The personhood of the Holy Spirit, and an example of misusing Greek rules

Tweet

In one of my posts I talked a bit about the idea of why people who have not studied languages attempt to make claims about those languages-and this will give an example. As is observed by some, the Greek term for spirit, in relation to God, is neuter. This is used to say that the Holy Spirit, is not a person. While it is true that the term is neuter, as I pointed out in another post, that doesn't mean the same thing in Greek. I also gave an example there, that the Greek term for a little girl is neuter. As well as the Gospel writers when speaking of the child Jesus use a neuter term. These don't mean that a little girl or the child Jesus was not a person, anymore then the masculine term for house makes it a person. This is a reason I stress that before a person or group can comment about someone's theology, they must be very careful that they are not misuing it. Especially if they are claiming to be the truth, as opposed to the others who are not. As a sidenote, in relation to the Spirit, we see things which pertain to personhood-as some have pointed out, the Spirit "speaks" and has a "will"-to get around these clear statements, a person must alter them. But in doing so, they are no longer following the text as written-which is sometimes the very claim they are making about others. But some things to consider, if the Spirit were just a way of writing about God in motion, why would the Biblical writers bother making a teaching about it at all? Why put it in the formula for baptism...and why would another being, "the Son", be placed before it in that formula? And why does the New Testament sometimes within Acts and the Pauline writings call it "the Spirit of Jesus"? If the Spirit is simply part of the Father, why is it linked with Jesus at all? Or in 2 Cor. where St. Paul very clearly links the Spirit with Yahweh saying "the Lord is the Spirit"- To get around these clear statements, again, I would point out that one must explain away what is written...the very claim certain groups make about others. I would suggest, that making big statements which amount to"everyone else is wrong", without understanding the subject matter, is very shakey ground and more or less amounts to "I don't care what it says". The question is, does one believe the Bible, or what their group says about it, even when it is at the espense of what is written? The truth is, no one, and I mean no one, is really as Biblical as they claim-and "salvation" is not found by belonging to a group. If the world is filled with Apostasy, as some claim...why trust your group to know about subjects which...they do not appear to actually know about? That question is not of the devil...it's simply rational. Seeking knowledge does not make one a Pharisee, it's simply obeying the command to love God with our minds as well as our hearts, and only God can judge that.