I'll start off with this: I believe in the person and deity of the Holy Spirit. With that said, I am a little bit confused with the following passages: John 15:26; 16:8. 13. Many times good commentators seem to think that John thought of the Holy Spirit as a person because he used a masculine pronoun to refer to him. I think that the masculine ἐκεῖνος certainly refers back to παράκλητος in 15:26 and 16:8 and is not trying to signify anything based on grammar. With that said, could I be wrong because in 16:13 ἐκεῖνος is used again, this time not referring to παράκλητος but to a neuter πνεῦμα?

__________________
Jeremy Ellis
Member of the Village Church of Bartlett
Bartlett, IL

Did you mix up your phraseology in the second sentence? {OK, that was changed}

As for his personality, he is spoken of frequently as "he" and not as "it", when "pneuma" is neuter, and grammatically should take a neuter pronoun, but instead we find the masculine, specifically in Jn 16:13&14, which is probably the clearest grammatical expression. Eph. 1:14, another unmistakable use of the masculine pronoun.

Furthermore, he exhibits personal characteristics, e.g.: grief, outrage, joy, speech, prayer, volition, discrimination.

He is accorded Divinity in his own right:
2Co 3:17-18 "Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit." (cf. Mt 28:19)

That's two three arguments for his personality.

__________________
Rev. Bruce G. Buchanan
ChainOLakes Presbyterian Church, CentralLake, MI


When posting friends, kindly bear those words of earthly wisdom in mind:
Oh, that God the gift would give us
To see ourselves as others see us.
--Robert Burns, 1786 (modernized) ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? --

Maybe I didn't make myself clear. Outside of 16:13, I don't think the masculine pronouns are referring back to a neuter noun. They are referring to a masculine noun, παράκλητος, the word used by Jesus to speak of the Holy Spirit. So Jesus naturally uses the masculine pronoun to refer to a masculine noun. The problem with this is that is 16:13 Jesus does seem to use a masculine to refer to a neuter noun, the closest referent. That is unless he is referring to παράκλητος in verse 7.

You may notice, I included another argument, which I have now supplemented with a third.

Also, in Jn 16:13, it is stated, that he "speakes from HIMSELF," aph heautou another plain use of the masculine, and so close to the "Spirit" reference antecedently. To apply that back to verse 7 is incredible to me.

And the grammatical argument is itself no inconsequential argument. Yes, you could make a case that paraklatos is the referent (hardly however, in 16:13 noted just above), however, that is not demanded, nor is it in even one case the nearest antecedent. The rendering "Helper" is itself a personal description, and not impersonal at all. And the description is explained by reference to the Being of the Holy Spirit. In other words, the emphasis in the verse falls upon the One, who is described by the additional name of "Helper."

The grammatical construction certainly gives no aid to those arguing that the Spirit is a "force". They still have to explain away the deliberate usage of the masculine in those cases. When they say "Its just case usage," they are demonstrating 1) the paucity of their argument, and 2) their general unfamiliarity with Greek grammar. I had one exchange (mediated by TomBombadil) with a JW, arguing for the impersonality of the H.S. He pontificated about the Greek cases, but he was merely parroting arguments from the Watchtower, or cherry-picking OnenessPentacostal websites. I don't think he owned (or even ever opened) a Greek Grammar in his life.

Then, there is at least the one case of Eph. 1:14, an iron-clad case of masculine usage with reference to the Spirit. I refrained from one or two other cases, simply because those references to the Spirit could be gainsaid also, by someone appealing to related words in context like Lord, Christ, or God.

In any case, the argument for the Spirit's Personality is at least as broad-based as the three arguments put forth above. For an uncomplicated introduction to the orthodox doctrine of the Holy Spirit, I recommend George Smeaton, The Holy Spirit, published by Banner of Truth, and probably available for free on the internet.