Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

Mounce and the natural gender of the Holy Spirit.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by CL4P-TP View Post
    the pronoun that they rendered "whom" is neuter and clearly refers back to the "Holy Ghost" and not the comforter which is masculine.
    You do not understand the English grammar.
    "Whom" definitely, 100%, refers back to the Comforter.

    This failure with basic English grammar is the same problem John Milton has with John 1.

    Originally posted by CL4P-TP View Post
    the AV referring to the Comforter..., as "whom" and "he."
    That you got right, as long as we skip your mixing the Comforter and the Holy Ghost.

    As I said, the AV is 100% consistent.
    You are welcome to object to the methodology, but you should try to get the basics right.

    If you want to claim that the AV is not representing the Greek properly, you should give the specific words where you feel this occurs. In Mark 9:26, the problem was a Critical Text corruption, here I do not think there are any such anomalies.

    Here is the AV with the italics, which are lost in the quote box.

    John 14:26 (AV-PCE)
    But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost,
    whom the Father will send in my name,
    he shall teach you all things,
    and bring all things to your remembrance,
    whatsoever I have said unto you.
    Last edited by Steven Avery; 02-06-19, 11:08 PM.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by Steven Avery View Post
      You do not understand English grammar which is the same as the Greek here.
      "Whom" definitely, 100%, refers back to the Comforter.

      This failure with basic English grammar is the same problem John Milton has with John 1.

      That you got right, as long as we skip your mixing the Comforter and the Holy Ghost.

      As I said, the AV is 100% consistent.
      You are welcome to object to the methodology, but you should try to get the basics right.
      Do you remember when you said this, "The Received Text and the AV are fully consistent in having pneuma / spirit with neuter grammar. Similarly, paraclete / Comforter is masculine."? I know you don't read Greek, so I'll try to explain this to you one last time. The word "ὅ" is neuter. According to your own words, since this is neuter it should go with "pneuma / spirit." However, they translate this this word with "whom" which is clearly not neuter. It must be either masculine or feminine. This would be an inconsistency. If you say that the ὅ refers back to ὁ παράκλητος, you have an even bigger problem because ὁ παράκλητος is masculine. Either way you go, you have an inconsistency. You would do well to stop insulting me. When you accuse me of mixing up English and Greek grammar, while you give "explanations" like this, you look like a fool. It's okay for you, though. If anything happens in response to your false accusations, I'll be the one to get an infraction for speaking the truth.

      In the meantime, look at this in an interlinear and see if you can fix your problems.
      John 14:26 ὁ δὲ παράκλητος τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον ὃ πέμψει ὁ πατὴρ ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί μου ἐκεῖνος ὑμᾶς διδάξει πάντα καὶ ὑπομνήσει ὑμᾶς πάντα ἃ εἶπον ὑμῖν"

      Comment


      • #78
        ὃ πέμψει ὁ πατὴρ

        First, none of this affects pneuma being neuter, the question is whether the paraclete could have a neuter referrant.
        Is there a question in the Received Text, or an ambiguity?

        Clearly the AV is totally clear, maintaining the neuter and masculine distinction between Spirit and Comforter.

        John 14:26 (AV)
        But the Comforter,
        which is the Holy Ghost,
        whom the Father will send in my name,
        he shall teach you all things,
        and bring all things to your remembrance,
        whatsoever I have said unto you.


        It is likely that the referent of ὃ in the Greek is the Holy Ghost.
        Greek geeks are welcome to comment.

        However the ultra-literal translation would be awkward, especially as the relative pronoun follows the noun, which is not our English construction.
        So the translation to English requires the which for the Holy Ghost and the whom for the Comforter.

        Ergo, translation equivalence, maintaining the pronoun gender distincttion.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Steven Avery View Post
          ὃ πέμψει ὁ πατὴρ

          First, none of this affects pneuma being neuter, the question is whether the paraclete could have a neuter referrant.
          Is there a question in the Received Text, or an ambiguity?

          Clearly the AV is totally clear, maintaining the neuter and masculine distinction between Spirit and Comforter.

          John 14:26 (AV)
          But the Comforter,
          which is the Holy Ghost,
          whom the Father will send in my name,
          he shall teach you all things,
          and bring all things to your remembrance,
          whatsoever I have said unto you.


          It is likely that the referent of ὃ in the Greek is the Holy Ghost.
          Greek geeks are welcome to comment.

          However the ultra-literal translation would be awkward, especially as the relative pronoun follows the noun, which is not our English construction.
          So the translation to English requires the which for the Holy Ghost and the whom for the Comforter.

          Ergo, translation equivalence, maintaining the pronoun gender distincttion.
          Would you look at that change in tone! It is amazing how many concessions and reconsiderations you are willing to make now that you realize that your position is hopeless.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by CL4P-TP View Post
            Would you look at that change in tone! It is amazing how many concessions and reconsiderations you are willing to make now that you realize that your position is hopeless.
            You asked a reasonable question, as there is some nuance in the text, especially involving the difference of word order in Greek and English construction. You seem to be upset that I gave you a solid answer.

            Originally posted by CL4P-TP View Post
            If you are working solely from grammar, you should have a good explanation for what is happening in John 14:26.
            And I gave you the requested good explanation. And I have no idea what you consider "hopeless",.More boorish posturing.

            ==================================

            Your fundamental error remains.

            Originally posted by CL4P-TP View Post
            The AV calls the Holy Ghost "whom." .
            You should have the integrity to retract this error, which really exemplifies your mistake on the whole question.

            ==================================
            Last edited by Steven Avery; 02-07-19, 06:20 AM.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Steven Avery View Post
              You asked a reasonable question, as there is some nuance in the text, especially involving the difference of word order in Greek and English construction. You seem to be upset that I gave you a solid answer.

              And I gave you the requested good explanation. And I have no idea what you consider "hopeless",.More boorish posturing.
              You haven't given a "solid" answer, and your position is hopeless. If this is the best answer you can give, you have no "good explanation." And you forget this explanation only came after you dismissed the whole thing as "rabbit trails." It was only later that you had a change of heart.

              ==================================

              Your fundamental error remains.



              You should have the integrity to retract this error, which really exemplifies your mistake on the whole question.

              ==================================
              The AV does call the Holy Ghost "whom." It does so plainly that you yourself said it was likely in your last post, "It is likely that the referent of ὃ in the Greek is the Holy Ghost." That word "ὅ" that you are referring to was translated "whom" in the AV. Now, you should stop questioning my integrity and admit that you don't know what you are talking about and that the AV does not maintain "the neuter and masculine distinction between Spirit and Comforter." You won't, of course, but you should.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by CL4P-TP View Post
                The AV does call the Holy Ghost "whom."
                You are hopeless.

                Originally posted by CL4P-TP View Post
                TIt does so plainly that you yourself said it was likely in your last post, "It is likely that the referent of ὃ in the Greek is the Holy Ghost." That word "ὅ" that you are referring to was translated "whom" in the AV.
                Fabrication. The AV did not translate that section word for word, and you do not understand the very simple AV English grammar. (Which I showed you above.)

                Originally posted by CL4P-TP View Post
                TItNow, you should stop questioning my integrity"
                This post showed your hopeless fabrication.

                Originally posted by CL4P-TP View Post
                and admit that you don't know what you are talking about and that the AV does not maintain "the neuter and masculine distinction between Spirit and Comforter."
                Clearly, the AV does. And you should read the Naselli and Gons paper.

                The AV is 100% consistent in maintaining:

                "the neuter and masculine distinction between Spirit and Comforter."

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Steven Avery View Post
                  Fabrication. The AV did not translate that section word for word, and you do not understand the very simple AV English grammar. (Which I showed you above.)

                  This post showed your hopeless fabrication.
                  You said that the Holy Ghost was the likely referent of ὅ. Do you deny this? If ὅ referred to the Holy Ghost, there is no way that it can be linked to the Comforter. The translators of AV most definitely translated that word with "whom." And "whom" is most certainly not neuter. There is no fabrication from me.

                  Clearly, the AV does. And you should read the Naselli and Gons paper.
                  What part of that paper do you think is relevant? Can you provide a specific example for me to address or is this another misdirection?

                  The AV is 100% consistent in maintaining:

                  "the neuter and masculine distinction between Spirit and Comforter."
                  So far, this remains a false claim with no support. Once again, I ask you to make a case. Look at what you've said in this post:
                  1) "You are hopeless."
                  You aren't making an argument. Only thinly-veiled ad hominem.

                  2) "Fabrication. The AV did not translate that section word for word, and you do not understand the very simple AV English grammar. (Which I showed you above.)"
                  This a false statement with another ad hominem.

                  3) "This post showed your hopeless fabrication."
                  This is another false statement with a repeated ad hominem.

                  4) "Clearly, the AV does. And you should read the Naselli and Gons paper. The AV is 100% consistent in maintaining: "the neuter and masculine distinction between Spirit and Comforter."
                  Here we have another false statement, an assertion about this paper which I asked about, and a final false statement. The bottom line is that you haven't made a single argument in this post.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by CL4P-TP View Post
                    The translators of AV most definitely translated that word with "whom." t.
                    This simply makes no sense. They did not leave us an interlinear. They knew how Greek grammar works.

                    Originally posted by CL4P-TP View Post
                    4) "Clearly, the AV does. And you should read the Naselli and Gons paper. The AV is 100% consistent in maintaining: "the neuter and masculine distinction between Spirit and Comforter." Here we have another false statement, an assertion about this paper which I asked about, and a final false statement..
                    The statement was a simple truth.
                    Naselli and Gons do not study AV translation.

                    You twist yourself around in knots.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X