Originally posted by robbie carrobie
well then what are you doing in my thread, i never brought the trinity anywhere near it,
i mentioned trinitarians and readers of the king James Bible.

Originally posted by divegeester
I read the KJ.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
well why does your translation render the Greek term as Ghost?

Originally posted by divegeester
I've already told you I don't know and that I'm not particularly interested.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
so you are simply willing to accept it, without trying to ascertain why, fine, anyone else
know why or is it a mystery?

Originally posted by divegeester
You are obviously itching to tell us all why you think it is, so why don't you put yourself out of your misery.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i dont think it is a valid translation but perhaps others know of a reason, yet,
overcoming their cynicism seems quite difficult, they felt that i was a laying a trap for
them.

Originally posted by divegeester
Is there really that much difference between a 'ghost' and a 'spirit' that intriuges you so much?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes, they are entirely unrelated, the term apparition or ghost has no place here,
otherwise we would read verses like this, God is an apparition (spirit) and those
worshipping him must worship in apparition (spirit) and truth. So clearly there is a
difference.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
do you or dont you know why the Greek word 'ruach', is translated as Ghost or do you
not, for nowhere else is it translated as ghost, spirit yes, wind yes, but Ghost? This is
really a rather poor reflection of how much you people actually know about your Bibles,
you have really no idea why a verse is translated in the way it is, do you? that is very
very worrying.

Originally posted by knightmeister
I really don't think that it matters that much because the Bible is obviously referring to the same thing. You worry too much about these technicalities and not enough about spiritual matters.

Ah, found it!

Medieval English theologians believed the Holy Spirit (the Third Person of the Holy Trinity) was unknown to the Hebrews and Jews of the Old Testament era. They believed he first appeared at the festival of Pentecost recorded in Acts chapter 2. This belief created a dilemma for them. For if the Third Person was unknown prior to his appearance, who or what was the Ruach mentioned in the OT?

To solve the problem and prevent conflicting interpretations, these theologians and their printers created two distinctions.

First. They coined the phrase "Holy Ghost" to designate the Third Person of the Trinity. John Wycliffe's version of 1380 was the first major translation to use the phrase. Later Bible editors followed his example and used "Holy Ghost" only in their NT portions, never in the OT.

The King James Version of 1611 followed the tradition and has the phrase 90x in its NT. And it never has "the Ghost," "Ghost of God," or "Ghost of Jesus." Instead, we read "the Spirit, of God, of Jesus," even though the same Greek word pneuma lies behind "ghost" and "spirit." The special phrase "Holy Ghost" denotes an independent, coequal member of the Godhead.

http://www.hebrew-streams.org/works/spirit/ruachpneuma.html



So, robbie you were saying that you wern't talking about the trinity...??

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
well why does your translation render the Greek term as Ghost?

Originally posted by divegeester
Robbie doesn't "buy" the trinity (nor do I),.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes i understand, but why the term Ghost, can you think of any other instance of
'ruach', translated as spirit, also wind in some cases, as being an apparition?