Spirit or Ghost?

[KJB1611reader]

God is called a 'which, what, it,'

God can be a it, there is no issue.

John, it was in one of those videos on YouTube that mentioned it.

Unfortunately I can't access YT, I faintly remember the reason for ghost and spirit. One was about the working of GOD and one was more on the person of God.

 

[John of Japan]

God is called a 'which, what, it,'

God can be a it, there is no issue.

There certainly is an issue. God is not a thing, which is what "it" refers to. He is a person. How would you like it if your parents said about you, "Yes, it was a good kid."?

John, it was in one of those videos on YouTube that mentioned it.

Which video, please? Can you remember anything about it?

Unfortunately I can't access YT, I faintly remember the reason for ghost and spirit. One was about the working of GOD and one was more on the person of God.

I wish you could elaborate on this. It makes no sense to me. I've studied every single mention in the Word about the Holy Spirit, and just don't see this anywhere.

 

[KJB1611reader]

There certainly is an issue. God is not a thing, which is what "it" refers to. He is a person. How would you like it if your parents said about you, "Yes, it was a good kid."?

Which video, please? Can you remember anything about it?

I wish you could elaborate on this. It makes no sense to me. I've studied every single mention in the Word about the Holy Spirit, and just don't see this anywhere.

One is about the person of the Holy Ghost and one is about the workings of the Holy Spirit.

 

[David Lamb]

One is about the person of the Holy Ghost and one is about the workings of the Holy Spirit.

It is important to remember that as English speakers, we are relying on a translation of the bible. The original Greek word is the same, whether translated into English as "Holy Spirit" or "Holy Ghost."

 

[JonC]

The KJV refers to the Holy Spirit as both the Holy Spirit and Holy Ghost. However, no modern English version I know of ever refers to Him as "Ghost".

Now, while "Holy Ghost" was OK in 1611, MODERN usage of the word "ghost" carries something not holy about it. It usually refers to the disembodied spirit of a dead person and to me using it as the name of the Holy Spirit in modern English is less-than-fully-respectful.

WHAT SAYEST THOU?

Either. We use "ghost" and "spirit" interchangeably. But I prefer spirit.

 

[KJB1611reader]

There is a reason for the distinction.

 

[John of Japan]

One is about the person of the Holy Ghost and one is about the workings of the Holy Spirit.

So, then, are there four persons in the Trinity, the Father, Son, Holy Spirit, and Holy Ghost? This is what this post seems to say--the Holy Spirit and Holy Ghost are two different Persons of the Trinity!

 

[KJB1611reader]

So, then, are there four persons in the Trinity, the Father, Son, Holy Spirit, and Holy Ghost? This is what this post seems to say--the Holy Spirit and Holy Ghost are two different Persons of the Trinity!

No, I meant the distinction is emphasing two different aspects of the same person.

 

[John of Japan]

No, I meant the distinction is emphasing two different aspects of the same person.

Okay, then, once again. How in the world does "Ghost" represent something about the blessed Spirit of God that "Spirit" does not represent? I have many books about the Holy Spirit, and none of them suggest this: John R. Rice, R. A. Torrey, H. A. Ironside, A. J. Gordon, etc. (All of those are fundamentalists).

 

[KJB1611reader]

Okay, then, once again. How in the world does "Ghost" represent something about the blessed Spirit of God that "Spirit" does not represent? I have many books about the Holy Spirit, and none of them suggest this: John R. Rice, R. A. Torrey, H. A. Ironside, A. J. Gordon, etc. (All of those are fundamentalists).

There is videos on this, I need to find it. Please bepatient.

 

[John of Japan]

There is videos on this, I need to find it. Please bepatient.

Okay, I'll wait.

 

[KJB1611reader]

Maybe its this one.

 

[37818]

By using the word IT in referring to the Holy Spirit, just seems like same thing JW do when they call Him as a force

Greek usage versus English only allowing a he a he or she for a self.
Even so a "self" is nevertheless in the Greek to be a person.

 

[KJB1611reader]

There is nothing wrong with 'it.'

 

[Reynolds]

The KJV refers to the Holy Spirit as both the Holy Spirit and Holy Ghost. However, no modern English version I know of ever refers to Him as "Ghost".

Now, while "Holy Ghost" was OK in 1611, MODERN usage of the word "ghost" carries something not holy about it. It usually refers to the disembodied spirit of a dead person and to me using it as the name of the Holy Spirit in modern English is less-than-fully-respectful.

WHAT SAYEST THOU?

I agree with you.

 

[37818]

Maybe its this one.

A 1 hour video. It is a very good KJB only video.

Now I have been a decidedly kJV user since 1968. But I cannot be a KJB only user.

If you want to understand KJB only view, watch this video.

 

[37818]

There is nothing wrong with 'it.'

This video provides an explanation using the translation Holy Ghost.

 

[KJB1611reader]

This video provides an explanation using the translation Holy Ghost.

Okay, do tell what it is. YT drain my data. I wish not to waste it

 

[David Lamb]

There is nothing wrong with 'it.'

As a word, there is nothing wrong with "it." However, in English, we use the word "it" when referring to things, not to people. Using the word "it" to refer to God (Father, Son or Holy Spirit) therefore cannot be correct, because God is not a thing.

 

[KJB1611reader]

As a word, there is nothing wrong with "it." However, in English, we use the word "it" when referring to things, not to people. Using the word "it" to refer to God (Father, Son or Holy Spirit) therefore cannot be correct, because God is not a thing.

It can, in the Bishop's Bible, 'it' was shewn in.margin as Christ. I am sure other versions have 'it' ascribed to God. We also call God a 'what' and a 'which.'