Public Challenge #1 ~ to Greg Stafford / Jason BeDhun / Serious JWs / Fred Coulter (CofG)

by 4examp 13 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  4examp

  "The WT conclusion is intellectually dishonest & deliberately deceitful in that the WT is only telling you 4/5 of the truth."

  My mistake. The sentence should say "1/5 of the truth".
• 

  4examp

  Greek Definite Article "the" & possible combinations with "spirit"
  CASE	Masculine		Feminine		Neuter		English
  	Singular	Plural	Singular	Plural	Singular	Plural
  Nominative (subject)	o	oi	h	ai	to pneuma	ta pneu.mata	the
  Accusative (object)	ton	tous	thn	tas	to pneuma	ta pneu.mata	the
  Genitive (of)	tou	twn	ths	twn	tou pneu.matos	twn pneu.matwn	of the
  Dative (to, for, with, +)	tw	tois	th	tais	tw pneuma pneu.mati	tois pneu.masin	to the
  Vocative	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
• 

  4examp

  {Sorry. Page one was posted then automatically deleted. Here it is again.}

  Does the following WT quote (Insight p.1019 / Aid p.1543) pass the "Test of Agreement" with Scripture? "...in a large number of cases the expression 'holy spirit' appears in the original Greek without the article,
  thus indicating its LACK of PERSONALITY."

  The WT conclusion is based on a fact of Greek grammar (i.e. missing definite article "the").The WT conclusion is intellectually dishonest & deliberately deceitful in that it's only 1/5 truth.

  ‘Pneuma’ (Greek for 'spirit') is used of: humans, angels, demons (fallen angels / unholy spirits), holy spirit, The Holy Spirit, God, Satan, etc.

  Key / Powerful / Pivotal Portraits of Pneuma
  - hidden to English readers but vital for understanding
  - 5 Portraits of Holy pneuma
  - 5 Portraits of Unholy pneuma (singular & plural)
  - the 2 sets of 5 portraits involve the (neuter) Greek definite article ‘the’
  - "the" may be absent (P#1 / P#2)
  - "the" may be present (P#3 / P#4 / P#5).

  In the original text, these distinctions on the surface in plain sight ("the" is there, or not).
  In most translations, these 5-Portrait distinctions are partially hidden (i.e. ignored or altered).
  {{Another part of Scripture hidden to English readers is the 22-letter, Hebrew-alphabet structure of Ps.119.
  Each line of verses 1 to 8 begins with Aleph; 9 to 16 with Beth; 17 to 24 with Gimel; etc.}}

  Portrait Comparisons
  - equal, grammatically identical, parallel sets for direct comparison & obvious conclusion
  Portrait #1 ~ no def. art. / no adj ~ translation: spirit ~ or ~ (demon) spirit(s)
  Portrait #2 ~ no art. / one adj ~ translation: holy spirit ~ or ~ unholy spirit(s)
  Portrait #3 ~ one art. / no adj ~ translation: The Spirit ~ or ~ the spirit(s)
  Portrait #4 ~ one art. / one adj ~ translation: The Holy Spirit ~ or ~ the unholy spirit(s)
  Portrait #5 ~ two art. / one adj ~ translation: The Spirit The Holy ~ or ~ the spirit(s) the unholy

  P#1 = NO definite article / no adjective ~ (focus is on simple fact of Existence)
  1a ~ Spirit ~ (Jn.3:5,6; 4:23,24; Rom.8:4,5; Rev.1:10; 4:2; 17:3)
  1b ~ (demon) spirit ~ (Lk.9:39; 13:11; 2Cor.11:4; 2Th.2:2)
  1c ~ (demon) spirits ~ (Mt.12:45; Lk.11:26; 1Cor.12:10; Rev.16:13,14)

  P#2 = NO art. / one adj ~ (focus is on Being’s Character or Nature – good or evil)
  2a ~ Holy Spirit ~ (Lk.11:13; Ac.1:2; 4:25; Rom.14:17; 15:13,16,19)
  2b ~ unholy spirit ~ (Mk.1:23; 3:30; 5:2; 7:25; 9:17; Lk.4:33; Ac.16:16; Rev.18:2)
  2c ~ unholy spirits ~ (Mt.10:1; Lk.6:18; 7:21; 8:2; Acts 5:16; 8:7)

  P#3 = ONE art. / no adj ~ (focus is on Activity of the Being)
  3a ~ THE Spirit ~ (Mt.4:1; Ac.2:4; 5:9; 8:29; 16:7; Rom.8:16,26,27; Heb.10:29; 1Jn.5:6)
  3b ~ THE (demon) spirit ~ (Mk.9:20; Ac.16:18; Eph.2:2 Satan!; 1Jn.4:3)
  3c ~ THE (demon) spirits ~ (Mt.8:16; Lk.10:20; 1Jn.4:1)

  P#4 = ONE art. / one adj ~ (focus is on Being)
  4a ~ THE Holy Spirit ~ (Mt.28:19; Lk.12:10,12; Ac.9:31; 13:4; 16:6; 2Cor.13:14)
  4b ~ THE unholy spirit ~ (Mt.12:43; Mk.9:25; Lk.11:24)
  4c ~ THE unholy spirits ~ (Lk.4:36)

  P#5 = TWO art. / one adj ~ (focus is on Essence of the Being)
  5a ~ THE Spirit THE Holy ~ (Mt.12:32; Mk.3:29; Ac.1:16; 5:3,32; 7:51; 13:2; 15:28; 20:23,28; 21:11; 28:25; Eph.4:30; Heb.3:7; 9:8; 10:15)
  5b ~ THE spirit THE unholy ~ (Mk.1:26; 5:8; Lk.8:29; 9:42; Ac.19:15,16)
  5c ~ THE spirits THE unholy ~ (Mk.1:27; 3:11; 5:13; 6:7; Ac.19:12,13)

  Some Observations / Conclusions

  The 5 Portraits (as part of God’s original / absolute Truth):
  - show Holy & Unholy pneuma in Equal & Identical grammatical structures
  - prove that the WT’s missing def. art. argument doesn't tell 4/5 of the whole truth
  - prove that The Holy Spirit's Personality cannot be eliminated by a missing def. art.
  - make a perfect parallel (for direct comparison & obvious conclusion)
  - show the distinction between Person & power; Giver & gift
  - proves that "holy spirit" is not Person-only, or Power-only
  - provide clear, direct, irrefutable evidence that Holy & Unholy pneuma are Sentient Beings
  - are a fact of Greek Scripture -- part of God's eternal, written Word. As such, the 5 Portraits are not affected overall by different Greek texts, or by variant readings, or by translation, or by interpretation, or by expert opinion, or by anything!
  - have nothing to do with human opinion, interpretation, or bias.

  The text itself, reveals 5 separate "portraits" of Holy pneuma.
  The text itself, reveals 5 separate "portraits" of Unholy / unclean / wicked / evil / demon pneuma.
  The Portrait charts merely identify the "addresses" of these mirror-image, grammatical facts of Scripture.

  To VERIFY the Presence or Absence of each (neuter) Greek def. art. "the" in P#1 - P#5,
  compare a definite article chart with any Greek or Interlinear NT.
  - See 4th column of WT’s chart on inside back cover of a Kingdom Interlinear, or
  - go to www.wikichristian.org/index.php/Koine_Greek:_Definite_Article. or see the posted chart.

  For additional confirmation see:
  - The Companion Bible (Appendix 101, p.146,147)
  - The Englishman’s Greek Concordance (March 1840; p.632-635, 1970).
• 

  boyzone

  Does the following WT quote (Insight p.1019 / Aid p.1543) pass the "Test of Agreement" with Scripture? "...in a large number of cases the expression 'holy spirit' appears in the original Greek without the article,
  thus indicating its LACK of PERSONALITY."

  I would say the Watchtower does not pass this test. From the evidence you posted, the definate article appears on numerous occasions thus identifying the Holy Spirit (and other Spirits) as personal.

  But I'm no greek scholar.
• 

  Narkissos

  I had to look up the context of that quote because it didn't make any sense to me: how would the lack of a neuter (i.e., a priori impersonal) article indicate a lack of personality????

  Well, the whole paragraph makes it sound even worse:

  ***

  Lacks personal dentification. Since God himself is a Spirit and is holy and since all his faithful angelic sons are spirits and are holy, it is evident that if the "holy spirit" were a person, there should reasonably be given some means in the Scriptures to distinguish and identify such spirit person from all these other ‘holy spirits.’ It would be expected that, at the very least, the definite article would be used with it in all cases where it is not called "God’s holy spirit" or is not modified by some similar expression. This would at least distinguish it as THE Holy Spirit. But, on the contrary, in a large number of cases the expression "holy spirit" appears in the original Greek without the article, thus indicating its lack of personality.—Compare Ac 6:3, 5; 7:55; 8:15, 17, 19; 9:17; 11:24; 13:9, 52; 19:2; Ro 9:1; 14:17; 15:13, 16, 19; 1Co 12:3; Heb 2:4; 6:4; 2Pe 1:21; Jude 20, Int and other interlinear translations.

  ***

  Leaving aside the manifest ignorance of Greek syntax, I don't understand the argument: if the absence of the article runs against the distinction between "the Holy Spirit" and other "holy spirits" -- who happen to be construed as persons! -- how does it indicate a lack of personality? Even unduly extrapolating from English usage (as the paragraph seems to do), how would "THE Holy Spirit" be more of a distinction from God? This is one of the lamest arguments I have ever seen (or please somebody explain what I missed).

  (N.B. I don't believe the NT texts in general present the "Holy Spirit" as personal; I just don't understand this argument.)
• 

  4examp

  It's clear that the WT argument is simply desperation, to attempt to justify their view.

  Do you believe the NT texts present "Unholy Spirits" (a.k.a. demons) as personal?
• 

  Narkissos

  Do you believe the NT texts present "Unholy Spirits" (a.k.a. demons) as personal?

  If you're asking me, in the narrative context (Synoptic Gospels) where the (more exactly) "unclean spirits" appear, yes. That makes a good case for a relatively "personal" understanding of the Holy Spirit, at least in the original context of Mark. But the level of personification varies greatly from one text to another. For instance, I don't think the Pauline oppositions of "spirit" vs. "flesh" or "letter" favour personification. This imo requires case by case examination, and I don't think it is possible to apply either an "impersonal" or "personal" understanding of "Spirit" on ALL NT (let alone OT) texts...
• 

  4examp

  1. You wrote: "If you're asking me, in the narrative context (Synoptic Gospels) where the (more exactly) "unclean spirits" appear, yes."

  Then in the context of the 5 Portraits, why do you accept an "unholy spirit" as a sentient being, but reject "the holy spirit"?

  I use the words "holy" and "unholy" pneuma in the 5 Portraits, to highlight the direct grammatical equality.
  The actual text uses several words for demons (e.g. unclean, wicked, etc).

  2. You wrote: "I don't think the Pauline oppositions of "spirit" vs. "flesh" or "letter" favour personification."

  I totally agree, but the 5 Portraits are not referring to this meaning of pneuma.

  3. You wrote:"I don't think it is possible to apply either an "impersonal" or "personal" understanding of "Spirit" on ALL NT (let alone OT) texts..."

  Again, I totally agree.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  Welcome to the board, 4examp. Greg Stafford does not frequent this board. But thanks for the thread.

  BTS
• 

  Narkissos

  Sorry 4examp, I have no intention to take up your "challenge" and no need to play by your rules :)... I only replied to your thread because I was (and still am) intrigued by this WT quote (I didn't remember this argument). As far as the refutation of this (WT) assertion goes I agree with you. The absence of article does not indicate lack of personality. But neither does it (or the presence of the article, or the presence or absence of an adjective or other determination for that matter) indicate personality! The different syntaxical patterns which appear in the text (for obvious contextual reasons) are simply irrelevant to this issue, which btw is mostly foreign and anachronistic to the texts. When analysed from this angle, the use of pneuma (in reference to God's or Christ's "Spirit") in the NT (and contemporary literature) shows different levels of personification (or lack thereof); moreover it also varies as to its identification to, or distinction from, God or Jesus. Which means (to me) that the "personality of the Holy Spirit" was not yet a conscious question (let alone a dogmatic answer) to the authors.

  A better method imo is to consider each work separately and see what "portrait" of the Holy Spirit it presents. This calls for literary rather grammatical analysis. Similar syntaxical patterns from unrelated contextsdo not add up to a "portrait" (at least from my understanding of that word).

  P.S. Welcome! :)