130 Jan van der Watt & Chrys Caragounis the point of time characterized as “the beginning”. Thus, John presents a Logos, who already existing at what can be termed as “the beginning”, implies that he is ἄναρχος (“without beginning”). This has important consequences for the Logos’ relation to God, as this is unfolded in the rest of the Gospel, in which, of course, the Logos is substituted for by the Son and the latter’s relation to the Father. In a section, which for lack of space has not been included in this study, I have argued that John’s Logos concept has been inspired by the socio-linguistic exigencies of the context in which John was trying to communicate his message158. Here the various “Jewish backgrounds” that have been suggested appear rather unimpressive and out of touch with the realities John was faced with in the Hellenic context. The term λόγος, perhaps the most important term in the Greek language for expressing the rich nuances of the mental, intellectual, and spiritual life and activi- ties of man, was also used in Greek theology159 for understanding and describing the Creator and Sustainer of the world and of man. John then takes a term of the utmost importance for Greek thought and injects it with a content of his own: the Logos is none other than God’s Logos, who was incarnated in Jesus Christ. b) The meaning of πρὸς τὸν θεόν Jan van der Watt: The use of πρός (a preposition implying movement “to/towards”) with the copulative (stative) verb leads to thorough discus- sions, as we have seen in 2.2. Several points should be considered in the light of the theology and socio-linguistic nature of the Gospel. ‣ In analyzing the structure of the Prologue, the link between verse 1 and 18 is regularly made160, and it is often argued that the Prologue reflects a chiastic structure and that verses 1 and 18 correspond. In John 1,18 not only the aspect of God as Father (Θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε) is mentioned, but also the divinity of Jesus (μονογενὴς θεός161) as well as the close relation between the Father and Son (ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο); these are all themes that correspond The interested reader may read this section in my web site: under “Recent Studies”. I use the word “theology” advisedly, because in ancient Greek thought the two are 159 indistinguishable: the philosopher is a theologian and the theologian is a philosopher. The structure of the Prologue cannot be discussed here in detail. See J.G. van der 160 Watt, “The Composition of the Prologue of John’s Gospel: The Historical Jesus Introducing Divine Grace”, in Westminster Theological Journal (1996) 57/2, 311-332 for a discussion of the positions in this regard. Bultmann, Johannes, (see n. 13), 2 also refers to a fixed form that is not by chance, but is also reflected in the finer detail. There are text critical problems here, but it is not so important for our argument. 161