臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

在這本論文我們要討論老子的，斐羅的邏各斯，和耶稣。 老子的道有兩個功能： 宇宙功能和Anagogical 功能。邏各斯也有兩個功能。在第一部分我們要描述宇宙功能。在第二個部分我們要說明 Anagogical 功能。

In this Thesis, we are going to compare the three different traditions, ranging from Laozi, Philo of Alexandria and John Gospel, with Philo as the connector between Laotzu and John.
So the main concept that we are going to discuss are Tao and Logos.
Tao and Logos have a twofold functions: Cosmological and Anagogical functions. Our efforts to compare their concepts based on these two functions.
In the first part: our focus is more to Cosmological function, as will be presented in chapter II and III.
In the second part: our focus is more to anagogical functions, as will be presented in chapter IV.
Based on these two functions: we will see the the Similarities and differences of their concepts.

CHAPTER I: GENERAL INTRODUCTION ........................................................................01
1. Motivation and Purpose .................................................................................01
2. Theme and Topic .............................................................................................03
3. A Short Review of Research Sources ...............................................................05
4. Methodology ..................................................................................................15
5. Structure of Argument ....................................................................................17
CHAPTER II : LAOZI’S TAO AND PHILO’S LOGOS ..........................................................20
1. Laozi’s concept of Tao .....................................................................................20
1.1. General Meaning of Tao .......................................................................20
1.2. Non-Being, Being and Ziran .................................................................21
1.3. Tao as Non-Being and Being ................................................................23
1.4. Tao and Te ............................................................................................31
2. Philo’s Concept of Logos .................................................................................32
2.1. General Meaning of Logos ...................................................................32
2.2. Logos as God’s Mind ............................................................................34
2.3. God as Unintelligible and Unnamable .................................................36
2.4. Logos as Imago Dei and Pattern of the World .....................................38
2.5. Logos as Deus ......................................................................................43
CHAPTER III: COMPARISON BETWEEN LAOZI’S TAO AND PHILO’S LOGOS ..................44
1. Similarities Concepts ......................................................................................44
1.1. Hiddenness and Manifestation ............................................................44
1.2. Mediatory-Instrument and Pattern .....................................................46
2. Differences Concepts ......................................................................................47
2.1. God as Personal Being .........................................................................47
2.2. Tao as trans-personal being .................................................................48
2.3. Divine Animating-Natural Way ............................................................49
CHAPTER IV: COMPARISON BETWEEN JOHN’S LOGOS, PHILOS’S LOGOS AND
A TAOIST PERSPECTIVE ...............................................................................................50
I. Comparison John’s Logos with Philo’s Logos ...................................................50
1.1. Logos as Intermediate Reality and Instrument.....................................51
1.2. Sons of God and Children of God .........................................................51
1.3. Personification and Incarnation ...........................................................52
2. Comparison John’ Logos with Laozi’s Sage .....................................................53
2.1. Becoming One with Tao .......................................................................54
2.2. Observing Tao’s Constant Ways ...........................................................56
3. Comparison Johannine Jesus with Taoist Sage ...............................................60
3.1. Sage’s Wu-Wei and Jesus “Hour” .........................................................61
3.2. Reversal and “Glorification” .................................................................64
3.3. Weakness-“Glorification” ....................................................................65
3.4. One With the Father and One with Tao ...............................................65
CHAPTER V: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ................................................................71
1. Summary ..............................................................................................................71
2. Conclusion
1. The Main Functions ........................................................................................74
2. Philo’ Logos and Laotzu’ Tao ...........................................................................74
3. Laozi’s Tao and John’s Logos ...........................................................................75
4. Philo and Inculturation ...................................................................................75
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................77

A. The Main References
I. Reference Books of Laotzu’ Tao
Chan Alan, K.L.Two Visions of the Way: A Study of the Wang Pi and the Ho-Shang Kung Commentaries on the Lao-Tzu . State University of New York Press, 1992.
Chan, Wing Tsit. The Way of Laotzu. The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Indianapolis, New York, 1963.
Finazzo,Giancarlo. The Notion of Dao In Laotzu and Chuag Tzu. Mei Ya Publication, Inc. Taipei, Taiwan, 1968
Kohn, Livia. Lao-Tzu and the Tao-Te-Ching. State University of New York Press: New York, 1990.
Lau, D. C. Tao te Ching .The Chinese University Press, Hongkong, 1989.
Zhang, Longxi.The Tao and the Logos: Literary Hermeneutics, East and West (Post-Contemporary Interventions) Duke University Press Books; Second Printing Used edition (April 17, 1992.
王弼， 老子道德經（北京市：中華書局， 2008）
2. Reference Books of Philo’s Logos
Dillon,John. M. The Middle Platonists . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1977, 1996.
Endo, Masonobu. Philo's Logos as Divine Mediator: St. Mary’s College Press, Scotland, United Kingdom, 1998.
Sandmel, S. Philo of Alexandria: An Introduction .New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979.
Tobin,Thomas, H. The Creation of Man: Philo and the History of Interpretation. Washington, D.C, 1983.
Winston, David. Philo of Alexandria, The Contemplative Life, The Giants, and Selections (Transl).New York/ Ramsey/Toronto: Paulist Press, 1981.
Williamson,Ronald. Philo and the Epistle to the Hebrews . Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970.
Williamson,Ronald. Jews in the Hellenistic World: Philo . Cambridge: Cambridge.
University Press, 1989.
3. Reference Books of John’s Prologue
Brown,E. Rymond. The Gospel of John I-XII: ANS Commentary. Garden, NY: Doubleday & Company, 1995.
Brown,E. Ryamond. Gospel According to John . Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1966.
Clark,Gordon. H. The Johannine Logos . Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1972.
Barrett,C,K. The Gospel According to St John, An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text .Marylebone Road, London: S.P.C.K., 1958.
C. J. Wright, Jesus the Revelation of God: His Mission and Message According to St. John .London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1950.
D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John .Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1991.
Dodd,C.H.The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel .Camridge University Press, 1953.
Edwards, Paul, The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, vols. 5 and 6. Broadway, NY: Simon & Schuster, 1972.
Elwell, Walter A. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1984.
Floyd V. Filson, The Gospel According to John . Richmond VA: John Knox, 1972.
Kostenberger, Andreas. John: Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2004.
Marsh,John. Saint John (Philadelphia, PA: The Westminster Press, 1968.
Mitchell,Daniel. The Person of Christ in John’s Gospel and Epistle .Ann Arbor, MI:University Microfilms Interantional, 2006.
W. F. Howard, Christianity According to St. John . London: Duckworth, 1952.
B. Additional References
Anderson, Martin. Jesus and Lao Tzu: The Parallel Sayings .California, Seastone, 2000.
Damascene, Hieromonk, Lou Shibai, and You-Shan Tang. Christ the Eternal Tao. Platina, CA: Saint Herman Press, 1999.
Forbes, Andrew; Henley, David (2012). The Illustrated Tao Te Ching (Jamese Legge translation). Chiang Mai: Cognoscenti Books. ASIN: B008NNLKXC.
Kaltenmark, Max. Lao Tzu and Taoism. Translated by Roger Greaves. Stanford:Stanford University Press. 1969.
Malek, Roman, S.V.D. (ed.) The Chinese Face of Jesus Christ, vol. I. Germany, Monumenta Serica and China-Zentrum, 2002.
C. Journal or Paper and Internet
Kheng, Kay. The Tao and the Logos: Lao Tzu and the Gospel of John: Journal International Review of Mission (1998)
Yoon, Seok Il. The Meaning of Logos in John 1:1-18 : Paper .Lynchburg, Virginia, july 2008.
http://ctext.org/dao-de-jing.