Chapter 5 of 21 · 3837 words · ~19 min read

Part 5

LOGAU, FRIEDRICH, FREIHERR VON (1604-1655), German epigrammatist, was born at Brockut, near Nimptsch, in Silesia, in June 1604. He was educated at the gymnasium of Brieg and subsequently studied law. He then entered the service of the duke of Brieg. In 1644 he was made "ducal councillor." He died at Liegnitz on the 24th of July 1655. Logau's epigrams, which appeared in two collections under the pseudonym "Salomon von Golaw" (an anagram of his real name) in 1638 (_Erstes Hundert Teutscher Reimensprüche_) and 1654 (_Deutscher Sinngedichte drei Tausend_), show a marvellous range and variety of expression. He had suffered bitterly under the adverse conditions of the time; but his satire is not merely the outcome of personal feeling. In the turbulent age of the Thirty Years' War he was one of the few men who preserved intact his intellectual integrity and judged his contemporaries fairly. He satirized with unsparing hand the court life, the useless bloodshed of the war, the lack of national pride in the German people, and their slavish imitation of the French in customs, dress and speech. He belonged to the _Fruchtbringende Gesellschaft_ under the name _Der Verkleinernde_, and regarded himself as a follower of Martin Opitz; but he did not allow such ties to influence his independence or originality.

Logau's _Sinngedichte_ were edited in 1759 by G. E. Lessing and K. W. Ramler, who first drew attention to their merits; a second edition appeared in 1791. A critical edition was published by G. Eitner in 1872, who also edited a selection of Logau's epigrams for the _Deutsche Dichter des XVII. Jahrhunderts_ (vol. iii., 1870); there is also a selection by H. Oesterley in Kürschner's _Deutsche Nationalliteratur_, vol. xxviii. (1885). See H. Denker, _Beiträge zur literarischen Würdigung Logaus_ (1889); W. Heuschkel, _Untersuchungen über Ränders und Lessings Bearbeitung Logauscher Sinngedichte_ (1901).

LOGIA, a title used to describe a collection of the sayings of Jesus Christ ([Greek: logia Iêsou]) and therefore generally applied to the "Sayings of Jesus" discovered in Egypt by B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. There is some question as to whether the term is rightly used for this purpose. It does not occur in the Papyri in this sense. Each "saying" is introduced by the phrase "Jesus says" ([Greek: legei]) and the collection is described in the introductory words of the 1903 series as [Greek: logoi] not as [Greek: logia]. Some justification for the employment of the term is found in early Christian literature. Several writers speak of the [Greek: logia tou kuriou] or [Greek: ta kuriaka logia], i.e. oracles of (or concerning) the Lord. Polycarp, for instance, speaks of "those who pervert the oracles of the Lord." (Philipp. 7), and Papias, as Eusebius tells us, wrote a work with the title "Expositions of the Oracles of the Lord." The expression has been variously interpreted. It need mean no more (Lightfoot, _Essays on Supernatural Religion_, 172 seq.) than narratives of (or concerning) the Lord; on the other hand, the phrase is capable of a much more definite meaning, and there are many scholars who hold that it refers to a document which contained a collection of the sayings of Jesus. Some such document, we know, must lie at the base of our Synoptic Gospels, and it is quite possible that it may have been known to and used by Papias. It is only on this assumption that the use of the term Logia in the sense described above can be justified.

"The Sayings," to which the term Logia is generally applied, consist of (a) a papyrus leaf containing seven or eight sayings of Jesus discovered in 1897, (b) a second leaf containing five more sayings discovered in 1903, (c) two fragments of unknown Gospels, the former published in 1903, the latter in 1907. All these were found amongst the great mass of papyri acquired by the Egyptian Exploration Fund from the ruins of Oxyrhynchus, one of the chief early Christian centres in Egypt, situated some 120 m. S. of Cairo.

The eight "sayings" discovered in 1897 are as follows:--

1. ... [Greek: kai tote diablepseis ekbalein to karphos to en tô ophthalmô tou adelphou sou].

2. [Greek: Legei Iêsous ean mê nêsteusête ton kosmon ou mê eurête tên basileian tou theou. kai ean mê sabbatisête to sabbaton ouk opsesthe ton patera].

3. [Greek: Legei Iêsous e[s]tên en mesô tou kosmou kai en sarki ôpsthên autois, kai euron pantas methuontas kai oudena euron dipsônta en autois, kai ponei ê psychê mou epi tois huiois tôn anthrôpôn, hoti typhloi eisin tê kardia autô[n] k[ai] ou ble[pousin]]....

4. [Illegible: possibly joins on to 3] ... [Greek: [t]ên ptôcheian].

5. [Greek: [Leg]ei [Iêsous hop]ou ean ôsin [b, ouk] e[isi]n atheoi kai h[o]pou e[is] estin monos, [le]gô, egô eimi met aut[ou] egei[r]on ton lithon kakei heurêseis me, schison to xylon kagô ekei eimi].

6. [Greek: Legei Iêsous ouk estin dektos prophêtês en tê patridi aut[o]u, oude iatpos poiei therapeias eis tous ginôskontas auton].

7. [Greek: Legei Iêsous polisoi kodomêmenê ep' akron [o]rous hypsêlou kai estêrigmenê oute pe[s]ein dynatai oute kry[b]ênai].

8. [Greek: Legei Iêsous akoueis [e]is to hen ôtion sou to [de eteron synekleisas]].

Letters in brackets are missing in the original: letters which are dotted beneath are doubtful.

1. "... and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote that is in thy brother's eye."

2. "Jesus saith, Except ye fast to the world, ye shall in no wise find the kingdom of God; and except ye make the sabbath a real sabbath, ye shall not see the Father."

3. "Jesus saith, I stood in the midst of the world and in the flesh was I seen of them, and I found all men drunken, and none found I athirst among them, and my soul grieveth over the sons of men, because they are blind in their heart, and see not...."

4. "... poverty...."

5. "Jesus saith, Wherever there are two, they are not without God, and wherever there is one alone, I say, I am with him. Raise the stone and there thou shalt find me, cleave the wood and there am I."

6. "Jesus saith, A prophet is not acceptable in his own country, neither doth a physician work cures upon them that know him."

7. "Jesus saith, A city built upon the top of a high hill and stablished can neither fall nor be hid."

8. "Jesus saith, Thou hearest with one ear [but the other ear hast thou closed]."

The "sayings" of 1903 were prefaced by the following introductory statement:--

[Greek: hoi toioi hoi logoi hoi [... hous elalêsen Iê(sou)s ho zôn k[yrios? ... kai Thôma kai eipen [autois; pas hostis an tôn logôn tout[ôn akousê thanatou ou mê geusêtai.]

"These are the (wonderful?) words which Jesus the living (Lord) spake to ... and Thomas and he said unto (them) every one that hearkens to these words shall never taste of death."

The "sayings" themselves are as follows:--

(1) [Greek: [legei Iê(sou)s· mê pausasthô ho zê[tôn... heôs an heurê kai hotan heurê [thambêthêsetai kai thambêtheis basileusei ka[i basileusas anapaêsetai.]

(2) [Greek: legei I[ê(sous ... tines ... hoi helkontes hêmas [eis tên basileian ei hê basileia en oura[nô estin; ta peteina tou our[anou kai tôn thêriôn ho ti hypo tên gên est[in ê epi tês gês kai hoi ichthyes tês thala[ssês houtoi hoi helkon- tes hymas kai hê bas[ileia tôn ouranôn entos hymôn [e]sti [kai hostis an heauton gnô tautên heurê[sei... heautous gnôsesthe [kai eidêsete hoti huioi este humeis tou patros tou t[... gnôs(es)the heautous en[... kai hu eis este êpto[]

(3) [Greek: [ legei Iê(sou)s ouk apoknêsei anth[rôpos... rôn eperôtêsai pa[... rôn peri tou topou tê[s... sete hoti polloi esontai p[rôtoi eschatoi kai hoi eschatoi prôtoi kai [... sin.]

(4) [Greek: legei Iê(sou)s· [pan to mê empros- then tês opseôs sou kai [to kekrummenon apo sou apokalyph(th)êset{ai soi. ou gar es- tin krypton ho ou phane[ron genêsetai kai tethammenon ho o[uk egerthêsetai.]

(5) [Greek: [ex] etazousin auton ho[i mathêtai autou kai [le]gousin; pôs nêsteu[somen kai pôs... [ ... ] metha kai pôs [ ... [ ... k]ai ti paratêrês{omen... [ ... ]n? legei Iê(sou)s; [ ... [ ... ]eitai mê poeit[e... [ ... ]ês alêtheias an[ ... [ ... ]n a[p]okekr[y... [ ... ma] kari[os] estin [ ... [ ... ]ô est[i... [ ... ]in [ ... ]

1. "Jesus saith, Let not him who seeks ... cease until he finds and when he finds he shall be astonished; astonished he shall reach the kingdom and having reached the kingdom he shall rest."

2. "Jesus saith (ye ask? who are those) that draw us (to the kingdom if) the kingdom is in Heaven? ... the fowls of the air and all beasts that are under the earth or upon the earth and the fishes of the sea (these are they which draw) you and the kingdom of Heaven is within you and whosoever shall know himself shall find it. (Strive therefore?) to know yourselves and ye shall be aware that ye are the sons of the (Almighty?) Father; (and?) ye shall know that ye are in (the city of God?) and ye are (the city?)."

3. "Jesus saith, A man shall not hesitate ... to ask concerning his place (in the kingdom. Ye shall know) that many that are first shall be last and the last first and (they shall have eternal life?)."

4. "Jesus saith, Everything that is not before thy face and that which is hidden from thee shall be revealed to thee. For there is nothing hidden which shall not be made manifest nor buried which shall not be raised."

5. "His disciples question him and say, How shall we fast and how shall we (pray?) ... and what (commandment) shall we keep ... Jesus saith ... do not ... of truth ... blessed is he ..."

_The fragment of a lost Gospel_ which was discovered in 1903 contained originally about fifty lines, but many of them have perished and others are undecipherable. The translation, as far as it can be made out, is as follows:--

1-7. "(Take no thought) from morning until even nor from evening until morning either for your food what ye shall eat or for your raiment what ye shall put on. 7-13. Ye are far better than the lilies which grow but spin not. Having one garment what do ye (lack)?... 13-15. Who could add to your stature? 15-16. He himself will give you your garment. 17-23. His disciples say unto him, When wilt thou be manifest unto us and when shall we see thee? He saith, When ye shall be stripped and not be ashamed ... 41-46. He said, The key of knowledge ye hid: ye entered not in yourselves, and to them that were entering in, ye opened not."

_The second Gospel fragment_ discovered in 1907 "consists of a single vellum leaf, practically complete except at one of the lower corners and here most of the lacunae admit of a satisfactory solution." The translation is as follows:--

... before he does wrong makes all manner of subtle excuse. But give heed lest ye also suffer the same things as they: for the evil doers among men receive their reward not among the living only, but also await punishment and much torment. And he took them and brought them into the very place of purification and was walking in the temple. And a certain Pharisee, a chief priest, whose name was Levi, met them and said to the Saviour, Who gave thee leave to walk in this place of purification, and to see these holy vessels when thou hast not washed nor yet have thy disciples bathed their feet? But defiled thou hast walked in this temple, which is a pure place, wherein no other man walks except he has washed himself and changed his garments neither does he venture to see these holy vessels. And the Saviour straightway stood still with his disciples and answered him, Art thou then, being here in the temple, clean? He saith unto him, I am clean; for I washed in the pool of David and having descended by one staircase, I ascended by another and I put on white and clean garments, and then I came and looked upon these holy vessels. The Saviour answered and said unto him, Woe ye blind, who see not. Thou hast washed in these running waters wherein dogs and swine have been cast night and day and hast cleansed and wiped the outside skin which also the harlots and flute-girls anoint and wash and wipe and beautify for the lust of men; but within they are full of scorpions and all wickedness. But I and my disciples who thou sayest have not bathed have been dipped in the waters of eternal life which come from.... But woe unto thee....

These documents have naturally excited considerable interest and raised many questions. The papyri of the "sayings" date from the 3rd century and most scholars agree that the "sayings" themselves go back to the 2nd. The year A.D. 140 is generally assigned as the _terminus ad quem_. The problem as to their origin has been keenly discussed. There are two main types of theory. (1) Some suppose that they are excerpts from an uncanonical Gospel. (2) Others think that they represent an independent and original collection of sayings. The first theory has assumed three main forms. (a) Harnack maintains that they were taken from the Gospel according to the Egyptians. This theory, however, is based upon a hypothetical reconstruction of the Gospel in question which has found very few supporters. (b) Others have advocated the Gospel of the Hebrews as the source of the "sayings," on the ground of the resemblance between the first "saying" of the 1903 series and a well-authenticated fragment of that Gospel. The resemblance, however, is not sufficiently clear to support the conclusion. (c) A third view supposes that they are extracts from the Gospel of Thomas--an apocryphal Gospel dealing with the boyhood of Jesus. Beyond the allusion to Thomas in the introductory paragraph to the 1903 series, there seems to be no tangible evidence in support of this view. The second theory, which maintains that the papyri represent an independent collection of "sayings," seems to be the opinion which has found greatest favour. It has won the support of W. Sanday, H. B. Swete, Rendel Harris, W. Lock, Heinrici, &c. There is a considerable diversity of judgment, however, with regard to the value of the collection. (a) Some scholars maintain that the collection goes back to the 1st century and represents one of the earliest attempts to construct an account of the teaching of Jesus. They are therefore disposed to admit to a greater or less extent and with widely varying degrees of confidence the presence of genuine elements in the new matter. (b) Sanday and many others regard the sayings as originating early in the 2nd century and think that, though not "directly dependent on the Canonical Gospels," they have "their origin under conditions of thought which these Gospels had created." The "sayings" must be regarded as expansions of the true tradition, and little value is therefore to be attached to the new material.

With the knowledge at our disposal, it is impossible to reach an assured conclusion between these two views. The real problem, to which at present no solution has been found, is to account for the new material in the "sayings." There seems to be no motive sufficient to explain the additions that have been made to the text of the Gospels. It cannot be proved that the expansions have been made in the interests of any sect or heresy. Unless new discoveries provide the clue, or some reasonable explanation can otherwise be found, there seems to be no reason why we should not regard the "sayings" as containing material which ought to be taken into account in the critical study of the teaching of Jesus.

The 1903 Gospel fragment is so mutilated in many of its parts that it is difficult to decide upon its character and value. It appears to be earlier than 150, and to be taken from a Gospel which followed more or less closely the version of the teaching of Jesus given by Matthew and Luke. The phrase "when ye shall be stripped and not be ashamed" contains an idea which has some affinity with two passages found respectively in the Gospel according to the Egyptians and the so-called Second Epistle of Clement. The resemblance, however, is not sufficiently close to warrant the deduction that either the Gospel of the Egyptians or the Gospel from which the citation in 2 Clement is taken (if these two are distinct) is the source from which our fragment is derived.

The second Gospel fragment (1907) seems to be of later origin than the documents already mentioned. Grenfell and Hunt date the Gospel, from which it is an excerpt, about 200. There is considerable difficulty with regard to some of the details. The statement that an ordinary Jew was required to wash and change his clothes before visiting the inner court of the temple is quite unsupported by any other evidence. Nothing is known about "the place of purification" ([Greek: agneutêrion]) nor "the pool of David" ([Greek: limnê tou Daueid]). Nor does the statement that "the sacred vessels" were visible from the place where Jesus was standing seem at all probable. Grenfell and Hunt conclude therefore--"So great indeed are the divergences between this account and the extant and no doubt well-informed authorities with regard to the topography and ritual of the Temple that it is hardly possible to avoid the conclusion that much of the local colour is due to the imagination of the author who was aiming chiefly at dramatic effect and was not really well acquainted with the Temple. But if the inaccuracy of the fragment in this important respect is admitted the historical character of the whole episode breaks down and it is probably to be regarded as an apocryphal elaboration of Matt. xv. 1-20 and Mark vii. 1-23."

See the _Oxyrhynchus Papyri_, part i. (1897), part iv. (1904), part v. (1908). (H. T. A.)

LOGIC ([Greek: logikê], sc. [Greek: technê], the art of reasoning), the name given to one of the four main departments of philosophy, though its sphere is very variously delimited. The present article is divided into 1. _The Problems of Logic_, II. _History_.

I. _The Problems of Logic._

_Introduction._--Logic is the science of the processes of inference, what, then, is inference? It is that mental operation which proceeds by combining two premises so as to cause a consequent conclusion. Some suppose that we may infer from one premise by a so-called "immediate inference." But one premise can only reproduce itself in another form, e.g. all men are some animals; therefore some animals are men. It requires the combination of at least two premises to infer a conclusion different from both. There are as many kinds of inference as there are different ways of combining premises, and in the main three types:--

1. _Analogical Inference_, from particular to particular: e.g. border-war between Thebes and Phocis is evil; border-war between Thebes and Athens is similar to that between Thebes and Phocis; therefore, border-war between Thebes and Athens is evil.

2. _Inductive Inference_, from particular to universal: e.g. border-war between Thebes and Phocis is evil; all border-war is like that between Thebes and Phocis; therefore, all border-war is evil.

3. _Deductive or Syllogistic Inference_, from universal to particular, e.g. all border-war is evil; border-war between Thebes and Athens is border-war; therefore border-war between Thebes and Athens is evil.

In each of these kinds of inference there are three mental judgments capable of being expressed as above in three linguistic propositions; and the two first are the premises which are combined, while the third is the conclusion which is consequent on their combination. Each proposition consists of two terms, the subject and its predicate, united by the copula. Each inference contains three terms. In syllogistic inference the subject of the conclusion is the minor term, and its predicate the major term, while between these two extremes the term common to the two premises is the middle term, and the premise containing the middle and major terms is the major premise, the premise containing the middle and minor terms the minor premise. Thus in the example of syllogism given above, "border-war between Thebes and Athens" is the minor term, "evil" the major term, and "border-war" the middle term. Using S for minor, P for major and M for middle, and preserving these signs for corresponding terms in analogical and inductive inferences, we obtain the following formula of the three inferences:--

The love of unity has often made logicians attempt to resolve these three processes into one. But each process has a peculiarity of its own; they are similar, not the same. Analogical and inductive inference alike begin with a particular premise containing one or more instances; but the former adds a particular premise to draw a particular conclusion, the latter requires a universal premise to draw a universal conclusion. A citizen of Athens, who had known the evils of the border-war between Thebes and Phocis, would readily perceive the analogy of a similar war between Thebes and Athens, and conclude analogously that it would be evil; but he would have to generalize the similarity of all border-wars in order to draw the inductive conclusion that all alike are evil. Induction and deduction differ still more, and are in fact opposed, as one makes a particular premise the evidence of a universal conclusion, the other makes a universal premise evidence of a particular conclusion. Yet they are alike in requiring the generalization of the universal and the belief that there are classes which are whole numbers of similars. On this point both differ from inference by analogy, which proceeds entirely from particular premises to a particular conclusion. Hence we may redivide inference into particular inference by analogy and universal inference by induction and deduction. Universal inference is what we call reasoning; and its two species are very closely connected, because universal conclusions of induction become universal premises of deduction. Indeed, we often induce in order to deduce, ascending from particular to universal and descending from universal to particular in one act as it were; so that we may proceed either directly from particular to particular by analogical inference, or indirectly from particular through universal to particular by an inductive-deductive inference which might be called "perduction." On the whole, then, analogical, inductive and deductive inferences are not the same but three similar and closely connected processes.