No this is not meant to be another trinity thread. Rather another shamelessly speculative / philosophical one. One good thing with the latter: they are usually much shorter.
So we often discuss how the logos was or wasn't "God/god/divine" etc. But very rarely how he/it was with God.
Ho logos èn pros ton theon: pros + accusative; in speech -- which is, after all, what the word logos (!) is primarily about -- the preposition and case of the address, as when you talk to somebody. Was the "Word" directed to God as a prayer? A question perhaps?
Or if we already think of the Logos as a "he"... was he before, in front of "God," as Wisdom was (Proverbs 8 etc.), facing Him and reflecting Him? Then, both the same and the opposite, as a mirror image or an imprint (Hebrews 1:3)? Was he not then against God, touching Him antagonistically, being against His bosom (1:18, eis ton kolpon) as the beloved disciple was to Jesus (13:23, en tô kolpô)? Hegel here comes dangerously to mind.
Word and Thing. Word and Being. Signifiant-Signifié. Ultimately inseparable from each other (a word is a thing, if only in the time of its articulation and the space of its writing; and "thing" is a word too) yet irreducible to each other.
Our "symbolical cut" (our only true cross?) in the bosom of "God". God truly in our image. Or we in His?
A few months ago I read an article from Catholic theologian Christoph Theobald, who said that the classical Trinitarian doctrine was lacking "internal antagonism". I'm getting to think he has a point.
(Oh, and you don't need to tell me I am crazy. I know. But I am all the more interested in the replies. If any.)