This very seemingly ambiguous line out of the Bible (John 1.1), seems almost a tautology, or is it? “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word is God. It seems this statement begs for meaning. Could the word of God be exclusively to mean --what we use when we want to imply “consciousness”? Consequently , then, can “consciousness” be what was with god, and God” BE that very "consciousness? And finally if God “IS” Consciousness, is that the beginning ? Therefore “IS” God THE BEGINNING? (The AlPHA AND OMEGA Christ talks about?). But, alpha and omega are not linearly described anymore, but functionally-circularly,can this be the eternity of the garden–? Implication being, that it is future generations to discover? And then what? And does this Eternity --THE RETURN to the garden (of realization)? There is a desperate need to really, really understand what is going on here, and no accusations of reading into the scripture will suffice here.
A “word” refers to an influence on the mind, a concept (but not a “complete thought of action”).
To"cast" something means to form something into a more solid structure, a “form”.
When someone is “casting a spell”, they are “formulating an influence”.
When you spell a “word”, you are formulating an influence, “casting the word”.
“In the beginning, there was The Influence, The Influence was with God (the Cause of influence), and The Influence was God (The Influence causes itself again - past creates the present).”
Go-spel == Spell of influence == “The Word” == God
In Quantum Physics;
Standard Model == Go-spel == Spell of Influence == “The Word” == God
Saint James, are you trying to reinterpret the opening of the so-called gospel of John? Are you speaking of the Logos? What do you do with “And the word became flesh and dwelt among us?”
Well, if “The Word” means “The Influence”, what do you think it means.
obe
Could perhaps mean that all informations are primarily in one place, = the word + with god, then that as like our thoughts are part of what we are, and are words, the word is in both us and god in that way.
This is perhaps truer than saying simply that we are the word, because we can stop words from forming in our minds, or can be thinking visually, listening to music [and being fully involved in it] and mind is in that instance not a word.
Then we consider the alpha and the omega;
Could it be that in the garden we departed from a language we shared with god, and that the return is to arrive back at that former residency?
Language is so very important to the way we model the world, and to what world we pass on to the next generation. It is not the only thing by which our perceptions shape those constructions, being in the world requires a world to be in [the garden], and the world itself [as the serpent?] also shapes our image of it.
Is there a path by which we may come to know the world, and by that remove the serpent from the garden? Or can only the person who is not of the world do that for us, take us back to innocence but in full knowledge. Is that then a shared path within which we must play our part?
So what happens then! Lets go there, and say we are in the reformed garden, does the universe change or cease to exist? [hope all the alien species are also in tune with all this lol]. Would humans be taken to another realm which is like earth but completely different [is a transformed earth], would we be equally like humans but completely different?
I’ll assume a less literal interpretation.
Edit; perhaps it’s a reference to the journey of life, that we are taken along a road upon which there are demons, and we all fall in some measure because we don’t know the world. Eventually we find our way by knowing, and in that may find a release, a return to the garden now pacified?
In both interpretations I cannot find an eternal resolution, though they are otherwise helpful metaphors.
e.g. What are we to become?
Why the world then not the world?
_
It must mean :
The influence became flesh and dwelt among us, to produce the Christian influence. And the influence continued to develop the Christian influence until the Christian influence became the state religion. And the influence continued, producing the crusades and inquisitions.
Over time the influence split the Christian influence. And in the end, or up to now, the influence broke the Christian influence into more than 41,000 sects, and over 2 billion Christians, influencing now into all kinds of directions.
So what will the influence produce today? Where will the influence take us from here?
Is the influence God?
There are many kinds of influence. A logos is a particular kind of influence. Logos became a technical term in philosophy, beginning with Heraclitus, who used the term for a principle of order and knowledge. Philo distinguished between logos prophorikos (the uttered word) and the logos endiathetos (the word remaining within).The Stoics also spoke of the logos spermatikos (the generative principle of the Universe). Based on the context of John 1, I’d say the latter meaning applies most directly i.e. logos as the creative, generating word.
Perhaps replace ‘word’ with ‘information‘, and we may be somewhat nearer to what is meant?
I don’t think it was a coincidence that both Heraclitus, who coined the word Logos, and the gospel of John, who used the word Logos, were both of Ephesus. Logos must have been the mindset in Ephesus.
I seriously doubt that John used the actual word “Logos”. Logos is a particular concept that the translators recognized. It means “the fundamental reason/logic” (ie. “First Cause”, “God”, or in QM “Standard Model”).
I seriously doubt that John wrote the gospel of John. Not to mention that Acts 4:13 says both John and Peter were illiterate.
Btw, another “word” for “Logos” is “ToE” - “Theory of Everything”.
Reference please? Or are you being arbitrary?
In the Chinese Bible Logos is translated as Dao, or Tao. That’s a good fit.
“Arbitrary”?? 
Yep. Same concept; “The Way” [it All works].
…or were you being arbitrary?
What, no reference? Are you pulling that the Logos is ToE out yer backside?
Here’s my reference :
“Tao is God, according to the Chinese who translate Gospel John 1:1 thus: “In the beginning was the Tao, and the Tao was with God, and the Tao was God.” According to the English translation of the Bible, the Word is God.” http://www.thegreattao.com/html/introfounderyelemp.html. You can find much more proof that the Logos is translated in Chinese into Tao all over the web.
Now how about a valid reference to back your claim? You know better than to make claims without backing them up.
When you actually know the Logos that they were talking about, their efforts to translate what other people meant, doesn’t carry much weight.
Yes, I pulled it out of my “backside” (which is more respectable than most other sources on many subjects 
).
Or were you looking for a debate?
No, just looking for some reference or source documentation that Logos is the ToE.
First of all we don’t have a theory of everything. Second, how does the Logos relate to the ToE? Does it provide the missing answer to the ToE?
The Logos (“reasoning”) of Jesus was proposed as their “Theory of Everything”.
Quantum Mechanics’s “Theory of Everything” is the “Standard Model”. That is why they were so enthused about trying to find the Higg’s boson.
But Rational Metaphysics has the real ToE, “Principles of Affectance”, and includes all of their concerns and more.
Simply put, what the writer was expressing was that Christ, as the Word, was with the father from the beginning through all of eternity…he did not just have his origin at the moment of conception. Sort of an expression of the Blessed Trinity (along with the Holy Spirit) for those who believe.
Though I’m agnostic, I might subtitute “Word” used here for Reality.
In the beginning was the reality. Now it finally makes sense. Thanks AD …