IT is the Holy Ghost!

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Eliseus

Well, now I know who NOT to interact with on the forum. Some people's intellectual acumen is equivalent to number 7 birdshot at 300 yards.

Your verbosity conceals/reveals hubris. What a paradox!!!

[SDG]

As an aside ... the New King James Version ... doesn't use it to refer the Spirit of Christ in the old KJV 1 Peter 1:11 reference used by our superior resident scholar ...

11 searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was indicating when He testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow.

[SDG]

The New King James Version, as the NIV, NAS, doesn't use "it" .. either ... for the old KJV Isaiah 34:16 text cited by Eliseus ...

16 “ Search from the book of the LORD, and read:
Not one of these shall fail;
Not one shall lack her mate.
For My mouth has commanded it, and His Spirit has gathered them.

NKJV

The question begs to be asked why the change?

Me thinks I know the answer.

[SDG]

Let's go for the tri-fecta ...

The New King James version doesn't use "it" either for the old KJV John 1:32 text used by Eliseus ...

32 And John bore witness, saying, “I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and He remained upon Him.

WHY THE CHANGE IN THE NKJV??? .... DID THEY NOT WANT TO PROPERLY CALL GOD AN "IT", TOO? ... DON'T THEY KNOW ABOUT THE THIRD PERSON NEUTER AND THAT SOME OPs LIKE CALLING THE HOLY SPIRIT AN IT?

DIDN'T THEY REALIZE THAT THE OLD KJV ... WAS GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT ????... AND THAT PRAXEAS AND ELISEUS [and Mizpeh, too] WOULD DO THEIR BEST TO JUSTIFY IT USING THE GREEK OUT OF CONTEXT W/ THE REST OF SCRIPTURE????

ANYONE????

[SDG]

The New King James Version, The New International Version, the New American Standard version, the original Greek, Hebrew don't use "it" or "she" but rather masculine pronouns for a God who has revealed Himself to us throughout scripture in a masculine concept and form ... yet there seems to be a desire to intellectualize ... the obvious.

Originally Posted by HeavenlyOne

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

HO,

Immaculate conception has nothing to do with Jesus or His conception. It has to do with Mary and the manner in which SHE was conceived. The doctrine is NOT scriptural. It is Catholic dogma.

[SDG]

Eliseus' first post:

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

Not!!! Only in the flawed old KJV translation...

Really now.

Your point is well taken Daniel.

Simple English grammar have parts of speech that other languages do not have. But we must remember that a pronoun simply take the place of a noun. Recalling 7th or 8th grade English lessons, a noun is the name of a person, place or thing. Therefore, substituting the name of a person, place or thing, the words, it, he, she, him, her, there, etc., are some times used.

Comparing the Greek with the English can be frustrating where parts of speech are demanded in every instance of the Greek, in which I am a total incompetent, void of any and all explanation. Thus, I must of neccessity rely on the English translations which do in fact, use these various pronouns, sometimes quite liberally.

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

This post says a lot more than you think, Praxeas ... Let's disregard the gender qualifications put on words by languages ....

I think by stating the abstract value we have placed on the relationship we have w/ God as Him being masculine .... the topics of Y chromosomes, or reproductive organs, etc ... becomes irrelevant ...

Scripture .... His Word ... has placed this masculine value ...
the relationships HE HAS SOUGHT to have w/ us ... has also made him masculine in our human minds and hearts ...

Simply replacing Him with "it" as we use "it" in our English language flies in the face of the value we have placed for God, IMO.

Furthermore, I will reiterate that modern translators have seen the error of the KJV translators in the inconsistency of calling His Spirit an "it" ... when talking about God.

A chair is called a chair because we as a culture have accepted chair to represent the device we use to sit on .. we could decide tomorrow that its not to be called a chair .. but a mufaba ... and if the culture accepts that value to represent the abstract concept ...then it would become part of our language.

We only have one word for snow in our language because we need to have a word to represent and place a value on the white frozen stuff that falls from the sky ...

However, the Inuit, or Eskimo ... has developed variations and distinct words to describe snow ... based on what type of snow it is, its texture, when it falls, etc. Why? Because it is so important to their culture they had to develop words to represent the values it has for them.


Example:

Eskimo Snow Lexemes


A. Snow particles

(1) Snowflake
qanuk 'snowflake'
qanir- 'to snow'
qanunge- 'to snow' [NUN]
qanugglir- 'to snow' [NUN]

(2) Frost
kaneq 'frost'
kaner- 'be frosty/frost sth.'

(3) Fine snow/rain particles
kanevvluk 'fine snow/rain particles
kanevcir- to get fine snow/rain particles

(4) Drifting particles natquik 'drifting snow/etc'
natqu(v)igte- 'for snow/etc. to drift along ground'

(5) Clinging particles
nevluk 'clinging debris/
nevlugte- 'have clinging debris/...'lint/snow/dirt...'

B. Fallen snow


(6) Fallen snow on the ground
aniu [NS] 'snow on ground'
aniu- [NS] 'get snow on ground'
apun [NS] 'snow on ground'
qanikcaq 'snow on ground'
qanikcir- 'get snow on ground'

(7) Soft, deep fallen snow on the ground
muruaneq 'soft deep snow'

(8) Crust on fallen snow
qetrar- [NSU] 'for snow to crust'
qerretrar- [NSU] 'for snow to crust'

(9) Fresh fallen snow on the ground
nutaryuk 'fresh snow' [HBC]

(10) Fallen snow floating on water
qanisqineq 'snow floating on water'

C. Snow formations


(11) Snow bank
qengaruk 'snow bank' [Y, HBC]

(12) Snow block
utvak 'snow carved in block'

(13) Snow cornice
navcaq [NSU] 'snow cornice, snow (formation) about to collapse'
navcite- 'get caught in an avalanche'

D. Meterological events


(14) Blizzard, snowstorm
pirta 'blizzard, snowstorm'
pircir- 'to blizzard'
pirtuk 'blizzard, snowstorm'

(15) Severe blizzard
cellallir-, cellarrlir- 'to snow heavily'
pir(e)t(e)pag- 'to blizzard severely'
pirrelvag- 'to blizzard severely'

In conclusion, if you admit that our relationships, interactions and even His Word place a masculine value on God ... then grammar, Greek, Hebrew ... becomes irrelevant ... our commonly accepted abstract value then makes He a He and not a she or an it ... Making the 3 KJV verses Eliseus posted inconsistent.

The New King James Version, The New International Version, the New American Standard version, original Greek Hebrew don't use it but rather pronouns for a masculine God ... yet there seems to be a desire to intellectualize ... the obvious.

Perfect example of using number 7 birdshot to 'hit' a squirrel at 300 yards.

[Subdued]

Was God male prior to the birth of Jesus; and if so, in what way(s)? What made God male?