refrain in the opening verses of Genesis is that 'God saw that it was good'. Again this implies some sort of conversation or response. If God knew it was going to be good, if God had embarked on an enterprise with a definite and clear outcome, why say this? God acted (spoke?) and received a response, checked to see it was good before moving onto the next stage. God saw it was good because God was seeking a response to her/his actions. It admits the possibility it might not have been good. If there were not that possibility - why look, let alone remark upon it? The pattern is act, check, act. The process any creative artist might adopt.
This implies a universe not created by a pefectionist who pre-determines all things from the beginning. But a universe where the outcome is predetermined but the means to the outcome are not predictable at the outset. I will return to this in more detail at some later date.
One last point, we speak of ecumenical conversations - am I implying some common ground between these prosaic conversations and the great universal conversation which started all things and keeps them going? Yes I am. This might sound outrageous - my point is that the most prosaic conversations contain the seeds of the same creativity we find in God's creative act. That is all conversations are potentially creative; free conversations will always lead to the creation of new things. This is what the Quakers mean by the spirit of the meeting. They do not mean consensus but a new creation. All our conversations are important. Ecumenical conversations are a small number of the conversations that are going on - they are likely to be more effective if seen in their cosmic context.
Comments