|
Ruach Studies | "Holy Ghost" in the KJV Spiritanity
|
|
During the Middle Ages, Christian translators created a way to make the English Bible reflect their belief that the Holy Ghost was not the Holy Spirit.
These theologians coined the phrase "Holy Ghost" to designate the Third Person of the Trinity. In contrast, they used "Holy Spirit" to refer to the Spirit of God or Spirit of the LORD encountered by the Hebrews and Jews in the Old Testament. Then, in the 16th century, Bible printers reinforced this distinction by introducing capital and small letters. In the OT they used "spirit" and "holy spirit." In the NT they printed "Spirit" and "Holy Ghost," but with subtle distinctions. These translation and printing differences do not exist in the Bible itself, in either Hebrew or Greek. They are theological biases imposed on the (English) Bible. They provided both verbal and visual validation for the already existing conviction that Christianity must be separated from its Hebraic/Jewish foundations. At the end of this study I discuss how these biases threaten biblical faith. For example, if the Holy Spirit is not the Holy Ghost, then there are two holy spirits. If the Spirit of the Lord in the OT is not the Holy Ghost of the NT, when did the Spirit become the Ghost, another person? And if the Holy Ghost is the actual father of Yeshua, why didn't Yeshua pray to him and call him Abba?
The linguistic distinction between "Holy Ghost" and "Holy Spirit" is most readily evident in the King James (Authorized) Version of 1611. In the KJV, "Holy Ghost" occurs 90 times only in its New Testament portion. [See "Holy Ghost" in the KJV.] The phrase "Holy Spirit" occurs four times in the NT. But in the original Greek there is no difference between "Holy Ghost" and "Holy Spirit." Note that in these KJV texts the Greek words are identical: pneuma = ghost, spirit; hagion = holy. Matthew 1:18 — "she was found with child of the Holy Ghost [pneuma hagion]" The KJV translators were so consistent about maintaining the distinction between "Ghost" and "Spirit" that they broke a key verbal link between two adjoining verses: Acts 16:6 — "they . . . were forbidden by the Holy Ghost [hagion pneuma] to preach the word in Asia"In context, these verses make a key link between the "Holy Ghost" and the "Spirit of Jesus." It tells readers that the resurrected Messiah himself superintends the messianic movement — by his invisible presence, his "Spirit" (pneuma), "the Holy Ghost" (hagion pneuma). But the link is cut in the KJV. Throughout the KJV, it's evident that "Holy Ghost" is a proper noun for deity, and translators sought to protect the Holy Ghost's independent, co-equal, divine status. He must never be subordinate to or "possessed" by anyone. That is, we never find "the Ghost of Jesus," "the Ghost of God" or "the Ghost of your Father." Likewise, God and Jesus give or send "the Spirit," but they never give or send "the Ghost" (John 3:34; 14:26; 15:26). In the KJV "Ghost" is not a synonym of "Spirit."
In the four places where "Holy Spirit" occurs in the KJV New Testament, the context reflects an OT viewpoint (the Spirit is fore-promised, as in Joel) or one in which the Third Person is a dependent agent acted upon (given) by God or possessed by him (Spirit of ...). Luke 11:13 — "How much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?"
The Holy Spirit in Ancient Israel The phrase "Holy Spirit" occurs only three times in the KJV-OT: Psalm 51:11 — "Take not thy holy spirit from me"In these passages the Septuagint (Greek Old Testament) has pneuma hagion, the same phrase used in the Greek NT. The Hebrew behind the phrase is ruach qodesh. Ruach is the noun also used in the phrases "Spirit of God" and "Spirit of the LORD" throughout the OT. There are no separate terms in Hebrew to describe God's Spirit or his Holy Spirit. Ruach is Ruach. [See the portal: Ruach Studies]
  In other words, there is no linguistic basis in the Bible for rendering either ruach or pneuma as both "Ghost" and "Spirit." The distinction lies within the minds of the translators. See the study The Personhood of the Holy Spirit for comments by Roman Catholic and Protestant authorities on their concept of Spirit in the OT and NT. B-KJV (Before the KJV) So far, we've focused on the King James Version of 1611. But the Ghost/Spirit difference existed in all major English versions prior to the KJV — dating back over 230 years to John Wycliffe's ground-breaking English version of 1380. Compare two verses in these five English versions. (Spellings are original.) [Note 1] Matthew 1:18This shows that the KJV editors weren't innovators, but tradition bearers of a theological bias rooted not in the text of Scripture. But the tradition did not start with Jerome's Latin Vulgate (5th century). For it does not distinguish between "Holy Ghost" and "Holy Spirit," but reads "SPIRITUS SANCTUS" in all passages.
[Top]
The distinction "Holy Spirit" and "Holy Ghost" all but disappeared in Christian English Bible translations after the late 1800s. But "Holy Ghost" still exists in older hymns based on the KJV text, and it's used in at least one modernized KJV edition from 1994. [Note 2] However, the underlying theological assumption that originally produced the distinction still exists among Roman Catholics and certain Protestants. Many theologians believe and teach that the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament is not the Holy Ghost or Third Person of the Trinity. They hold tight the doctrine that the Third Person came or was revealed at Pentecost after the resurrection of Jesus (Acts 2). Before then the third member of the triune Godhead was unknown to the human race. [See comments by Catholic and Protestant authorities in The Personhood of the Holy Spirit.] One exegetical challenge theologians must face is 1 Peter 1:11, where the text says "the spirit [pneuma] of Christ" was "within" the ancient Hebrew prophets, "indicating" or "forewitnessing" the coming Messiah's sufferings. Was his pre-Pentecost "spirit" Christ himself? If so, what is his post-Pentecost "spirit" mentioned in Romans 8:9, Galatians 4:6, and Philippians 1:19? Is that spirit different from the Holy Ghost?
Giving the Third Person Increased Place of Honor The belief that the Third Person appeared only after Jesus' departure is still reflected in modern Catholic and liberal Protestant translations of the English Bible. Though the Spirit/Ghost verbal distinction was discarded over a century ago, translators and publishers rely on another, artificial way of distinguishing theological meanings. This involves typography. In the earliest English translations by Wycliffe, Tyndale, and Cranmer, the word "Spirit" (even "God" and "Jesus") was printed in what we now call lower case letters: spirit, god, jesus. This wasn't an act of irreverence. In those times, there was no distinction in type face. People did not distinguish words or interpret biblical texts using the eye. But in the mid-1500s, doctrine-minded printers introduced a watershed distinction: spirit and Spirit. Apparently, the first translations to employ the spirit/Spirit distinction were the Protestant Geneva Bible and the Catholic (Counter-Reformation) Rheims edition. Note the evolution: Matthew 3:11 [Top] The spirit and the Spirit This typographical distinction is used in all translations today. But not the same way. In recent Roman Catholic versions (e.g., New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible) and in the liberal Protestant versions Revised English Bible and New Revised Standard Version we find two forms of the same word: spirit and Spirit, even though both spirits originate with God. In each version, the form "spirit" (lower case initial letter) occurs in their OT portion, while the upper case form "Spirit" occurs only in their NT. Note that even the adjective "holy" is also distinguished in the New Revised Standard Version: Psalm 51:11 — "Do not take your holy spirit from me" Similarly, the editors of the Catholic New Jerusalem Bible print Isaiah 61:1 as: The spirit of the LORD God is upon me.Then, to be consistent, when they come to Yeshua's reading of this passage in the synagogue (Luke 4:18), they print his words as: The spirit of the Lord is upon me.In their consistency, these Catholic editors suggest that since Isaiah the prophet was a pre-Pentecost-Acts-2 Jew, he didn't know about the Third Person of the Godhead. Therefore, Yeshua's quotation could not have referred to the Third Person. And that suggests Yeshua himself didn't know about the (Holy) Spirit; he only knew God's "spirit." The Latin Vulgate is not the source of this Catholic distinction. For it reads "SPIRITUS SANCTUS" (in caps) in all these verses.
Other English translations print "holy Spirit" in the OT and "Holy Spirit" in the NT (a subtle distinction without explanation). James Moffatt put "sacred Spirit" in his OT and "holy Spirit" throughout his NT. But today nearly all conservative Protestant versions print "Holy Spirit" in both OT and NT. Clearly, editorial opinions exist on what the Bible should "say" — to uninformed readers [Top] Typography Isn't Inspired There is no distinction in either Hebrew or ancient Greek between holy spirit, holy Spirit, and Holy Spirit. Biblical texts were written in letters of the same size. It is still true of Hebrew scrolls and printed Hebrew Bibles today. Scripture was originally written for the ears, not the eyes. (We can't hear a distinction between "spirit" and "Spirit" if spoken.) [Note 3]
Isaiah 63:10 — They rebelled and grieved his HOLY SPIRIT.
Mark 12:36 — David himself said in the HOLY SPIRIT:
Ever since the spirit/Spirit distinction was created in the 1500s, translators and editors have had to decide whether to capitalize SPIRIT or not. (See marginal readings throughout their NTs.) But the original texts did not create (nor solve) the problem. Typography is an instrument for conveying doctrine.
[Top]
Bible versions reveal beliefs residing in the translators and in their sponsoring traditions. This isn't unique to Christians. Jewish Bibles in English typically print "holy spirit," "spirit of God," and "spirit of the LORD," all lower case. Orthodox Jews don't believe in the doctrine of the Trinity nor in the separate personality of the Spirit, apart from God. In this, Jews agree with Catholic tradition — that is, about the absence of trinitarian doctrine in the Hebrew Bible/OT. These verbal and typographical distinctions that Christian theologians developed — Spirit/Ghost, spirit/Spirit — demand that we query the validity of the beliefs that created them. If these men misrepresent the original text of Scripture for doctrinal purposes, we have an obligation to examine their doctrines.
Answers will come from an informed study of Scripture, in their original languages.
[Top]
In the end, if these age-old Christian views about the Spirit are valid, we are led to reach at least four conclusions:
[Top]
Along this same path of Deconstruction, we must be honest about the Gospel record too. Frankly, we realize that Yeshua himself was unaware of the Spirit in much the same way his Hebrew ancestors were. In the synagogue at Capernaum, Yeshua declared he was anointed with "the spirit of the Lord" (Luke 4:18). He was quoting from Isaiah 61 — a pre-Pentecost Jewish text. Was he anointed with God's "OT spirit" or with the "NT Holy Ghost"? Yeshua never spoke to the Spirit or prayed to him. He never included him in his anguished cries to God, his father. Nor did he direct his disciples to ask for the Spirit's counsel in their lives. He told them to pray, "Our Father who is in heaven." One time, when he burst into praise to God, he didn't also praise the Holy Spirit (Matt 11:25). And another time he said, "I am not alone, the Father is with me" (John 16:32). He did not acknowledge the presence of someone else. Does this imply that Yeshua was completely oblivious to the reality of the Third Person? [Consider the comments by Christian theological historians on The Personhood of the Holy Spirit.]
What is clearly most devastating to a "Christian" view of Yeshua — if we follow the path of Medieval English "Holy Ghost Theology" — is that he didn't seem to know who his true father was. According to Matthew and Luke, the Holy Spirit was the literal father of the baby conceived within and born to Miryam.
Matt 1:18, 20 — "... she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. ... that which has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit." But if the Spirit is a distinct person, separate from God the Father, must we not conclude that the Spirit is Yeshua's Father — and that God the Father's title "father" has no real meaning? [Note 4] From that it follows that Yeshua was erroneously looking to the wrong Person of the Godhead as the one who gave him life and nurtured him — from Bethlehem to the Tree, then to resurrection and enthronement at the Father's right hand. In light of that, as shocking as it may be, we ultimately cannot take Yeshua's testimonies seriously — if later Christian doctrines about the Third Person are true. In other words: Christianity has more authority than Jesus. Do we want to go there?
[Top]
John Wycliffe translated from Jerome's Latin Vulgate, not from Greek texts. Even though Wycliffe made a "spirit" and "ghost" distinction in his version, Jerome did not. He uniformly used the word spiritus. Therefore, Wycliffe's choice to use goost in some texts and spirit in others derived from theological traditions within the English church. It would be worth checking the translations of Coverdale (1535), Matthew (1537), and the Great Bible (1539) to see if these distinctions also exist in them. Do not misunderstand my critiques of these early Bible translators. They were men of their times. Though they carried theological baggage, they were courageous and devoted to the cause of putting the Scriptures into English vernacular for the sake of all believers. And many of the Protestant translators paid with their lives for doing so. If we read and study the Bible in English we owe them all our gratitude. — P.S.Based on fragments of pre-14th century Bible translations, the Gothic, Anglo-Saxon and Old English versions have no ghost/spirit distinction: Gothic [Ahma=Spirit], Anglo-Saxon [Gast=Spirit], Old English [Gast=Spirit], Middle English [Gost/Goost=Spirit]. The English word "Spirit" derives from the Latin spiritus. [Joseph Bosworth, The Gothic and Anglo-Saxon Gospels (London: n.p., 1865); Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1933), Vol. 1, pp. 790-91.] [Return to footnote marker]
|
|
Ruach Studies | "Holy Ghost" in the KJV Spiritanity
|
