Spirit or Ghost?

"The translators to the reader" addresses your point Pastor Larry.
Essentially they said they anticipated complaints of "inconsistency" and chose NOT to stick with wooden translations. When travel would work just as well as journey and such like synonyms.
So, while some may say it is inconsistent or even inaccurate, the translators didn't think so and explained why.
Do you have the "Translators to the Reader" in you Bible? I do. It clears up a bunch of alledged problems.
(Even KJVo )

In HIS service;
Jim

 

Well, I look at it this way: In speaking of the third Person of the Trinity, I never use the term "Holy Ghost" when teaching children. Why? Because modern usage is what it is, and we don't need the distraction of Halloween imagery and spooky cartoons when trying to get a Biblical point across.

And for adults who have never heard the Word before, for whom the things of God are totally foriegn, I would not say "ghost" either, for the same reason.

Now those of us with deeper knowledge can use either term, because I don't think He minds one way or the other.

 

Having "cut my teeth" on the KJV, I was always used to the use of the term "Holy Ghost." However, I am also comfortable with the term "Holy Spirit." I have no real convictions that either phrase is "wrong." At times I use the two phrases interchangeably and I feel quite comfortable with both phrases.

 

the terms spirit and ghost carry the same meaning.
There is no difference in the meanings of the two words other than how they are spelled.

DERR

 

An observation: It seems if you all were smart enough to figure out such a word, others would be also.

 

A KJV-only advocate wrote the following claim:
"To teach that 'the Holy Ghost' and 'the Holy Spirit' have the same meaning, is to be in denial of the gospel."

This quotation was found in the article at the following web address:
www.kjbbn.net/is_the_holy_ghost_and_the_holy_same.htm

 

Once again we have the possible idea of "advanced revelation" and/or "translation inspiration".

The King James translators added the notion of the old English/Anglo-Saxon nuance of "ghost" to the Koine word "pneuma" in some places but not all and for the most part it works (for that period English).

In fact this above mentioned article possibly has it backwards. "Ghost", "gheist", "gustr" (from which we get "gust") as in a gust of wind indicates a manifestation of the power of the "wind-pneuma".

We don't know why the KJV translators did this (at least I have never found a documented reason).

But I think it's a stretch to suggest that the Holy Spirit intervened and caused the KJV translators to use the term "Holy Ghost" in the AV rather than the "holy Spirit". Though I admit, it's possible.

BTW the Douay-Rheims also used "Holy Ghost" extensively, so did the Holy Spirit guide these RCC translators?

What of the 1st 2-3 century fluent Greek speakers who used the raw text and only knew "pneuma"? were they "in denial of the gospel"?

What of the earliest ancient translations which made no such distinction?

HankD

 

Exactly right! </font>[/QUOTE]Sorry, but the above is not true! See five examples of five different modern translation:

(CEV) Luke 24:39 Look at my hands and my feet and see who I am! Touch me and find out for yourselves. Ghosts don't have flesh and bones as you see I have."

(TEV) Luke 24:39 Look at my hands and my feet, and see that it is I myself. Feel me, and you will know, for a ghost doesn't have flesh and bones, as you can see I have."

(GodsWord) Luke 24:39 "Look at my hands and feet, and see that it's really me. Touch me, and see for yourselves. Ghosts don't have flesh and bones, but you can see that I do."

(Holman NT) Luke 24:39 Look at My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself! Touch Me and see, because a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you can see I have."

(ISV NT) Luke 24:39 Look at my hands and my feet, that it is I myself! Touch me and see, for a ghost doesn't have flesh and bones as you see I have."

Now we find the Greek word "pneuma" being translated as "ghost" in the above five different modern translations! This shows that the modern translations are NOT consistent in translating pneuma as spirit.

 

We do know why the KJV translators translated the Greek word sometimes as "the Holy Ghost"! The Greeks had no way to distinguish between the words ghost and spirit when using their word "pneuma". But, Hebrew, like English can distinguish between ghost and spirit. It is this very distinguish between the words ghost and spirit that we know the Greek word "pneuma" is sometimes speaking of the third person of the Godhead and not just the wind. The KJV translators translated the Greek word into English from the Hebrew Old Testament context!

The Hebrew word "gava" is "to breathe out" as in "ghost".

The Hebrew word "ruwach" is "wind", "breath" as in "spirit".

We find the Greek word "pneuma" in John 19:30 as "ghost" and not "spirit". The Greek could just as well read: gave up the spirit." We learn a very important association of the Greek word "pneuma" within its Hebrew context! Not only is the Greek word "pneuma" of the New Testament found in context with the Hebrew word "ruach" in the Old Testament, but also with the Hebrew word "gava".

When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. (John 19:30)

Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died in a good old age, an old man, and full of years; and was gathered to his people. (Genesis 25:8)

It is by this Hebrew context that the KJV translators translated the Greek into English! After all, large parts of the New Testament is quoted Hebrew Old Testament!

We find in the King James Bible the third person of the Godhead: the Holy Ghost is always masculine. The only time the word Spirit is masculine, is when the office of the Holy Ghost is found in the context as being that of truth and not his person: John 14:17; John 15:26; John 16:13,4; 1 Corinthians 12:11

And, yes, the earliest ancient translations DID make a distinction! Look at the Hebrew, and Gothic for examples! Oh, and English can be found as far back as A.D. 450. (see The Mother Tongue: English and How It Got That Way by Bill Bryson)!

"The Gothic is a language of Low German origin, as well as the Anglo-Saxon and English." (The Gospels Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, Wycliffe and Tyndale Versions by Joseph Bosworth; published by Gibbings and Company in London - 1907; p.iii).

Therefore, as we find a distinction in Hebrew and English; we also find it in the Gothic, Low german, and Anglo-Saxon.

 

Amen, amen!!!

 

Holy Ghost:

Matthew 1:18
KJV (1611) — she was found with child of the Holy Ghost
Rheims (1582) — she vvas found to be vvith childe by the Holy Ghost
Geneva (1557) — she was found wyth chylde of the holy goost
Cranmer (1539) — she was founde with chylde by the holy goost
Tyndale (1534) — she was founde with chylde by the holy goost
Wycliffe (1380) — sche was founde hauynge of the holy goost in the wombe


Holy Spirit:

1 Thessalonians 4:8
KJV (1611) — God . . . has also giuen unto us his holy Spirit
Rheims (1582) — God . . . also hath giuen his holy Spirit in vs
Geneva (1557) — God . . . hath geuen you his holy Sprite
Cranmer (1539) — God . . . hath sent his holy sprete amonge you
Tyndale (1534) — God . . . hath sent his holy sprete amonge you
Wycliffe (1380) — god . . . also yaf his holi spirit in us


The AV is NOT the ONLY work of that time in which He is called "the Holy Ghost" and also called "Holy Spirit"; see above!

 

Then you, like Icthus, would be guilty of attributing something to me that I did not say. If you (and he) would actually read what I said, you would be able to be more accurate with it. Statements such as Icthus made and you agreed with are completely out of line because they are not truthful. When you quote someone, quote what they actually said, not what you wish they had said.

There is a lot of discerment on the BB (though not spread around to all). It is interesting that you say "one also can "see" that when Jesus "gives up the ghost", He is releasing that life giving breath and commending His Spirit into the hands of the Father." In your statement, you proved my point, by interchanging "Spirit" for "Ghost." The point is that the "ghost" he gave up was his spirit, and that is exactly what I said. And knowing that doesn't even take discernment. YOu just have to be able to read. </font>[/QUOTE]This gives us one of the distinctions of "Ghost" and "spirit" in the KJ Bible! When the "spirit" is seperated from its body; it is called a "ghost".

This gives us a greater understanding of the "body of Christ"! Our relationship to God as individuals is through the death of Christ on the cross (John 3:16; 1 Cor. 6)- thus we find the Holy Ghost in our KJ Bibles. Our relationship to God as a saved person in Christ (1 John 3:16; 1 Cor. 3- thus we find the Spirit (the Holy Ghost in each believer agreeing in truth).

 

Very true ... if you lived in contemporary times. But we don't ... and the KJV is still inconsistent in translating it one way some of the time and one way other times. </font>[/QUOTE]When we find "the Holy Ghost" (90 times) in the KJ Bible it is ALWAYS masculine. We actually only find "holy spirit" in the New Testament 4 times.

Thus, "the Holy Ghost" (which is always masculine) when He manifest in some bodily form, we find "Spirit" as a neuter. But, unclean spirits are also always masculine, and therefore the reason we ALWAYS find "Holy" with God's "Ghost" !

 

kjv was written a very long time age....and language chanhes over tine...take for example the word fear commonly used int kjv..we are to fear God. When written he word to hold in awe...ove the centuriens in has come to mean to be afraid of...we're not suppsed to be afraid of God, we're supposed to hold him in awe.

Ghost is the same kind of situation...ghost now means exclusively the restless image of an deceased person. That meaning is very old and included kjv time of writng. Howerver, the use of ghost and spirt as synomyms is now larely lost.

WE have to careful to not use emerging langage differences to spilit hairs in a text hundreds of years old ...obviously in kjv languare to two words are used to describe the same thing, which in modern english is caller almosy exclusively spiret

 

Ghost or Spirit... either may be fine. What is not fine is introducing confusion unnecessarily by using both words to translate one Greek word as it refers to the Holy Spirit.

I use the KJV and have less problem with "Holy Ghost" than I do with an inconsistency that has no apparent value to the reader.

 

In Gk. "Holy Ghost" and "unclean spirit" are never masculine; they're always neuter.

BTW, Hollywood seems always to use the "Holy Ghost" nomenclature. If little Johny falls on the ground and pitches a fit on any given T.V. show, a bystander is apt to say that he's actin' just like he got da Holy Ghost!

Cheers,

Bluefalcon

 

Not sure I understand the intent of this thread.
Ghost is actually offered as one definition of the word spirit.

And one definition of ghost is "disembodied spirit."

The words have the same meaning.