Last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

[UntoHim]

Good idea KSA!

Just as we have discovered that there is a big difference between teaching that the Lord Jesus "became THE life giving Spirit" - (an erroneous teaching/interpretation that the Greek word PNEUMA here refers to the Holy Spirit, when a different article "A life giving spirit" was used) - so here again we see the jumping to an erroneous conclusion in interpreting John 7:39. In this case Witness Lee has intentionally brought an erroneous teaching to the table, and this time it was not by changing an article from "a" to "the", rather his interpretation is erroneous because he intentionally leaves out the completed thought of the author as given in the original language.

There is a very good reason that most translators completed the author's thought for us English readers by adding the word "given"...."the Spirit had not been given". The reason is, that to us English readers, the phrase "not yet", if left in it's uncompleted form in English, conveys the meaning that the Holy Spirit either did not exist, or did not exist in a completed state. When one does even a cursory check to the sentence construction in the Greek, it is more then obvious that the complete and correct translation is "the Spirit had not been given".

Please take a look at the sentence structure as clearly laid out in Greek:
http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-b...version=KJV#39

Also, here is a partial list of all the reputable translations of John 7:39

KJV
(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet [given]; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
NIV
By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.
ESV
Now this he said about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were to receive, for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.
NASB
But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet {given,} because Jesus was not yet glorified.
RSV
Now this he said about the Spirit, which those who believed in him were to receive; for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.
ASV
But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believed on him were to receive: for the Spirit was not yet [given]; because Jesus was not yet
glorified.
Webster
(But this he spoke of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive, for the Holy Spirit was not yet [given], because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

[YP0534]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Good idea KSA!

Just as we have discovered that there is a big difference between teaching that the Lord Jesus "became THE life giving Spirit" - (an erroneous teaching/interpretation that the Greek word PNEUMA here refers to the Holy Spirit, when a different article "A life giving spirit" was used)

oh.

OK

You hear that Old Rasputin?
We're done with the topic.
We're moving on to something else now.



Probably ought to be a new thread, though, moderators.

Or maybe just move all of it over to a more general "heretical pneumatology of the Witness Lee followers" or something like that?

:rollingeyes2:



(The worst thing is, the biggest criticism of Lee's interpretation of this verse that I can think of, no one even mentioned because of this "discovery" about definite versus indefinite articles. But I'm not bringing it up now. Too late!)

[UntoHim]

So who is saying that "we're done with the topic"?

KSA can speak for himself, but I understand that he thought that it would be profitable to keep the thread moving along, so to speak.

My post was on topic. I addressed the verse that the moderator was suggesting we address. KSA is correct, there are a number of verses that Witness Lee used in support of his teaching that the Lord Jesus became the Holy Spirit.

YP, would you care to address what I have posted, or maybe just give us your take on how this verse fits in with this crucial teaching?

[YP0534]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

So who is saying that "we're done with the topic"?

KSA can speak for himself, but I understand that he thought that it would be profitable to keep the thread moving along, so to speak.

My post was on topic. I addressed the verse that the moderator was suggesting we address. KSA is correct, there are a number of verses that Witness Lee used in support of his teaching that the Lord Jesus became the Holy Spirit.

YP, would you care to address what I have posted, or maybe just give us your take on how this verse fits in with this crucial teaching?

Um, Old Rasputin and I were basically concerned that you fellas are merely assuming what you need to prove and now there's a conclusory statement about what has supposedly been thoroughly vetted. You both state your intention to change the subject from the original verse under consideration, which I submit is done unwisely and in error. Some might get the impression that you guys were pushing an agenda on the topic, you know?

Regardless, I'm content to let you guys settle into this new doctrine of proper article usage, although I was somewhat disappointed that my citation to the implications of that approach in another verse strangely went entirely ignored when I brought it up previously. (It is "The Lord is THE Spirit," right? Or do I have the incorrect article there as well?)

If you haven't got the message yet, I simply do not play Internet debating games even thought I do thoroughly enjoy lively exchange on topics like these.

I'm sure I'd just put a monkeywrench in things at this point by arguing yet again that the article distinction is virtually meaningless in the case of 1 Cor 15: 45 and repeating again my illustration that a banana on the table and the banana on the table have nearly identical semantic values when there is but one banana. I'll concede I implicitly make the assumption of only one banana (because I think the entailments are reducible to Biblical absurdity) but you must also concede that you have done the converse if there is going to be honest discussion of topics such as these.

But honestly, I had grown quite weary with those same arguments myself!

So, go ahead and move things along as you see fit, guys.

If y'all say something I think I can contribute positively to, I'll just jump right in with my $.02 at the time I think appropriate. You may have noticed that I feel comfortable to post here freely.

I appreciate your efforts to do your best in all of these things...