IT is the Holy Ghost!

[Eliseus]

There seems to be some controversy over the use of the third person neuter pronoun 'it' in regard to the Holy Spirit. Some folks feel that it is wrong to speak of the Spirit of God as 'it'.

But please do notice the following:

Isa 34:16 Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall fail, none shall want her mate: for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them.

Here, Isaiah delivers a message from God, who speaks of his spirit as 'it'.

Jhn 1:32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.

Here John the Baptist speaks of the Spirit as 'it'.

1Pe 1:11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

Here the apostle Peter speaks of the Spirit of Christ as 'it' and uses the term 'which' (instead of the religiously correct term 'who'.


Now let's look at one verse, which is actually merely a sample of numerous other similarly constructed verses:

1Jo 5:6 This is he that came by water and blood, [even] Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

Notice the phrase 'it is the Spirit'. This is similar in construction to numerous other phrases which say 'it is ...X' where X is a person (male or female). For example, howmany times have you said 'it's God' or 'it's Jesus'? We see no problem whatsoever in saying 'it is [insert male or female person's name here]'.

Why is this possible? Why do we not say 'he is the Spirit' or 'He is God' in such situations? Technically and grammatically, the phrase 'it is the Spirit' is simply saying that 'the Spirit is it' where 'it' is the subject of the sentence or phrase.

Why is this not considered incorrect grammar? Because that is simply how language works.

To say 'it is ...X' is simply saying that 'it', an unidentified subject, is then identified as 'the Spirit' or 'God' or 'Fred' or 'Mary' or whatever you supply. There is no grammatical difficulty even though the pronoun is neuter and the noun which it refers to is masculine or feminine or whatever the case may be.

So, in short, there is both Biblical and grammatical precedent for using 'it' in reference to the Holy Spirit.

Does this mean the Spirit is 'an it' and not a 'He'? No, of course not. The pronoun does not determine the reality of the underlying noun. That would be contrary to all logic and language, not to mention common sense.

But, to put it simply, if the Bible itself occasionally refers to the Spirit of God as 'it' then it is not wrong for us to do so as well.

[SDG]

I don't want to burst your it bubble ...

1. but in the 4 verses you mentioned the word Spirit is always included in context of its usage. Some today use an impersonal "it" to refer to the Spirit of God ... like "Did you receive it?' ... never once acknowledging it is the Spirit of the living God ... but simply the experience.

2. I also see a freedom, or creative license, used by KJV translators in using the Greek work "to", "o","ho" ... as it ... when those words are properly translated as "this"

Greek [3588]: ho .... this, that, these, etc.

Examples:

John 1:32

This (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3778) is (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) he that came (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2064) by (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1223) water (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) and (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) blood, (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=129) even Jesus (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2424) Christ; (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547)not (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3756) by (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) water (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) only, (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3440) but (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=235) by (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) water (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) and (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) blood. (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=129) And (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) it is (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) the Spirit (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) that beareth witness (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3140) , because (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3754) the Spirit (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) is (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) truth. (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=225)
Outov (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3778) estin (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) (5748 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5748)) o (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) elqwn (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2064) (5631 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5631)) di' (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1223) udatov (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) kai (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) aimatov, (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=129) Ihsouv (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2424) Xristov; (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547)ouk (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3756) en (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) tw (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) udati (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) monon (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3440) all' (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=235) en (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) tw (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) udati (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) kai (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) en (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) tw (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) aimati; (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=129) kai (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) to (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) pneuma (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) estin (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) (5748 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5748)) to (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) marturoun, (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3140) (5723 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5723)) oti (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3754) to (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) pneuma (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) estin (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) (5748 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5748)) h (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) alhqeia. (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=225)

1:11
what (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5101) * (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1519), or (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2228) what manner (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4169) of time (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2540) the Spirit (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) of Christ (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547) which (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) was in (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) them (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=846) did signify (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1213) , when it testified beforehand (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4303) the sufferings (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3804) of (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1519) Christ, (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547)and (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) the glory (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1391) that should follow (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5023)

eraunwntev (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2045) eiv (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1519) tina (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5101) h (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2228) poion (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4169) kairon (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2540) edhlou (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1213) to (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) en (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) autoiv (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=846)pneuma (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) Xristou (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547) promarturomenon (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4303) (5740 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5740)) ta (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) eiv (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1519) Xriston (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547) paqhmata (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3804) kai (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) tav (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) meta (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3326) tauta (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5023) docav;

The NAS ... does not use it in this reference in 1 Peter....

seeking (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2045) to know (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2045) what (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4169) person (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5101) or (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2228) time (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2540) the Spirit (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) of Christ (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547) within (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) them was indicating (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1213) as He predicted (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4303) the sufferings (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3804) of Christ (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547) and the glories (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1391) to follow (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3326)

Clearly the Apostles in their original intent did not refer the the Spirit of God as an it ... but you can if you like.

[SDG]

As the lone OT reference ... perhaps a Hebrew specialist can help us to see if the Spirit is linked to an impersonal it.

KJV Isaiah 34:16 ...

Seek (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=01875) from the book (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=05612) of the LORD (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=03068), and read (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=07121): Not one (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=0259) of these (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=02007) will be missing (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=05737); None (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=0802) * (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=03808) will lack (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=06485) its mate (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=07468). For His mouth (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=06310) has commanded (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=06680), And His Spirit (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=07307) has gathered (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=06908) them.

Dr$W (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=01875) m)l-spr (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=05612) yhwh Wqr(W (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=07121) (xt mhNh l( n)Drh (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=05737) (%h r)WtH l( pqdW (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=06485) Ky-py hW( cWh wrWxO hW( qBca

Once again the NAS omits the word it ...

Seek (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=01875) from the book (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=05612) of the LORD (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=03068), and read (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=07121): Not one (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=0259) of these (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=02007) will be missing (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=05737); None (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=0802) * (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=03808) will lack (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=06485) its mate (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=07468). For His mouth (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=06310) has commanded (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=06680), And His Spirit (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=07307) has gathered (http://studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=06908) them.

[Felicity]

Wow! Eliseus and Daniel are really doing their homework. :thumbsup

This is great guys!

[Eliseus]

I don't want to burst your it bubble ...

I don't blow bubbles, bubba.

1. but in the 4 verses you mentioned the word Spirit is always included in context of its usage. Some today use an impersonal "it" to refer to the Spirit of God ... like "Did you receive it?' ... never once acknowledging it is the Spirit of the living God ... but simply the experience.

Nice avoidance of the actual facts. The Scripture clearly uses the word 'it' in reference to the Spirit of God in the passages I cited. Case closed. (Unless of course, you believe the Holy Word of God is wrong....)

2. I also see a freedom, or creative license, used by KJV translators in using the Greek work "to", "o","ho" ... as it ... when those words are properly translated as "this"

Of course you do. When the Bible plainly contradicts your premise, you 'see creative license' in the Scripture rather than where it belongs - your interpretation.


Clearly the Apostles in their original intent did not refer the the Spirit of God as an it ... but you can if you like.

I am simply quoting the Bible, which uses 'it' to refer to the Spirit of God. Obviously, you did not bother with much of my post, which clearly explained how and why this is not only possible, but normal.

I am always somewhat amused at how some people take their personal grievances with some abstract 'movement' and apply it to such things as grammar and the plain text of Scripture.

Funny.

:slaphappy

[Brother Strange]

Jn 14:17, 15:26 and 16:13 clearly speaks of the Holy Ghost as "HE," as well as other places too.

The PERSON of the Holy Ghost is nothing less than Christ IN you, your hope of glory.

[Eliseus]

As the lone OT reference ... perhaps a Hebrew specialist can help us to see if the Spirit is linked to an impersonal it.

And herein lies the root of your error. 'An impersonal it'. It is not 'impersonal', it is neuter gender.

If I ask 'Who was it?' does this mean I have conflated and commingled pronouns, mixing genders and confusing the issue? Of course not. Any child can see that asking 'Who is it?' involves the use of a neuter pronoun, it, to refer to a PERSON, but without referring to or indicating the GENDER thereof.

Simple grammar, Daniel. But unfortunately, our various vendettas sometimes blind us to such simple things.

[Eliseus]

Jn 14:17, 15:26 and 16:13 clearly speaks of the Holy Ghost as "HE," as well as other places too.

The PERSON of the Holy Ghost is nothing less than Christ IN you, your hope of glory.

Amen! Absolutely! There is no argument with this.

However, my point is that the Bible does OCCASIONALLY refer to the Spirit as 'it' as well as 'he', and the Word is God is certainly not confused in it's (!) grammar.

By the way, how are you and the Mrs?

[SDG]

And herein lies the root of your error. 'An impersonal it'. It is not 'impersonal', it is neuter gender.

If I ask 'Who was it?' does this mean I have conflated and commingled pronouns, mixing genders and confusing the issue? Of course not. Any child can see that asking 'Who is it?' involves the use of a neuter pronoun, it, to refer to a PERSON, but without referring to or indicating the GENDER thereof.

Simple grammar, Daniel. But unfortunately, our various vendettas sometimes blind us to such simple things.

Wrong again .... you are assuming that every language has 3rd person neuter pronoun equivalent to the English "it" ... which refers almost always to an inanimate object or animal

... As I sit and reflect about the Spanish language there is no direct translation for the word it as we use it in English ...

I could be talking to a baby or a dog ... and say Pasamelo ... which can be translated to "Pass me him" or "Pass me it"

Or the eso can be used in Spanish ... but it is not best translated as "it" but rather "that".

Once again the writers did not use the word as we see it in the KJV ... the only source you are utilizing... Plain and simple. The OP contingent that is KJV only should be livid.

[SDG]

Nothing personal here, Eliseus ... I am deconstructing a flawed argument w/ the original intent of the writers you quote ... who consequently did use the English word it.. Let's rightly divide the Word and stop trying to defend a poor practice among some in our movement.

[Felicity]

However, my point is that the Bible does OCCASIONALLY refer to the Spirit as 'it' as well as 'he', and the Word is God is certainly not confused in it's (!) grammar.Yep! I often refer to the Holy Ghost as "it" but I can assure you I know of what I'm speaking. It's usually a reference to the moving of, or the power of, or the presence of, or the working of the Holy Ghost.

I like to feel the Spirit of God when IT starts moving over me
It's a feeling that starts at the top of my head and goes to the soles of my feet
There's no greater feeling in the whole wide world than to feel the Spirit of God
I like to feel what I feel when I feel what I feel right now.

Many of our choruses have this "IT" referred to.

:D

[SDG]

I've gathered that the Bible is the KJV only to you Eliseus ... and looking at the Greek ... is just that to you ...

The writers did not use it ... like you and I use it today ... nor did they use a word equivalent to it ... but used the word this ... which connotes an entirely different meaning today

[SDG]

If you don't want your posts to be scrutinized btw .... don't hang w/ the big dogs!!!!!!!!!!!!! Woof!!!!

[Felicity]

If you don't want your posts to be scrutinized btw .... don't hang w/ the big dogs!!!!!!!!!!!!! Woof!!!!

Arph! :dogkiss





LOL! :)

[Eliseus]

Daniel, stop being a twit, would ya?

The Greek word 'ho' is the definite article. It means what it means, not what you want it to mean whenever you want it to mean something. When you can show credentials that surpass those of the translators of the King James Bible, then I might listen to what you and all the other Bible correctors have to say.

But in the meantime, chew on these:

And John bore witness: “I saw the Spirit descend from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him.

The Holy Bible, English Standard Version © 2001 Crossway Bibles

And John bore witness, "I saw the Spirit descend as a dove from heaven, and it remained on him.
Revised Standard Version © 1947, 1952.

And John bare witness, saying, I have beheld the Spirit descending as a dove out of heaven; and it abode upon him.
American Standard Version 1901

And John testified, saying -- `I have seen the Spirit coming down, as a dove, out of heaven, and it remained on him;
Robert Young Literal Translation 1862, 1887, 1898

And John bore testimony, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.
Noah Webster Version 1833

(Yes, Mr Dictionary Expert himself used 'it' referring to the Spirit when translating the Bible... go figure...)

Yochanan testified, saying, "I have seen the Spirit descending like a dove out of heaven, and it remained on him.
Hebrew Names Version 2000

Need I go on with the other verses? no? Didn't think so. Thanks for playing, though, Daniel.

[Eliseus]

Wrong again .... you are assuming that every language has 3rd person neuter pronoun equivalent to the English "it" ... which refers almost always to an inanimate object or animal

... As I sit and reflect about the Spanish language there is no direct translation for the word it as we use it in English ...

I could be talking to a baby or a dog ... and say Pasamelo ... which can be translated to "Pass me him" or "Pass me it"

Or the eso can be used in Spanish ... but it is not best translated as "it" but rather "that".

Once again the writers did not use the word as we see it in the KJV ... the only source you are utilizing... Plain and simple. The OP contingent that is KJV only should be livid.


Daniel, we need not reflect on the Spanish language, since the underlying text of Scripture is KOINE GREEK, not Spanish.

Here is the Greek from one of the verses I posted:

'...kai emainen ep' auton.' The word in question is 'meno' and means 'to abide'. Now Danny boy, since you are such a Greek scholar, please would you explain to us what the ending '-ainen' signifies in this particular instance?

Does it mean literally 'he abode' or does it mean literally 'it abode'? Can you tell us the GENDER of the word 'emainen', Daniel?

Without making anything up, that is...?

[chaotic_resolve]

Does it really matter? I don't see the fuss . . . I mean, it's been shown that Scriptures show ~both~ the use of "it" and "He" in references to the Holy Spirit.

This is about as silly as the debate over whether to say "Holy Ghost" or "Holy Spirit."

[Eliseus]

Exactly, Chaotic resolve!

However, some seem desperate to correct even the Bible...

[chaotic_resolve]

Jhn 1:32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.

I'm no Bible Scholar, and generally shy away from these types of debates, but isn't the latter portion of the verse: "and it abode upon him," speaking more in relation to the literal dove than the Spirit?

The Spirit descended from heaven . . . like a dove . . . and it abode upon him. I take the "it" to mean the literal manifestation of the dove, not the spiritual.

Am I way of[f] on this?

[Eliseus]

And Daniel, when you have exegeted the grammar of the word in question I asked you about, you may proceed to explain why the Spirit of God is referred to as 'to pneuma'. Tell us what 'to' signifies in KOINE GREEK, Daniel...

[Rico]

I have never liked the fact that the Holy Ghost is referred to as "it." It seems to go against oneness thinking, in my opinion. If it is ok to refer to the HG as "it" then why not replace Father with "it?"

[Eliseus]

I have never liked the fact that the Holy Ghost is referred to as "it." It seems to go against oneness thinking, in my opinion. If it is ok to refer to the HG as "it" then why not replace Father with "it?"

Rico, the use of the pronoun 'it' in reference to the Spirit of God says nothing whatsoever about whether the Spirit is an impersonal 'something' or the personal presence of God Himself. It is strictly a grammatical thing.

The same thing can be said regarding the use of the plural pronouns 'us' and 'our' in reference to God. It says nothing about the nature of God Himself, nor does it require there be more than one.

It's all just the grammar. :)

[Rico]

Rico, the use of the pronoun 'it' in reference to the Spirit of God says nothing whatsoever about whether the Spirit is an impersonal 'something' or the personal presence of God Himself. It is strictly a grammatical thing.

The same thing can be said regarding the use of the plural pronouns 'us' and 'our' in reference to God. It says nothing about the nature of God Himself, nor does it require there be more than one.

It's all just the grammar. :)

Brother, I don't care if it's grammatically fine to use "it" when referring to God or not, I still don't like it.

[Eliseus]

By the way, what trips people up, I think, is the fact that in English 'it' is generally used of inanimate objects or animals, and thus is considered the 'impersonal' pronoun. Whereas Biblical Greek does not require that particular nuance when using a neither pronoun. A neuter pronoun in Greek does not require the referrent to be 'impersonal', and the gender of nouns (and thus pronouns) in Greek is not entirely dependent upon the actual gender of the object to which the noun or pronoun refers.

Going back to Spanish, for a brief moment, one says 'la pluma' even though a pen is in no way shape or form a lady.

:)

[Eliseus]

Brother, I don't care if it's grammatically fine to use "it" when referring to God or not, I still don't like it.

So you don't like how the Bible speaks.

Okie dokie, fine by me!

:choir

[Brother Strange]

"IT" is gramatically correct. I've used it many times in reference to not only the person, power and presence of the Holy Ghost but of the experience itself.

[Eliseus]

Indeed, elder. In fact, it seems that at least some times the Bible uses the phrase 'the Holy Ghost' to refer to the experience, as well as the 'person'.

[Rico]

So you don't like how the Bible speaks.

Okie dokie, fine by me!

:choir


Is there scripture that says I am required to like the way the Bible is written?

[mizpeh]

2. I also see a freedom, or creative license, used by KJV translators in using the Greek work "to", "o","ho" ... as it ... when those words are properly translated as "this"

Greek [3588]: ho .... this, that, these, etc.

Examples:

John 1:32

This (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3778) is (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) he that came (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2064) by (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1223) water (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) and (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) blood, (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=129) even Jesus (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2424) Christ; (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547)not (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3756) by (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) water (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) only, (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3440) but (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=235) by (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) water (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) and (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) blood. (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=129) And (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) it is (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) the Spirit (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) that beareth witness (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3140) , because (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3754) the Spirit (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) is (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) truth. (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=225)
Outov (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3778) estin (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) (5748 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5748)) o (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) elqwn (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2064) (5631 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5631)) di' (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1223) udatov (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) kai (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) aimatov, (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=129) Ihsouv (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2424) Xristov; (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547)ouk (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3756) en (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) tw (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) udati (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) monon (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3440) all' (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=235) en (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) tw (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) udati (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) kai (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) en (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) tw (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) aimati; (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=129) kai (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) to (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) pneuma (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) estin (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) (5748 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5748)) to (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) marturoun, (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3140) (5723 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5723)) oti (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3754) to (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) pneuma (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) estin (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) (5748 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5748)) h (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) alhqeia. (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=225)

1:11
what (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5101) * (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1519), or (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2228) what manner (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4169) of time (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2540) the Spirit (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) of Christ (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547) which (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) was in (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) them (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=846) did signify (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1213) , when it testified beforehand (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4303) the sufferings (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3804) of (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1519) Christ, (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547)and (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) the glory (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1391) that should follow (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5023)

eraunwntev (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2045) eiv (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1519) tina (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5101) h (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2228) poion (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4169) kairon (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2540) edhlou (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1213) to (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) en (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) autoiv (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=846)pneuma (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) Xristou (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547) promarturomenon (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4303) (5740 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5740)) ta (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) eiv (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1519) Xriston (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547) paqhmata (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3804) kai (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) tav (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) meta (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3326) tauta (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5023) docav;



Clearly the Apostles in their original intent did not refer the the Spirit of God as an it ... but you can if you like.


1Pe 1:11 ερευνωντες Searching 2045 V-PAP-NPM εις of 1519 PREP τινα what 5101 I-ASM η or 2228 PRT ποιον what manner 4169 I-ASM καιρον of time 2540 N-ASM εδηλου did signify 1213 V-IAI-3S το the 3588 T-NSN εν which was in 1722 PREP αυτοις them 846 P-DPM πνευμα Spirit 4151 N-NSN χριστου of Christ 5547 N-GSM προμαρτυρομενον when it testified beforehand 4303 V-PNP-NSN τα the 3588 T-APN εις 1519 PREP χριστον Christ 5547 N-ASM παθηματα sufferings 3804 N-APN και and 2532 CONJ τας the 3588 T-APF μετα that should follow 3326 PREP ταυτα 5023 D-APN δοξας glory. 1391 N-APF


Joh 1:32 και And 2532 CONJ εμαρτυρησεν bare record 3140 V-AAI-3S ιωαννης John 2491 N-NSM λεγων saying 3004 V-PAP-NSM οτι 3754 CONJ τεθεαμαι I saw 2300 V-RNI-1S το the 3588 T-ASN πνευμα Spirit 4151 N-ASN καταβαινον descending 2597 V-PAP-ASN ωσει like 5616 ADV περιστεραν a dove 4058 N-ASF εξ from 1537 PREP ουρανου heaven 3772 N-GSM και and 2532 CONJ εμεινεν it abode 3306 V-AAI-3S επ upon 1909 PREP αυτον him. 846 P-ASM

Daniel,

In neither of the verses you quoted did the translator translate as you assert they did. They did not mistranslate the word 'to','ho', or 'o' because those words just aren't there. In each verse they used a pronoun they thought was appropriate for the antecedent noun, a pronoun which is implied in the verb itself.

I also see a freedom, or creative license, used by KJV translators in using the Greek work "to", "o","ho" ... as it ... when those words are properly translated as "this"

You may see a creative license with the KJV translators but that license is taken with other translators as well.

Do you think the Spirit of God has a gender? The NAS translators chose to use the pronoun, he, but the pronoun, he, is not in the Greek text.

[Brother Strange]

Do you think the Spirit of God has a gender?

Yes sir.

[deseret]

People arguing against the Bible. Who would have imagined? :)

[Barb]

People arguing against the Bible. Who would have imagined? :)

Who is arguing against the Bible?!

[deseret]

Who is arguing against the Bible?!

The Bible does say "it". Now lets get upset about that and argue about how uncomfortable we are with it. :)

[Rico]

The Bible does say "it". Now lets get upset about that and argue about how uncomfortable we are with it. :)

Yup. Can you believe it? Can you believe that some of us would even have the nerve to tell the very people who referred to God as "it" in the Bible that we don't like it?

[Scott Hutchinson]

If we call the Holy Ghost or He does it matter ?We know that is the Spirit of Jesus Christ.The notion of three beings or persons of God is just a theory anyways.

[HeavenlyOne]

I don't believe God nor His Spirit has a gender. Gender is only required in the physical life and needed for procreation. There is no other purpose for genders, and since procreation isn't needed by God, He has no gender. Us humans assign Him a gender because that's all we understand, but God is neither male nor female.

[deseret]

I don't believe God nor His Spirit has a gender. Gender is only required in the physical life and needed for procreation. There is no other purpose for genders, and since procreation isn't needed by God, He has no gender. Us humans assign Him a gender because that's all we understand, but God is neither male nor female.

The BIBLE refers to God as HE. :)

[Rico]

The BIBLE refers to God as HE. :)



It also describes HIM as having a beard. Can you picture a HER God with a beard? YUK!

[HeavenlyOne]

The BIBLE refers to God as HE. :)

Like I said, we assign Him a gender because it's all we understand. But think about it....what would be the purpose of God and the angels being male? What is our purpose for having gender?

We don't understand genderless beings and our language doesn't allow that understanding, thus the reason why God refers to Himself as male to us, and why Jesus was born a male instead of being born genderless.

That, coupled with the fact that our history holds males in high esteem (thus the reason why Jesus wasn't female instead) is the reason why God is male and the only purpose for being such. But God is a spirit, and spirits don't have gender. There is no need for it.

[mizpeh]

Yes sir.

In what way does the Spirit of God have a gender?

[deseret]

It also describes HIM as having a beard. Can you picture a HER God with a beard? YUK!

God is not a Russian. :)

[Scott Hutchinson]

Doesn't The Kabbalah teach that God has femine and masculine charcteristics?

[Praxeas]

I don't want to burst your it bubble ...

1. but in the 4 verses you mentioned the word Spirit is always included in context of its usage. Some today use an impersonal "it" to refer to the Spirit of God ... like "Did you receive it?' ... never once acknowledging it is the Spirit of the living God ... but simply the experience.

2. I also see a freedom, or creative license, used by KJV translators in using the Greek work "to", "o","ho" ... as it ... when those words are properly translated as "this"

Greek [3588]: ho .... this, that, these, etc.

Examples:

John 1:32

This (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3778) is (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) he that came (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2064) by (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1223) water (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) and (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) blood, (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=129) even Jesus (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2424) Christ; (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547)not (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3756) by (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) water (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) only, (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3440) but (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=235) by (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) water (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) and (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) blood. (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=129) And (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) it is (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) the Spirit (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) that beareth witness (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3140) , because (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3754) the Spirit (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) is (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) truth. (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=225)
Outov (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3778) estin (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) (5748 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5748)) o (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) elqwn (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2064) (5631 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5631)) di' (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1223) udatov (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) kai (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) aimatov, (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=129) Ihsouv (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2424) Xristov; (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5547)ouk (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3756) en (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) tw (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) udati (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) monon (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3440) all' (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=235) en (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) tw (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) udati (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5204) kai (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) en (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1722) tw (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) aimati; (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=129) kai (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2532) to (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) pneuma (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) estin (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) (5748 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5748)) to (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) marturoun, (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3140) (5723 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5723)) oti (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3754) to (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) pneuma (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151) estin (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2076) (5748 (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/extras.cgi?number=5748)) h (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3588) alhqeia. (http://studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=225)


This is actually 1Jn 5:6 not John 1:32. The word in question is NOT being translated "it". It's being translated THE. TO is a neuter gender Definite article. It's Neuter Gender because the noun Pneuma is also neuter gender.

ho, hay, to
The masculine, feminine (second) and neuter (third) forms, in all their inflections; the definite article; the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom): - the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc.



1:11
that should what *, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify , when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ,and the gloryfollow

eraunwntev eiv tina h poion kairon edhlou to en autoivpneuma Xristou promarturomenon (5740) ta eiv Xriston paqhmata kai tav meta tauta docav;
Here the greek is to en auto iv pneuma Xristou. That phrase is translated "the Spirit of Christ which was in them" Again 'to' is translated THE before SPIRIT. The others are also translated THE

The NAS ... does not use it in this reference in 1 Peter....BTW "to" can be translated "it"...what is happening here though is probably that the translators are adding the word "it" because the nouns pneuma is neuter, the articles are all neuter and if there was to be a pronoun here for clarity, in the greek it would HAVE to be neuter too. The authors of the NAS and other such translations usually ignore neuter pronouns too when in reference to the Spirit because it goes against their doctrine of the Trinity that relies on masculine pronouns to prove distinct personhood. An example is Rom 8:16 and 8:26 where the KJV translates the neuter "itself" many other modern translations translate the neuter "Himself", showing a doctrinal bias

seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow

Clearly the Apostles in their original intent did not refer the the Spirit of God as an it ... but you can if you like.This shows ignorance of the greek language. The greek word for Spirit is neuter. It has NO gender. According to greek grammar pronouns and the nouns they modify MUST agree in case, number and gender. The Apostles did not manipulate and break grammar in order to teach doctrine. They only called Spirit "it" because that was grammatically correct.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Hey Prax some now say that the NT. should have been written in Hebrew rather than in KOINE Greek.

[deseret]

Doesn't The Kabbalah teach that God has femine and masculine charcteristics?

The Kabbalah doesn't teach me anything. Friend -if that is where you get your information from you are in spiritual danger. Your soul is hanging in the balance.

[Praxeas]

As the lone OT reference ... perhaps a Hebrew specialist can help us to see if the Spirit is linked to an impersonal it.

KJV Isaiah 34:16 ...

Seek from the book of the LORD, and read: Not one of these will be missing; None * will lack its mate. For His mouth has commanded, And His Spirit has gathered them.

Dr$W m)l-spr yhwh Wqr(W (xt mhNh l( n)Drh (%h r)WtH l( pqdW Ky-py hW( cWh wrWxO hW( qBca

Once again the NAS omits the word it ...

Seek from the book of the LORD, and read: Not one of these will be missing; None * will lack its mate. For His mouth has commanded, And His Spirit has gathered them.
"it" is NOT necessarily impersonal Dan. "It" is neuter gender.

That the NAS omits the word it proves nothing

Here is the NET Isa 34:16 Carefully read the scroll of the Lord! Not one of these creatures will be missing, none will lack a mate. For the Lord has issued the decree, and his personal spirit gathers them.

ESV Isa 34:16 Seek and read from the book of the LORD: Not one of these shall be missing; none shall be without her mate. For the mouth of the LORD has commanded, and his Spirit has gathered them.

WEB Isa 34:16 Seek you out of the book of Yahweh, and read: no one of these shall be missing, none shall want her mate; for my mouth, it has commanded, and his Spirit, it has gathered them.

According though to the TWOT and BDB the word "ruah" is usually feminine...does the NAS say "she"?

[Praxeas]

Hey Prax some now say that the NT. should have been written in Hebrew rather than in KOINE Greek.
To late. It was written in greek

[Praxeas]

Wow! Eliseus and Daniel are really doing their homework. :thumbsup

This is great guys!
not exactly.

[Brother Strange]

In what way does the Spirit of God have a gender?

It always amuses me to hear how people express themselves in regard to "spirit" as though spirit is a indefinite glob of air or cloud or something strangely etherial.

First let me ask you.

Don't you believe that Jesus is the One True Lord God, Jehovah Almighty?

Don't you believe that He is a man?

Do you not believe that He is the last Adam?

Are we not speaking of gender? Don't you believe that Jesus in the flesh was nothing unlike you and I in regards to gender?

I am sure that you said "yes" to all of the above.

Now for the last question, do you not believe that the Lord (Jesus Christ) is that Spirit?

2Cr 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord [is], there [is] liberty.

Yes sir. When you see Jesus, you will see God, who is Lord above all. You will also see that He is a man. Yes, He is THE Spirit...the Holy Spirit having no human limitations, indwelling all believers, present in His church, filling all space and time, having all power.

[Scott Hutchinson]

The Kabbalah doesn't teach me anything. Friend -if that is where you get your information from you are in spiritual danger. Your soul is hanging in the balance.

No I don't get info from that book of witchcraft and neither do I say Shekinah either.

[deseret]

No I don't get info from that book of witchcraft and neither do I say Shekinah either.

Why don't you say "Shekinah"?

[Praxeas]

Jn 14:17, 15:26 and 16:13 clearly speaks of the Holy Ghost as "HE," as well as other places too.

The PERSON of the Holy Ghost is nothing less than Christ IN you, your hope of glory.
Again, greek grammar comes into play here.

First of all, often when a neuter pronoun is used translators translated the pronoun as HE to reflect doctrinal bias. Second of all in some instances a masculine pronoun is used to reflect the antecedent "comforter" which was a masculine noun.

Again, the rules of greek grammar was that pronouns and the nouns they modify MUST agree in case, number and gender. If the word Pneuma (spirit) is used and a pronoun is used modifing that word, then that pronoun MUST be neuter. It has nothing to do with proving personhood or not.

[tbpew]

It always amuses me to hear how people express themselves in regard to "spirit" as though spirit is a indefinite glob of air or cloud or something strangely etherial.

First let me ask you.

Don't you believe that Jesus is the One True Lord God, Jehovah Almighty?

Don't you believe that He is a man?

Do you not believe that He is the last Adam?

Are we not speaking of gender? Don't you believe that Jesus in the flesh was nothing unlike you and I in regards to gender?

I am sure that you said "yes" to all of the above.

Now for the last question, do you not believe that the Lord (Jesus Christ) is that Spirit?

2Cr 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord [is], there [is] liberty.

Yes sir. When you see Jesus, you will see God, who is Lord above all. You will also see that He is a man. Yes, He is THE Spirit...the Holy Spirit having no human limitations, indwelling all believers, present in His church, filling all space and time, having all power.
Gender is a below realm distinction that does not have application in the Kingdom of God (that which is from ABOVE).

There is neither male nor female in Christ,; the body of God's anointing.

[Brother Strange]

Again, greek grammar comes into play here.

First of all, often when a neuter pronoun is used translators translated the pronoun as HE to reflect doctrinal bias. Second of all in some instances a masculine pronoun is used to reflect the antecedent "comforter" which was a masculine noun.

Again, the rules of greek grammar was that pronouns and the nouns they modify MUST agree in case, number and gender. If the word Pneuma (spirit) is used and a pronoun is used modifing that word, then that pronoun MUST be neuter. It has nothing to do with proving personhood or not.

Understood...but,

See my very last post.

[Praxeas]

BTW the KJV also refers to demonic spirits as it....because the word is NEUTER.

Most often though the word Spirit is said to be the Spirit OF God or the Spirit OF the Father or the Spirit OF Christ. Question, is the spirit OF Dan or Elias a He?

[deseret]

BTW the KJV also refers to demonic spirits as it....because the word is NEUTER.

Most often though the word Spirit is said to be the Spirit OF God or the Spirit OF the Father or the Spirit OF Christ. Question, is the spirit OF Dan or Elias a He?

Not if they were neutered.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Why don't you say "Shekinah"?

Because it comes from The Sacred Tree Of Sephiroth out of the Caballah.
It has to done with a Marco Prosopus The Crown, Abba, Aima The Primal Mother.

[Praxeas]

I have never liked the fact that the Holy Ghost is referred to as "it." It seems to go against oneness thinking, in my opinion. If it is ok to refer to the HG as "it" then why not replace Father with "it?"
Same reason we don't say the Son is the Father. There is a distinction. The Spirit is not the Father. The Spirit is the Spirit OF the Father usually. Sometimes the bible ascribes personal function to the Spirit, but that is probably because Spirit is the very essence of being OF the Father and when the Father does something He does it BY His Spirit.

[Praxeas]

Because it comes from The Sacred Tree Of Sephiroth out of the Caballah.
It has to done with a Marco Prosopus The Crown, Abba, Aima The Primal Mother.
What if the word Shekinah is used in the scriptures?

[Praxeas]

By the way, what trips people up, I think, is the fact that in English 'it' is generally used of inanimate objects or animals, and thus is considered the 'impersonal' pronoun. Whereas Biblical Greek does not require that particular nuance when using a neither pronoun. A neuter pronoun in Greek does not require the referrent to be 'impersonal', and the gender of nouns (and thus pronouns) in Greek is not entirely dependent upon the actual gender of the object to which the noun or pronoun refers.

Going back to Spanish, for a brief moment, one says 'la pluma' even though a pen is in no way shape or form a lady.

:)
Exactly, but please don't feed the dogs. :choir

[Scott Hutchinson]

So with God we can say there is a distinction in attributes ,but not in being since God is indivisble in being.

[Praxeas]

"IT" is gramatically correct. I've used it many times in reference to not only the person, power and presence of the Holy Ghost but of the experience itself.
BTW we often refer to animals as "it"...I've even heard babies called "it"...probably because we don't know the gender at the time.

[Scott Hutchinson]

What if the word Shekinah is used in the scriptures?

Is it ? I might be wrong but I don't recall seeing it.

[Brother Strange]

Gender is a below realm distinction that does not have application in the Kingdom of God (that which is from ABOVE).

There is neither male nor female in Christ,; the body of God's anointing.

If we were to take that position, which I do not, we then be in error to refer to Jesus with ANY pronoun such as "He," "Him" but would neccessarily be a neuter form which would seriously detract from his personhood. He is a Man. In his sacrifical role as the Son of God, He, the man is the mediator between God and man.

Of neccessity, pronouns that depict Him in all of His reality must be conveyed in our language, regardless if its in the language of the Hotten Tots. If that language is remiss in this, we would soon lose our vision of Jesus to become difused in our thinking and opinion of Him.

[Praxeas]

1Pe 1:11 ερευνωντες Searching 2045 V-PAP-NPM εις of 1519 PREP τινα what 5101 I-ASM η or 2228 PRT ποιον what manner 4169 I-ASM καιρον of time 2540 N-ASM εδηλου did signify 1213 V-IAI-3S το the 3588 T-NSN εν which was in 1722 PREP αυτοις them 846 P-DPM πνευμα Spirit 4151 N-NSN χριστου of Christ 5547 N-GSM προμαρτυρομενον when it testified beforehand 4303 V-PNP-NSN τα the 3588 T-APN εις 1519 PREP χριστον Christ 5547 N-ASM παθηματα sufferings 3804 N-APN και and 2532 CONJ τας the 3588 T-APF μετα that should follow 3326 PREP ταυτα 5023 D-APN δοξας glory. 1391 N-APF


Joh 1:32 και And 2532 CONJ εμαρτυρησεν bare record 3140 V-AAI-3S ιωαννης John 2491 N-NSM λεγων saying 3004 V-PAP-NSM οτι 3754 CONJ τεθεαμαι I saw 2300 V-RNI-1S το the 3588 T-ASN πνευμα Spirit 4151 N-ASN καταβαινον descending 2597 V-PAP-ASN ωσει like 5616 ADV περιστεραν a dove 4058 N-ASF εξ from 1537 PREP ουρανου heaven 3772 N-GSM και and 2532 CONJ εμεινεν it abode 3306 V-AAI-3S επ upon 1909 PREP αυτον him. 846 P-ASM

Daniel,

In neither of the verses you quoted did the translator translate as you assert they did. They did not mistranslate the word 'to','ho', or 'o' because those words just aren't there. In each verse they used a pronoun they thought was appropriate for the antecedent noun, a pronoun which is implied in the verb itself.



You may see a creative license with the KJV translators but that license is taken with other translators as well.

Do you think the Spirit of God has a gender? The NAS translators chose to use the pronoun, he, but the pronoun, he, is not in the Greek text.
You are correct. Daniel does not know what he is talking about here.

[Rico]

Same reason we don't say the Son is the Father. There is a distinction. The Spirit is not the Father. The Spirit is the Spirit OF the Father usually. Sometimes the bible ascribes personal function to the Spirit, but that is probably because Spirit is the very essence of being OF the Father and when the Father does something He does it BY His Spirit.

The Spirit is not the Father? Does not the Bible say it was the Spirit that overshadowed Mary and caused her to conceive? That would most certainly make the Spirit the Father, Prax.

[Brother Strange]

BTW we often refer to animals as "it"...I've even heard babies called "it"...probably because we don't know the gender at the time.
True...

and oft times when we DO know the gender.

[deseret]

The Spirit is not the Father? Does not the Bible say it was the Spirit that overshadowed Mary and caused her to conceive? That would most certainly make the Spirit the Father, Prax.

When the Jehovah's Witness speak of the Spirit, they see it as God's way of doing things. A force, if you will.

[Praxeas]

If we call the Holy Ghost or He does it matter ?We know that is the Spirit of Jesus Christ.The notion of three beings or persons of God is just a theory anyways.
Is the Holy Ghost a WHAT or a WHO or both? I think we need to understand that the Spirit is the Spirit OF Christ, not someone other than Christ nor something other than Christ.

[Praxeas]

The Spirit is not the Father? Does not the Bible say it was the Spirit that overshadowed Mary and caused her to conceive? That would most certainly make the Spirit the Father, Prax.
Did you read what I just said? Spirit is God's essence of Being. He does not have physical arms. So when HE does things He does things BY His Spirit. Again, Spirit is called the Spirit OF the Father. Spirit is WHAT God is.

[Praxeas]

Is it ? I might be wrong but I don't recall seeing it.
It's not there. The ISBE says
shḗ-kī´na (שׁכינה, shekhīnah, “that which dwells,” from the verb שׁכן, shākhēn, or שׁכן, shākhan, “to dwell,” “reside”): This word is not found in the Bible, but there are allusions to it in Isa_60:2; Mat_17:5; Luk_2:9; Rom_9:4. It is first found in the Targums. See GLORY.

[Sam]

Jesus is my Savior and it lives in my heart.

God is my Father and it takes care of me.

The Holy Spirit lives in me and it guides me.

For God so loved the world that it gave its only begotten son, that whosoever believes in it shall not perish but have everlasting life.

God is Father, God is Son, and God is Holy Ghost.
Some times this triune God is referred to as we and us and some times this triune God is referred to as He or Him.

[Praxeas]

Like I said, we assign Him a gender because it's all we understand. But think about it....what would be the purpose of God and the angels being male? What is our purpose for having gender?

We don't understand genderless beings and our language doesn't allow that understanding, thus the reason why God refers to Himself as male to us, and why Jesus was born a male instead of being born genderless.

That, coupled with the fact that our history holds males in high esteem (thus the reason why Jesus wasn't female instead) is the reason why God is male and the only purpose for being such. But God is a spirit, and spirits don't have gender. There is no need for it.
It's called Anthropomorphism.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Is the Holy Ghost a WHAT or a WHO or both? I think we need to understand that the Spirit is the Spirit OF Christ, not someone other than Christ nor something other than Christ.

I agree.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Jesus is my Savior and it lives in my heart.

God is my Father and it takes care of me.

The Holy Spirit lives in me and it guides me.

For God so loved the world that it gave its only begotten son, that whosoever believes in it shall not perish but have everlasting life.

God is Father, God is Son, and God is Holy Ghost.
Some times this triune God is referred to as we and us and some times this triune God is referred to as He or Him.

But three Gods don't live inside of you ,just one.

[Praxeas]

It always amuses me to hear how people express themselves in regard to "spirit" as though spirit is a indefinite glob of air or cloud or something strangely etherial.

First let me ask you.

Don't you believe that Jesus is the One True Lord God, Jehovah Almighty?

Don't you believe that He is a man?

Do you not believe that He is the last Adam?

Are we not speaking of gender? Don't you believe that Jesus in the flesh was nothing unlike you and I in regards to gender?

I am sure that you said "yes" to all of the above.

Now for the last question, do you not believe that the Lord (Jesus Christ) is that Spirit?

2Cr 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord [is], there [is] liberty.

Yes sir. When you see Jesus, you will see God, who is Lord above all. You will also see that He is a man. Yes, He is THE Spirit...the Holy Spirit having no human limitations, indwelling all believers, present in His church, filling all space and time, having all power.
Spirit, but definition, is incoporeal. Spirit, in greek, refers to air or wind. Spirits are not usually seen. They are unseen.

[deseret]

But three Gods don't live inside of you ,just one.
I did not know that this Sam character is a trinitarian.

[Rico]

Did you read what I just said? Spirit is God's essence of Being. He does not have physical arms. So when HE does things He does things BY His Spirit. Again, Spirit is called the Spirit OF the Father. Spirit is WHAT God is.

Yes, I read what you said. That's why I responded with my question. Jesus doesn't have arms now either? Tsk, tsk. What am I gonna do with you, Prax? Who do you think you are going to see when you get to Heaven, Bro? Won't it be the same Jesus that walked this Earth, arms and all?

[Praxeas]

True...

and oft times when we DO know the gender.
Yes then we might say "What's his name" or "What's her name"

[Scott Hutchinson]

It's not there. The ISBE says
shḗ-kī´na (שׁכינה, shekhīnah, “that which dwells,” from the verb שׁכן, shākhēn, or שׁכן, shākhan, “to dwell,” “reside”): This word is not found in the Bible, but there are allusions to it in Isa_60:2; Mat_17:5; Luk_2:9; Rom_9:4. It is first found in the Targums. See GLORY.

Does that differ from the Textus Receptus ?I'm not the scholar you are.

[Praxeas]

Yes, I read what you said. That's why I responded with my question. Jesus doesn't have arms now either? Tsk, tsk. What am I gonna do with you, Prax? Who do you think you are going to see when you get to Heaven, Bro? Won't it be the same Jesus that walked this Earth, arms and all?
Is that supposed to be a joke? We are talking about SPIRIT. Not the body of Jesus.

BTW you called Jesus an "it".....

[Scott Hutchinson]

I did not know that this Sam character is a trinitarian.

No He's not I was just pullin his leg.

[Rico]

Is that supposed to be a joke? We are talking about SPIRIT. Not the body of Jesus.

Yes, Prax. I am giving you a hard time, Brother. Relax already, would ya? ;)

[Praxeas]

Yes, Prax. I am giving you a hard time, Brother. Relax already, would ya? ;)
You called Jesus an "it" nyah nyah nyah :slaphappy

[Praxeas]

I did not know that this Sam character is a trinitarian.
I think he is a bisectitarian

[Rico]

You called Jesus an "it" nyah nyah nyah :slaphappy

That's because I made the mistake of using improper grammar. Are you now saying the Bible has improper grammar in it? :)

[Brother Strange]

Is the Holy Ghost a WHAT or a WHO or both? I think we need to understand that the Spirit is the Spirit OF Christ, not someone other than Christ nor something other than Christ.

Both WHAT and WHO could have been used appropriately in regards to the Holy Ghost. What can be used relatively to indicate that which.
In speaking of the promise of the Father, he could have told his disciples that He would send that which (what) was promised. He made specific note of refering to the Holy Ghost as "He." The Which, the What, the Who, though neuter in form nevertheless does not in any way diminish the "He," whom the scriptures says is a MAN. Man denotes gender.

[Praxeas]

That's because I made the mistake of using improper grammar. Are you now saying the Bible has improper grammar in it? :)
Nope. I've been saying it uses proper grammar and that is exactly why it calls Spirit "it"

[Praxeas]

Both WHAT and WHO could have been used appropriately in regards to the Holy Ghost. What can be used relatively to indicate that which.
In speaking of the promise of the Father, he could have told his disciples that He would send that which (what) was promised. He made specific note of refering to the Holy Ghost as "He." The Which, the What, the Who, though neuter in form nevertheless does not in any way diminish the "He," whom the scriptures says is a MAN. Man denotes gender.
It really depends on the context. Most often the Spirit is refered to as the Spirit OF the Father or the Spirit OF Christ or the Spirit OF the Son. Jesus has a Spirit and so do you.

When Christ is in you He is in you BY His Spirit. Spirit is the Divine essence of Being. Spirit is HOW God exists eternally/transcendently. So when God does something AS God via His Divine nature it is always By or As Spirit.

So Spirit often times refers to just a what...what God is or HOW He exists. Other times personal action is ascribed to Spirit...

[Brother Strange]

Spirit, but definition, is incoporeal. Spirit, in greek, refers to air or wind. Spirits are not usually seen. They are unseen.

Spirits are men and women. They are very often seen by the natural eye. They have been known to purposefully make themselves visibile to the natural eye. All through the O.T., this is noted. It happens very often today as well. I've seen them. My son related an encounter with a spirit that severely rebuked him when he was a young teenager, sending him home with a sharp rebuke. That rebuke from a tall man (spirit) saved him a great deal of grief.

These spirits (both men and women) are among us as ministering spirits who are the heirs of salvation.

[HeavenlyOne]

Gender is a below realm distinction that does not have application in the Kingdom of God (that which is from ABOVE).

There is neither male nor female in Christ,; the body of God's anointing.

Agreed. Gender has no meaning to God. It only means something to the physical world.

[HeavenlyOne]

Understood...but,

See my very last post.

Was Jesus male before He was born?

What purpose does gender have in heaven?

[Scott Hutchinson]

Here on earth gender means that women get the final say ,yes I let my wife win sometimes.

[HeavenlyOne]

If we were to take that position, which I do not, we then be in error to refer to Jesus with ANY pronoun such as "He," "Him" but would neccessarily be a neuter form which would seriously detract from his personhood. He is a Man. In his sacrifical role as the Son of God, He, the man is the mediator between God and man.

Of neccessity, pronouns that depict Him in all of His reality must be conveyed in our language, regardless if its in the language of the Hotten Tots. If that language is remiss in this, we would soon lose our vision of Jesus to become difused in our thinking and opinion of Him.

What was male, the deity or humanity of Jesus?

Our language doesn't allow us to understand the lack of gender assignment in referring to personalities. Most, if not all, languages don't allow for that. We don't understand a genderless being.

[tbpew]

If we were to take that position, which I do not, we then be in error to refer to Jesus with ANY pronoun such as "He," "Him" but would neccessarily be a neuter form which would seriously detract from his personhood. He is a Man. In his sacrifical role as the Son of God, He, the man is the mediator between God and man.

Of neccessity, pronouns that depict Him in all of His reality must be conveyed in our language, regardless if its in the language of the Hotten Tots. If that language is remiss in this, we would soon lose our vision of Jesus to become difused in our thinking and opinion of Him.

I offer no departure from any thing that you have stated provided it pertains to (limited to) THIS WORLD. Our Lord's Kingdom is NOT of this world. The SON of God is a male when referenced from within the framework, or as viewed from, the natural order.

In the resurrection we will be as the angels; no gender. (as Prax asked..."is so-n-so's spirit an it?

Prior to the resurrection, we have access to move and have our being IN CHRIST. This blessed access to another realm (ABOVE) does not have the distinctions that so define our BELOW realm existence. Any "roles and distinctions" need to be wisely applied to conduct pertaining to the natural order and not be dragged into the realm of God's Kingdom; the fellowship we have as members in the Body of Christ.

In matters pertaining to our BELOW-ness (our present state) gender is a role that we each must operate within. This distinction does not have application in the Spirit of God. This same spirit anoints his own dwellingplace and establishes his CHRIST, the all-in-all.

[Praxeas]

Spirits are men and women. They are very often seen by the natural eye. They have been known to purposefully make themselves visibile to the natural eye. All through the O.T., this is noted. It happens very often today as well. I've seen them. My son related an encounter with a spirit that severely rebuked him when he was a young teenager, sending him home with a sharp rebuke. That rebuke from a tall man (spirit) saved him a great deal of grief.

These spirits (both men and women) are among us as ministering spirits who are the heirs of salvation.
Gender, as far as people are concerned, is an aspect of sexuality. It's a physical attribute. Spirits don't have gender but male and female people have spirit and soul. Their physical makeup make them distinctive.

That an angel can take on a human form does not mean that the spirit itself has gender

[Brother Strange]

It really depends on the context. Most often the Spirit is refered to as the Spirit OF the Father or the Spirit OF Christ or the Spirit OF the Son. Jesus has a Spirit and so do you.

When Christ is in you He is in you BY His Spirit. Spirit is the Divine essence of Being. Spirit is HOW God exists eternally/transcendently. So when God does something AS God via His Divine nature it is always By or As Spirit.

So Spirit often times refers to just a what...what God is or HOW He exists. Other times personal action is ascribed to Spirit...

Yes, it does often depend on the context. When we use "it" in today's language, we are often speaking of the expierience. "I received IT, praise God! The songs says, "I've got it, I've got it, something about the power of the Holy Ghost, I can't explain it but I've got IT." IT being the experience and not the WHO.


Without my spirit, I would ONLY be a what or an it. My corporeal self is not myself. My spirit is myself in every form from foot to folic and everything in between...including...., just like Jesus in every way.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Angels sure don't procreate do they ?

[HeavenlyOne]

It's called Anthropomorphism.

Didn't I have a problem with that word before? LOL!

[HeavenlyOne]

Is that supposed to be a joke? We are talking about SPIRIT. Not the body of Jesus.

BTW you called Jesus an "it".....

Hahaha.....I caught that too!

[HeavenlyOne]

Spirits are men and women. They are very often seen by the natural eye. They have been known to purposefully make themselves visibile to the natural eye. All through the O.T., this is noted. It happens very often today as well. I've seen them. My son related an encounter with a spirit that severely rebuked him when he was a young teenager, sending him home with a sharp rebuke. That rebuke from a tall man (spirit) saved him a great deal of grief.

These spirits (both men and women) are among us as ministering spirits who are the heirs of salvation.

I'd be interested in seeing where a female spirit is seen in the Bible.

[Brother Strange]

Gender, as far as people are concerned, is an aspect of sexuality. It's a physical attribute. Spirits don't have gender but male and female people have spirit and soul. Their physical makeup make them distinctive.

That an angel can take on a human form does not mean that the spirit itself has gender

Clinically looking below the waist line, we find absolutely nothing differently about Jesus, the Lord, who is that Spirit than myself, including a navel button. This can be said of angels too. I am speaking anatomically of course. Certainly there is no procreation in the spirit world. All of that 'messin' around is done here. As far as sexuality is concerned, Jesus noted that there was neither male nor female. I am sure he had marriage and procreation in mind, in regards to sexuality but not in regards to gender. The subject underconsideration was marriage and divorce.

[HeavenlyOne]

Gender, as far as people are concerned, is an aspect of sexuality. It's a physical attribute. Spirits don't have gender but male and female people have spirit and soul. Their physical makeup make them distinctive.

That an angel can take on a human form does not mean that the spirit itself has gender

I would add that the angel or spirit taking on a gender is for our benefit, not for theirs, because gender is needed only for procreation, and spirits don't do that.....or so I've heard.

[HeavenlyOne]

Angels sure don't procreate do they ?

I hope not....LOL!

Since they are all male, who would they procreate with???

[deseret]

I am amazed at the extent some people will go to -to prove their point.

[HeavenlyOne]

I am amazed at the extent some people will go to -to prove their point.

Amazed? I'm over that already.....LOL!

Nothing amazes me anymore.

[Brother Strange]

Was Jesus male before He was born?

What purpose does gender have in heaven?

Was Jesus Jesus before he was born? NO! Jesus was not Jesus until he WAS born.

There is no purpose for "sexuality" in heaven, but we are made after the figure of Him, (Jesus) that was to come.

[HeavenlyOne]

Was Jesus Jesus before he was born? NO! Jesus was not Jesus until he WAS born.

There is no purpose for "sexuality" in heaven, but we are made after the figure of Him, (Jesus) that was to come.

And how do we know that God has gender, and how is that gender determined?

Gender in humans is seen at birth in only one place on the body, and other than blood tests, that's the only way to positively identify someone's gender.

How is this applied to God, even the Spirit of God, considering that the only purpose for gender is procreation?

[Brother Strange]

[QUOTE]What was male, the deity or humanity of Jesus?

Jesus IS diety. He is the ONLY diety. Jesus IS a man. He, Jesus the MAN, is God almighty having become one with His Father and having been GIVEN all power both in heaven and in earth. The LORD is THAT spirit.

Our language doesn't allow us to understand the lack of gender assignment in referring to personalities. Most, if not all, languages don't allow for that. We don't understand a genderless being.

I certainly understand the limitations of the human language, especially my own. You are right. We do not understand a genderless being. Jesus and angels are beings. We cannot think of them as being genderless. They have gender. Often the bible speaks of an angel being a MAN. The MAN Gabriel, for instance. Gender is ascribed to him.

[Rico]

Some of you need to burn your Bibles and buy one from these people.


http://www.genderneutralbibles.com/

[HeavenlyOne]

Jesus IS diety. He is the ONLY diety. Jesus IS a man. He, Jesus the MAN, is God almighty having become one with His Father and having been GIVEN all power both in heaven and in earth. The LORD is THAT spirit.

I think you are misunderstanding what I'm saying. Jesus was also humanity, so I'm asking, what is male, the humanity or the deity, and if the latter is the answer, what purpose does having a gender make to God?

I certainly understand the limitations of the human language, especially my own. You are right. We do not understand a genderless being. Jesus and angels are beings. We cannot think of them as being genderless. They have gender. Often the bible speaks of an angel being a MAN. The MAN Gabriel, for instance. Gender is ascribed to him.

But for what purpose? For us, or for the angels? And do angels have the physical characteristics of gender? What makes them male, other than just being referred to in that manner?

[HeavenlyOne]

Some of you need to burn your Bibles and buy one from these people.


http://www.genderneutralbibles.com/

Why would anyone want to do that?

God is my Father. He has a gender for me to understand, and since I'm human, that's important for me to know.

But to God, gender has no importance, therefore, He doesn't have one.

[Brother Strange]

[QUOTE]And how do we know that God has gender, and how is that gender determined?

Of course we know that God has gender. The bible says in Isa. 9:6, "For unto us a child is born, a SON is given. His name shall be called wonderful, counselor, Prince of Peace, the MIGHTY GOD, THE EVERLASTING FATHER.

Think of that! Think: SON, FATHER, GOD! What is his name? His name is Jesus. This passage of scripture came to pass in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod. He did not stay a baby with scar tissue over his navel. Eight days after his birth he bled when his penis was circumcised. All, just like any other boy. He died but he rose again...the body having GENDER rose again. He is NOW ON HIGH, having received all power both in heaven and earth, becoming ONE with God, now called the Everlasting Father.

I am not sure how gender is determined but it has something to do with X and Y Chromosones. When I took biological chemistry, a lot of these things were not kown back then.

Gender in humans is seen at birth in only one place on the body, and other than blood tests, that's the only way to positively identify someone's gender.

How is this applied to God, even the Spirit of God, considering that the only purpose for gender is procreation?

I don't think that you are trying to say that Jesus missed his purpose here on earth. You know that he was circucised. So, it is understood that he had certain fixtures of the male anatomy which has never been discarded. The gender is the same, dear. It will be the same for eternity. esus did not come into the world to procreate. Yet HE IS A MAN. :D

[Sam]

Angels sure don't procreate do they ?

Some people do believe that angels did have (and maybe still do have) sexual relations with humans and produced some kind of hybrid offspring. Some of this would be called "serpent seed" and some would see Genesis 6:1-2 speaking of the mating of angels with humans and producing some type of semi-human offspring.

[Brother Strange]

Why would anyone want to do that?

God is my Father. He has a gender for me to understand, and since I'm human, that's important for me to know.

But to God, gender has no importance, therefore, He doesn't have one.

LOL.... :killinme

He don't have ONE? I am not being scarcastic dear, because I love you to death. But, I laughed so hard until I almost fell out of my chair. Imagine that, "He doesn't have one."

Yes, he has one. In fact, on the 8th day it was circumcised. A part of His one was cut off, but he still has one. He was a man entirely like me. He is gone on into glory in his post-glorivied state, but still a man...still possessing one.

You know that I am not trying to be vulgar here, but I am using emphasis to bring home the point that God almighty is a MAN having gender...forever.

[deseret]

:eek:

[HeavenlyOne]

Of course we know that God has gender. The bible says in Isa. 9:6, "For unto us a child is born, a SON is given. His name shall be called wonderful, counselor, Prince of Peace, the MIGHTY GOD, THE EVERLASTING FATHER.

Right...a son is GIVEN. There was no son until He was given...and who was He given to? Us....humans.

Think of that! Think: SON, FATHER, GOD! What is his name? His name is Jesus. This passage of scripture came to pass in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod. He did not stay a baby with scar tissue over his navel. Eight days after his birth he bled when his penis was circumcised. All, just like any other boy. He died but he rose again...the body having GENDER rose again. He is NOW ON HIGH, having received all power both in heaven and earth, becoming ONE with God, now called the Everlasting Father.

You are speaking of human attributes, not deity. He had gender because He was human. God wasn't circumcized because He doesn't have physical attributes in reference to gender. That's the point I'm making.

God is called a Father in relation to us. There is no need for Him to be referred to as a Father for the angels, nor any other male personification. Being assigned a gender is for our benefit, not His.

I am not sure how gender is determined but it has something to do with X and Y Chromosones. When I took biological chemistry, a lot of these things were not kown back then. [quote]

God doesn't have chromasomes.


[quote]I don't think that you are trying to say that Jesus missed his purpose here on earth. You know that he was circucised. So, it is understood that he had certain fixtures of the male anatomy which has never been discarded. The gender is the same, dear. It will be the same for eternity. esus did not come into the world to procreate. Yet HE IS A MAN. :D

But you are speaking of Jesus in His human state. Are you saying that Jesus still has genitalia? Whatever for??

[HeavenlyOne]

LOL.... :killinme

He don't have ONE? I am not being scarcastic dear, because I love you to death. But, I laughed so hard until I almost fell out of my chair. Imagine that, "He doesn't have one."

Yes, he has one. In fact, on the 8th day it was circumcised. A part of His one was cut off, but he still has one. He was a man entirely like me. He is gone on into glory in his post-glorivied state, but still a man...still possessing one.

You know that I am not trying to be vulgar here, but I am using emphasis to bring home the point that God almighty is a MAN having gender...forever.

Again, you are speaking of Jesus in His human state. The topic was about the Spirit of God and does it have gender. Jesus is also God, but you keep referring to His humanity.

God wasn't circumcized. He doesn't have genitalia to require such an action.

And I know you aren't being vulgar. I can speak about these issues without feeling uncomfortable. It's the nurse in me. :D

[HeavenlyOne]

Going to church. Be back later!

[SDG]

In what way does the Spirit of God have a gender?

In the way Jesus referred to the Spirit ... as HE.

[SDG]

Jhn 1:32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.

I'm no Bible Scholar, and generally shy away from these types of debates, but isn't the latter portion of the verse: "and it abode upon him," speaking more in relation to the literal dove than the Spirit?

The Spirit descended from heaven . . . like a dove . . . and it abode upon him. I take the "it" to mean the literal manifestation of the dove, not the spiritual.

Am I way of[f] on this?

Nope.

[SDG]

1Pe 1:11 ερευνωντες Searching 2045 V-PAP-NPM εις of 1519 PREP τινα what 5101 I-ASM η or 2228 PRT ποιον what manner 4169 I-ASM καιρον of time 2540 N-ASM εδηλου did signify 1213 V-IAI-3S το the 3588 T-NSN εν which was in 1722 PREP αυτοις them 846 P-DPM πνευμα Spirit 4151 N-NSN χριστου of Christ 5547 N-GSM προμαρτυρομενον when it testified beforehand 4303 V-PNP-NSN τα the 3588 T-APN εις 1519 PREP χριστον Christ 5547 N-ASM παθηματα sufferings 3804 N-APN και and 2532 CONJ τας the 3588 T-APF μετα that should follow 3326 PREP ταυτα 5023 D-APN δοξας glory. 1391 N-APF


Joh 1:32 και And 2532 CONJ εμαρτυρησεν bare record 3140 V-AAI-3S ιωαννης John 2491 N-NSM λεγων saying 3004 V-PAP-NSM οτι 3754 CONJ τεθεαμαι I saw 2300 V-RNI-1S το the 3588 T-ASN πνευμα Spirit 4151 N-ASN καταβαινον descending 2597 V-PAP-ASN ωσει like 5616 ADV περιστεραν a dove 4058 N-ASF εξ from 1537 PREP ουρανου heaven 3772 N-GSM και and 2532 CONJ εμεινεν it abode 3306 V-AAI-3S επ upon 1909 PREP αυτον him. 846 P-ASM

Daniel,

In neither of the verses you quoted did the translator translate as you assert they did. They did not mistranslate the word 'to','ho', or 'o' because those words just aren't there. In each verse they used a pronoun they thought was appropriate for the antecedent noun, a pronoun which is implied in the verb itself.



You may see a creative license with the KJV translators but that license is taken with other translators as well.

Do you think the Spirit of God has a gender? The NAS translators chose to
use the pronoun, he, but the pronoun, he, is not in the Greek text.

The word ho is there ... my dear Mizpeh ... it languages there are variations of root words ... hate to break to you ... but according to Strong's the word ho ... has variations ... to ... tav etc.

[Pressing-On]

I think you are misunderstanding what I'm saying. Jesus was also humanity, so I'm asking, what is male, the humanity or the deity, and if the latter is the answer, what purpose does having a gender make to God?



But for what purpose? For us, or for the angels? And do angels have the physical characteristics of gender? What makes them male, other than just being referred to in that manner? We have the masculinity in the names as Father and Son and, I believe I read that, the"Comforter" as referring to the Holy Ghost is masculine in the Greek.

I also remember reading that the writer used the masculine form of the demonstrative pronoun ekeinos ("that male one"). Thus, breaking the grammatical agreement that was expected by native language readers. It then was a clear indication of the author's intention to unambiguously convey the Holy Spirit as masculine.

[SDG]

Here is John 1:19 parsed in the Greek... please find it as it is connoted in the English language ... if you can ... as to describe an inanimate object, animal or general idea ...


eraunwntev (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=v+-papnpm-&num=2045&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Verb : Present : Active : Participle : Nominative : Plural : Masculine 2045 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#)eraunaw

eiv (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=p+--------&num=1519&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Preposit ion1519 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#)eiv
tina (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=ri+----asm-&num=5101&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Interrog ative Pronoun : Accusative : Singular : Masculine 5101 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#) tiv

h (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=c+--------&num=2228&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Conjunct ion 2228 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#)h

poion (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=ri+----asm-&num=4169&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Interrog ative Pronoun : Accusative : Singular : Masculine 4169 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#) poiov

kairon (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=n+----asm-&num=2540&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Noun : Accusative : Singular : Masculine2540 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#) kairov

edhlou (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=v+3iai-s--&num=1213&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29) Verb : 3rd Person : Imperfect : Active : Indicative : Singular 1213 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#) dhlow

to (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=ra+----nsn-&num=3588&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Definite Article : Nominative : Singular : Neuter 3588 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#) o

en (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=p+--------&num=1722&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Preposit ion 1722 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#)en

autoiv (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=rp+----dpm-&num=846&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Personal Pronoun : Dative : Plural : Masculine 846 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#)autov

pneuma (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=n+----nsn-&num=4151&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Noun : Nominative : Singular : Neuter4151 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#)pneuma

Xristou (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=n+----gsm-&num=5547&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Noun : Genitive : Singular : Masculine5547 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#) Xristov

promarturomenon (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=v+-pmpnsn-&num=4303&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29) Verb : Present : Middle : Participle : Nominative : Singular : Neuter 4303 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#)promarturomai

ta (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=ra+----apn-&num=3588&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Definite Article : Accusative : Plural : Neuter 3588 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#)o

eiv (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=p+--------&num=1519&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Preposit ion1519 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#) eiv

Xriston (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=n+----asm-&num=5547&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Noun : Accusative : Singular : Masculine 5547 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#)Xristov

paqhmata (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=n+----apn-&num=3804&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Noun : Accusative : Plural : Neuter3804 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#)paqhma

kai (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=c+--------&num=2532&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Conjunct ion 2532 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#)kai

tav (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=ra+----apf-&num=3588&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29) Definite Article : Accusative : Plural : Feminine 3588 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#) o

meta (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=p+--------&num=3326&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29)Preposit ion3326 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#)meta

tauta (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=rd+----apn-&num=5023&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29) Demonstrative Pronoun : Accusative : Plural : Neuter 5023 (http://studylight.org/isb/parse.cgi?bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na#) outov

docas (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27lem.cgi?parts=n+----apf-&num=&bk=1pe&ch=1&vs=11&nt=na%27,%27parts%27,450,500,1,0,1,0,0%29) Noun : Accusative : Plural : Feminine doca

[Brother Strange]

[QUOTE]I think you are misunderstanding what I'm saying. Jesus was also humanity, so I'm asking, what is male, the humanity or the deity, and if the latter is the answer, what purpose does having a gender make to God?

HO, when you use the word "also," there seems to be inherent in that thought that Jesus was structurally different that I am. Jesus was/is a Spirit. You and I are are spirits. Period. End of discussion. Book closed. Class dismissed. Lights out.

Jesus was/is nothing unlike you and I in this regard. He too, is a Spirit...albeit the Holy Spirit, omnipresent. Yes, Jesus is humanity. He is God. He is the ONLY man that is diety..or God. This man IS God. To use the word "also," somehow draws the reader to assume that one believes that there is a distinction between God and Jesus, the man. This is a mistaken idea. There is NO distinction between God and the man Christ Jesus except...now this is imporant to remember...EXCEPT in his mediatorial role in which he officiates in the office of SON of God...by which blood was shed for redemption...a work that was completed on the cross.

So let us not think in the "also." Let us rather think, "This man born of a virgin in Bethlehem of Judea, lived, taught, suffered under Pontius Pilate, died, rose again, ascended on high and has promised to return again, IS THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, GOD ALMIGHTY. In short, we must think: THAT MAN IS GOD.

The fact that He is a MAN, denotes gender.

But for what purpose? For us, or for the angels?

Well, I guess he could have come as a neuter, having no navel button, no sex, no nipples on his chest, no buttocks or colon or any such thing that made him entirely like me as Heb 2 states. But then, who would have received him. I doubt that the disciples would have received what they would have thought of as a curious freak.

And do angels have the physical characteristics of gender? What makes them male, other than just being referred to in that manner?

Well, the bible says that they are men. The word denotes gender in my opinion. Jacob wrestled with such a very powerful man all night long one night. The man finally put a whoopin on Jacob just before dawn. He limped for the rest of his life. Some fight. Some man.

[Pressing-On]

Jhn 1:32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.

I'm no Bible Scholar, and generally shy away from these types of debates, but isn't the latter portion of the verse: "and it abode upon him," speaking more in relation to the literal dove than the Spirit?

The Spirit descended from heaven . . . like a dove . . . and it abode upon him. I take the "it" to mean the literal manifestation of the dove, not the spiritual.

Am I way of[f] on this?
I believe it says, "like as a dove", implying that whatever they saw it (lol) was identified with what the region knew of the dove - the most gentle and loving creature of all.

They captured them and put them in cages because they loved the gentle cooing and the beauty.

So, more than likely, whatever experience they had or saw after Jesus was baptized , the dove, was the most awesome, peaceful thing they could relate the experience to.

[SDG]

Secondly just because a word has gender in language does not mean it literally reflects its real literal gender, or lack thereof ...

Example: the word preacher in the Hebrew is feminine ... but of course we would not think that the preacher in Ecclesiastes is really a female.

[Pressing-On]

Secondly just because a word has gender in language does not mean it literally reflects its real literal gender ...

Example: the word preacher in the Hebrew is feminine ... but of course we would not think that the preacher in Ecclesiastes is really a female.

Perhaps, then, it's an all encompassing word?

:doggyrun

[SDG]

NIV translators didn't see an it either:

32Then John gave this testimony: "I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him.

[Pressing-On]

There seems to be some controversy over the use of the third person neuter pronoun 'it' in regard to the Holy Spirit. Some folks feel that it is wrong to speak of the Spirit of God as 'it'.

But please do notice the following:

Isa 34:16 Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall fail, none shall want her mate: for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them.

Here, Isaiah delivers a message from God, who speaks of his spirit as 'it'.

Jhn 1:32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.

Here John the Baptist speaks of the Spirit as 'it'.

1Pe 1:11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

Here the apostle Peter speaks of the Spirit of Christ as 'it' and uses the term 'which' (instead of the religiously correct term 'who'.


Now let's look at one verse, which is actually merely a sample of numerous other similarly constructed verses:

1Jo 5:6 This is he that came by water and blood, [even] Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

Notice the phrase 'it is the Spirit'. This is similar in construction to numerous other phrases which say 'it is ...X' where X is a person (male or female). For example, howmany times have you said 'it's God' or 'it's Jesus'? We see no problem whatsoever in saying 'it is [insert male or female person's name here]'.

Why is this possible? Why do we not say 'he is the Spirit' or 'He is God' in such situations? Technically and grammatically, the phrase 'it is the Spirit' is simply saying that 'the Spirit is it' where 'it' is the subject of the sentence or phrase.

Why is this not considered incorrect grammar? Because that is simply how language works.

To say 'it is ...X' is simply saying that 'it', an unidentified subject, is then identified as 'the Spirit' or 'God' or 'Fred' or 'Mary' or whatever you supply. There is no grammatical difficulty even though the pronoun is neuter and the noun which it refers to is masculine or feminine or whatever the case may be.

So, in short, there is both Biblical and grammatical precedent for using 'it' in reference to the Holy Spirit.

Does this mean the Spirit is 'an it' and not a 'He'? No, of course not. The pronoun does not determine the reality of the underlying noun. That would be contrary to all logic and language, not to mention common sense.

But, to put it simply, if the Bible itself occasionally refers to the Spirit of God as 'it' then it is not wrong for us to do so as well.
Very good. I understand this and I agree!

[SDG]

We want to say the bible says its so ... but is it the bible or the translator that uses the word it????

Just examining this topic from the translation given to us by the KJV translators is like an art connoisseur trying to analyze the hues and strokes of Da Vinci's Mona Lisa from a black and white print.

[Pressing-On]

We want to say the bible says its so ... but is it the bible or the translator that uses the word it????

Just examining this topic from the translation of the KJV translators is like an art connoisseur trying to analyze the hues and strokes of Da Vinci's Mona Lisa from a black and white print.

It makes no difference, Daniel. The point is understood and unless we want to gravitate to God in three persons, blessed Trinity,:musicnotes it's seems a moot argument, IMHO! :D

I'm more interested in His Spirit descending - "like as a dove". Beautiful!

[SDG]

The Jewish believer in OT times would not even dare to pronounce of write the name of God ... it would astonish me ... that the would then turn around and refer to the Spirit of God as an it as we use it today. And apparently after close examination ... of the original texts it is not used ....

The Jewish believer has always referred to God as He.

[Pressing-On]

The Jewish believer in OT times would not even dare to pronounce of write the name of God ... it would astonish me ... that the would then turn around and refer to the Spirit of God as an it as we use it today. And apparently after close examination ... of the original texts it is not used ....

How would you have all the passages phrased?

Could you post a few?

[Brother Strange]

Again, you are speaking of Jesus in His human state. The topic was about the Spirit of God and does it have gender. Jesus is also God, but you keep referring to His humanity.

God wasn't circumcized. He doesn't have genitalia to require such an action.

And I know you aren't being vulgar. I can speak about these issues without feeling uncomfortable. It's the nurse in me. :D

Clinically speaking... LOL

Gotta luv ya, girl.

It becomes clear, like so many other Apostolic people, you are trying to divide God up, trying to recognize God as to what is Spirit and what is man. But, there is no man at all...impossible to be a man without spirit. It is impossible for it to be divided as to recognize a division or distinction between the God and the Man...except for the duration of his "kenosis" or humiliation during the time on earth, in His pre-glorified state. Since then, there are no distinction unless we want to be 2/3rds Trinitarian. :D

[SDG]

How would you have all the passages phrased?

Could you post a few?

My translation is irrelevant ....

Let's look at the NIV and NAS ... who apparently did not use the creative license of the KJV translators ... these are the verses included in Eliseus' exegesis

NIV

Isaiah 3:16
16 Look in the scroll of the LORD and read:
None of these will be missing,
not one will lack her mate.
For it is his mouth that has given the order,
and his Spirit will gather them together.

NAS

6Seek from the (A (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isa%2034:16;&version=49;#cen-NASB-18320A))book of the LORD, and read:
Not one of these will be missing;
None will lack its mate
For (B (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isa%2034:16;&version=49;#cen-NASB-18320B))His mouth has commanded,
And His Spirit has gathered them.

NO IT!!!
----------------------------
JOHN 1:32

NIV

32Then John gave this testimony: "I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him.


NAS
32John (A (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%201:32;&version=49;#cen-NASB-26077A))testified saying, "(B (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%201:32;&version=49;#cen-NASB-26077B))I have seen the Spirit descending as a dove out of heaven, and He remained upon Him.

NO IT!!!

------------------------------------------------

1 PETER 1:11

NIV
11trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow.

NAS

1seeking to know what person or time (A (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20PETER%201:11;&version=49;#cen-NASB-30386A))the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He (B (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20PETER%201:11;&version=49;#cen-NASB-30386B))predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow.

NO IT!!!!

-------------------------------------------

In First John we find the word it ... but it is not modifying the word Spirit ... but the word is ... the verb to be.

NIV

6This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.


We could use any word there for Spirit and it has nothing to do w/ noun Spirit...

I.E. ... IT IS THE LORD THAT BEARETH WITNESS ...

[Pressing-On]

My translation is irrelevant ....

Let's look at the NIV and NAS ... who apparently did not use the creative license of the KJV translators ... these are the verses included in Eliseus' exegesis

NIV

Isaiah 3:16
16 Look in the scroll of the LORD and read:
None of these will be missing,
not one will lack her mate.
For it is his mouth that has given the order,
and his Spirit will gather them together.

NAS

6Seek from the (A (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isa%2034:16;&version=49;#cen-NASB-18320A))book of the LORD, and read:
Not one of these will be missing;
None will lack its mate
For (B (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isa%2034:16;&version=49;#cen-NASB-18320B))His mouth has commanded,
And His Spirit has gathered them.

NO IT!!!
----------------------------
JOHN 1:32

NIV

32Then John gave this testimony: "I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him.


NAS
32John (A (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%201:32;&version=49;#cen-NASB-26077A))testified saying, "(B (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%201:32;&version=49;#cen-NASB-26077B))I have seen the Spirit descending as a dove out of heaven, and He remained upon Him.

NO IT!!!

------------------------------------------------

1 PETER 1:11

NIV
11trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow.

NAS

1seeking to know what person or time (A (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20PETER%201:11;&version=49;#cen-NASB-30386A))the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He (B (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20PETER%201:11;&version=49;#cen-NASB-30386B))predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow.

NO IT!!!!

-------------------------------------------

In First John we find the word it ... but it is not modifying the word Spirit ... but the word is ... the verb to be.

NIV

6This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.


We could use any word there for Spirit and it has nothing to do w/ noun Spirit...

I.E. ... IT IS THE LORD THAT BEARETH WITNESS ...
Daniel,
I never said anything you put out was "irrelevant". I said the thought of "it" being confusing when it isn't is irrelevant, IMHO! :D

The KJV, IMHO, is saying the same thing as what you just quoted above. At least, that is how I have always read it. So, in researching and putting them side by side, and being that all translations confirm the same message, it's a moot point.

[SDG]

Daniel,
I never said anything you put out was "irrelevant". I said the thought of "it" being confusing when it isn't is irrelevant, IMHO! :D

The KJV, IMHO, is saying the same thing as what you just quoted above. At least, that is how I have always read it. So, in researching and putting them side by side, and being that all translations confirm the same message, it's a moot point.

In examining the main idea ... or big picture the message is the similar... but the argument here is not the overall message but if it's okay or acceptable to use the Word "it" in referring to the Spirit of God ... a weak argument, IMHO, has been put forth that because a poor translation in these instances refers to the Spirit as it ... then somehow it vindicates our modern usage of it in our circles. The writer of the scriptures apparently did not use it .... as connoted in the English language ...

The details ... tell a different story

[SDG]

To quote my hero, Rush Limbaugh, WORDS MEAN THINGS.

[Pressing-On]

In examining the main idea ... or big picture the message is the similar...


This is as far as I got. :D

[Pressing-On]

To quote my hero, Rush Limbaugh, WORDS MEAN THINGS.

You are right and so I say - "Shut up. You're ugly and your mother dresses you funny!"


:bliss :bliss :bliss :bliss

[Brother Strange]

We want to say the bible says its so ... but is it the bible or the translator that uses the word it????

Just examining this topic from the translation given to us by the KJV translators is like an art connoisseur trying to analyze the hues and strokes of Da Vinci's Mona Lisa from a black and white print.

Certainly I am not a Greek study. I used to know a little Greek but he died. Other than that, I have to take the word of those who say that they know the difference.

However, I am sure that God is quite competent in the work of delivering to me the Word that He would have me to have. He is the overseer of His own Word. I think he did an excellent job for thousands of years.

[Praxeas]

In the way Jesus referred to the Spirit ... as HE.
Once again, the ONLY reason why anything is called a "HE" is to modify the MASCULINE noun with a masculine pronoun. The word Church from the greek is a feminine word and if it takes a pronoun that pronoun would be feminine also. Does that mean they intentionally meant to say we are all women?

Of course not. The ONLY time the word Spirit is used with the word HIM, in the greek, is when the masculine pronoun is used to modify the antecedent comforter because comforter is a masculine noun. The authors and speakers were just grammatically correct and this has nothing to do with theology.

In fact never EVER that I can find in the gospels is a pronoun even used with the word pneuma, except in John 14 like we talked about and then it refers to the antecedent comforter. In agreement with that is one of the worlds best known greek scholar Daniel Wallace

Something interesting though that Trinitarians seem to over look. Jesus said "I in my FAther and you in me and I in you"...why does he leave out the third person of the Trinity?

BTW HOW is he in the Father, we in Him and He in us? It's through the Spirit which is what the context is abouit.

[Praxeas]

The word ho is there ... my dear Mizpeh ... it languages there are variations of root words ... hate to break to you ... but according to Strong's the word ho ... has variations ... to ... tav etc.
Actually Mizpeh was correct in saying there is a pronoun in the verse. I was just not sure it referred to the Spirit or to the witnesses.

However the article in question is the neuter. It is NOT "ho". Ho is masculine. It's TO and it is NOT being translated "it". It's being translated THE or not translated at all. Very often articles are NOT translated

[Praxeas]

Here is John 1:19 parsed in the Greek... please find it as it is connoted in the English language ... if you can ... as to describe an inanimate object, animal or general idea ...

Let's have a roll call here. Who believes Spirit is an inanimate object, animal or general idea?

I know I don't and I did not see anyone else say that either.

[Praxeas]

Secondly just because a word has gender in language does not mean it literally reflects its real literal gender, or lack thereof ...

Example: the word preacher in the Hebrew is feminine ... but of course we would not think that the preacher in Ecclesiastes is really a female.
Wow....I think I already said that once or something similiar. As I pointed out, just because something has no gender does NOT make it impersonal

[Praxeas]

NIV translators didn't see an it either:

32Then John gave this testimony: "I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him.
So? They actually leave a pronoun out of the english translation. As I said, the reason other translations have an "it" is because the word for Spirit is neuter gender

[Praxeas]

We want to say the bible says its so ... but is it the bible or the translator that uses the word it????

Just examining this topic from the translation given to us by the KJV translators is like an art connoisseur trying to analyze the hues and strokes of Da Vinci's Mona Lisa from a black and white print.
very very few bibles are word for word translations and even then a word is often translated as more than one word which might include an article or a pronoun to help us understand it better in english.

English is not greek. If the greek has a neuter noun and the english translation might require an article or a pronoun, that is going to be neuter too unless the translators are doctrinally biased

[Praxeas]

The Jewish believer in OT times would not even dare to pronounce of write the name of God ... it would astonish me ... that the would then turn around and refer to the Spirit of God as an it as we use it today. And apparently after close examination ... of the original texts it is not used ....

The Jewish believer has always referred to God as He.
Uh...it was not until a LONG time later that this superstition became the norm. Yes they did say and write it...we need only look to the OT where we have examples of them saying the name. However they were told NOT to take the NAME in vain and never told NOT to refer to Spirit as a neuter gender it or feminine she. Spirit is generally a neuter gender word, in our language. It's neutral and we are talking about translations INTO our language

[HeavenlyOne]

We have the masculinity in the names as Father and Son and, I believe I read that, the"Comforter" as referring to the Holy Ghost is masculine in the Greek.

I also remember reading that the writer used the masculine form of the demonstrative pronoun ekeinos ("that male one"). Thus, breaking the grammatical agreement that was expected by native language readers. It then was a clear indication of the author's intention to unambiguously convey the Holy Spirit as masculine.

I understand the assigning of gender to words, and most words in any language are described as masculine of feminine, but that isn't assigning gender to the word, which is how I'm seeing it done.

I keep asking what purpose does having a gender serve to God, but have not yet received an answer to that.

[Felicity]

I always think of God as a male. Male or female greek pronouns aren't going to change that one iota so .... whatever. :blah

:)

[HeavenlyOne]

HO, when you use the word "also," there seems to be inherent in that thought that Jesus was structurally different that I am.

No, I was referring to the humanity of Jesus separately from His deity. I wasn't comparing His humanity to ours.

Jesus was/is a Spirit. You and I are are spirits. Period. End of discussion. Book closed. Class dismissed. Lights out.

We are spirits as well as humans. We are not only spirits.

Jesus was/is nothing unlike you and I in this regard. He too, is a Spirit...albeit the Holy Spirit, omnipresent. Yes, Jesus is humanity. He is God. He is the ONLY man that is diety..or God. This man IS God. To use the word "also," somehow draws the reader to assume that one believes that there is a distinction between God and Jesus, the man. This is a mistaken idea. There is NO distinction between God and the man Christ Jesus except...now this is imporant to remember...EXCEPT in his mediatorial role in which he officiates in the office of SON of God...by which blood was shed for redemption...a work that was completed on the cross.

So let us not think in the "also." Let us rather think, "This man born of a virgin in Bethlehem of Judea, lived, taught, suffered under Pontius Pilate, died, rose again, ascended on high and has promised to return again, IS THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, GOD ALMIGHTY. In short, we must think: THAT MAN IS GOD.

Not meaning to offend, but the above has nothing to do with the topic. We are discussing the spirit of God, not His humanity.

The fact that He is a MAN, denotes gender.

A man because he was human. He's not human as a spirit. The question is, does the spirit have a gender? You said yes, and I'm looking for scripture to that effect without the mention of His being human.



Well, I guess he could have come as a neuter, having no navel button, no sex, no nipples on his chest, no buttocks or colon or any such thing that made him entirely like me as Heb 2 states. But then, who would have received him. I doubt that the disciples would have received what they would have thought of as a curious freak.

Now you are getting my point! The purpose of Him having a gender was for OUR benefit, not HIS! Humanity had a gender. But...does His spirit?



Well, the bible says that they are men. The word denotes gender in my opinion. Jacob wrestled with such a very powerful man all night long one night. The man finally put a whoopin on Jacob just before dawn. He limped for the rest of his life. Some fight. Some man.

The Bible says that angels are men? Where? When they are seen on earth? Where does the Bible refer to angels as men in the Bible except when they are seen of men on the earth? IOW, where does God refer to the angels as a gender assigned being in heaven?

[Barb]

This verse just dropped in my inner beings...

John 16:13

13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
KJV

Hmmm...

[HeavenlyOne]

Clinically speaking... LOL

Gotta luv ya, girl.

It becomes clear, like so many other Apostolic people, you are trying to divide God up, trying to recognize God as to what is Spirit and what is man. But, there is no man at all...impossible to be a man without spirit. It is impossible for it to be divided as to recognize a division or distinction between the God and the Man...except for the duration of his "kenosis" or humiliation during the time on earth, in His pre-glorified state. Since then, there are no distinction unless we want to be 2/3rds Trinitarian. :D

I don't see it as dividing God up, just recognizing His various attributes and manifestations.

God is a Spirit. Jesus was human. Recognizing those differences isn't dividing God up, but merely recognizing a manifestation of the Spirit of God.

[Rico]

This verse just dropped in my inner beings...

John 16:13

13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
KJV

Hmmm...

You mean the Spirit is a He too?!?!?! Whatever shall we do????? :D

[HeavenlyOne]

Actually Mizpeh was correct in saying there is a pronoun in the verse. I was just not sure it referred to the Spirit or to the witnesses.

However the article in question is the neuter. It is NOT "ho". Ho is masculine. It's TO and it is NOT being translated "it". It's being translated THE or not translated at all. Very often articles are NOT translated

I don't appreciate being talked about this way. Not one bit.


It's lies, all lies, I tell ya!!!!


I'm totally feminine, even if I do have a deep voice! So there!

[Barb]

I don't appreciate being talked about this way. Not one bit.


It's lies, all lies, I tell ya!!!!


I'm totally feminine, even if I do have a deep voice! So there!

:killinme

[HeavenlyOne]

We all know what makes us a certain gender, so I won't go into details, but I have to wonder...how does what makes us male and female apply to God? I understand that God assigns Himself a gender for our benefit, but since male and female attributes are what makes us male and female, in what way does God possess those attributes? I'm speaking about His Spirit, not His flesh.

[Subdued]

Before Jesus was born, was God male? In what way(s)???

[HeavenlyOne]

Before Jesus was born, was God male? In what way(s)???

I hope someone answers this from you, cause they aren't answering it from me......LOL!

[deseret]

God is male. If not, He can not be our FATHER.

[Subdued]

God is male. If not, He can not be our FATHER.


What specifically makes God (prior to the birth of Jesus) male?

[Felicity]

The voice that thundered from heaven .... was it male or female? The finger that wrote 10 commandments on tablets of stone .... male or female?

[deseret]

The voice that thundered from heaven .... was it male or female? The finger that wrote 10 commandments on tablets of stone .... male or female?

Male.

[HeavenlyOne]

God is male. If not, He can not be our FATHER.

I think there is a difference in God being male and God being assigned a male gender for our benefit. Being male serves God no purpose at all.

And in what way is God male? He possesses neither chromasomes or genitalia.

[Rico]

God is male. If not, He can not be our FATHER.


No. You are missing the point. God can't possibly be male because He doesn't have male reproductive organs. Forget that the Bible refers to Him as male because that's just because of how different languages were written. God truly is an "it." :wacko

[HeavenlyOne]

The voice that thundered from heaven .... was it male or female? The finger that wrote 10 commandments on tablets of stone .... male or female?

Voices and fingers don't have gender. Those things aren't what makes us our gender.

[Subdued]

I think there is a difference in God being male and God being assigned a male gender for our benefit. Being male serves God no purpose at all.

And in what way is God male? He possesses neither chromasomes or genitalia.

He had a deep voice...?

[Felicity]

Male.The One pictured sitting on the throne in Revelation ..... the Ancient of Days ....... male or female?

The One Satan comes before accusing the brethren ... male or female?


:)

[HeavenlyOne]

Male.

How do you know?

[Barb]

We all know what makes us a certain gender, so I won't go into details, but I have to wonder...how does what makes us male and female apply to God? I understand that God assigns Himself a gender for our benefit, but since male and female attributes are what makes us male and female, in what way does God possess those attributes? I'm speaking about His Spirit, not His flesh.



I was just reading in Genesis where God was speaking to Abraham and the Scripture state, "And He said unto him, I am the LORD..." (15:7)

Also "AndHesaid unto Abram..." (15:13).

The Scriptures refer to God as 'He'...

[HeavenlyOne]

The One pictured sitting on the throne in Revelation ..... the Ancient of Days ....... male or female?

The One Satan comes before accusing the brethren ... male or female?


:)

Without wanting to be graphic, in what way is the one on the throne male? What proof is there?

[deseret]

I think there is a difference in God being male and God being assigned a male gender for our benefit. Being male serves God no purpose at all.

And in what way is God male? He possesses neither chromasomes or genitalia.

The immaculate conception. The 'Y' did not come from mama.

[deseret]

Without wanting to be graphic, in what way is the one on the throne male? What proof is there?

He had a beard.

[Subdued]

Again, what specifically made God (prior to the birth of Jesus) a male? In what way(s) was He male?

[Felicity]

Voices and fingers don't have gender. Those things aren't what makes us our gender.Well you know there are those who would like to believe God is female .... that whole "goddess of wisdom" foolishness. I dont buy it for a minute.

Gender as we normally think of it might not be what God is but He sure isn't a female, that's for sure.

He's always referred to in scripture as being characteristically male with male characteristics and attributes overall.

[HeavenlyOne]

He had a deep voice...?

I have a deep voice. ;)

I'm totally NOT male!

[HeavenlyOne]

I was just reading in Genesis where God was speaking to Abraham and the Scripture state, "And He said unto him, I am the LORD..." (15:7)

Also "AndHesaid unto Abram..." (15:13).

The Scriptures refer to God as 'He'...

I agree, but for who's benefit? My assertion is that God assigned Himself a gender for our benefit, but doesn't physically or spiritually have a gender.

[Felicity]

I have a deep voice. ;)

I'm totally NOT male!LOL! You do have a deep voice. So guess God can't be male then either if that's the test or proof. :D

[HeavenlyOne]

The immaculate conception. The 'Y' did not come from mama.

God wasn't immaculately conceived. Jesus was, but He didn't get a Y from God either. ;)

[deseret]

God wasn't immaculately conceived. Jesus was, but He didn't get a Y from God either. ;)

Tell me, where did He get the Y? It wasn't from Joseph.

[HeavenlyOne]

He had a beard.

ROFL! That's too funny! You are something else, you know!

[Subdued]

Well you know there are those who would like to believe God is female .... that whole "goddess of wisdom" foolishness. I dont buy it for a minute.

Gender as we normally think of it might not be what God is but He sure isn't a female, that's for sure.

He's always referred to in scripture as being characteristically male with male characteristics and attributes overall.

I completely agree that God is not female.

Concerning the male characteristics & attributes; could it be that God put some of HIS characteristics & attributes into man? Did God also put some of His own characteristics & attributes into woman? If so, does God possess all of those characteristics & attributes? This wouldn't make God male or female; but it means that we possess God-given characteristics & attributes - those characteristics & attributes are not what makes us male or female.

What makes us male/female?

[deseret]

ROFL! That's too funny! You are something else, you know!

Beards used to be a characteristic of a MAN before God gave us the revelation that they are now prideful. :)

[Barb]

Again, what specifically made God (prior to the birth of Jesus) a male? In what way(s) was He male?

What specifically makes a ship female..."She's a grand ship!!"

And until just a short time ago, hurricanes were referred to by females names...what say ye, Substance?!

[HeavenlyOne]

Well you know there are those who would like to believe God is female .... that whole "goddess of wisdom" foolishness. I dont buy it for a minute.

Gender as we normally think of it might not be what God is but He sure isn't a female, that's for sure.

He's always referred to in scripture as being characteristically male with male characteristics and attributes overall.

I'm not saying that God is female instead, but rather, genderless. His identity is male for our benefit because we cannot understand a genderless being.

In what way is God male? What attributes does He possess that make Him male?

[HeavenlyOne]

LOL! You do have a deep voice. So guess God can't be male then either if that's the test or proof. :D

Ah, but my dear, you are the one who asked.....LOL!

That's why I told you that gender isn't determined by voices or hands.

[Subdued]

What specifically makes a ship female..."She's a grand ship!!"

And until just a short time ago, hurricanes were referred to by females names...what say ye, Substance?!

So, ships and hurricanes are female in the same manner that God is male????

[Felicity]

I'm not saying that God is female instead, but rather, genderless. His identity is male for our benefit because we cannot understand a genderless being.

In what way is God male? What attributes does He possess that make Him male?Lots! Read scripture.

What I said is that he may not be male in the way we normally think but He sure isn't female in His characteristics or attributes, that's for sure.

It seems that the writers of both old and new testaments perceived Him as a male with male characteristics and male attributes.

[HeavenlyOne]

Tell me, where did He get the Y? It wasn't from Joseph.

He didn't get the Y from anyone, thus the reason it was an IMMACULATE conception. That's the definition of that word.

[deseret]

He didn't get the Y from anyone, thus the reason it was an IMMACULATE conception. That's the definition of that word.

You are a trip.:Nhl_check

[HeavenlyOne]

I completely agree that God is not female.

Concerning the male characteristics & attributes; could it be that God put some of HIS characteristics & attributes into man? Did God also put some of His own characteristics & attributes into woman? If so, does God possess all of those characteristics & attributes? This wouldn't make God male or female; but it means that we possess God-given characteristics & attributes - those characteristics & attributes are not what makes us male or female.

What makes us male/female?


Good point. I didn't think about it that way!

[Barb]

So, ships and hurricanes are female in the same manner that God is male????

Not hardly...just saying we don't question other things...why this?!

[Felicity]

Ah, but my dear, you are the one who asked.....LOL!

That's why I told you that gender isn't determined by voices or hands.Sure, I asked. It was a serious question. Gender isn't determined by those things but those things can be very real and strong indicators of male or female gender.

[HeavenlyOne]

What specifically makes a ship female..."She's a grand ship!!"

And until just a short time ago, hurricanes were referred to by females names...what say ye, Substance?!

Barb gets it!!!

Those things are assigned a gender without possessing a gender, which is my point about God that I've been making.

[Barb]

Lots! Read scripture.

What I said is that he may not be male in the way we normally think but He sure isn't female in His characteristics or attributes, that's for sure.

It seems that the writers of both old and new testaments perceived Him as a male with male characteristics and male attributes.

I was just reading in Genesis where God was speaking to Abraham and the Scripture state, "And He said unto him, I am the LORD..." (15:7)

Also "AndHesaid unto Abram..." (15:13).

The Scriptures refer to God as 'He'...
Exactly...that's what I just posted...

[Barb]

Barb gets it!!!

Those things are assigned a gender without possessing a gender, which is my point about God that I've been making.

NOnono...answer Subby's phone...I'm a calling!!

[Subdued]

Not hardly...just saying we don't question other things...why this?!

Honestly, I have never questioned it until tonight... when I read this thread.

Since it was posted/asked, I thought I'd think about it.

[deseret]

I still stand by my facial hair comment.

[Subdued]

NOnono...answer Subby's phone...I'm a calling!!

Sorry... I had my ringer off during church & forgot to turn it back on.

[Subdued]

Lots! Read scripture.

What I said is that he may not be male in the way we normally think but He sure isn't female in His characteristics or attributes, that's for sure.

It seems that the writers of both old and new testaments perceived Him as a male with male characteristics and male attributes.

Please list the various male characteristics/attributes & the various female characteristics/attributes.

[Felicity]

Please list the various male characteristics/attributes & the various female characteristics/attributes.I can't.

I'm eating a banana split! :p

[Subdued]

I can't.

I'm eating a banana split! :p

:icecream

[HeavenlyOne]

Lots! Read scripture.

What I said is that he may not be male in the way we normally think but He sure isn't female in His characteristics or attributes, that's for sure.

It seems that the writers of both old and new testaments perceived Him as a male with male characteristics and male attributes.

God doesn't possess female attributes? If not, then how can God possibly understand us women, and how did He make us in His image and likeness without putting His attributes within us also?

Does possessing male attributes make one male?

[HeavenlyOne]

Sure, I asked. It was a serious question. Gender isn't determined by those things but those things can be very real and strong indicators of male or female gender.

Genetics are responsible for those. God doesn't have genes. ;)

[Barb]

I feel the NyQuil calling my name, so I'm outta here for the night...goodnite all!!

[HeavenlyOne]

Please list the various male characteristics/attributes & the various female characteristics/attributes.

Better yet, what are the female characteristics and attributes that females solely have that God doesn't.

[deseret]

Better yet, what are the female characteristics and attributes that females solely have that God doesn't.

God's emotions are not based on whether or not there is chocolate on the desk.

[HeavenlyOne]

I feel the NyQuil calling my name, so I'm outta here for the night...goodnite all!!

Is it a male or female voice talking to you?


:D

[Subdued]

Better yet, what are the female characteristics and attributes that females solely have that God doesn't.

This is why I wanted to see a list. I wanted to see what attributes and characteristics God does not possess.

[deseret]

Is it a male or female voice talking to you?


:D
Let us hope that it is not the same voice that talked to Carlton Pearcesen. :)

[HeavenlyOne]

God's emotions are not based on whether or not there is chocolate on the desk.

That's it. You've convinced me.

If God is against chocolate, He cannot POSSIBLY have female attributes or characteristics!!!

[Subdued]

God's emotions are not based on whether or not there is chocolate on the desk.

You have just convinced me that God is 100% male! (I wonder what H1 thinks now.)

[HeavenlyOne]

Let us hope that it is not the same voice that talked to Carlton Pearcesen. :)

I must have missed something here.....LOL!

[Subdued]

You have just convinced me that God is 100% male! (I wonder what H1 thinks now.)


I guess she clicked "submit" right before I did.

We're both convinced.

[deseret]

I got it.. I got it.. :)

[HeavenlyOne]

You have just convinced me that God is 100% male! (I wonder what H1 thinks now.)

ROFL!! I just said the same thing!

[deseret]

I must have missed something here.....LOL!That gay charismatic preacher that doesn't believe in hell.

[HeavenlyOne]

That gay charismatic preacher that doesn't believe in hell.

I guess I've never heard of him.

[deseret]

I guess I've never heard of him.

My mistake. Carlton Pearson. :)

[HeavenlyOne]

My mistake. Carlton Pearson. :)

I've heard of him, but didn't know he was gay or didn't believe in hell.

[Sherri]

I've heard of him, but didn't know he was gay or didn't believe in hell.
I don't think he says he is gay, but he definitely doesn't believe in hell and he says that all mankind will be saved because Jesus already did the work on Calvary and it cannot be refuted or changed by us.

However, the gay community is flocking to him because they want to believe that they can live their lifestyle and still be saved. It's universalism.

[Scott Hutchinson]

CP'S Favorite song proably is Tutti Fruiti.

[SDG]

Once again assigning gender to words does not mean they are to be taken literally ... in all cases.

[Pressing-On]

God has placed himself after a masculine gender because he wanted "man" to rule the earth. Male authority is his order.

It's plain to see that in the scriptures - "A woman is not to usurp a man's authority, unless you're typing on a Forum."

It goes something like that. I think.

MEN RULE AND WOMEN DROOL!!!!


Get over it! :D

[Praxeas]

We have the masculinity in the names as Father and Son and, I believe I read that, the"Comforter" as referring to the Holy Ghost is masculine in the Greek.

I also remember reading that the writer used the masculine form of the demonstrative pronoun ekeinos ("that male one"). Thus, breaking the grammatical agreement that was expected by native language readers. It then was a clear indication of the author's intention to unambiguously convey the Holy Spirit as masculine.
Either you didn't read my post or just dismissed it, but they did NOT break the grammatical agreement that was expected. This is the typical Trinitarian argument that is made and ignores scholarship (Trinitarian) as well as grammar. They did NOT break anything. As I pointed out before, even Daniel Wallace acknowledges that the masculine pronoun modifies the antecedent noun comforter.

The vast majority of times you guys should notice that no pronoun is used. The only other time is in Romans where the neuter gender is used "itself"

[Praxeas]

This verse just dropped in my inner beings...

John 16:13

13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
KJV

Hmmm...
How many inner beings do you have anyways? :slaphappy

As I pointed out already twice before...maybe three times, Greek scholars recognize that the masculine pronoun here modifies the masculine word comforter, the antecedent noun and not the neuter noun pneuma or Spirit.

Check again people and I think you will find NO pronouns are used for the word pneuma until Romans
Rom 8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
Rom 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

BTW a quote by Bro Arnold who is also quoting Daniel Wallace, one of the best known biblical greek scholars and a trinitarian

Attention has also been drawn to the fact that the pronouns which follow are in the masculine. It has been claimed that because of this, the word must be a person. Now when such a claim is made, I must conclude that either the person who said it knows very little about the Greek language or they are not being fully honest with what they are saying. The rules of Greek grammar require that pronouns must agree with the nouns they represent in case, number and gender. Since the word logos (word) is masculine, its pronoun would of necessity be masculine! For example, the word church (ekklesia) is feminine. So the church is called a "she" in the Greek whenever a pronoun is used. No one would claim that this makes the church a person. This can also be seen where John later calls the comforter (parakletos) a "he." Commenting on this, Greek scholar Daniel Wallace makes this observation:
The use of ekeinos [he] here is frequently regarded by [Trinitarian] students of the NT to be an affirmation of the personality of the Spirit. . . . But this is erroneous. In all these Johannine passages, pneuma [spirit] is appositional to a masculine noun. The Gender of ekeinos thus has nothing to do with the natural gender of pneuma. The antecedent of ekeinos, in each case, is parakletos [comforter], not pneuma. . . . Thus, since parakletos is masculine, so is the pronoun. . . . Indeed, it is difficult to find any text in which pneuma is grammatically referred to with the masculine gender.1 (http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/logos.htm#foot1)

[Pressing-On]

Either you didn't read my post or just dismissed it, but they did NOT break the grammatical agreement that was expected. This is the typical Trinitarian argument that is made and ignores scholarship (Trinitarian) as well as grammar. They did NOT break anything. As I pointed out before, even Daniel Wallace acknowledges that the masculine pronoun modifies the antecedent noun comforter.

The vast majority of times you guys should notice that no pronoun is used. The only other time is in Romans where the neuter gender is used "itself"
I didn't read it. I think I have you on ignore. I think. :D

[Praxeas]

I don't appreciate being talked about this way. Not one bit.


It's lies, all lies, I tell ya!!!!


I'm totally feminine, even if I do have a deep voice! So there!
snap snap snap, You go girl!!!

[Praxeas]

No. You are missing the point. God can't possibly be male because He doesn't have male reproductive organs. Forget that the Bible refers to Him as male because that's just because of how different languages were written. God truly is an "it." :wacko
The bible never calls God a male. Rather it just uses masculine pronouns, but it also uses a feminine noun for Spirit. Does that make the Holy Spirit a female?

[Praxeas]

I was just reading in Genesis where God was speaking to Abraham and the Scripture state, "And He said unto him, I am the LORD..." (15:7)

Also "AndHesaid unto Abram..." (15:13).

The Scriptures refer to God as 'He'...
The scriptures also call Spirit "it"...has anyone yet figured out these pronouns are useless for determining gender of non coporeal entities?

Are there male and female angels too?

[Praxeas]

I didn't read it. I think I have you on ignore. I think. :D
Yup, looks that way *Praxeas makes ugly faces at you just to make sure*

[Praxeas]

He had a beard.
scripture?

[Pressing-On]

How many inner beings do you have anyways? :slaphappy

As I pointed out already twice before...maybe three times, Greek scholars recognize that the masculine pronoun here modifies the masculine word comforter, the antecedent noun and not the neuter noun pneuma or Spirit.

Check again people and I think you will find NO pronouns are used for the word pneuma until Romans
Rom 8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
Rom 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

BTW a quote by Bro Arnold who is also quoting Daniel Wallace, one of the best known biblical greek scholars and a trinitarian

Attention has also been drawn to the fact that the pronouns which follow are in the masculine. It has been claimed that because of this, the word must be a person. Now when such a claim is made, I must conclude that either the person who said it knows very little about the Greek language or they are not being fully honest with what they are saying. The rules of Greek grammar require that pronouns must agree with the nouns they represent in case, number and gender. Since the word logos (word) is masculine, its pronoun would of necessity be masculine! For example, the word church (ekklesia) is feminine. So the church is called a "she" in the Greek whenever a pronoun is used. No one would claim that this makes the church a person. This can also be seen where John later calls the comforter (parakletos) a "he." Commenting on this, Greek scholar Daniel Wallace makes this observation:
The use of ekeinos [he] here is frequently regarded by [Trinitarian] students of the NT to be an affirmation of the personality of the Spirit. . . . But this is erroneous. In all these Johannine passages, pneuma [spirit] is appositional to a masculine noun. The Gender of ekeinos thus has nothing to do with the natural gender of pneuma. The antecedent of ekeinos, in each case, is parakletos [comforter], not pneuma. . . . Thus, since parakletos is masculine, so is the pronoun. . . . Indeed, it is difficult to find any text in which pneuma is grammatically referred to with the masculine gender.1 (http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/logos.htm#foot1)

You went into more detail, as you often do, and said the same thing that I did.

:hanky

Are you sure you aren't SAB under another name? :killinme

[Praxeas]

Tell me, where did He get the Y? It wasn't from Joseph.
He created it.

You all sound like you've spent too much time looking at the paintings in the Sistene chapel
Next you'll be arguing the Pope is the vicar of Christ

[Pressing-On]

Yup, looks that way *Praxeas makes ugly faces at you just to make sure*

:hunter

My daddy always taught me to shoot things that are that ugly!






























:muwahaha

[Praxeas]

You went into more detail, as you often do, and said the same thing that I did.

:hanky

Are you sure you aren't SAB under another name? :killinme
No I repeated myself to show that the author of John did NOT break the rules of greek grammar at all. The masculine refers to the antecedent and not to Spirit

[Praxeas]

:hunter

My daddy always taught me to shoot things that are that ugly!






























:muwahaha
I hope youir house has no mirrors in them then :slaphappy

[Praxeas]

What specifically makes a ship female..."She's a grand ship!!"

And until just a short time ago, hurricanes were referred to by females names...what say ye, Substance?!
Anthropomorphism. Literary devices. People the bible is full of things just like this.

[Praxeas]

I can't.

I'm eating a banana split! :p <------ Female Characteristic?? :slaphappy

[SDG]

Once again, the ONLY reason why anything is called a "HE" is to modify the MASCULINE noun with a masculine pronoun. The word Church from the greek is a feminine word and if it takes a pronoun that pronoun would be feminine also. Does that mean they intentionally meant to say we are all women?

Of course not. The ONLY time the word Spirit is used with the word HIM, in the greek, is when the masculine pronoun is used to modify the antecedent comforter because comforter is a masculine noun. The authors and speakers were just grammatically correct and this has nothing to do with theology.

In fact never EVER that I can find in the gospels is a pronoun even used with the word pneuma, except in John 14 like we talked about and then it refers to the antecedent comforter. In agreement with that is one of the worlds best known greek scholar Daniel Wallace

Something interesting though that Trinitarians seem to over look. Jesus said "I in my FAther and you in me and I in you"...why does he leave out the third person of the Trinity?

BTW HOW is he in the Father, we in Him and He in us? It's through the Spirit which is what the context is abouit.

And in the OT ... you seem to be omitting the OT saints ...

[SDG]

Uh...it was not until a LONG time later that this superstition became the norm. Yes they did say and write it...we need only look to the OT where we have examples of them saying the name. However they were told NOT to take the NAME in vain and never told NOT to refer to Spirit as a neuter gender it or feminine she. Spirit is generally a neuter gender word, in our language. It's neutral and we are talking about translations INTO our language

and other translations, the NIV and NAS, which I provided, are consistent in harmonizing the fact that God is referred to as He throughout scripture ... not an it.

[Pressing-On]

I hope youir house has no mirrors in them then :slaphappy

I actually have 27 mirrors in my house, thus far. :D

[SDG]

God is male. If not, He can not be our FATHER.

There is some common sense in this post.

[Praxeas]

and other translations, the NIV and NAS, which I provided, are consistent in harmonizing the fact that God is referred to as He throughout scripture ... not an it.
That's nice Dan you have your translations you like. So how does that interact with what I said? Spirit, in the OT, is usually a feminine word. Spirit in the NT is a neuter word. If either of them were to take a corresponding pronoun, it would be feminine and neuter respectively

[Praxeas]

I actually have 27 mirrors in my house, thus far. :D
Wow...can you say EGO? :slaphappy

[Pressing-On]

Wow...can you say EGO? :slaphappy

Whatevah! :killinme

So, I love mirrors. They bring in and reflect more light. I like that.

[SDG]

That's nice Dan you have your translations you like. So how does that interact with what I said? Spirit, in the OT, is usually a feminine word. Spirit in the NT is a neuter word. If either of them were to take a corresponding pronoun, it would be feminine and neuter respectively

Once again the gender in language is irrelevant ...

I provided the example for preacher in Ecclesiastes ... as a hebrew word it is feminine ... but of course in reality the preacher we can infer is male.

The error being made here is that by assigning the gender provided by a particular language you can lose the context ... God, the Lord, Jesus, the Holy Spirit has alway been a HE .. not an it ... or she ... the KJV translators dropped the ball.

[Praxeas]

Do you all take this verse literally to mean God flies through the air on the back of an angel?
2Sa 22:11 And He rode upon a cherub and did fly. And He was seen upon the wings of the wind.

Kings have breasts to suck on?
Isa 60:16 You will also suck the milk of nations, and suck the breast of kings; and you will know that I Jehovah am your Savior and your Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.

Jerusalem is a woman?
Isa 66:10 Rejoice with Jerusalem, and be glad with her, all who love her. Rejoice for joy with her, all who mourn for her;
Isa 66:11 that you may suck and be satisfied with her comforting breasts; that you may milk out and be delighted with the fullness of her glory.
Isa 66:12 For so says Jehovah, Behold, I will hold out peace to her like a river, and the glory of the nations like a flowing stream. Then you will suck, you will be carried on her sides and be dandled upon her knees.

Wow. There is wisdom in that....Jerusalem must be a female city, how else can they suck milk...

You guys are beginning to disappoint me

[SDG]

Do you all take this verse literally to mean God flies through the air on the back of an angel?
2Sa 22:11 And He rode upon a cherub and did fly. And He was seen upon the wings of the wind.

Kings have breasts to suck on?
Isa 60:16 You will also suck the milk of nations, and suck the breast of kings; and you will know that I Jehovah am your Savior and your Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.

Jerusalem is a woman?
Isa 66:10 Rejoice with Jerusalem, and be glad with her, all who love her. Rejoice for joy with her, all who mourn for her;
Isa 66:11 that you may suck and be satisfied with her comforting breasts; that you may milk out and be delighted with the fullness of her glory.
Isa 66:12 For so says Jehovah, Behold, I will hold out peace to her like a river, and the glory of the nations like a flowing stream. Then you will suck, you will be carried on her sides and be dandled upon her knees.

Wow. There is wisdom in that....Jerusalem must be a female city, how else can they suck milk...

You guys are beginning to disappoint me

You are confusing metaphors for prose ... Prax ... you have disappointing me w/ this post