Why do many Christians claim the Spirit of God is a Holy ‘Ghost’?

[vijeno]

The exact same Greek and Hebrew words are translated "ghost" and "spirit" in the KJV in different occurrences of the words.

רוּחַ and πνεῦμα, I take it? Are there other words in the bible for "ghost" in the sense of "apparition" vs "spirit" in the sense of god's spirit? Or the spirits of other gods, for that matter?

Can someone enlighten me please?

But the Latin equivalent of the same word is fine?

Haha, good catch! I wonder if OP's brain will explode once they realize that a "pneumatic buxom blonde" also goes back the same word.

 

[vijeno]

ghost (n.)
....

Wow. Thanks for that! So english ghost, german Geist is related to breath - and hebrew ruach also means breath or wind? I wonder if the connection of ghost and air came about by way of bible translation. Anyway, stuff like that gives me warm fuzzy feelies and lifts my .... tadaaaah... spirit.

 

[Soapy]

Sure, let's get back to your OP:



This definition does not apply to the third person of the trinity.


It may be either, or it may be neither. For example, it can just be sloppy language, two concepts that share the same word, or two words overlapping in meaning. It happens all the time.

The two concepts are similar enough for people to sometimes use the same word. And sometimes, people just don't care, or they rely on the listener to know from context what they are talking about.

Moreover, in some languages, such as my mother language, the two concepts are expressed by the same word. I'm not sure if this is the case for ancient greek and hebrew (I would love to learn more about that - that would be way more fun to discuss!) - but my suspicion is that they probably did indeed use the same word.

Please do not rely on dictionary definitions alone for any proofs, since people often use language in ways that do not conform to dictionary definitions, for various reasons beside either maliciousness or ignorance.

By the way, a spirit can also be the spirit of a place, the spirit of a play or a book, the spirit of a nation... are all those words malicious in your view?

Er, I feel like you are trying to teach me about what you don’t know about.

Let me say that the ‘sloppy’ part you mentioned: If CHURCH leaders are using sloppy language…. Get out of her!!!! It’s foul and putrid ideology!!

If it’s a melding of language… They‘be chosen a very BAD one. Let’s say that you are taught through your church that angels are DEMONS because an Angel is a Spirit and a Demon is a Spirit… yeah… and then someone says, ‘Please do not say that. If it’s true what you say then how can there a Holy Angel? A holy DEMON!!

You see what I’m saying???

Moreover, what these other posters ARE NOT ACKNOWLEDGING (read back through the posts …) that a GHOST is defined as a Spirit of a dead person. You stating ‘Don’t use Dictionaries!’ Well, we need to have common ground if a debate is to be successful. It’s sheer madness to be arguing a point using two completely but connected terms… no solution except that one person sees sense and gives in - it won’t happen with Trinitarians since they fear the one who is misleading them!!

The term, ‘Ghost’ comes from the medieval period of language in Britain. These people were PAGANS who believed in spirits of dead people roaming the earth, haunting people and places You still hear of people being scared of church burial ground as they claim the GHOSTS of the dead people wandered around in it and will come get you if you do something bad in there. Some people even claim they have SEEN ghosts… and sone even make a living doing ‘Ghost Hunting’, or stealing money from people claiming they can contact these Ghosts!!

So, I say, “No, please do not ever call the Spirit of God, a GHOST’.

 

[Rival]

Er, I feel like you are trying to teach me about what you don’t know about.

Let me say that the ‘sloppy’ part you mentioned: If CHURCH leaders are using sloppy language…. Get out of her!!!! It’s foul and putrid ideology!!

If it’s a melding of language… They‘be chosen a very BAD one. Let’s say that you are taught through your church that angels are DEMONS because an Angel is a Spirit and a Demon is a Spirit… yeah… and then someone says, ‘Please do not say that. If it’s true what you say then how can there a Holy Angel? A holy DEMON!!

You see what I’m saying???

Moreover, what these other posters ARE NOT ACKNOWLEDGING (read back through the posts …) that a GHOST is defined as a Spirit of a dead person. You stating ‘Don’t use Dictionaries!’ Well, we need to have common ground if a debate is to be successful. It’s sheer madness to be arguing a point using two completely but connected terms… no solution except that one person sees sense and gives in - it won’t happen with Trinitarians since they fear the one who is misleading them!!

The term, ‘Ghost’ comes from the medieval period of language in Britain. These people were PAGANS who believed in spirits of dead people roaming the earth, haunting people and places You still hear of people being scared of church burial ground as they claim the GHOSTS of the dead people wandered around in it and will come get you if you do something bad in there. Some people even claim they have SEEN ghosts… and sone even make a living doing ‘Ghost Hunting’, or stealing money from people claiming they can contact these Ghosts!!

So, I say, “No, please do not ever call the Spirit of God, a GHOST’.

You think Mediaevals were Pagans?

Wot?

 

[Soapy]

You think Mediaevals were Pagans?

Wot?

Yes they were! What makes you think they were not? Of course I know your trick here. I’m talking about those from whom the word ‘Ghost’ came from - the debate touched on medieval (is that ‘Medium Evil’?) since on poster stated that it came from the Anglo-Saxons…. Defo Pagans!!!

 

[Rival]

Yes they were! What makes you think they were not? Of course I know your trick here. I’m talking about those from whom the word ‘Ghost’ came from - the debate touched on medieval (is that ‘Medium Evil’?) since on poster stated that it came from the Anglo-Saxons…. Defo Pagans!!!

Err, I'm an Anglo-Saxon. We're still here.

Mediaeval means Middle Age.

So no, the Anglo-Saxons weren't Pagans.

You need to read some history before you come on here and start lecturing folks like me who study this.

And use an Anglo-Saxon to modern English dictionary.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Err, I'm an Anglo-Saxon. We're still here.

Mediaeval means Middle Age.

So no, the Anglo-Saxons weren't Pagans.

You need to read some history before you come on here and start lecturing folks like me who study this.

And use an Anglo-Saxon to modern English dictionary.

Well, nitpick. It depends for the early period where you start the Middle Ages in England, but early Anglo-Saxons were pagan.

 

[Rival]

Well, nitpick. It depends for the early period were you start the Middle Ages in England, but early Anglo-Saxons were pagan.

They were but were converted by the 8th c.

 

[Viker]

I'm sorry but Holy Ghost is not the same thing as spooky ghost. Ghost in the context just means spirit of God. The two are interchangeable.

 

[vijeno]

Er, I feel like you are trying to teach me about what you don’t know about.

I'm sorry if you feel that way, but rest assured I'm not trying to teach anybody anything. We're simply exchanging arguments, and, like almost all internet debates, it leads nowhere, so I stay in it until it stops being fun.

Let me say that the ‘sloppy’ part you mentioned: If CHURCH leaders are using sloppy language…. Get out of her!!!! It’s foul and putrid ideology!!

First, you didn't mention church leaders before. You only said that the two words mean what you suppose they do, so it's wrong.

It seems to me like pretty much everybody understands perfectly fine that "holy ghost" is the same as "holy spirit", and does not mean "holy apparition" or "dead man walking". And that's how language works. Not through dictionary definitions, but through actual practice.

Maybe you should go into a church and ask people what they mean when they say "holy ghost"? If the majority of people agree with you, badoom, you won the argument. Otherwise, you were wrong. Deal?

If it’s a melding of language… They‘be chosen a very BAD one. Let’s say that you are taught through your church that angels are DEMONS because an Angel is a Spirit and a Demon is a Spirit… yeah… and then someone says, ‘Please do not say that. If it’s true what you say then how can there a Holy Angel? A holy DEMON!!

Well, that's the way of language. There are quite a few ambivalences commonplace in my own language, that make me die a little inside. I try to avoid them myself, but I do not possess the authority to dictate how people like to use words, so it's useless to fight about it.

You see what I’m saying???

Of course. I see it, and I disagree.

Moreover, what these other posters ARE NOT ACKNOWLEDGING (read back through the posts …) that a GHOST is defined as a Spirit of a dead person.

It is, in one particular dictionary, in one particular context. A quick search for "Holy Ghost" gave me this here from Mirriam-Webster. Should we play dictionary vs dictionary now?

You stating ‘Don’t use Dictionaries!’

I never said that. What I said was that a one dictionary entry, in and of itself, is not proof enough. Dictionary entries can be incomplete, and obviously, searching for "ghost" will yield different results than looking for "holy ghost". That's because the adjective changes the meaning of the whole word.

So, I say, “No, please do not ever call the Spirit of God, a GHOST’.

Sure. You can try that. In fact, I wish you luck. I don't care either way. Let's just say that I would be incredibly impressed and suprised if you had a lot of success.

Just one question: What are we to do in German, where the holy spirit is called "der heilige Geist", using the same word as in "der Geist eines Toten" - and always has been? Should we change all prayers, all catechisms, and all sermons? Even if you think this would be wise - do you think it's very realistic?

 

[Soapy]

I'm sorry but Holy Ghost is not the same thing as spooky ghost. Ghost in the context just means spirit of God. The two are interchangeable.

A Ghost is the disembodied SPIRIT of a dead person. The Spirit that is loosened from the encasement of a body when that body falls into negative living - dead!

In pagan mythology, that unencased Spirit can wander the world of the living usually in a haunting manner or bringing badness or revenge to living people whom and where it desires.

In that respect, how is there such a thing as a ‘Holy’ Ghost?

But a SPIRIT, no embellishment, created by the one true God, is HOLY…. All God’s Spirit creations are Holy… but because they also have free Will, some were seduced into becoming evil - now no longer Holy - they are classed as DEMONIC (Demons). No such demon spirits can influence those living world now as God has ‘chained them in spiritual prisons’.

When a living person dies, their Spirit ‘GOES TO REST WITH GOD’. They have no interaction in the living world - in fact, they are inert, dormant, ‘sleeping’… awaiting the last judgement.

So…. There are NO disembodied Spirit of dead persons interacting in the living world - nor any world!!

The Spirit of God IS NOT disembodied since God is ETERNALLY ALIVE. Therefore, the Spirit of God cannot be a ‘GHOST’.

‘The Ghost of God’??? What is ‘The Ghost of God’ in your view - explain!!

 

[Viker]

A Ghost is the disembodied SPIRIT of a dead person. The Spirit that is loosened from the encasement of a body when that body falls into negative living - dead!

In pagan mythology, that unencased Spirit can wander the world of the living usually in a haunting manner or bringing badness or revenge to living people whom and where it desires.

In that respect, how is there such a thing as a ‘Holy’ Ghost?

But a SPIRIT, no embellishment, created by the one true God, is HOLY…. All God’s Spirit creations are Holy… but because they also have free Will, some were seduced into becoming evil - now no longer Holy - they are classed as DEMONIC (Demons). No such demon spirits can influence those living world now as God has ‘chained them in spiritual prisons’.

When a living person dies, their Spirit ‘GOES TO REST WITH GOD’. They have no interaction in the living world - in fact, they are inert, dormant, ‘sleeping’… awaiting the last judgement.

So…. There are NO disembodied Spirit of dead persons interacting in the living world - nor any world!!

The Spirit of God IS NOT disembodied since God is ETERNALLY ALIVE. Therefore, the Spirit of God cannot be a ‘GHOST’.

‘The Ghost of God’??? What is ‘The Ghost of God’ in your view - explain!!

I can see we're going to have a potential ongoing context issue.

 

[Soapy]

I'm sorry if you feel that way, but rest assured I'm not trying to teach anybody anything. We're simply exchanging arguments, and, like almost all internet debates, it leads nowhere, so I stay in it until it stops being fun.

You’d language was as if you were talking to a first grader in Scriptural matters. I haven’t come across ‘vijeno’ before so I’ll let you off but I’m not naive in these matters.

If you only debate for FUN then it’s not surprising your posts contain devil’s advocate content!!

First, you didn't mention church leaders before. You only said that the two words mean what you suppose they do, so it's wrong.

What’s that to do with anything… People, mostly learn… are taught… by church leaders… They are the ones that enforce and reenforce dogma in their church. Anyone found not following the ideology of the church is in grave danger of being expelled. And since that person has friends in the church, they fear losing those friends, too. So they ‘tow the party line’ EVEN IF they can SEE THE TRUTH from an outside source and falsity of their church leader!!!

It seems to me like pretty much everybody understands perfectly fine that "holy ghost" is the same as "holy spirit", and does not mean "holy apparition" or "dead man walking". And that's how language works. Not through dictionary definitions, but through actual practice.

There MANY MANY MANY things people MISBELIEVE and think nothing of it. I’ve discussed elsewhere where the English language is so fluid it is starting to be like that great saying from Humpty Dumpty to Alice:

• ‘'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less. ' Words mean what I want them to mean!!’

Maybe you should go into a church and ask people what they mean when they say "holy ghost"? If the majority of people agree with you, badoom, you won the argument. Otherwise, you were wrong. Deal?

No one is going to go into a church and ask such questions. The preacher is 99.9% likely to be freaked out to be asked something which makes him have to THINK that he’s been teaching falsely all this time - causing him to be defensive and deceitful - even angry (p.s. Which shows he’s fighting himself inside!!! A church leader should be calm and composed and have control of himself over all matters in his church… anger shows he’s lost it - bad news for the congregation… sorry, a bit of tautology crept in!!)

Well, that's the way of language. There are quite a few ambivalences commonplace in my own language, that make me die a little inside. I try to avoid them myself, but I do not possess the authority to dictate how people like to use words, so it's useless to fight about it.

Wow, you actually understand that ambivalences like, using ‘Holy Ghost’ for ‘Holy Spirit’ is WRONG!!!

Great… you are the first to admit the grave error of those churches that preach such blasphemies.

Of course. I see it, and I disagree.

Yep! You See the truth and choose to deny it… Typical ‘head in the sand’ denial behaviour!!!

It is, in one particular dictionary, in one particular context. A quick search for "Holy Ghost" gave me this here from Mirriam-Webster. Should we play dictionary vs dictionary now?

What???? Show me a LEGITIMATE dictionary that DOES NOT define ‘Ghost’ as a ‘Disembodied Spirit of a dead person’ (or words to the same effect!)

Mirriam-Webster seems like a popular choice and yet you APPEAR to be saying that if DOES NOT define ‘Ghost’ as ‘Spirit of a dead person’?!!

I never said that. What I said was that a one dictionary entry, in and of itself, is not proof enough. Dictionary entries can be incomplete, and obviously, searching for "ghost" will yield different results than looking for "holy ghost". That's because the adjective changes the meaning of the whole word.

I think you are being extremely naive. Do you think that I am fooled by diversify into off-topic examples? The post is about THE SPIRIT OF GOD and that it is wrong to think of, and preach that, the Spirit is God as a GHOST.

Sure. You can try that. In fact, I wish you luck. I don't care either way. Let's just say that I would be incredibly impressed and suprised if you had a lot of success.

Hmmm… Sounds like you are saying that you agree!!

Just one question: What are we to do in German, where the holy spirit is called "der heilige Geist", using the same word as in "der Geist eines Toten" - and always has been? Should we change all prayers, all catechisms, and all sermons? Even if you think this would be wise - do you think it's very realistic?

What is ‘Der Heilig Heist’ … what does it translate to?

I looked it up and it says: ‘The Holy Spirit’, and separately, ‘The saintly mind’.

But I love this one:

• ‘'Geist ist Geil' is German for 'Thriftiness is sexy'

But I guess you would say:

• [The] Ghost is sexy’….

 

[Soapy]

I can see we're going to have a potential ongoing context issue.

It would aid things easier and simpler if you just answer the questions that are set to the posters!!!

‘The Ghost of God’???

What is ‘The Ghost of God’ in your view - explain!!

 

[Viker]

It would aid things easier and simpler if you just answer the questions that are set to the posters!!!

‘The Ghost of God’???

What is ‘The Ghost of God’ in your view - explain!!

Ghost and spirit are used in the same context to describe the same thing. And I never said "The Ghost of God".

It's about the essence of God (apparently a higher spiritual being), like breath and fire. As described in the book of Acts.

Do you always have context and semantics issues?

 

[Rival]

Do you always have context and semantics issues?

Ideological issues are at play here, moreso.

 

[Soapy]

Ghost and spirit are used in the same context to describe the same thing. And I never said "The Ghost of God".

It's about the essence of God (apparently a higher spiritual being), like breath and fire. As described in the book of Acts.

Do you always have context and semantics issues?

Now you’re getting weird.

Just answer the question: ‘What is the Ghost of God’. That’s what people like you do when you know not to actually answer the question you are asked…

Does God have a Ghost?

If you believe that ‘Spirit’ and ‘Ghost’ are interchangeable then you should have just answered as such with something with reference to like:

• “God’s Ghost is ….’
• “God gave his Ghost to the apostles at Pentecost”
• ‘In the beginning God created the world…. And the Ghost of God was hovering over the earth…’

 

[Soapy]

Ideological issues are at play here, moreso.

Wow….! You guys are sooooo…. worried!!

Must have seen a ‘….. Ghost’…..

 

[Rival]

Wow….! You guys are sooooo…. worried!!

Must have seen a ‘….. Ghost’…..

Given my studies I'm more worried that you haven't read any books on the topic you're apparently so passionate about

 

[vijeno]

I haven’t come across ‘vijeno’ before so I’ll let you off

Lol. You don't possess the authority to "let me off" or not.

Professional help is available in your country. There is no shame in getting support when you need it.

What is ‘Der Heilig Heist’ … what does it translate to?

"The holy ghost". Der is the article, heilig means holy and Geist means ghost. It should be "der heilige Geist", to be precise.

'Geist ist Geil' is German for 'Thriftiness is sexy'

No.