The Holy Spirit

[Cos]

9 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Cos:

Even though we don't know what those names are, Jehovah has even named the stars of the heavens, and knows them all by a personalized, (which really means individual),  name  ....he did NOT give personalized individual  names to  the radiations they emit ...gamma radiation,  x-rays, ultra violet, radio waves, infrared, etc. .... for electricity, Reddy Kilowatt comes to mind as a personalized name that power companies gave to Electricity as an advertising ploy.    before they realized you do not have to advertise electricity.

PEOPLE are silly that way, but we enjoy being amused.

I am going to keep this short, as today I have to work outside all day installing bundles of electrical wiring for my yard underground wiring system , and I don't want to get a sunburn from Fred ultraviolet light, or have a heat stroke from Wanda infrared light, and is rumored that If I am not careful, Reddy Kilowatt will try to kill me.

I am silly THAT way.

Forgive me ... it's silly to name FORCES with personal names as I have just done ( and the electrical companies did)...... that is why Jehovah does not do it.

That is why the HOLY SPIRIT does NOT have a personal name  , it,  like a star, is a FORCE that emanates from God to affect things at the other end ... to accomplish his will at his direction.

It is a DIRECTED force, not light sunlight that illuminates the solar system, and beyond.

So ...ponder this ... why do trillions upon trillions of stars have a personalzed name ...  and the HOLY SPIRIT does not ... only descriptions of WHAT IT DOES!

Answer: (For those in Rio Linda...) IT'S A FORCE.

Of course Casper the friendly farce may condemn me to hell for saying so ... but that would be...... "unfriendly"

MAY THE FORCE BE WITH YOU, COS.

 

Mr Rook,

You really should read Isaiah 6:8-10 and Acts 28:25-29 it may help you see through your misguided delusion. <><

 

[TrueTomHarley]

On 9/3/2017 at 10:24 AM, The Librarian said:

Too often in our explanations or illustrations of Holy Spirit we have used electricity as an analogy which is an oversimplification

WHAT??!!!

ZZAAPPPP!!! There! That takes care of you. (you old hen)

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

Cos:

You have already proved by your own words in the Archive Topic "Demonism and the Watchtower", that you are completely clueless as to what constitutes proof, or reason, or logic .. and it's possibly only because you do not understand what is generally referred to a "figures of speech".

When you hear on the News that North Korea tested a hydrogen bomb ... no they didn't. The MILITARY of North Korea tested a hydrogen bomb (if true).

If the news says "The White House today said that this action will NOT be tolerated !'"  The building itself did not actually say anything at all.  The building is recognized as a symbol of the will of the President and his administration.,

In the scriptures giving personification to a force as a person ... like Reddy Kilowatt, or the HOLY SPIRIT, is what is known as a "Metonymy".  It's a subset of a "Synecdoche", which is a subset of a "Metaphor" 

After all ... what's a meta phor?  *coff"*

This is what Wikipedia has to say about that: (bold type added by me)

" Synecdoche is a rhetorical trope and a type of figurative speech similar to metonymy, a figure of speech in which a term that denotes one thing is used to refer to a related thing. Indeed, synecdoche is sometimes considered a subclass of metonymy. It is more distantly related to other figures of speech, such as metaphor.^[6]

More rigorously, metonymy and synecdoche can be considered subspecies of metaphor, intending metaphor as a type of conceptual substitution (as Quintilian does in Institutio oratoria Book VIII). In Lanham's Handlist of Rhetorical Terms,^[7] the three terms have somewhat restrictive definitions, arguably in tune with a certain interpretation of their etymologies from Greek:

• Metaphor: changing a word from its literal meaning to one not properly applicable but analogous to it; assertion of identity rather than likeness, as with simile.
• Metonymy: substitution of cause for effect, proper name for one of its qualities, etc.

Classification

Synecdoche is often used as a type of personification by attaching a human aspect to a nonhuman thing. It is used in reference to political relations, including "having a footing", to mean a country or organization is in a position to act, or "the wrong hands", to describe opposing groups, usually in the context of military power.

The two main types of synecdoche are microcosms and macrocosms. A microcosm is when a part of something is used to refer to the entirety.An example of this would be someone saying that they “need a hand" with a project, when they really need the entire person.   A macrocosm is the opposite, when the entire structure of something is used to refer to a small part^.  An example of this could be referring to "the world", when the speaker really means a certain country or part of the world. The figure of speech is divided into the image (what the speaker uses to refer to something) and the subject (what is being referred to).

This type of reference is quite common in politics. The residence of an executive is often credited for the executive's action. A spokesperson of the Executive Office of the President of the United States is identified in "The White House announced a new plan to reduce hunger." References to the King or Queen of the United Kingdom are made in the same fashion by referring to today's official residence, Buckingham Palace. Worldwide examples include "the Sublime Porte" of the Ottoman Empire, and "the Kremlin" of Russia.

Sonnets and other forms of love poetry frequently use synecdoches to characterize the beloved in terms of individual body parts rather than a coherent whole. This practice is especially common in the Petrarchan sonnet, where the idealised beloved is often described part by part, from head to toe.

It is also popular in advertising. Since synecdoche uses a part to represent a whole, its use requires the audience to make associations and "fill in the gaps", engaging with the ad by thinking about the product. Moreover, catching the attention of an audience with advertising is often referred to by advertisers as "getting eyeballs", another synecdoche. Synecdoche is very common in spoken English, especially in reference to sports. The names of cities are used as shorthand for their sports teams to describe events and their outcomes, such as "Denver won Monday's game", when it would be more accurate that a sports team from the city won the game.^[

Kenneth Burke (1945), an American literary theorist, declared that in rhetoric the four master tropes, or figures of speech, are metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony. Burke's primary concern with these four master tropes is not simply their figurative usage but their role in the discovery and description of the truth. He described synecdoche as “part of the whole, whole for the part, container for the contained, sign for the thing signified, material for the thing made… cause for the effect, effect for the cause, genus for the species, species for the genus". In addition, Burke suggests that synecdoche patterns can include reversible pairs such as disease-cure. Burke proclaimed the noblest synecdoche is found in the description of microcosm and macrocosm" since microcosm is related to macrocosm as part to the whole, and either the whole can represent the part or the part can represent the whole".^[15] Burke also compared synecdoche with the concept of "representation", especially in the political sense in which elected representatives stand in pars pro toto for their electorate.

Part referring to whole (pars pro toto)

• Referring to people according to a single characteristic: "the gray beard" representing an older man or "the long hair" representing a hippie
• Referring to a large group of related peoples according to the proper name of one subgroup: Eskimos instead of Native Alaskans; Caucasians instead of Europeans or Whites
• Describing a complete vehicle as "wheels"
• referring to a vehicle's manual transmission by the control handle ("stick shift" or "stick")
• referring to the whole vehicle by the transmission control handle ("can you drive a stick?")
• Referring to people by a particular body part. For example, "head count" or "counting noses"
• Saying "bubbly" to refer to Champagne or any other sparkling wine
• Using "Arabian sands" to refer the Arabian deserts
• Using "ivories" to refer to a piano (particularly in the phrase "tickling the ivories", meaning to play the piano), by a pair of synecdoches: the piano designated by its part, the keys, which in turn were historically made of ivory
• He asked for her hand in marriage.
• Using "boba" to refer to the drink, Bubble tea

General class name used to denote specific member of that or associated class

• Using "the good book" or "The Book" for the Bible ("Bible" itself comes from the Greek word for "book")
• Describing any four-wheel drive vehicle (including long-haul trailers, etc.) as a "truck"
• In the phrase, "He's good people", the word "people" is used to denote a specific instance of people (a single person)
• "The pill" is used to refer to 28-pill packets of the combined oral contraceptive pill, a common birth control method

Specific class name referring to general set of associated things

• "John Hancock" used in the United States, for the signature of any person
• A genericized trademark, for example "Coke" for any variety of cola (or for any variety of soft drink, as in the southern United States), "Band-Aid" for any variety of adhesive bandage, or "Styrofoam" for any product made of expanded polystyrene
• A "Rube Goldberg (or Heath Robinson) contraption" to refer to any machine which seems overly complicated or bizarrely constructed

Referring to material actually or supposedly used to make something

• "brass" for brass instruments, or the shell casings of bullet cartridges
• "cement" for concrete, cement being just the binder in concrete
• "glasses" for spectacles
• "armor" for tanks
• "paper" for a journal article or newspaper
• "pigskin" for an American or Canadian football
• "plastic" for a credit card
• "steel" for a sword
• "strings" for string instruments
• "threads" for clothing
• "tin" for a container made with tin plating

Container is used to refer to its contents

• "barrel" for a barrel of oil
• "keg" for a keg of beer
• "He drank the cup", to refer to his drinking of the cup's contents "

If the "White House" actually started talking .. I suspect people would be running out of all exits ...  but that is the expression.

GET USED TO IT.

Perhaps I am different than most Jehovah's Witnesses ... and although JWs are often represented as a monolithic  group of marching robots, that is not always true ... my guess is more than half would not agree with anything that violated their concept of plain old common sense, even though they would not press any points for fear of being disfellowshipped for apostasy.

Among most people ..... there is truly infinite variety.

I became one of Jehovah's witnesses FIRST ... because it made sense ... it agreed with the real world ... I did not have to stretch my perception of the Universe into a pretzel.  The theology AGREED WITH PLAIN OLD COMMON SENSE.  I did not join because I agreed with them ... but because they agreed with ME.

OK ... now, lets look at the two scriptures you quoted  -  I always like to put it in context with what went before, and what is stated after a cited scripture, to see if someone is trying to lead me up the creek to booger's woods.

5 hours ago, Cos said:

Mr Rook,

You really should read Isaiah 6:8-10 and Acts 28:25-29 it may help you see through your misguided delusion. <><

 

Isaiah 6:6-12New American Standard Bible (NASB)

⁶ Then one of the seraphim flew to me with a burning coal in his hand, which he had taken from the altar with tongs. ⁷ He touched my mouth with it and said, “Behold, this has touched your lips; and your iniquity is taken away and your sin is ^[a]forgiven.”

⁸ Then I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us?” Then I said, “Here am I. Send me!” ⁹ He said, “Go, and tell this people:

‘Keep on listening, but do not perceive;
Keep on looking, but do not understand.’
¹⁰ “Render the hearts of this people ^[b]insensitive,
Their ears ^[c]dull,
And their eyes ^[d]dim,
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
Hear with their ears,
Understand with their hearts,
And return and be healed.”

¹¹ Then I said, “Lord, how long?” And He answered,

“Until cities are devastated and without inhabitant,
Houses are without people
And the land is utterly desolate,
¹² “The Lord has removed men far away,
And the ^[e]forsaken places are many in the midst of the land."

OK...fine scripture ... but it is only your OPINION that it relates to this discussion. 

Here's a clue for you Cos ... IT DON'T !

Acts 28:23-30New International Version (NIV)

²³ They arranged to meet Paul on a certain day, and came in even larger numbers to the place where he was staying. He witnessed to them from morning till evening, explaining about the kingdom of God, and from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets he tried to persuade them about Jesus. ²⁴ Some were convinced by what he said, but others would not believe. ²⁵ They disagreed among themselves and began to leave after Paul had made this final statement: “The Holy Spirit spoke the truth to your ancestors when he said through Isaiah the prophet:

²⁶ “‘Go to this people and say,
“You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
    you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.”
²⁷ For this people’s heart has become calloused;
    they hardly hear with their ears,
    and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
    hear with their ears,
    understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.’^[a]

²⁸ “Therefore I want you to know that God’s salvation has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will listen!” ^[29] [b]

³⁰ For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house and welcomed all who came to see him."

From your viewpoint , this is a "worst case scenario" ... here we have another example of a synecdoche ... as the men received what they heard by inspiration due to an UN-NAMED force.

But here is the clincher, which makes the most common sense .... "HOLY SPIRIT" IS NOT A PERSONAL NAME, ANY MORE THAN GAMMA RADIATION HAS A GOOD FRIEND NAMED "WENDY".

It's "something", for sure, but NOT A PERSONAL NAME.

When Jehovah wants to accomplish something fro 30 billion light years away ... there HAS to be a force carrier ... a DIRECTED force carrier, to make things happen at OUR END OF THE UNIVERSE.

If you want to get a tan .. you use UV radiation that comes from the Sun, at this end.

If you want God's blessing, you try to be the recipient of directed "Holy Spirit", at this end.

Casper is a name FOR A SPIRIT, ....... but only The Farce will be with you.

That's why "Casper the Friendly Ghost" was a COMIC BOOK.

ps:  And Casper DID have a friend ... Wendy the Witch.

.

 

[Evacuated]

9 hours ago, Cos said:

I have had JW’s describe the Holy Spirit to me as God’s “power”.

Well this just shows that people may not always understand the language they speak. The basic dictionary definitions of power as a noun are:

"the ability or capacity to do something or act in a particular way"

or

"the ability or capacity to direct or influence the behaviour of others or the course of events"

This seems to concur reasonably with some of the thought behind related Bible words. e.g. the Hebrew word koʹach is translated “power”; gevu·rahʹ, “mightiness”; and ʽoz, “strength.” The Greek dyʹna·mis is translated both “power” and “powerful works,” as the context makes appropriate.

Patently then, as an attribute of the true God, who alone is Almighty in power, this cannot be synonymous with the Holy Spirit for which different expressions are used both in the Hebrew and Greek scriptures.

Therefore your suggestion that "the words in Acts 10:38 "anointed with the Holy Spirit and with power" makes the idea that the Holy Spirit is a mere "force" or "attribute" as redundant,  "anointing with power and power"(?)" is actually incorrect. These words cannot be construed as meaning an "anointing with power and power". Your attribution of such a concept to the current teaching or beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses is also false.

 

[Otto]

On 03/09/2017 at 05:13, Cos said:

I find it strange how JWs will sometimes regard the Holy Spirit as an attribute of God; and at other times resolve the passages in which He is spoken of into a roundabout way, or indirect way for God Himself; or, to express both as a figure of speech; to me this shows that JW have no real idea, but will say anything except the obvious.

 

In establishing the fact that the Holy Spirit is a Person, note when you read Scripture how frequent the Holy Spirit is associated (and distinguished) with two other Persons in equal degree! <><

What is the name of the Holy Spirit.

[Cos]

On ‎9‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 8:16 PM, Otto said:

What is the name of the Holy Spirit.

Otto,

 

Read Isaiah 6:8-10 and Acts 28:25-29. <><

[Cos]

On ‎9‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 3:54 AM, Gone Fishing said:

Well this just shows that people may not always understand the language they speak. The basic dictionary definitions of power as a noun are:

"the ability or capacity to do something or act in a particular way"

or

"the ability or capacity to direct or influence the behaviour of others or the course of events"

This seems to concur reasonably with some of the thought behind related Bible words. e.g. the Hebrew word koʹach is translated “power”; gevu·rahʹ, “mightiness”; and ʽoz, “strength.” The Greek dyʹna·mis is translated both “power” and “powerful works,” as the context makes appropriate.

Patently then, as an attribute of the true God, who alone is Almighty in power, this cannot be synonymous with the Holy Spirit for which different expressions are used both in the Hebrew and Greek scriptures.

Therefore your suggestion that "the words in Acts 10:38 "anointed with the Holy Spirit and with power" makes the idea that the Holy Spirit is a mere "force" or "attribute" as redundant,  "anointing with power and power"(?)" is actually incorrect. These words cannot be construed as meaning an "anointing with power and power". Your attribution of such a concept to the current teaching or beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses is also false.

 

Gone Fishing,

 

The JW’s speak how they have been taught. Did you not see what the watchtower claims? My question to you is, do you understand the language that you speak? Please describe your idea of the Holy Spirit. <><

[Cos]

On ‎9‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 1:07 AM, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Cos:

You have already proved by your own words in the Archive Topic "Demonism and the Watchtower", that you are completely clueless as to what constitutes proof, or reason, or logic .. and it's possibly only because you do not understand what is generally referred to a "figures of speech".

When you hear on the News that North Korea tested a hydrogen bomb ... no they didn't. The MILITARY of North Korea tested a hydrogen bomb (if true).

If the news says "The White House today said that this action will NOT be tolerated !'"  The building itself did not actually say anything at all.  The building is recognized as a symbol of the will of the President and his administration.,

In the scriptures giving personification to a force as a person ... like Reddy Kilowatt, or the HOLY SPIRIT, is what is known as a "Metonymy".  It's a subset of a "Synecdoche", which is a subset of a "Metaphor" 

After all ... what's a meta phor?  *coff"*

This is what Wikipedia has to say about that: (bold type added by me)

" Synecdoche is a rhetorical trope and a type of figurative speech similar to metonymy, a figure of speech in which a term that denotes one thing is used to refer to a related thing. Indeed, synecdoche is sometimes considered a subclass of metonymy. It is more distantly related to other figures of speech, such as metaphor.^[6]

More rigorously, metonymy and synecdoche can be considered subspecies of metaphor, intending metaphor as a type of conceptual substitution (as Quintilian does in Institutio oratoria Book VIII). In Lanham's Handlist of Rhetorical Terms,^[7] the three terms have somewhat restrictive definitions, arguably in tune with a certain interpretation of their etymologies from Greek:

• Metaphor: changing a word from its literal meaning to one not properly applicable but analogous to it; assertion of identity rather than likeness, as with simile.
• Metonymy: substitution of cause for effect, proper name for one of its qualities, etc.

Classification

Synecdoche is often used as a type of personification by attaching a human aspect to a nonhuman thing. It is used in reference to political relations, including "having a footing", to mean a country or organization is in a position to act, or "the wrong hands", to describe opposing groups, usually in the context of military power.

The two main types of synecdoche are microcosms and macrocosms. A microcosm is when a part of something is used to refer to the entirety.An example of this would be someone saying that they “need a hand" with a project, when they really need the entire person.   A macrocosm is the opposite, when the entire structure of something is used to refer to a small part^.  An example of this could be referring to "the world", when the speaker really means a certain country or part of the world. The figure of speech is divided into the image (what the speaker uses to refer to something) and the subject (what is being referred to).

This type of reference is quite common in politics. The residence of an executive is often credited for the executive's action. A spokesperson of the Executive Office of the President of the United States is identified in "The White House announced a new plan to reduce hunger." References to the King or Queen of the United Kingdom are made in the same fashion by referring to today's official residence, Buckingham Palace. Worldwide examples include "the Sublime Porte" of the Ottoman Empire, and "the Kremlin" of Russia.

Sonnets and other forms of love poetry frequently use synecdoches to characterize the beloved in terms of individual body parts rather than a coherent whole. This practice is especially common in the Petrarchan sonnet, where the idealised beloved is often described part by part, from head to toe.

It is also popular in advertising. Since synecdoche uses a part to represent a whole, its use requires the audience to make associations and "fill in the gaps", engaging with the ad by thinking about the product. Moreover, catching the attention of an audience with advertising is often referred to by advertisers as "getting eyeballs", another synecdoche. Synecdoche is very common in spoken English, especially in reference to sports. The names of cities are used as shorthand for their sports teams to describe events and their outcomes, such as "Denver won Monday's game", when it would be more accurate that a sports team from the city won the game.^[

Kenneth Burke (1945), an American literary theorist, declared that in rhetoric the four master tropes, or figures of speech, are metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony. Burke's primary concern with these four master tropes is not simply their figurative usage but their role in the discovery and description of the truth. He described synecdoche as “part of the whole, whole for the part, container for the contained, sign for the thing signified, material for the thing made… cause for the effect, effect for the cause, genus for the species, species for the genus". In addition, Burke suggests that synecdoche patterns can include reversible pairs such as disease-cure. Burke proclaimed the noblest synecdoche is found in the description of microcosm and macrocosm" since microcosm is related to macrocosm as part to the whole, and either the whole can represent the part or the part can represent the whole".^[15] Burke also compared synecdoche with the concept of "representation", especially in the political sense in which elected representatives stand in pars pro toto for their electorate.

Part referring to whole (pars pro toto)

• Referring to people according to a single characteristic: "the gray beard" representing an older man or "the long hair" representing a hippie
• Referring to a large group of related peoples according to the proper name of one subgroup: Eskimos instead of Native Alaskans; Caucasians instead of Europeans or Whites
• Describing a complete vehicle as "wheels"
• referring to a vehicle's manual transmission by the control handle ("stick shift" or "stick")
• referring to the whole vehicle by the transmission control handle ("can you drive a stick?")
• Referring to people by a particular body part. For example, "head count" or "counting noses"
• Saying "bubbly" to refer to Champagne or any other sparkling wine
• Using "Arabian sands" to refer the Arabian deserts
• Using "ivories" to refer to a piano (particularly in the phrase "tickling the ivories", meaning to play the piano), by a pair of synecdoches: the piano designated by its part, the keys, which in turn were historically made of ivory
• He asked for her hand in marriage.
• Using "boba" to refer to the drink, Bubble tea

General class name used to denote specific member of that or associated class

• Using "the good book" or "The Book" for the Bible ("Bible" itself comes from the Greek word for "book")
• Describing any four-wheel drive vehicle (including long-haul trailers, etc.) as a "truck"
• In the phrase, "He's good people", the word "people" is used to denote a specific instance of people (a single person)
• "The pill" is used to refer to 28-pill packets of the combined oral contraceptive pill, a common birth control method

Specific class name referring to general set of associated things

• "John Hancock" used in the United States, for the signature of any person
• A genericized trademark, for example "Coke" for any variety of cola (or for any variety of soft drink, as in the southern United States), "Band-Aid" for any variety of adhesive bandage, or "Styrofoam" for any product made of expanded polystyrene
• A "Rube Goldberg (or Heath Robinson) contraption" to refer to any machine which seems overly complicated or bizarrely constructed

Referring to material actually or supposedly used to make something

• "brass" for brass instruments, or the shell casings of bullet cartridges
• "cement" for concrete, cement being just the binder in concrete
• "glasses" for spectacles
• "armor" for tanks
• "paper" for a journal article or newspaper
• "pigskin" for an American or Canadian football
• "plastic" for a credit card
• "steel" for a sword
• "strings" for string instruments
• "threads" for clothing
• "tin" for a container made with tin plating

Container is used to refer to its contents

• "barrel" for a barrel of oil
• "keg" for a keg of beer
• "He drank the cup", to refer to his drinking of the cup's contents "

If the "White House" actually started talking .. I suspect people would be running out of all exits ...  but that is the expression.

GET USED TO IT.

Perhaps I am different than most Jehovah's Witnesses ... and although JWs are often represented as a monolithic  group of marching robots, that is not always true ... my guess is more than half would not agree with anything that violated their concept of plain old common sense, even though they would not press any points for fear of being disfellowshipped for apostasy.

Among most people ..... there is truly infinite variety.

I became one of Jehovah's witnesses FIRST ... because it made sense ... it agreed with the real world ... I did not have to stretch my perception of the Universe into a pretzel.  The theology AGREED WITH PLAIN OLD COMMON SENSE.  I did not join because I agreed with them ... but because they agreed with ME.

OK ... now, lets look at the two scriptures you quoted  -  I always like to put it in context with what went before, and what is stated after a cited scripture, to see if someone is trying to lead me up the creek to booger's woods.

Isaiah 6:6-12New American Standard Bible (NASB)

⁶ Then one of the seraphim flew to me with a burning coal in his hand, which he had taken from the altar with tongs. ⁷ He touched my mouth with it and said, “Behold, this has touched your lips; and your iniquity is taken away and your sin is ^[a]forgiven.”

⁸ Then I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us?” Then I said, “Here am I. Send me!” ⁹ He said, “Go, and tell this people:

‘Keep on listening, but do not perceive;
Keep on looking, but do not understand.’
¹⁰ “Render the hearts of this people ^[b]insensitive,
Their ears ^[c]dull,
And their eyes ^[d]dim,
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
Hear with their ears,
Understand with their hearts,
And return and be healed.”

¹¹ Then I said, “Lord, how long?” And He answered,

“Until cities are devastated and without inhabitant,
Houses are without people
And the land is utterly desolate,
¹² “The Lord has removed men far away,
And the ^[e]forsaken places are many in the midst of the land."

OK...fine scripture ... but it is only your OPINION that it relates to this discussion. 

Here's a clue for you Cos ... IT DON'T !

Acts 28:23-30New International Version (NIV)

²³ They arranged to meet Paul on a certain day, and came in even larger numbers to the place where he was staying. He witnessed to them from morning till evening, explaining about the kingdom of God, and from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets he tried to persuade them about Jesus. ²⁴ Some were convinced by what he said, but others would not believe. ²⁵ They disagreed among themselves and began to leave after Paul had made this final statement: “The Holy Spirit spoke the truth to your ancestors when he said through Isaiah the prophet:

²⁶ “‘Go to this people and say,
“You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
    you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.”
²⁷ For this people’s heart has become calloused;
    they hardly hear with their ears,
    and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
    hear with their ears,
    understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.’^[a]

²⁸ “Therefore I want you to know that God’s salvation has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will listen!” ^[29] [b]

³⁰ For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house and welcomed all who came to see him."

From your viewpoint , this is a "worst case scenario" ... here we have another example of a synecdoche ... as the men received what they heard by inspiration due to an UN-NAMED force.

But here is the clincher, which makes the most common sense .... "HOLY SPIRIT" IS NOT A PERSONAL NAME, ANY MORE THAN GAMMA RADIATION HAS A GOOD FRIEND NAMED "WENDY".

It's "something", for sure, but NOT A PERSONAL NAME.

When Jehovah wants to accomplish something fro 30 billion light years away ... there HAS to be a force carrier ... a DIRECTED force carrier, to make things happen at OUR END OF THE UNIVERSE.

If you want to get a tan .. you use UV radiation that comes from the Sun, at this end.

If you want God's blessing, you try to be the recipient of directed "Holy Spirit", at this end.

Casper is a name FOR A SPIRIT, ....... but only The Farce will be with you.

That's why "Casper the Friendly Ghost" was a COMIC BOOK.

ps:  And Casper DID have a friend ... Wendy the Witch.

.

 

Mr Rook,

 

Your claim is that Bible uses “figurative speech” and/or “subspecies of metaphor” to explain Scriptures that go against your false teaching, this is exactly what I said you JWs do at the start of this thread, and I said it in just a few lines whereas you required, well, many lines (tedious copy and paste).

 

This opinion you JWs have (and it is just an opinion) fails when reading passages where the Holy Spirit and the Father are mentioned together which show that there is a distinction which exclude the of figures of speech (or “subspecies of metaphor”) idea that you want to force upon certain passages to try and make them fit into your little box of false teachings.

 

I gave you one example already, here it is again.

 

Eph. 2:18 "For through Him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit" ["access to the Father by one Father (?)].

 

Clearly your opinion fails when it takes into account the clear distinction throughout Scripture.

 

Here is a experiment you can do, why don’t you go through the scriptures and try substituting the Holy Spirit with active force and you will see how passage after passage becomes meaningless and absurd which makes active force a redundant option. <><

[Otto]

On 03/09/2017 at 05:13, Cos said:

I find it strange how JWs will sometimes regard the Holy Spirit as an attribute of God; and at other times resolve the passages in which He is spoken of into a roundabout way, or indirect way for God Himself; or, to express both as a figure of speech; to me this shows that JW have no real idea, but will say anything except the obvious.

 

In establishing the fact that the Holy Spirit is a Person, note when you read Scripture how frequent the Holy Spirit is associated (and distinguished) with two other Persons in equal degree! <><

The holy spirit is Gods and belongs to him therefore it will always be associated with God as no one else as his holy spirit jesus is never referred to as holy spirit but as using God's Holy Spirit.

 

How can the Holy Spirit be in equilibrium with Jesus and God as you stayed when a person can sin against God and Jesus but not sin against the Holy Spirit I also think that you would know the name for the Holy Spirit if it were a person the Bible but after all personified sin and wisdom and speaks about things as though they have gender

[Otto]

1 hour ago, Cos said:

Mr Rook,

 

Your claim is that Bible uses “figurative speech” and/or “subspecies of metaphor” to explain Scriptures that go against your false teaching, this is exactly what I said you JWs do at the start of this thread, and I said it in just a few lines whereas you required, well, many lines (tedious copy and paste).

 

This opinion you JWs have (and it is just an opinion) fails when reading passages where the Holy Spirit and the Father are mentioned together which show that there is a distinction which exclude the of figures of speech (or “subspecies of metaphor”) idea that you want to force upon certain passages to try and make them fit into your little box of false teachings.

 

I gave you one example already, here it is again.

 

Eph. 2:18 "For through Him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit" ["access to the Father by one Father (?)].

 

Clearly your opinion fails when it takes into account the clear distinction throughout Scripture.

 

Here is a experiment you can do, why don’t you go through the scriptures and try substituting the Holy Spirit with active force and you will see how passage after passage becomes meaningless and absurd which makes active force a redundant option. <><

I think you are misunderstanding surely Ephesians means that you can have access to the father through one spirit or active force of which there is only one it doesn't mean it's a person in fact that has nothing to do with personality.

 

Give another example of way the idea of a force from God cannot be substituted into the word holy spirit or Holy Ghost.. and that's completely remove it's personified appearance

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

I was mentioning this discussion with my wife, yesterday, and I remembered a WW I howitzer the Germans produced called BIG BERTHA by the allies. It had a bore diameter of about 18 inches.

In the REAL world it is often common to have means of projected power have personal names.

BIG BERTHA, and even larger guns .. but none of them were people, even though they had peoples names.

However, even with all this .. the HOLY SPIRIT only has a designation ... not a personal name .

Linguistic artifices in every direction are commonplace.

[Evacuated]

3 hours ago, Cos said:

The JW’s speak how they have been taught

Which of course is true of every human that has ever lived.

However, this doesn't exclude mistaken notions of which you appear to have provided an example:   "the words in Acts 10:38 "anointed with the Holy Spirit and with power" makes the idea that the Holy Spirit is a mere "force" or "attribute" as redundant,  "anointing with power and power"(?)"  Did you speak this of your own originality? Or were you taught?

Anyway, the best description of Holy Spirit as I have been taught is provided by Jesus who said:

(John 14:16, 17) And I will ask the Father and he will give you another helper to be with you forever,  the spirit of the truth, which the world cannot receive, because it neither sees it nor knows it. You know it, because it remains with you and is in you.
(John 14:26) But the helper, the holy spirit, which the Father will send in my name, that one will teach you all things and bring back to your minds all the things I told you.
(John 15:26) When the helper comes that I will send you from the Father, the spirit of the truth, which comes from the Father, that one will bear witness about me;
(John 16:13, 14) However, when that one comes, the spirit of the truth, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak of his own initiative, but what he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things to come.  That one will glorify me, because he will receive from what is mine and will declare it to you.

What about you? Please describe your idea of the Holy Spirit.