Talk:Holy Spirit
|
|
Can anyone verify this statement, from the "Gender of the Holy Spirit" section?: 'The term "Holy Ghost" is widely used by American Christians, whereas "Holy Spirit" is the common European term.' I noticed it was originally added by 83.70.192.43, who also seems to have vandalized the Leprechaun article. So, it would be good to make sure this isn't a case of subtle vandalism by inserting false information.--209.108.217.226 03:22, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
"The term "Holy Ghost" is widely used by American Christians, whereas "Holy Spirit" is the common European term.'"
I have worshipped with many congregations among four denominations in the South: Church of Christ, Methodist, Baptist, Church of God. I cannot say how Europeans refer to the Holy Spirit, but in my experience churches in the U.S. refer to the Holy Spirit and not the Holy Ghost.
--Bill Blue 20:14, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)Bill Blue--Bill Blue 20:14, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I just deleted this text:
- The Holy Spirit plays a more central role in Pentecostalism than in most other types of Christianity.
I know that Pentecostals think this is so, and I used to be a member of an Assemblies of God church myself. However, it's a very one-sided statement, and in my own not so humble opinion, isn't at all accurate. I could make a similarly biased statement regarding the role of the Holy Spirit in Pentecostalism, but it would be just as biased. Instead, more details or qualification would be appropriate, for instance comparing the role of the Holy Spirit with other specific groups, or it could be left out as is. Wesley
- Or one could say 'in Pentecostalism less attention is paid to God the Father'. I agree, Wesley. The statement is unbalanced and must be redone if it is to be retained. "Contemporary 'Pentecostal' groups stress the practice of the 'gifts of the Holy Spirit'."? We need to make it clear that this movement is Contemporary (not Modern - modernity, in history of religion, sets in with 1648) and that it is their opinion about themselves rather than mere truth. MichaelTinkler
- I'm not sure the statement is biased or inaccurate, although perhaps it might be better to say Pentecostals place more emphasis on the Holy Spirit rather than using the phrase "more central role." Of course, what is really needed is to revamp the article on Pentecostalism, which in its current form is awkwardly written at best. —Eric
- The article on Pentecostalism is probably the best place to address this in detail, and a cross link from this Holy Spirit article would be fine. If we were to say they stress the practice of the 'gifts of the Holy Spirit' I think it would also be necessary to describe what they mean by that (speaking in tongues, healing, etc.) and what others may mean by that. As for having more emphasis... have you ever attended a Catholic or Orthodox celebration of the Eucharist and counted how many times they pray, "Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit", and variations thereof? Now attend a Pentecostal Sunday morning service and count how many times prayer, praise or worship is actually directed to the Holy Spirit (and the Father and Son for comparison while you're at it), and I'd be surprised if they were that far ahead, if at all. Of course the Orthodox and Catholics are also reminded of the Holy Spirit through various icons (typically depicted as a dove), and are thereby called to additional worship, as well as other disciplines. And of course, in the liturgical year, Pentecost is by far the longest season, which could suggest greater emphasis as well; I think the icon of Pentecost is probably most often the one to greet an Orthodox believer at the door, as that varies with the liturgical season. If that's not enough there's always the obscure Filioque clause argument; though I think Pentecostals probably use the Apostles Creed rather than the Nicene Creed? There are other ways to "measure" emphasis or centrality as well, of course... I just think it would be difficult to substantiate that statement comparing with other "types" of Christianity.
- Another way of saying it might be something like "The Pentecostal movement places special emphasis on the work of the Holy Spirit; see Pentecostalism." Would that work? Wesley
- Excellent and insightful comments. Just to add another semi-random example (because I'm familiar with it), the flame (representing the H.S.) is as prominent in the symbol of the United Methodist Church as is the cross. So you're right; it may not even be that Pentecostals place more emphasis, but it certainly a different emphasis. I'll add the suggestion you gave and see if it sticks. And if I ever feel like tackling it, I'll revamp the Pentecostalism article a bit. —Eric
- The change looks good to me, for what it's worth. And yes, I certainly agree that the Holy Spirit has a prominent place in Methodism (used to be one of those, too), and in at least most of the rest of Christianity as well. :-) Wesley
Can any knowledgeable person discuss the term "Shekinah" in this subject? Thanks.
- I'll put in a little information on Shekinah, but I can't find a reference, so I'll be writing from memory. What this means is that others should PLEASE correct me. Also, as I understand it, the distinction between the Holy Spirit and the Shekinah glory of God was made primarily by the Babylonian Talmud, which I don't know about.
- Secondly, the last edit seemed awefully preachy. I happen to agree with it, but I'm not sure it's appropriate for an encyclopedia. I'll see if I can't do something to get the npov thing going again. Kpearce
Removed this sermonette:
- According to one Christian: "All matters pertaining to the doctrine of the Holy Spirit should, therefore, be of special interest to us who live in this age of special privilege. Yet how ignorant is the average Christian concerning matters pertaining to the Spirit. The Christian church today needs to heed Paul's exhortation: "Now concerning spiritual gifts (or, perhaps better, "matters pertaining to the Spirit"), I would not have you ignorant." May it not be that the reason why the sin against the Holy Spirit is so grievous is because it is a sin committed in the light and with the knowledge of the clearest and fullest revelation of the Godhead. We cannot, therefore, afford to remain in ignorance of this all-important doctrine."
It's clearly a quotation, but there's no attribution. Surely we should know who said this? Who are they, does anyone besides that person hold this view? An encyclopedia should document persons, places, ideas, events, etc.; it should NOT try to persuade, as is obviously the intent of this paragraph. Wesley 17:51 Dec 18, 2002 (UTC)
- I did that. The quote was from the last editor. I was trying to get npov without deleting anything, but, as I noted, it was a rather difficult task, and that was the best I could do. Probably better off deleting it anyway. kpearce
Hate to jump on the recent addition; just trying to be helpful. Anyway, it reads like this:asd
- The Old testament word for spirit is 'ruwach', meaning wind, breath, inspiration,and the OT Hebrew noun is always feminine. In the "Odes of Solomon'; the oldest surviving Christian hymnal, the Holy Spirit is female. The original tongue of the Hebrew or Aramaic would translate 'Holy Spirit' as female. Also, Greek would translate 'Holy Spirit' as either female or more likely 'neuter in reference to the subject' and it only became 'He' in Latin and English bibles.
The hymn to the Holy Spirit we use in the Orthodox church begins Heavenly King, Comforter, Spirit of truth... and I've heard it sung in a Greek Orthodox church as well, even though the Greek word pneuma is generally feminine. This usage certainly predates English Bibles and might predate the Latin; I'm not sure of exactly how old this particular hymn is. Of course many or most ancient prayers to the Holy Spirit do not directly suggest either male or female gender.
- Clearly, the ancient church traditions refer to the Holy Spirit in feminine rather than masculine terms. It is important to speak of the Holy Spirit, the Comforter and Reconciler, with a feminine pronoun. The mother aspect of God is real and Holy. The functions of the Holy Spirit as characterized in Biblical texts are often those which have been associated with women: consolation, inspiration, emotional warmth, and birth of the spirit.
Which church traditions exactly? Which church fathers, or truly ancient hymns? The Holy Spirit of course is without physical form or physical gender. The early church fathers always spoke of God being completely dispassionate, not changing according to emotions; I don't know whether this is entirely compatible with the notion of emotional warmth you're proposing. In any case, if an encyclopedia article is to say that something is important, it should say who thinks it is important: the entire Church, Christian feminists, or whomever.
- I agree. First, the lexicons at http://bible.crosswalk.com say that the Hebrew word is, in fact, feminine, but the Greek is neuter (as it was suggested might be the case). However there are a few important issues at stake here. Firstly, I was unable to determine the gender used in the pronouns. Someone who has an interlinear Bible could check the endings of the pronouns in John 14 where it speaks of the comforter. Generally speaking, if they end in omicron (or omega) sigma they are masculine, and if they end in alpha they are feminine. That is about the extent of my knowledge of Greek, so don't ask me on anything beyond that. Secondly, the Bible teaches that each of us has a spirit (our own spirit, as opposed to the Spirit of God within us). I would think that either all spirits are neuter or else my spirit is masculine and a woman's spirit is feminine. The structure is neuter or feminine, but that does not even necessarily tell us what the grammatical gender is. The Latin words "nauta", sailor, and "agricola", farmer, are feminine by structure but always appear with masculine adjectives and pronouns. In addition, even if the Holy Spirit is, in fact, neuter rather than masculine, it is still proper to refer to Him with masculine pronouns in English. This is because the masculine pronoun in English (and, indeed, all Indo-European languages, and many others) can be used in a gender indefinite sense, which is to say that feminine pronouns ALWAYS refer to female persons or things, but masculine pronouns sometimes refer to persons or things whose gender is unknown, as in the phrase "...when a driver comes to a stop sign he..." (incidentally, here in the state of Washington our drivers guide says "she" in all such places, which is imporper grammar). The neuter pronoun in English cannot refer to persons, but only to impersonal things. Since the Holy Spirit is indisputably a person rather than a thing (if you believe in the Bible), it is not right to refer to Him with neuter pronouns in English.
- Finally, I don't understand how anyone could possibly see this as being important, unless they wanted to use it to manipulate Scriptural teaching on the role of women. Nevertheless, I'll leave this open for discussion a while and not delete the change just yet. -- kpearce
I'd have to admit (grudgingly, speaking personally) that the line of reasoning reflected in the last two paragraphs of the article has become academically important. The argument there is used to give crediblity to the "gender-neutral" translations of the Bible and revisions of prayers and hymns used in liberal Protestant worship, for example. Folks who like to find parallels between Christianity and everything from gnosticism to goddess-worship also love this stuff. Feminist ideology has driven this to be sure; but, that isn't a factor all on its own. There are real historical and textual issues involved, too. It's not our business to decide what is "important" and "holy", in a theological sense, as the article presently does. And, while I have to admit that it's informative for describing some significant contemporary issues, it is by no means neutral to dictate the conclusions that should be drawn. Mkmcconn 21:32 Apr 23, 2003 (UTC)
- Yes... I think one of the goals of at least some feminists is to reaffirm the value of women and womanhood, which they believe is necessary to counterbalance centuries of patriarchal oppression. It would be nice if the person who added these paragraphs would chime in here to correct our speculations though. As always, POV needs to be attributed or cut, and in this case I think it would be better to attribute it. But the attribution needs to be accurate, which is difficult without the poster's input or other source of domain expertise. Wesley
- I'm going to attempt some npov changes without removing any information. I don't think I can get to a completely neutral point without more information, but I'll at least avoid inserting my own bias. Kpearce
It now is clear to me that some people want to create a detailed discussion of how people translate words for God into English, and want to relate this to sexism and all sorts of other issues. This has nothing to do with the term Holy Spirit as such, but rather has to do with all English names for God, such as Holy Spirit, God, Father, etc. As such, it is now appropriate to remove this detailed discussion from here, and create a new entry on it. (This is standard Wikipedia practice when a digression becomes long and moves off into a distinct topic.) RK 17:54 30 May 2003 (UTC)
- I think you're right on the money. This article should make a brief mention of the overall issue and link to the new article for more detailed discussion. That article could perhaps have a subsection on ways "Holy Spirit" has been translated. Wesley 19:28 30 May 2003 (UTC)
Just added a link to Pneumatology. If anyone enjoys adding references to biblical passages, have a go on the pneumatology page
| Contents |
Holy Ghost
'Holy Ghost' should not be redirected here (to the Holy Spirit article). The 'Holy Ghost' article was very informative about how LDS, Pentecostals, and others insisted on using this obsolescent term, and the term itself. It was not an article about the Holy Spirit, but rather focuses on why certain groups insisted on using the former name that He was generally called.
Rlquall 22:39, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
"Chrisma": is it a typo for "charisma"?
or is it a specialized usage? If so, it needs at least a stub. --Wetman 16:54, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Christian template
I don't think the Christian template should be here as it implies that the Holy Spirit is a Christian concept, whereas it is also Jewish and Rastafarian. The templarte misleads, and the template is wrong to claim so, --SqueakBox 17:26, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
"Processed Triune God"? Huh?
The article begins "The Holy Spirit, or the Holy Ghost, is the name used in the New Testament referring to the processed Triune God, or the third Person of the Holy Trinity." What does that mean? I don't recall ever seeing God spoken of as "processed", and I can't guess what it might be trying to say. Why not just begin with something like "The Holy Spirit, or Holy Ghost, in Trinitarian Christian belief, is God, the third Person of the Holy Trinity", and go from there to explain 1) what that means, and 2) that "some other religions, and some non-Trinitarian Christians" have other views and beliefs". Frjwoolley 20:51, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
- The term "processed" refers to the nature of the Holy Spirit. This nature is most famously articulated in the Nicene Creed (RCC version): "We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son."
- While the Father is unbegotten (Summa Theologica) and the Son is "begotten, not made" (Nicene Creed), the Holy Spirit "proceeds" from the Father (Nicene Creed) and (for those churches that accept the filioque clause) the Son.
- A full explanation of the theology behind this would produce a separate article. In short, the heresy of Monarchianism denied that the Holy Spirit was a separate person of the Trinity, and the heresy of Pneumatomachianism denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit. The Second Ecumenical Council, refuting both heresies, determined that the Spirit “proceeds” from the Father, establishing that the Holy Spirit is both divine of the same essence (ouisa) as the Father. Hence, the Holy Spirit “proceeds” from the Father, and can be referred to as “processed.”
- However, while I recognize the source of “processed,” I also recognize that the average reader could easily be confused by the reference. I think it would be better articulated simply as “the third person of the Trinity.” Other thoughts?
- Essjay 07:11, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
OK, I'm going to modify the first sentence. Frjwoolley 23:12, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)