What is the relation between the Logos of Greek Philosophy and the Logos in Christianity? The first known mention of the "logos" was by Greek philosopher Heraclitus who lived around 535 - 475 BC. The idea was subsequently developed further by other philosophers such as Aristotle.

The Author of John's Gospel picks up on this "logos" idea and claims that the logos "was in the beginning with God", that the logos "was God", and that the logos "became flesh and dwelt among us".

I've always suspected that a lot of information is lost when translating Johns Gospel to English where they translate "Logos" as "Word". "Word" is such a mundane word compared to "Logos" which is rich in meaning and comes loaded with 500 years of philosophical baggage.

This leads me to wonder, what is the relationship between the "logos" of Greek philosophy and the "logos" as used in Johns Gospel? Why did the author of Johns Gospel use that particular word? Was it their intention to import all of the Greek philosophical baggage that was associated with the term into Christianity? Or were they attempting to completely redefine the word?

Most (English speaking) Christians I've spoken to don't seem aware or concerned by the fact that this Greek word "logos" has much more significance than the English word "Word". Some Christians I've spoken to reckon that all that Greek philosophy is irrelevant and that we should only focus on the "Christian" meaning of the word, which is simply "Word", nothing more or less than that. Personally I dispute that this is the "Christian" meaning, and I reckon that there are a lot of deep connections to be had between Christianity and Greek Philosophy if we ponder "logos" within it's original cultural context and meaning.

Summary question: What is the connection between the "Logos" of Greek philosophy and the "Logos" of John's Gospel? Are they meant to be the same thing? Are they meant to be entirely different? Are they supposed to be similar but not identical?
By using the term &quot;Logos&quot; the author of John's Gospel intends to explain the Lord Jesus Christ in terms of Greek philosophical ideas current at the time.  He may have done this, not because Greek philosophy influenced his beliefs, but rather to make the Gospel easier to understand for those who knew the Greek philosophy; he used Greek philosophical teaching about the Logos to act as a bridge for some of his readers.
To know the background to those ideas might add to our appreciation of John's Gospel.
This is a quote from a book by C.H. Dodd:-

Augustine, in a well-known passage of the Confessions (vii. 9), writes:
Thou didst procure for me through a certain person... some books of the Platonists translated from Greek into Latin.
There [i.e. in those Platonist books] I read - not in so many words, but in substance, supported by many arguments of various kinds — that
in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The same was in the beginning with God.
By him were all things made, and without him was not anything made.
That which was made in him was life, and the life was the light of men.
And the light shines in darkness and the darkness comprehended it not.
And that the soul of man, though it bear witness of the light, is not itself the light; but the Word of God, being God, is the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
And that he was in the world and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
But that he came unto his own and his own received him not, but as many as received him to them gave he power to become sons of God, even to them that believe on his name, I did not read there.
Again I read there that God the Word was born not of the flesh nor of blood, nor of the will of man, nor of the will of the flesh, but of God.
But that the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us I did not read there.

Quoted from &quot;The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel&quot; by C.H. Dodd (page 10):-
http://preteristarchive.com/Books/pdf/1953_dodd_interpretation-of-the-fourth-gospel.pdf
Reading on from that page 10 is a long section too long to give here.
Or you can look at Augustine's Confessions book 7 chapter 9, page 170, online here:-
http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/SpiritualFormation/Texts/Augustine_Confessions.pdf
Augustine is at pains to show that, though the Greek philosophers speak of Logos and even of the Son of God they never speak of this Son becoming man and dying for sinners.  That is unique to the Christian Gospel.
C.H. Dodd's work is referenced here:-
https://www.iep.utm.edu/philo/#H11
Philo of Alexandria (20 BC to 40 AD) was the (Jewish) philosopher who sought to construct philosophical bridges between Hellenistic philosophy and Jewish religious thought.  In Chapter 11 (the Doctrine of the Logos in Philo's writings) we read:

The pivotal and most developed doctrine in Philo's writings on which hinges his entire philosophical system, is his doctrine of the Logos.

It does look very much as if the author of John's Gospel used Greek thought about the Logos to write his Gospel, and to appeal better to those with a Greek education and philosophical background, while simultaneously not undermining the ability of those without a Greek philosophical background to understand his message.
What advantage did John see in using the term Logos?  If Augustine is right (see his quote relating to John 1:1 above) then by the time of the writing of John's Gospel Greek philosophy had already progressed from a unitarian understanding of God to a Two-Persons-One-God, a &quot;Bi-une&quot;, understanding.  In Greek philosophy the Logos is not just &quot;God's word&quot;, but rather one of the Persons of the Godhead.  It was used to help his readers who knew Greek philosophy: it is a much smaller step of the understanding to go from a Biune God to a Triune God than from a Unitarian God to a Triune God.