"And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, in whom you were sealed for the day of redemption." (Eph. 4:30) RSV
"In the N[ew] T[estament] there is no direct suggestion of a doctrine of the Trinity. The spirit is conceived as an impersonal power by which God effects his will through Christ." - An Encyclopedia of Religion, Ferm (ed.), 1945, p. 344.
"It is important to realize that for the first Christians the Spirit was thought of in terms of divine power." - New Bible Dictionary, p. 1139, Tyndale House Publishers, 1984.
"On the whole, the New Testament, like the Old, speaks of the Spirit as a divine energy or power." - A Catholic Dictionary
p. 269, The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1976, admits: "In the OT the Holy Spirit means a divine power ..."
............................................
Since Jehovah's (the Father's) holy spirit is actually his active force, it can do anything God wants done.
What it does or 'says,' etc. is really the Father (or whoever the Father allows to use that force) acting through it.
An imperfect example might be a person listening to a two-way radio. He can only see the radio and hear the message from the radio, but there really is a person somewhere far away whose thoughts are conveyed to him through invisible electrical energy and through the radio. That person is not the electrical energy and not the radio (which is actually 'speaking' to the man).
The personification of this holy force of God's should not be considered proof that it is a person. Certainly it is not evidence that it is God!
Even the trinitarian A Catholic Dictionary admits that the personification of the holy spirit in the New Testament certainly does not mean that it is a person:
"Most of these places furnish no cogent proof of personality....We must not forget that the NT personifies mere attributes such as love (1 Cor. xiii. 4), and sin (Rom. vii. 11), nay even abstract and lifeless things, such as the law (Rom iii.19), the water and the blood (1 John v.8)."
This understanding was not confined only to scriptural usage but was in common use. Included with the early Christian letter, "The Epistle to Diognetus," is a 2nd or 3rd century Christian's statement written in the same Greek language as used in the NT manuscripts. It states:
"the grace [charis] of the prophets is recognized.... If thou grieve [lupeo] not this grace [charis] thou shalt understand." - "Epistle to Diognetus," The Apostolic Fathers, Lightfoot and Harmer, Baker Book House, 1984 ed., pp. 499 (text) and 510 (translation). Also see p. 183, Early Christian Writings, Staniforth, Dorset Press, 1986 ed.
And Young's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible tells us that "Abstract and inanimate things are frequently personified" and then gives a long list of such things found in the Bible, including "a will [attributed to] the flesh and mind .... knowing, rejoicing [attributed] to the sun..." - "Hints and Helps to Bible Interpretation," #2. (Also see Jn 3:8 where "the pneuma ['wind' or `spirit'] blows where it wills.")
So, it is certainly no surprise to find that holy spirit can be "grieved" in New Testament figurative language: "do not be grieving God's Holy Spirit." Eph. 4:30. Certainly anything you do to (or against) God's direct active force you are also doing to (or against) God himself.
For more, see
Holy Spirit
What About Trinity "Proof Texts"?
Trinity Scripture Index
Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE
Scriptures Index
Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Monday, January 18, 2010
What did Jesus actually say at John 8:58?
Many Bible versions render John 8:58 this way: "Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."
And Ex. 3:14 this way: "God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And he said, "Say this to the people of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'"
(Because of this, Trinitarians often refer to this as 'proof' that Jesus is the Hebrew GOD of the O.T.)
But are the words "I am" supposed to be God's name? Even if it were so, would it make sense in John 8:58 for Jesus to say the equivalent of, "Most assuredly I say to you, before Abraham was...JEHOVAH?!?"
Looking at the context, the correct phrasing of this sentence should be "I was" instead of "I am" when used after the word "before." Also in verse 57, the question to which Jesus was replying had to do WITH AGE, not identity.
During the exchange with the Jews leading up to John 8:58, NOWHERE DOES JESUS CLAIM TO BE GOD. And as we've already seen, the words "I am" at John 8:58 (including the blatant unwarranted use of capitalization) is not only inaccurate but nonsensical.
Several translations phrase John 8:58 the correct way by which Jesus was actually illustrating how long he has existed. One, for instance:
"Jesus answered, "The truth is, I EXISTED BEFORE ABRAHAM WAS EVEN BORN!" (NLT)
Besides that, numerous TRINITARIAN authorities even have to admit that "I am" in Ex. 3:14 is not even correct and should be rendered more like "I will Be" (the MEANING OF God's name rather than God's personal name itself...Jehovah):
Encyclopedia Britannica:
"The writer of Exodus 3:14-15 ... explains it [the meaning of God's name] by the phrase EHYEH asher EHYEH (Ex. iii., 14); this can be translated `I am that I am' or more exactly `I am wont to be that which I am wont to be' or `I will be that which I will be.'" - p. 995, 14th ed., v. 12.
For more, see:
John 8:58 "I AM"
Sahidic Coptic John 8:58 and Sahidic Coptic Exodus 3:14
What About Trinity "Proof Texts"?
Trinity Scripture Index
Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE
Scriptures Index
Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide
And Ex. 3:14 this way: "God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And he said, "Say this to the people of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'"
(Because of this, Trinitarians often refer to this as 'proof' that Jesus is the Hebrew GOD of the O.T.)
But are the words "I am" supposed to be God's name? Even if it were so, would it make sense in John 8:58 for Jesus to say the equivalent of, "Most assuredly I say to you, before Abraham was...JEHOVAH?!?"
Looking at the context, the correct phrasing of this sentence should be "I was" instead of "I am" when used after the word "before." Also in verse 57, the question to which Jesus was replying had to do WITH AGE, not identity.
During the exchange with the Jews leading up to John 8:58, NOWHERE DOES JESUS CLAIM TO BE GOD. And as we've already seen, the words "I am" at John 8:58 (including the blatant unwarranted use of capitalization) is not only inaccurate but nonsensical.
Several translations phrase John 8:58 the correct way by which Jesus was actually illustrating how long he has existed. One, for instance:
"Jesus answered, "The truth is, I EXISTED BEFORE ABRAHAM WAS EVEN BORN!" (NLT)
Besides that, numerous TRINITARIAN authorities even have to admit that "I am" in Ex. 3:14 is not even correct and should be rendered more like "I will Be" (the MEANING OF God's name rather than God's personal name itself...Jehovah):
Encyclopedia Britannica:
"The writer of Exodus 3:14-15 ... explains it [the meaning of God's name] by the phrase EHYEH asher EHYEH (Ex. iii., 14); this can be translated `I am that I am' or more exactly `I am wont to be that which I am wont to be' or `I will be that which I will be.'" - p. 995, 14th ed., v. 12.
For more, see:
John 8:58 "I AM"
Sahidic Coptic John 8:58 and Sahidic Coptic Exodus 3:14
What About Trinity "Proof Texts"?
Trinity Scripture Index
Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE
Scriptures Index
Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide
Where And How Do Jehovah's Witnesses Meet?
Click on any of the following links to view:
Our Ministry - Gathering Together
Jehovah's Witnesses Official Media Web Site
Jehovah's Witnesses Building Kingdom Halls Around the World
Video From The Jehovah's Witnesses Official Media Web Site
VIDEO: Jehovah's Witnesses
A very fair and unbiased report from the BBC. A look at a meeting conducted inside one Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses.
For More, See:
Jehovah's Witnesses
Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE
Scriptures Index
Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide
Our Ministry - Gathering Together
Jehovah's Witnesses Official Media Web Site
Jehovah's Witnesses Building Kingdom Halls Around the World
Video From The Jehovah's Witnesses Official Media Web Site
VIDEO: Jehovah's Witnesses
A very fair and unbiased report from the BBC. A look at a meeting conducted inside one Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses.
For More, See:
Jehovah's Witnesses
Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE
Scriptures Index
Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide
Sunday, January 17, 2010
If the holy spirit really is a person, then why is it sandwiched between a list of QUALITIES at 2 Cor. 6:6?
At 2 Corinthians 6:6, the Holy Spirit is listed with a number of qualities:
"...by purity, by knowledge, by long-suffering, by kindness, by holy spirit, by love free from hypocrisy" - NWT
It wouldn't make much sense for a person to be mentioned in this manner.
Also, in the Greek text of 2 Cor. 6:6, the word /definite article "the" does not occur. Yet many biased translations get creative in getting around that.
For more, see
Holy Spirit
What About Trinity "Proof Texts"?
Trinity Scripture Index
Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE
Scriptures Index
Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide
"...by purity, by knowledge, by long-suffering, by kindness, by holy spirit, by love free from hypocrisy" - NWT
It wouldn't make much sense for a person to be mentioned in this manner.
Also, in the Greek text of 2 Cor. 6:6, the word /definite article "the" does not occur. Yet many biased translations get creative in getting around that.
For more, see
Holy Spirit
What About Trinity "Proof Texts"?
Trinity Scripture Index
Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE
Scriptures Index
Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide
Do scriptures personifying the "Holy Spirit" mean that it is a person?
The "Person" of the Holy Spirit
Are you familiar with a language (like Spanish) which puts different endings on the same word to show number and gender? In Spanish, for example, words and names that are literally applied to persons have endings that show those persons' sex. For example, el muchacho is "the boy," but la muchacha is "the girl"! But impersonal things are also given genders. For example, "the table" is la mesa (feminine) whereas "the hat" is el sombrero (masculine).
The languages used by the inspired Bible writers do the same thing. In OT Hebrew they had only feminine and masculine endings for their words (La Sor, Vol. 2, p.75 and Gesenius, p. 222), whereas in NT Greek they had masculine, feminine, and neuter endings (p. 23, Machen).
In Hebrew, if the writers were referring to a person and using a noun that literally (not figuratively) describes that person, they always used the word ending that corresponded to the actual sex of that person: "Father" (masc. ending); "son" (masc.); "wife" (fem.); "God" (masc.); "Messiah" (masc.), etc. This is especially true of all personal names: "Moses," "Sarah," "Abraham," etc.
If, however, they were speaking literally about a non-personal thing, they would use either masculine or feminine endings on those literal names and words (like in the Spanish examples above). Thus, "wisdom" is feminine in Hebrew and "day" is masculine. And if the Hebrew writers used one of these words (non-personal thing) to figuratively describe a person, they would usually not change the gender of that word. In other words, when a person is literally called a "king" it is always a word with a masculine ending because it applies literally to him as a person. But if a person is figuratively called a "Rock" or a "wall," etc., the original gender of the word that is used for that thing will still be applied to that man or woman.
So if a woman were figuratively called "a rock" (masculine ending), it could read like this in the Hebrew: "Hannah (fem. ending) was a rock (masc. ending), and he (masc. pronoun referring to "rock") was immovable." Or, we could see: "The Messiah (masc.) is Wisdom (fem. ending), and she (fem. pronoun) was created by God in the beginning." When we see such things in the original language we know that an impersonal thing is being used to figuratively describe a person in some respect.
It is very similar in NT Greek. When a word is literally applied to an adult person ("man," "woman," "husband," "bride," etc.) telling what he or she literally is, then the gender must match with that person's actual sex. And, again, this is especially true of personal names: "John," "Mary," "Jesus," etc.
But if it is a word or name literally applied to a thing, then it may be masculine, feminine, or neuter. (Of course if it is neuter, there is no doubt that it is an impersonal thing.)
Thus, as in Hebrew, "wisdom" is always feminine even though it is literally a thing. We know it's a thing, but since both the OT Hebrew and NT Greek happen to call it "wisdom" with a feminine ending and use feminine pronouns ("she," "her," "herself") with it, we can't prove grammatically that it is a thing and not a person.
However, "day" is masculine in the Hebrew (and uses masculine pronouns and articles) and feminine in the Greek (where it, of course, uses feminine pronouns and articles)! This makes it grammatically certain (when we examine both the Old and the New Testaments) that "day" cannot be a person, but is a thing.
And, of course, whenever we find a word in NT Greek that is neuter (Hebrew doesn't use a neuter form - LaSor, p. 75), it is already grammatically defined as a non-personal thing (infants and the immature young are sometimes excepted).
Let's take as an example those who are already known to be heavenly spirit persons. God and the pre-existent person who became Jesus on earth are both clearly and often shown in the form of men in both the Old and New Testaments. They both have literal personal names ("Jesus" and "Jehovah") and descriptive titles ("Father" and "Son") which are masculine in both the Old and New Testaments. They both always have masculine pronouns applied to them in both the Old and New Testaments. Thus they are grammatically (and obviously) shown to be persons.
The other heavenly spirit persons are the angels. Some theologians (Christian and Jewish) say that these are not really persons, but simply the personified influences, energies, etc. from God used to accomplish his purpose. This may seem a possibility, but grammatically we should know better.
The angels, like God and the heavenly Christ, are always represented as masculine persons. Even if in reality they are genderless, they are nevertheless always given a gender by the inspired writers to show us that they really are persons. When they come to earth and take on a physical form, it is always in the form of a man in both the Hebrew and Greek inspired writings. Their personal names (e.g., "Michael" and "Gabriel") are masculine in both the Hebrew and Greek writings. (And, of course, just having a literal personal name shows they are persons.) A personal name was extremely important to the Hebrews during Bible times.) And all their literal titles/descriptions (e.g., "angel," "cherub," "seraph," etc.) have masculine endings in both biblical Greek and Hebrew. All pronouns used for the angels in both Hebrew and Greek are always masculine: "he," "him," "his," "himself. There can be no doubt grammatically that the inspired Bible writers intended for us to know that angels are truly persons!
But let's suppose, as an example, that someone who didn't know the ancient Hebrew understanding of the often personified term "name of God" began to believe that it had been "revealed" to him that it is actually another person of the "Godhead"! A few of the many scriptures he might use as evidence are:
"I had pity for my holy Name." - Ezek. 36:21.
"God has caused his name to dwell there." - Ezra 6:12.
"the place where your name dwells on earth" - Ps. 74:7 - KJIIV.
"incense shall be offered to my name." - Malachi 1:11
"and sing to thy name" - Ro. 15:9, RSV.
But if this individual to whom the "mystery" of "The Name of God" has been `revealed' had actually analyzed the grammar of both the Old and New Testaments, he should have known that the "Holy Name of God" was a holy thing not a person!
You see, although often personified, "The Name (of God)" is never literally seen in the Bible as a person (masc. or fem.). And the literal name of "the Holy Name" is masculine in the Hebrew all right, but it is neuter in the New Testament Greek! (And being neuter in the inspired New Testament language is enough, by itself, to prove that it is not a person, but a thing.) So, although masculine pronouns ("he," "him," "his," etc.) are used for "The Holy Name" in Hebrew, neuter pronouns ("it," "itself," "which") are used for this same word in the original New Testament Greek! We know grammatically, therefore, that, unlike real spirit persons, (God, Christ, and the holy angels), "the Holy Name" is merely a personified thing! * * * *
So what about the often personified "Holy Spirit"? Is it truly a person? Do the inspired Bible writers actually use masculine pronouns to describe it? As with "Holy Name" it is never shown in the form of a person! Often it is described as a thing (e.g., being poured out or given out in portions). Only once is it (perhaps) manifested as a living creature: a "dove" not a person! If it is a person (especially such an extremely important person as God), it must be known by a personal name like the other persons of the "Godhead": "Jesus" (the Son) and "Jehovah" (the Father). The ancient Hebrews (and God Himself) laid great stress on the extreme importance of their personal names. For example, to die and have one's name forgotten (or despised) was the worst fate of all for the ancient Hebrews. So what is the Holy Spirit's personal name? Either its name is not revealed (which tells us it is not a person - and certainly not God - but a thing), or its 'personal' name is "Holy Spirit"!
And what frequently used literal title or description is applied to the Holy Spirit? Well, all I can find is "Holy Spirit" (never "Patriarch," "Uncle," "Mother," etc. which would fit with the "relational" titles of the other two members of the 'trinity')! So, strangely, perhaps that is its "personal" name and its literal descriptive title as well.
But notice: Even though many trinitarian Bibles use the pronoun "he" to describe the Holy Spirit, the actual Old Testament Hebrew language of the inspired writers uses a feminine ending for "Holy Spirit" (whether it's `her' "personal" name or 'her' literal title or both)! And they actually used feminine pronouns ("she," "her," "herself") to describe "her"! So grammatically we know that to these inspired writers the Holy Spirit was either a thing or a female person! See Judges 3:10; 6:34; 1 Sam. 10:6; 11:6; and Is. 11:2 in the trinitarian The NIV Interlinear Hebrew-English Old Testament by Zondervan. It shows the literal use of feminine pronouns for the literally feminine "Holy Spirit" in the original Hebrew!'
We find that this gender usage in Hebrew is explained by OT Hebrew grammar authority, Gesenius:
"a 1. The Hebrew, like all Semitic languages, recognizes only two genders in the noun, a masculine and a feminine. Inanimate objects and abstract ideas, which other languages sometimes indicate by the neuter, are regarded in Hebrew as masculine or feminine, more often the latter [feminine]"! – emphasis added.
Furthermore, the inspired NT Greek writers used a different gender! This is enough to prove it is not a person. But even more importantly this different gender for "Holy Spirit" (and its pronouns) is the neuter gender. This proves grammatically, all by itself, that Holy Spirit simply is not a person! Any good NT Greek lexicon that shows the gender of words will show that "Spirit" is neuter. Also see John 14:17 in the trinitarian interlinear New Testament, The Zondervan Parallel New Testament in Greek and English, 1980: "the Spirit of truth which [ o - neut. - p. 173, Machen] the world cannot receive, because it beholds not it [the Spirit] nor knows [it]; ye know it [the Spirit]"!
The New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., 1970, (Roman Catholic), like so many other trinitarian Bibles, used "him" at John 14:17, but it at least provided this footnote for it: "The Greek word for `Spirit' is neuter, and while we [trinitarian NAB writers] use personal pronouns in English (`he,' `his,' `him'), most Greek MSS [ancient NT Greek Manuscripts] employ `IT'." Then, when this trinitarian Bible was later revised, John 14:17 was changed to: "the Spirit of truth, which [neuter o] the world cannot accept, because it [the world] neither sees nor knows it [the Spirit]. But you know it [the Spirit], because it remains with you" - NAB, 1991 ed. (also AT).
The only place that "he" (masc.) can be properly used in connection with the Holy Spirit is when the masculine noun paraclete ("helper"/"advocate") was used, and then the masculine pronouns must be used in the Greek to agree grammatically with the "masculine" paraclete regardless of what person (male or female) or thing that masculine noun is representing.
We also find that the neuter pronoun auto ("it/itself") and the neuter article to ("the" - neuter) are applied to the Holy Spirit at Ro. 8:16 and 1 Cor. 12:4, 8, 11. - see the actual Greek in the interlinear since some trinitarian interlinears even mistranslate this in the word-for-word sections. Machen explains this on pp. 34 and 47 of his New Testament Greek for Beginners. Strangely, the very trinitarian King James Version (also AT & the revised NAB) translates this honestly at Ro. 8:16 ("the Spirit itself beareth witness")!
The Holy Spirit clearly is not a person (its "personal name" is even neuter), but a holy thing which God uses to fulfill his purposes.
________________________ Some references: (1) A Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament, B. M. Newman, Jr., United Bible Societies, 1971. Note pp. 126 (onoma, "name") and 145 (pneuma "Spirit"). (2) Handbook of Biblical Hebrew, Vol. 2, p. 75, LaSor, Eerdmans, 1980. (3) Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar, p. 222, Oxford at the Clarendon Press, 1910.(4) The NIV Interlinear Hebrew-English Old Testament, Zondervan, 1980. (5) Learn New Testament Greek, Dobson, Baker Book House, 1992 (pp. 120, 123.) (6) The Zondervan Parallel New Testament in Greek and English, Marshall, 1980.
For more, see
Holy Spirit
What About Trinity "Proof Texts"?
Trinity Scripture Index
Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE
Scriptures Index
Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide
Are you familiar with a language (like Spanish) which puts different endings on the same word to show number and gender? In Spanish, for example, words and names that are literally applied to persons have endings that show those persons' sex. For example, el muchacho is "the boy," but la muchacha is "the girl"! But impersonal things are also given genders. For example, "the table" is la mesa (feminine) whereas "the hat" is el sombrero (masculine).
The languages used by the inspired Bible writers do the same thing. In OT Hebrew they had only feminine and masculine endings for their words (La Sor, Vol. 2, p.75 and Gesenius, p. 222), whereas in NT Greek they had masculine, feminine, and neuter endings (p. 23, Machen).
In Hebrew, if the writers were referring to a person and using a noun that literally (not figuratively) describes that person, they always used the word ending that corresponded to the actual sex of that person: "Father" (masc. ending); "son" (masc.); "wife" (fem.); "God" (masc.); "Messiah" (masc.), etc. This is especially true of all personal names: "Moses," "Sarah," "Abraham," etc.
If, however, they were speaking literally about a non-personal thing, they would use either masculine or feminine endings on those literal names and words (like in the Spanish examples above). Thus, "wisdom" is feminine in Hebrew and "day" is masculine. And if the Hebrew writers used one of these words (non-personal thing) to figuratively describe a person, they would usually not change the gender of that word. In other words, when a person is literally called a "king" it is always a word with a masculine ending because it applies literally to him as a person. But if a person is figuratively called a "Rock" or a "wall," etc., the original gender of the word that is used for that thing will still be applied to that man or woman.
So if a woman were figuratively called "a rock" (masculine ending), it could read like this in the Hebrew: "Hannah (fem. ending) was a rock (masc. ending), and he (masc. pronoun referring to "rock") was immovable." Or, we could see: "The Messiah (masc.) is Wisdom (fem. ending), and she (fem. pronoun) was created by God in the beginning." When we see such things in the original language we know that an impersonal thing is being used to figuratively describe a person in some respect.
It is very similar in NT Greek. When a word is literally applied to an adult person ("man," "woman," "husband," "bride," etc.) telling what he or she literally is, then the gender must match with that person's actual sex. And, again, this is especially true of personal names: "John," "Mary," "Jesus," etc.
But if it is a word or name literally applied to a thing, then it may be masculine, feminine, or neuter. (Of course if it is neuter, there is no doubt that it is an impersonal thing.)
Thus, as in Hebrew, "wisdom" is always feminine even though it is literally a thing. We know it's a thing, but since both the OT Hebrew and NT Greek happen to call it "wisdom" with a feminine ending and use feminine pronouns ("she," "her," "herself") with it, we can't prove grammatically that it is a thing and not a person.
However, "day" is masculine in the Hebrew (and uses masculine pronouns and articles) and feminine in the Greek (where it, of course, uses feminine pronouns and articles)! This makes it grammatically certain (when we examine both the Old and the New Testaments) that "day" cannot be a person, but is a thing.
And, of course, whenever we find a word in NT Greek that is neuter (Hebrew doesn't use a neuter form - LaSor, p. 75), it is already grammatically defined as a non-personal thing (infants and the immature young are sometimes excepted).
Let's take as an example those who are already known to be heavenly spirit persons. God and the pre-existent person who became Jesus on earth are both clearly and often shown in the form of men in both the Old and New Testaments. They both have literal personal names ("Jesus" and "Jehovah") and descriptive titles ("Father" and "Son") which are masculine in both the Old and New Testaments. They both always have masculine pronouns applied to them in both the Old and New Testaments. Thus they are grammatically (and obviously) shown to be persons.
The other heavenly spirit persons are the angels. Some theologians (Christian and Jewish) say that these are not really persons, but simply the personified influences, energies, etc. from God used to accomplish his purpose. This may seem a possibility, but grammatically we should know better.
The angels, like God and the heavenly Christ, are always represented as masculine persons. Even if in reality they are genderless, they are nevertheless always given a gender by the inspired writers to show us that they really are persons. When they come to earth and take on a physical form, it is always in the form of a man in both the Hebrew and Greek inspired writings. Their personal names (e.g., "Michael" and "Gabriel") are masculine in both the Hebrew and Greek writings. (And, of course, just having a literal personal name shows they are persons.) A personal name was extremely important to the Hebrews during Bible times.) And all their literal titles/descriptions (e.g., "angel," "cherub," "seraph," etc.) have masculine endings in both biblical Greek and Hebrew. All pronouns used for the angels in both Hebrew and Greek are always masculine: "he," "him," "his," "himself. There can be no doubt grammatically that the inspired Bible writers intended for us to know that angels are truly persons!
But let's suppose, as an example, that someone who didn't know the ancient Hebrew understanding of the often personified term "name of God" began to believe that it had been "revealed" to him that it is actually another person of the "Godhead"! A few of the many scriptures he might use as evidence are:
"I had pity for my holy Name." - Ezek. 36:21.
"God has caused his name to dwell there." - Ezra 6:12.
"the place where your name dwells on earth" - Ps. 74:7 - KJIIV.
"incense shall be offered to my name." - Malachi 1:11
"and sing to thy name" - Ro. 15:9, RSV.
But if this individual to whom the "mystery" of "The Name of God" has been `revealed' had actually analyzed the grammar of both the Old and New Testaments, he should have known that the "Holy Name of God" was a holy thing not a person!
You see, although often personified, "The Name (of God)" is never literally seen in the Bible as a person (masc. or fem.). And the literal name of "the Holy Name" is masculine in the Hebrew all right, but it is neuter in the New Testament Greek! (And being neuter in the inspired New Testament language is enough, by itself, to prove that it is not a person, but a thing.) So, although masculine pronouns ("he," "him," "his," etc.) are used for "The Holy Name" in Hebrew, neuter pronouns ("it," "itself," "which") are used for this same word in the original New Testament Greek! We know grammatically, therefore, that, unlike real spirit persons, (God, Christ, and the holy angels), "the Holy Name" is merely a personified thing! * * * *
So what about the often personified "Holy Spirit"? Is it truly a person? Do the inspired Bible writers actually use masculine pronouns to describe it? As with "Holy Name" it is never shown in the form of a person! Often it is described as a thing (e.g., being poured out or given out in portions). Only once is it (perhaps) manifested as a living creature: a "dove" not a person! If it is a person (especially such an extremely important person as God), it must be known by a personal name like the other persons of the "Godhead": "Jesus" (the Son) and "Jehovah" (the Father). The ancient Hebrews (and God Himself) laid great stress on the extreme importance of their personal names. For example, to die and have one's name forgotten (or despised) was the worst fate of all for the ancient Hebrews. So what is the Holy Spirit's personal name? Either its name is not revealed (which tells us it is not a person - and certainly not God - but a thing), or its 'personal' name is "Holy Spirit"!
And what frequently used literal title or description is applied to the Holy Spirit? Well, all I can find is "Holy Spirit" (never "Patriarch," "Uncle," "Mother," etc. which would fit with the "relational" titles of the other two members of the 'trinity')! So, strangely, perhaps that is its "personal" name and its literal descriptive title as well.
But notice: Even though many trinitarian Bibles use the pronoun "he" to describe the Holy Spirit, the actual Old Testament Hebrew language of the inspired writers uses a feminine ending for "Holy Spirit" (whether it's `her' "personal" name or 'her' literal title or both)! And they actually used feminine pronouns ("she," "her," "herself") to describe "her"! So grammatically we know that to these inspired writers the Holy Spirit was either a thing or a female person! See Judges 3:10; 6:34; 1 Sam. 10:6; 11:6; and Is. 11:2 in the trinitarian The NIV Interlinear Hebrew-English Old Testament by Zondervan. It shows the literal use of feminine pronouns for the literally feminine "Holy Spirit" in the original Hebrew!'
We find that this gender usage in Hebrew is explained by OT Hebrew grammar authority, Gesenius:
"a 1. The Hebrew, like all Semitic languages, recognizes only two genders in the noun, a masculine and a feminine. Inanimate objects and abstract ideas, which other languages sometimes indicate by the neuter, are regarded in Hebrew as masculine or feminine, more often the latter [feminine]"! – emphasis added.
Furthermore, the inspired NT Greek writers used a different gender! This is enough to prove it is not a person. But even more importantly this different gender for "Holy Spirit" (and its pronouns) is the neuter gender. This proves grammatically, all by itself, that Holy Spirit simply is not a person! Any good NT Greek lexicon that shows the gender of words will show that "Spirit" is neuter. Also see John 14:17 in the trinitarian interlinear New Testament, The Zondervan Parallel New Testament in Greek and English, 1980: "the Spirit of truth which [ o - neut. - p. 173, Machen] the world cannot receive, because it beholds not it [the Spirit] nor knows [it]; ye know it [the Spirit]"!
The New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., 1970, (Roman Catholic), like so many other trinitarian Bibles, used "him" at John 14:17, but it at least provided this footnote for it: "The Greek word for `Spirit' is neuter, and while we [trinitarian NAB writers] use personal pronouns in English (`he,' `his,' `him'), most Greek MSS [ancient NT Greek Manuscripts] employ `IT'." Then, when this trinitarian Bible was later revised, John 14:17 was changed to: "the Spirit of truth, which [neuter o] the world cannot accept, because it [the world] neither sees nor knows it [the Spirit]. But you know it [the Spirit], because it remains with you" - NAB, 1991 ed. (also AT).
The only place that "he" (masc.) can be properly used in connection with the Holy Spirit is when the masculine noun paraclete ("helper"/"advocate") was used, and then the masculine pronouns must be used in the Greek to agree grammatically with the "masculine" paraclete regardless of what person (male or female) or thing that masculine noun is representing.
We also find that the neuter pronoun auto ("it/itself") and the neuter article to ("the" - neuter) are applied to the Holy Spirit at Ro. 8:16 and 1 Cor. 12:4, 8, 11. - see the actual Greek in the interlinear since some trinitarian interlinears even mistranslate this in the word-for-word sections. Machen explains this on pp. 34 and 47 of his New Testament Greek for Beginners. Strangely, the very trinitarian King James Version (also AT & the revised NAB) translates this honestly at Ro. 8:16 ("the Spirit itself beareth witness")!
The Holy Spirit clearly is not a person (its "personal name" is even neuter), but a holy thing which God uses to fulfill his purposes.
________________________ Some references: (1) A Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament, B. M. Newman, Jr., United Bible Societies, 1971. Note pp. 126 (onoma, "name") and 145 (pneuma "Spirit"). (2) Handbook of Biblical Hebrew, Vol. 2, p. 75, LaSor, Eerdmans, 1980. (3) Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar, p. 222, Oxford at the Clarendon Press, 1910.(4) The NIV Interlinear Hebrew-English Old Testament, Zondervan, 1980. (5) Learn New Testament Greek, Dobson, Baker Book House, 1992 (pp. 120, 123.) (6) The Zondervan Parallel New Testament in Greek and English, Marshall, 1980.
For more, see
Holy Spirit
What About Trinity "Proof Texts"?
Trinity Scripture Index
Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE
Scriptures Index
Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide
Saturday, January 16, 2010
ARE NATURAL DISASTERS PUNISHMENT FROM GOD?
When considering whether God is responsible for eathquakes today, the scale of such disasters hinges to some extent on the human element. For example, one factor is population density in high-risk areas. It has been said that nearly half the world’s big cities now lie in areas of seismic risk.
Another factor is buildings - the materials used and the structural quality. It can be reasonably argued that many people in poorer nations have no choice about this since they are too impoverished to build earthquake-resistant structures. The adage, “Earthquakes don’t kill people; buildings do,” is all too often proved true. Considering this, how can the results of any earthquake today be blamed on God?
Today, God is not responsible for natural disasters hurting innocent people because “God is love” (1 John 4:8). Deuteronomy 32:4 says that God is "perfect is his activity, for all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness, with whom there is no injustice; righteous and upright is he."
Ecclesiastes 9:11 simply tells us that “time and unforeseen occurrence befall [us] all”.
For more, see:
2 Cor.13:14 "Jesus", "God", "and the...Holy Spirit"
Many times another scripture is used by trinitarians along with Matt. 28:19 which is also supposed to show the Father, Son, and holy spirit all being mentioned in the same breath. Somehow this is intended to prove that they are all equally God. That scripture is 2 Cor. 13:14:
"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all." - ASV.
Does that verse really say the Father, the Son, and the holy spirit are three persons who constitute the one Most High God? Doesn't it say, instead, that the Lord Jesus Christ is one individual, the holy spirit is another individual (whether a person or a thing), and that God is another different individual?
Does it say Jesus is God? Does it say the holy spirit is God? No, it treats God as someone entirely separate from those two! So, either the inspired Bible writer is completely ignoring the person of the Father: "the grace of...Christ [an individual person]...the love of [a composite] God...and the communion of the spirit [an individual person or thing], or, since the Father alone really is the only true God (Jn 17:1, 3; 1 Cor. 8:6), Paul is including the person of the Father in this verse and properly identifying him alone as God (as all his readers at that time well knew - see the CREEDS and ISRAEL studies)!
The actual wording of the "trinitarian" 2 Cor. 13:14, when examined, proves it to be evidence against a trinity concept. (Analyze Luke 9:26 and 1 Tim. 5:21 in this "three mentioned together so they must be equal" manner of trinitarian "evidence.")
For more, see:
What About Trinity "Proof Texts"?
Trinity Scripture Index
Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE
Scriptures Index
Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide
"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all." - ASV.
Does that verse really say the Father, the Son, and the holy spirit are three persons who constitute the one Most High God? Doesn't it say, instead, that the Lord Jesus Christ is one individual, the holy spirit is another individual (whether a person or a thing), and that God is another different individual?
Does it say Jesus is God? Does it say the holy spirit is God? No, it treats God as someone entirely separate from those two! So, either the inspired Bible writer is completely ignoring the person of the Father: "the grace of...Christ [an individual person]...the love of [a composite] God...and the communion of the spirit [an individual person or thing], or, since the Father alone really is the only true God (Jn 17:1, 3; 1 Cor. 8:6), Paul is including the person of the Father in this verse and properly identifying him alone as God (as all his readers at that time well knew - see the CREEDS and ISRAEL studies)!
The actual wording of the "trinitarian" 2 Cor. 13:14, when examined, proves it to be evidence against a trinity concept. (Analyze Luke 9:26 and 1 Tim. 5:21 in this "three mentioned together so they must be equal" manner of trinitarian "evidence.")
For more, see:
What About Trinity "Proof Texts"?
Trinity Scripture Index
Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE
Scriptures Index
Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)