IT is the Holy Ghost!

[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?"

Originally Posted by 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?"

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]

Originally Posted by Eliseus

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.

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.

Originally Posted by Rico

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!

"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.

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]

Originally Posted by Eliseus

So you don't like how the Bible speaks.

Okie dokie, fine by me!

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

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

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 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.

Outov estin (5748) o elqwn (5631) di' udatov kai aimatov, Ihsouv Xristov;ouk en tw udati monon all' en tw udati kai en tw aimati; kai to pneuma estin (5748) to marturoun, (5723) oti to pneuma estin (5748) h alhqeia.

1:11
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

eraunwntev eiv tina h poion kairon edhlou to en autoivpneuma Xristou promarturomenon (5740) ta eiv Xriston paqhmata kai tav meta tauta 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.

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Do you think the Spirit of God has a gender?

Yes sir.