1. Introduction
In modern charismatic and evangelical teachings, Logos is often defined as the general, written Word of God (Scripture), while Rhema is considered a specific, spoken, or revealed word for an individual or situation. However, examining New Testament Greek usage raises the question: Are these distinctions linguistically and doctrinally consistent with Scripture’s use of these terms?
2. Lexical and Semantic Analysis
2.1 Logos (λόγος)
| General Meaning | Biblical Examples |
|---|---|
| Word, speech, message, reason, principle, or Christ Himself. | John 1:1–14: The Word (Logos) is God, pre-existent, incarnate in Jesus. |
| Hebrews 4:12: The Logos of God is living and active. | |
| Acts 10:44: The Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the Word (Logos) – refers to the apostolic preaching. |
2.2 Rhema (ῥῆμα)
| General Meaning | Biblical Examples |
|---|---|
| That which is spoken, utterance, saying, message. | Luke 1:38: Mary responds, “Let it be to me according to your word (Rhema).” |
| Luke 4:4: “Man shall not live by bread alone but by every word (Rhema) of God.” | |
| Romans 10:17: “Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word (Rhema) of Christ,” referring contextually to the preached gospel message. |
3. Overlapping and Interchangeable Usage
3.1 No Rigid Distinction in Contextual Usage
| Verse | Term Used | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Ephesians 6:17 | Rhema | “Take the sword of the Spirit, which is the word (Rhema) of God.” Often interpreted as spoken scripture declarations, but broadly refers to God’s communicated Word. |
| Hebrews 4:12 | Logos | Describes the Word as living and active, applicable both to Scripture and God’s present communication. |
| Luke 5:5 | Rhema | Peter: “At your word (Rhema) I will let down the nets.” Refers to Jesus’ spoken instruction, functionally a divine command. |
| Acts 6:7 | Logos | “The Word (Logos) of God spread,” referring to the gospel proclamation. |
These examples demonstrate:
- Both Logos and Rhema can refer to spoken or preached words, not exclusively to written vs. spoken distinctions.
- Context, rather than lexical meaning alone, determines the nuance.
4. Scholarly Perspectives
4.1 Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Kittel, 1964)
Logos and Rhema frequently overlap in meaning; no systematic doctrinal distinction is inherent in their usage.
4.2 Gordon Fee (1994)
Warns against constructing doctrinal systems based on lexical fallacies, as the NT authors use Logos and Rhema interchangeably depending on narrative and rhetorical needs.
4.3 D. A. Carson (1996)
The rigid separation popular in modern charismatic teaching is not consistently supported by New Testament usage and risks imposing artificial categories onto biblical language.
5. Theological Implications
5.1 Practical Distinction vs. Doctrinal Absolutism
While distinguishing Logos and Rhema pastorally (e.g. general biblical principles vs. specific Spirit-applied words) can aid spiritual growth:
- Elevating it to a doctrinal absolute is unwarranted.
- Both terms refer broadly to God’s speech, revelation, and communication, whether written, spoken, preached, or incarnate in Christ.
5.2 Ultimate Authority
Regardless of whether God speaks through Logos or Rhema, both are:
- Subject to Scripture’s final authority (2 Timothy 3:16–17).
- Centred in Christ, the eternal Word (Logos) made flesh (John 1:14).
6. Summary Table
| Aspect | Conclusion |
|---|---|
| Biblical usage | Logos and Rhema overlap; context defines nuance rather than strict categories. |
| Theological caution | Doctrinal rigidity risks lexical fallacy and misinterpretation. |
| Practical application | Distinctions can aid teaching if viewed as functional, not ontological, with all words tested against Scripture. |
7. Conclusion
Logos and Rhema are used interchangeably in various biblical contexts, undermining strict doctrinal distinctions. Their primary shared meaning is God’s communication, whether spoken or written. Pastoral teaching may employ distinctions for practical discipleship, but biblical and linguistic evidence does not support constructing systematic theological separation between them.
8. References
- Carson, D. A. (1996). Exegetical Fallacies (2nd ed.). Grand Rapids: Baker.
- Fee, G. D. (1994). God’s Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul. Peabody: Hendrickson.
- Kittel, G., & Friedrich, G. (Eds.). (1964). Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Vol. 4). Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
- Morris, L. (1995). The Gospel According to John. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.