Greetings, dear Metatron... and peace to you! I'm not sure if you know but paganism, as that word meant originally, wasn't necessarily in opposition to Christ. It became so when various rural folk delayed in accepting the teachings of the early church, as such was led by men who had deviated from the teachings of Christ (the "great apostasy"). A lot of "pagan" symbols, etc., were more cultural/regional/tribal than religious, going way back. It is religion that puts the bad "mark" on all paganism... while dilly-dallying in much of it themselves.
Even so, I don't get from the Wiki article that the term was "pre-Christ." To the contrary, actually. Indeed, Heraclitus, the man who coined the term was speaking about the same One that Lazarus ("John") wrote of:
"The writing of Heraclitus was the first place where the word logos was given special attention in ancient Greek philosophy, although Heraclitus seems to use the word with a meaning not significantly different from the way it was used in ordinary Greek of his time. For Heraclitus logos provided the link between rational discourse and the world's rational structure."
The latter part of this statement, while sounding very "wise" actually shows a lack of wisdom because that was not actually Heraclitus' intention. Rather it was to point out the futility of man's wisdom. For instance, when he stated:
This LOGOS holds always but humans always prove unable to understand it, both before hearing it and when they have first heard it. For though all things come to be in accordance with this LOGOS, humans are like the inexperienced when they experience such words and deeds as I set out, distinguishing each in accordance with its nature and saying how it is. But other people fail to notice what they do when awake, just as they forget what they do while asleep. —Diels-Kranz, 22B1
Here, Heraclitus is speaking OF the Word (Logos)... the Holy One of Israel. More accurately, of the SPIRIT of that One. Where the translators use the word "it" is the result of the same error when Bible translators referred to the holy spirit. Here, the correct word is "him/he" (however, those who did not KNOW that Word would not KNOW this truth; even so, "it" is accurate where one is referring solely to the spirit of that One and not the One himself, both of which relay the accurate message); when referring to holy spirit, however, the correct term would have been "it" (people believe that "him" is accurate because the spirit "speaks" - but the spirit is the life... the life is the blood... and the blood... SPEAKS. Hence, the holy spirit God, His blood, which He put in His Son... speaks. Like Abel's, but better).
So, the ACCURATE rendering of Heraclitu's words above would be:
This LOGOS holds always but humans always prove unable to understand him, both before hearing him and when they have first heard him. For though all things come to be in accordance with this LOGOS, humans are like the inexperienced when they experience such words and deeds as I set out, distinguishing each in accordance with its nature and saying how it is. But other people fail to notice what they do when awake, just as they forget what they do while asleep. —Diels-Kranz, 22B1
Here, Heraclitus was saying that unlike HIM, who knew the LOGOS and so was NOT inexperienced, so that the words and deeds HE set out, distinguishing each according to its nature and saying how they TRULY were, [other] humans, because of their INEXPERIENCE (and thus, lack of knowledge of the LOGOS) failed to notice these truths, as done and said by HIM... when they were AWAKE... as much as they forget what they do (forget) when they're asleep. That for such ones, being awake was NO DIFFERENT than being asleep.
The erroneous transliteration is a VERY common error in the Greek renderings and with renderings FROM the Greek... because, as Heraclitus stated, the people don't KNOW the LOGOS. And so, much of what was written with reference to him was misUNDERSTOOD and so mistranslated, mistransliterated... mistaught... and so misleading... to further misunderstanding. It was so with the Septuagint (LXX), the "Bible" from which virtually all modern-day Bible derive. Let's look at his other statements:
For this reason it is necessary to follow what is common. But although the LOGOS is common, most people live as if they had their own private understanding. —Diels-Kranz, 22B2
Heraclitus is NOT saying here that it is necessary for man to follow what is common, but that BECAUSE for their INEXPERIENCE, it is necessary for THEM to follow what was common to THEM (which was NOT the LOGOS). But he clarifies that it is the LOGOS that IS common... to all humans; however, MOST humans live as if they have some kind of "private" understanding... or "consciousness"... APART from that One. When we don't, none of us. Many just THINK they do... and so live accordingly.
Finally:
Listening not to me but to the LOGOS it is wise to agree that all things are one. —Diels-Kranz, 22B50 [17]
Here, he is simply speaking truth and admonishing his audiences as to that truth: not listen to HIM, but TO the LOGOS, wisdom would dictate such a one to acknowledge that there is only ONE [spirit]... borne of ONE consciousness... that ALL things are inter-connected so that there really is no individuality, as those who think they are of a different, separate consciousness, believe. They are not, and so in truth, there is no "private" understanding. There is only the illusion of such.
The article goes on to state:
"What logos means here is not certain: it may mean 'reason' or 'explanation' in the sense of an objective cosmic law; or it may signify nothing more than 'saying' or 'wisdom'. Yet, an independent existence of a universal logos was clearly suggested by Heraclitus. "
This statement is accurate on two levels: first, that the author and others who opined are NOT certain what Heraclitus meant (because they, too, do not know the LOGOS), and but it may signify "wisdom." To say "nothing more than", however, further shows that they did NOT know the LOGOS... because he IS "Wisdom." He is the Source and conduit for ALL truth and knowledge... which things have been given TO him to give to mankind:
"Does not wisdom keep calling out, and discernment keep giving forth his voice? On top of the heights, by the way, at the crossing of the roadways it has stationed itself. At the side of the gates, at the mouth of the town, at the going in of the entrances HE keeps crying loudly:
“To ? YOU , O men, I am calling, and my voice is to the sons of men. O inexperienced ones, understand shrewdness; and ? YOU ? stupid ones, understand heart. Listen, for it is about the foremost things thatI speak, and the opening of my lips is about uprightness. For my palate in low tones utters truth itself; and wickedness is something detestable to my lips. All the sayings of my mouth are in righteousness. Among them there is nothing twisted or crooked. All of them are straight to the discerning one, and upright to the ones finding knowledge. T AKE ? my discipline and not silver, and knowledge rather than choice gold. For wisdom is better than corals, and all other delights themselves cannot be made equal to it.
“I, wisdom, I have resided with shrewdness and I find even the knowledge of thinking abilities. The fear of JaHVeH means the hating of bad. Self-exaltation and pride and the bad way and the perverse mouth I have hated. I have counsel and practical wisdom. I—understanding; I have mightiness. By ME kings themselves keep reigning, and high officials themselves keep decreeing righteousness. By me princes themselves keep ruling as princes, and nobles are all judging in righteousness. Those loving ME I myself love, and those looking for ME are the ones that FIND ME. Riches and glory are with me, hereditary values and righteousness. MY fruitage is better than gold, even than refined gold, and my produce than choice silver. In the path of righteousness I walk, in the middle of the roadways of judgment, to cause those loving me to take possession of substance; and their storehouses I keep filled.
"JaHVeH Himself produced MEas the beginning of His way, the first of His achievements of long ago. From time indefiniteI was installed, from the start, from times earlier than the earth. When there were no watery deeps I was brought forthas with labor pains, when there were no springs heavily charged with water. Before the mountains themselves had been settled down, ahead of the hills, I was brought forth as with labor pains, when as yet he had not made the earth and the open spaces and the first part of the dust masses of the productive land. When he prepared the heavens I was there; when he decreed a circle upon the face of the watery deep, when he made firm the cloud masses above, when he caused the fountains of the watery deep to be strong, when he set for the sea his decree that the waters themselves should not pass beyond his order, when he decreed the foundations of the earth, thenI came to be beside him as a master worker, and I came to be the one he was specially fond of day by day, I being glad before him all the time, being glad at the productive land of his earth, andthe things I was fond of were with the sons of men."
Because they are the same Greek word, autos (which means "he, she, it"), these erroneous transliterations between "it" and "he" are a VERY common error in the Greek renderings and with renderings FROM the Greek. Of course, you might say that the quotes above are from the Hebrew part of the Bible; however, the modern Hebrew section of the Bible is nothing more than a translation from Greek. From the Hebrew/Aramaic, to the Greek (Septuagint), then back to Hebrew (FROM Greek). So this particular error is rampant in both the modern OT AND the NT.
For some reasons, folks... scholars (?)... choose to believe that Heraclitus did not believe in the MOST Holy One of Israel... because he was a Greek philosopher. As they also believe of Socrates. But this is erroneous thinking. Both not only believe in that One... but knew His Word - the LOGOS - His Son and Christ, JAHESHUA, the Holy One of Israel. That one was a Greek philosopher didn't negate a belief in the God of Israel; indeed, Israel resided AMONG the Greeks during the time these men lived and it would be absolutely reasonable to think that these men, these philosophers, would have looked into the teachings related to the Israelite God. Greece was the world empire at the time... and so Greek was the common language (hence, the translation of the Hebrew writings to Greek by Greek-speaking Jews - so that those who did not speak HEBREW could read "in the Law" as they were supposed to). Indeed, in his oration to the Greek Senate, Socrates repeatedly told them who had sent him to speak with them, to try and turn them around: "The True God." Unfortunately, many overlook this truth because they are more concerned with HOW Socrates spoke to the Senate (in a questioning manner that evoked thought, rather than direct comments/responses)... than in WHAT he said to them.
But spirit beings mostly speak this way, in a questioning style. From the MOST Holy One of Israel... who questioned everyone from Adham to Job, David, and more... to Christ, who questioned his disciples, the corrupt priests, and the blind religious leaders... to even the Adversary, who questioned not only Eve, but the Most Holy One Himself. It is their PRIMARY manner of communicating with man... in a way that prompts you to tell THEM rather than them telling YOU (unless you have that relationship).
Why? Because it's more difficult for humans to hide the truth when prompted this way. It evokes thought... and since most of us are thoughtLESS... we immediately respond and that response, since it is immediate, is usually the truth. Even if we didn't want to TELL the truth.
Anyway, I hope this helps and, again, I am not sure your article indicates a dichotomy between the Logos (Word)... and paganism.
Again, peace to you!
A slave of Christ,
SA
