So it goes ...
- Reaction score
- London UK
]"Jesus" qualifies as a name in the sense of referring to an individual without regards to his role, but "Word of God" is a role, not the intrinsic name of a person. We know his role in Christianity (Word of God), and his historical name (Jesus) but what's his identity? What does he mean to us? I believe that is what is being addressed in Revelation 19:12. The exact meaning of Christ is a mystery. We can only see parts of the concept in the written text, but not the whole thing. It's because of our limited scope of knowledge and understanding as human beings.
It might be worth considering the Gospel of John, specifically the prologue.
'Word' is a Latin translation of 'Logos', and in that sense the Logos of God is neither name nor role, but the Being of God.
Another useful commentary is De Trinitate of St Augustine, Book IX, or Aquinas Summa Theologicae, First Part, questions 27-43. Here are discussed such terms as analogy and the limitations of language generally.
The logic of such arguments often leads one to assume that Jesus is then but a pointer towards an abstract metaphysical principle ... certainly John was insistent that Jesus Christ is the incarnate reality of the paradigmatic principle, not simpy a pointer towards it.
For some, Scripture as the Eternally Spoken Word is 'alive' today as it was in the moment the words left the Lord's lips, and to read Scripture is to dialogue with God — this is called lectio divina — another 'secret' of the Christian Tradition. In light of a significant body of evidence along these lines, I would not be too quick to dispose of Scripture on the basis of a neologism.
As we cannot meet Christ in the flesh today, as it were, we can meet Him in Scripture ... but as much as we know God, there is always more to know, as God is Infinite ...