Talk:Logia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On Wiktionary, logia is simply the plural of logion. Either of these titles could refer to the other article. Neelix 12:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

The article currently makes clear that the usage is confined to New Testament scholarship. A recent substitution seemed to labor under the misconception that there was one logia and that it was lost. Logia are collections of sayings attributed ro Jesus, whether we like the sayings or not. No neutral or rational definition of logia could exclude the "Gospel" of Thomas, which is merely a list of sayings attributed to Jesus. The rest is persiflage. --Wetman (talk) 10:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Wordnet at Princeton defines this as "a saying of Jesus that is regarded as authentic although it is not recorded in the Gospels". Why is WP deviating from this? Faith (talk) 14:59, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Logia are plural, for a start. The usenet definition, as it makes plain, is of a single logion, not of a literary genre.--Wetman (talk) 17:59, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

That would simply mean logia would be "sayings", rather than "a saying", moving both from singular to plural. So, again, why does WP deviate from this definition, relating these to Papias, while Princeton's wordnet relates them as authentically from Jesus? I would also point to the Catholic Encyclopaedia entry. Faith (talk) 18:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)