What means these: Holy Ghost, or Holy Spirit?

To many scriptures that show a difference..

And I didn’t think AI would have a clue…but it did:

Yes, there is a difference, as “Holy Ghost” and “Holy Spirit” are two different concepts: “Holy Ghost” and “Holy Spirit” both refer to the Third Person of the Trinity, but the term “power” refers to the manifestation or action of the Holy Spirit, not the person itself

Now what this looks like in original language is what I will be researching. If you have your answer then no need to respond..but there is no one that has proven that there isn’t any difference in the terminology.

To many scriptures that show a difference..

No. They don’t. The Scriptures were written in Hebrew and Greek. And as has been shown to you many, many times, in Hebrew there is only one word Ruach, and in Greek there is only one word Pneuma.

And I didn’t think AI would have a clue…but it did:

How you phrase a question to a LLM will change everything.

I’m going to ask ChatGPT a question, let’s see how it answers. Here is what my question is going to be: “Is there a difference between the Holy Spirit and the Holy Ghost?”

Here is ChatGPT’s full response to that question:

That’s a great question — and one that has puzzled and intrigued people for centuries!

In Christian theology, there is no difference in meaning between the Holy Spirit and the Holy Ghost. Both refer to the third Person of the Holy Trinity — God’s Spirit, co-equal and co-eternal with the Father and the Son.

Here’s where the difference in wording comes from:

1. Language and Translation History

  • The word “ghost” in older English (from Old English gast or spiritus in Latin) simply meant spirit or breath.

  • Early English Bible translations, like the King James Version (1611), used “Holy Ghost.”

  • As English evolved, the word “ghost” came to mean primarily the spirit of a dead person, so later Bible translations switched to “Holy Spirit” to avoid confusion.

2. Modern Usage

  • Most modern English Bibles and churches now say “Holy Spirit.”

  • Some older traditions (like certain Pentecostal, Anglican, or Catholic prayers) still use “Holy Ghost” out of reverence for tradition.

3. Meaning

Regardless of the wording, both terms refer to the same divine being — God’s Spirit who:

  • Empowers and sanctifies believers,

  • Brings God’s presence,

  • Gives spiritual gifts,

  • And works in creation and redemption.

So in short:

“Holy Spirit” and “Holy Ghost” mean the same thing — the difference is just historical language, not theology.

Would you like me to show how the terms appear differently across Bible translations?

I’m going to ask ChatGPT a different sort of question, let’s see how it responds.
I asked ChatGPT this question:

“Assuming that Holy Spirit refers to the Third Person of the Trinity and the phrase Holy Ghost refers to a type of British pastry invented in the 16th century, how would you describe the difference between the Holy Spirit and the Holy Ghost?“ and then refined it and told chatGPT to treat the question as serious and provide a one paragraph summary of the difference between the two. Here is what it gave me:

In this scenario, the Holy Spirit and the Holy Ghost differ completely in nature, function, and significance. The Holy Spirit, as the Third Person of the Trinity, is a divine, immaterial being—eternal, omnipresent, and active in the spiritual life of believers, serving as a source of inspiration, sanctification, and divine guidance. The Holy Ghost, by contrast, is a 16th-century British pastry, a material and finite creation of human culinary art, existing not as a divine person but as a baked good meant for physical nourishment and enjoyment. Where the Holy Spirit acts within the metaphysical and theological realm to unite humanity with God, the Holy Ghost pastry operates within the physical and cultural sphere, reflecting historical tastes and traditions rather than spiritual truths. In essence, the Holy Spirit transforms souls; the Holy Ghost pastry satisfies appetites.

We can get the answers we want from LLM AI, because it’s just a machine using predictive language models and fed millions of lines of training data. It cannot think.

1 Like

Exactly, so you have proven to me that there are many angles one can view from. If I were you I would not continue to visit a thread that I knew the answer to after I’ve given a thought that I’m dogmatic about. Let others enjoy what they find out for themselves. Why impose your wrenching dogmatic opinion on rather a post should close because of your angle on it.

So as Johann knows I’m sensitive :pleading_face:…I close down to people who do not act in love. And so do many other people.

This thread has not even begun to analyzed any scriptures from the kjv to even allow one to come to any conclusion.

Now if you want to do that then stay, but if not there are over 300 threads that you can enter besides this one. If you have come from all angles and your mind has been made up then move on…but I’d yet to see anyone respond to the earlier angles along side H20 that I was coming from. How something can be the same in one manner but expell something different.

So if you’re going to stay Open your mind up to look through another lens other than man made doctrines that put God in a box→that CAN’T say all that is meant by them, nor → all that CAN be meant by them.

As I mentioned in your thread.

…………………….start here……………………………………..

Take a scripture from KJV with Holyghost and actually read it in context and analyze it.

John 7:39

(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.)

Luke 24:49

And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

Romans 8:9-11

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

10And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

11But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you

Luke 3:22

And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

He is making some good points @Corlove13 and another is Precept Austin, just saying, not imposing my “dogmatic ideologies” upon you.

I study directly from the Hebrew and Greek texts, along with exegetical works from scholars, so this may not be of much help to you. I’m sorry if my words hurt your feelings.

Should you need help in future, just holler.

Shalom.

J.

Bible Series FAQs
God Series FAQs
Holy Spirit Series FAQs
The Identity of the Holy Spirit
Who Is The Spirit Of God? (Introduction)
Why Is It Important to Study the Subject of the Holy Spirit?
What Is the Proper Way to Approach the Subject of the Spirit of God?
Why Is the Subject of the Holy Spirit Neglected?
Who Is the Holy Spirit?
Is the Holy Spirit a Person?
Does the New Testament Depart from the Normal Rules of Grammar to Indicate the Personality of the Holy Spirit?
Could the Holy Spirit Merely Be the Personification of God’s Power?
Why Is the Holy Spirit Spoken of in the Neuter Gender?
Why Do Some Argue That the Holy Spirit Is an Impersonal Force?
What Do We Learn About The Nature Of The Spirit Of God From The Old Testament?
Is the Holy Spirit Called God?
Is the Holy Spirit Associated on an Equal Basis with God the Father and God the Son?
Does the Holy Spirit Have the Attributes of God?
Has the Holy Spirit Performed Divine Works?
What Different Titles Are Ascribed to the Spirit of God?
Why Is the Holy Spirit Called, “the Spirit of Jesus Christ” and, the “Spirit of Jesus?”
Should the Holy Spirit Be Singled Out for Worship?
Whom Does the Holy Spirit Proceed From?
What Is the “Name” of the Holy Spirit?
Who Are the Seven Spirits?
Is There a Counterfeit Holy Spirit?
What Symbols Does the Bible Use to Describe the Holy Spirit?
Why Is the Holy Spirit Compared to a Dove?
Why Is the Holy Spirit Compared to Water?
Why Is the Holy Spirit Compared to Fire?
Why Is the Holy Spirit Compared to the Wind?
Why Is the Holy Spirit Compared to Clothing?
Why Is the Holy Spirit Compared to a Pledge or a Guarantee?
Why Is the Holy Spirit Associated with Anointing with Oil?
Why Is the Seal, or Insignia, a Symbol of God’s Spirit?
Is There a Difference between the Holy Spirit and the Holy Ghost?
The Holy Spirit: How He Works
Baptism with the Holy Spirit
Introduction to the Gifts of the Holy Spirit
The Various Gifts of the Holy Spirit
The Various Gifts of the Holy Spirit (Part Two)
Are All Spiritual Gifts Active Today?
Divine Healing
Speaking in Tongues
The Holy Spirit and Us
Jesus Series FAQs
The Case for Christianity
Additional Bible FAQs

I study directly from the Hebrew and Greek texts, along with exegetical works from scholars, so this may not be of much help to you. I’m sorry if my words hurt your feelings.

Lots of talk but I do not see any one taking on a single verse I have mentioned.

……..

Let think for a minute how many meanings the term Spirit carries….yet uses the same Greek term pneuma:

https://revbible.com/Wordstudy/Pneuma

Context, the language and the lens one views through will play a part to where one leans.

So when you post the Greek or Hebrew you must also define the term. Have you done that?

And if you see through doctrinal man-made creeds then you might lead to same conclusions.

For example one can clearly see in the passage below that what is sent back is something the same but different:

If it were the same they would see Jesus in the same image in which He came.

Common sense right? You would think but. People sweep that under the rug

So context will will be a key to understanding passages.

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.)

Possible meanings

They would receive the Spirit when the Holyghost was given.

The Holyghost is of the Spirit

The Holyghost is a Spirit

The Holyghost is from the Spirit

The Holyghost is about the Spirit

The Holyghost is the Spirit they would receive

That comes from the Spirit

He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water

Possible meanings :
Flow Rivers of living water

rivers of living water as revelation.

it come from the inside

Possible interpretation:

" rivers of living water " are “of the Spirit”

the power of mankind is belief

How would I interpret:
Life flows out of man when the word that He received, when He believed becomes Spirit by the way of the power of the Holyghost.

Now if I may have grace to elaborate on my interpretation

The teaching about the Son are from the
father.
Those are the words believed, for the father reveals the son.

( thats why if you believe the son you believe the father because the son is sent by the father and its the father that reveals the son.)

So those words were taken in (eaten) believed

Doing the will of the father is: to look to the son and believe.(eat)

Now for some reason my thoughts whistle body, Soul, and Spirit

As if these Are put back in place by (possibly) the God’s image and likeness we were created in.

By these I mean, the order in which God dealt with man before the fall. SPIRIT->SOUL-> BODY

“Looking to the son and believes will have life” Sounds like we get a taste of what it might have been back in the garden, now.

The answer is death…so ,“today our lives are required of us.”

My thoughts…will be back to go into some thing I see that look like they can be in err.

I was trying to find something on body, soul, spirit. So far I got this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/religion/s/veuegtDVie

Of course I am not dogmatic in the way I viewed my interpretation in the post before this one, …because I alse see …the image as being made male and female. There is nothing wrong with trying things on. BUT i do want to ride with the concept for a minute..

Right, let’s see @Corlove13

Τοῦτο δὲ εἶπεν περὶ τοῦ Πνεύματος οὗ ἔμελλον λαμβάνειν οἱ πιστεύοντες εἰς αὐτόν· οὔπω γὰρ ἦν Πνεῦμα Ἅγιον, ὅτι Ἰησοῦς οὔπω ἐδοξάσθη.

Now, note that the grammatical and syntactical structure shows several decisive points.

“Τοῦτο δὲ εἶπεν περὶ τοῦ Πνεύματος”- Touto de eipen peri tou Pneumatos- “But this He spoke concerning the Spirit.”
The preposition περὶ (peri) governs the genitive τοῦ Πνεύματος (tou Pneumatos), meaning “about” or “concerning.” So the statement that follows defines what about the Spirit He was speaking, not that the Spirit is “about” something else.

“οὗ ἔμελλον λαμβάνειν οἱ πιστεύοντες εἰς αὐτόν”- hou emellon lambanein hoi pisteuontes eis auton- “whom those believing in Him were about to receive.”
The relative pronoun οὗ (hou) is genitive singular neuter, agreeing with Πνεύματος and functioning as a possessive or source marker: “of whom” or “from whom.” However, in Johannine style, it is idiomatic for “which,” referring back to the Spirit as the direct object of λαμβάνειν (to receive). So syntactically, the Spirit is the direct object, the entity to be received, not “from” or “about” something else.

“οὔπω γὰρ ἦν Πνεῦμα Ἅγιον”- oupō gar ēn Pneuma Hagion- “for the Holy Spirit was not yet.”
Note that ἦν (ēn) is imperfect active indicative of εἰμί (to be), meaning “was existing.” The phrase does not mean the Spirit did not exist at all but that His indwelling ministry (the giving) had not yet come into being. The following ὅτι Ἰησοῦς οὔπω ἐδοξάσθη (because Jesus was not yet glorified) explains the temporal clause.

The verb ἐδοξάσθη (edoxasthē) is aorist passive indicative of δοξάζω (to glorify), referring to the completed event of Jesus’ glorification through the cross, resurrection, and ascension. Only after this glorification would the Spirit be given (cf. ~John 16:7).

So syntactically and morphologically, the text affirms one meaning only:

Jesus spoke concerning the Spirit, the same Spirit whom those believing in Him would receive, because the Holy Spirit had not yet been given, since Jesus was not yet glorified.

Therefore, among the options here listed.

• “They would receive the Spirit when the Holy Ghost was given”- Correct, matches the syntax.
• “The Holy Ghost is of the Spirit”- Incorrect, “of” does not express source or distinction here.
• “The Holy Ghost is a Spirit”- Incorrect, the article Πνεῦμα Ἅγιον denotes a specific identity, not a generic category.
• “The Holy Ghost is from the Spirit”- Incorrect, no genitive of source between two persons of the same noun.
• “The Holy Ghost is about the Spirit”- Incorrect, “peri tou Pneumatos” means Jesus spoke about the Spirit, not that the Spirit is “about” someone else.
• “The Holy Ghost is the Spirit they would receive”-Here you are correct, that is exactly what the syntax expresses.
• “That comes from the Spirit”- Incorrect, there is no syntactical or semantic marker of procession in this verse.

Hence, the morphology and syntax show that the Holy Spirit is the very Spirit Jesus spoke of, the object believers would receive after His glorification. It is not a separate Spirit “from” another Spirit but the same divine presence proceeding from the glorified Christ (cf. ~John 14:16–18, ~John 15:26).

Joh 14:16 And I will ask HaAv and another Melitz Yosher [Advocate, Counselor, Helper in Court, 14:26; 15:26; 16:7] He will give you that He may be with you l’Olam,
Joh 14:17 The Ruach HaEmes, which the Olam Hazeh is not able to receive, because it does not see Him nor have da’as of Him. But you have da’as of Him, because He remains with you and He will be in you.
OJB

Joh 15:26 But when the Melitz Yosher (Praklit, Advocate, Counselor, Helper in Court) comes, whom I will send to you from HaAv, the Ruach Hakodesh, the Ruach HaEmes, who proceeds from HaAv, that one will gives solemn edut (testimony) about me.
OJB.

Do you still think I’m dogmatic?

J.

37 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.

38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

39 (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.)

The Spirit = “flow rivers of living water” [frolw]

Why cant they receive the “flow of rivers of living water”
until the Holyghost is given?

The spirit they would receive is the flow of living water.

So what is the flow of living water…
Thing is its not from the mouth, but from the belly…
So my thought that it is Revelation might go out the window

Lets say for now the [frolw] is life

Why can’t “life” be given until the holyghost is come?

Why did Jesus need to be Glorified for life to happen in an individual?

Jesus uses the phrase living water in two instances in the Bible. The first is in John 4. Jesus and His disciples had traveled into Samaria. Jesus was tired and sat at a well while His disciples went into a nearby town to buy food. A Samaritan woman came to draw water, and Jesus asked her for a drink (verse 7). The Samaritan woman was quite shocked because Jesus was a Jew, and Jews and Samaritans had a long history of mutual animosity. She naturally asked Him why He was speaking to her, since He was Jewish.

Jesus ignored the question and went right to the point: “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water” (John 4:10). Notice that He does not say that He is the living water, but that He would give living water to her. It would be His gift to her, and when she received it, she would never thirst again. Of course, Jesus was speaking of a spiritual truth, whereas the woman’s thoughts were fixed on physical water, the type that could only be procured with a bucket down a well. But, as the conversation progressed, the woman began to understand what Jesus was saying to her about the living water.

The other passage of Scripture where Jesus speaks of “living water” is in John 7. In that context, Jesus is in the temple for the Feast of Booths (or Feast of Tabernacles). One feature of that feast was the pouring out of water at the base of the altar for seven days**. On the eighth day, the ritual was suspended—no water was poured.** It was then that Jesus made a very public, very dramatic offer:
On the last day, the climax of the festival, Jesus stood and shouted to the crowds, “Anyone who is thirsty may come to me! Anyone who believes in me may come and drink! For the Scriptures declare, ‘Rivers of living water will flow from his heart.’” (When he said “living water,” he was speaking of the Spirit, who would be given to everyone believing in him. But the Spirit had not yet been given, because Jesus had not yet entered into his glory.) (John 7:37–39, NLT).

John’s note that Jesus “was speaking of the Spirit” (John 7:39) is key to understanding the meaning of the “living water.”

The living water is the Holy Spirit. Jesus extended the offer to everyone (“anyone” in John 7:37 and “whoever” in verse 38). The requirement for salvation was faith in Christ (verses 38 and 39). The result of salvation would be the gift of the Holy Spirit (verse 39), likened unto “rivers of living water” (verse 38). Jesus repeats the promise of the Spirit to His disciples in John 16:7–15. The Spirit is always involved in salvation (John 3:5–8), but the time of the permanent indwelling of the Spirit would have to wait until “later,” when Jesus had ascended back to glory (John 7:39).

The picture of the Spirit as “living water” leads us to the following conclusions:

• The Spirit gives life. Just as water refreshes and revitalizes a thirsty person, so the Spirit gives life to the believer, enabling God to produce fruit in his or her life. Just as, in Moses’ time, the water in the desert kept the Israelites alive, so the Spirit enlivens the followers of Christ (and, according to 1 Corinthians 10:4, the rock providing the water was a picture of Christ).

• The Spirit is active. He is living water, as opposed to still, standing, or stagnant water. He is an artesian well, “a spring of water welling up to eternal life,” in John 4:14. He is a flowing river of water in John 7:38.

• Believers are channels for the Spirit’s work. At the well in Samaria, Jesus said the water would be “in them” to well up and overflow (John 4:14). During the Feast of Booths, Jesus said the water would “flow from within them” (John 7:38). The Spirit gives gifts, and the believer “shall receive spiritual blessings, or communications of divine grace, in so great an abundance, that he shall not only be refreshed and comforted himself, but shall be instrumental in refreshing and comforting others” (Benson, J., Benson Commentary on the Old and New Testaments, 1857). This is exactly what we see in John 4, as the Samaritan woman, “leaving her water jar, . . . went back to the town” and told everyone about Jesus the Messiah (verse 28).

Long ago, God told His people, Israel, not to fear, giving them this promise:
“For I will pour water on the thirsty land,
and streams on the dry ground;
I will pour out my Spirit on your offspring,
and my blessing on your descendants”
(Isaiah 44:3).
The Spirit, whom the Father likens unto water, was indeed poured out on all of those who put their faith in the Son. It’s just one of the many promises of God that are “yes” and “amen” in Christ (2 Corinthians 1:20).

Unless you are planning to dive into the textual criticism threads on Reddit about this matter yourself , why raise the point in the first place?

Joh 7:39 Now δὲ He said εἶπεν this τοῦτο concerning περὶ the τοῦ Spirit, Πνεύματος whom οὗ those οἱ having believed πιστεύσαντες in εἰς Him αὐτόν· were about ἔμελλον to receive; λαμβάνειν for γὰρ [the] Spirit Πνεῦμα, not yet [given], οὔπω because ὅτι Jesus Ἰησοῦς {was} not yet οὐδέπω glorified. ἐδοξάσθη.

Was not yet given - Δεδομενον, given is added by the Codex Vaticanus, (B.) the Syriac, all the Persic, later Syriac with an asterisk, three copies of the Slavonic, Vulgate, and all the Itala but three; and several of the primitive fathers. The word seems necessary to the completion of the sense.
Certain measures of the Holy Spirit had been vouchsafed from the beginning of the world to believers and unbelievers: but that abundant effusion of his graces spoken of by Joel, Jol_2:28, which peculiarly characterized the Gospel times, was not granted till after the ascension of Christ:

J.

@Corlove13

Are you questioning why the translators of the 1611 King James Authroized version of the Bible chose to translate the same Greek and Hebrew phrase 90 times as “Holy Ghost”, but 7 times as “Holy Spirit”?

Peace
KP

Was not yet given - Δεδομενον, given is added by the Codex Vaticanus, (B.) the Syriac, all the Persic, later Syriac with an asterisk, three copies of the Slavonic, Vulgate, and all the Itala but three; and several of the primitive fathers. The word seems necessary to the completion of the sense.
Certain measures of the Holy Spirit had been vouchsafed from the beginning of the world to believers and unbelievers: but that abundant effusion of his graces spoken of by Joel, Jol_2:28, which peculiarly characterized the Gospel times, was not granted till after the ascension of Christ
emphasized text

Yes I looked it up…because it did not go with the flow…

Which was a great point looking from kjv

Not yet vs not yet given

You see the Spirit in scripture has been shown much more…
But the Holyghost kjv —> was not yet…

The pouring out of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost was the fulfillment of many promises, going at least as far back as the words of the Prophet Joel (whom St. Peter quotes in Acts ch. 2).

Let’s take a step back and look at this, big picture:

The Messiah was to come, suffer and die, be raised up, and then take up His throne.

Jesus’ ascension is the Son of Man being taken up before the Ancient of Days and given everlasting kingdom (see Daniel 7:13-14). This is the exaltation of the Messiah (see also Philippians 2:9-11). As side-note, the exaltation of the Messiah does not mean the Lord was without glory before His Incarnation; as God the Son He always knew the glory He had with the Father (John 17:5); this is about His Messianic work. As King Messiah He reigns until all His enemies are a footstool (Psalm 110:1-2, 1 Corinthians 15:25-26).

The sending/pouring out of the Holy Spirit is about the inauguration of this new Messianic Reign, where Christ having suffered and died, is ascended and is seated at the right hand of the Father. The Messiah has been raised up, and is now seated at the right hand of the Father in glory, reigning as King of kings and Lord of lords.

But the Lord Himself told His disciples, “I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you” (John 14:18), though He would disappear from their sight, ascending and taking up His throne in glory, He would send the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth. For the outpouring of the Spirit inaugurates this newness: Christ reigning in heaven, and through His Church through the Holy Spirit; for when the Spirit came He empowered the Apostles to their apostolic task, “You will be My witnesses beginning in Jerusalem…” (Acts 1:8), the same Holy Spirit will convict the world of sin (John 16:8) and He will remind us of Christ’s word, glorifying Christ (John 16:12-15). It is therefore the Holy Spirit who, through the preaching of the Law and of repentance convicts sinners by the Law; and it is the Holy Spirit who through the preaching of the Gospel gives ears to hear, “For faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of Christ” (Romans 10:17). For we are sealed by and in the Holy Spirit when we heard and believed the Gospel, God’s guarantee of His promises (Ephesians 1:13-14).

So the Holy Spirit came, giving power to the Church to preach the Word of God, to minister, to bear witness to Christ, to bring the life-saving power of the Gospel to all four corners of the globe. The Holy Spirit seals us and keeps us in faith, we are sealed, the Spirit lives in us, and through Him Christ is in us and works through us, as both individual members of His Body, and collectively as His Body; through which the Lord continues His work in the world, for the preaching of forgiveness, that’s the Lord’s work, and we are His servants and ministers bearing this before the world through the preaching of the Word, through our lives of obedience to Christ as disciples, by our ordinary Christian vocation.

The giving of the Spirit means Messiah is on His throne, and we are citizens of His kingdom, walking in accord with Him and His Way, to be His Church, His Body, His representatives to a grieving, sinful, wicked, and suffering world–to announce Good News: What God long ago promised through the patriarchs and the prophets, and which the Torah itself looked forward to, has finally come: God is covenantly faithful to His creation, to His people, and indeed to all people for when Adam and Eve first fell it was declared that a Child of Eve would break the serpent, and long ago God called Abram out from Ur of the Chaldeans and told him he would be a father of many nations. And to Abraham was born Isaac, and to Isaac was born Jacob, and to Jacob was born the Twelve Tribes of Israel, and from Judah came Jesse, from Jesse came David, and from David came the Christ, Jesus our Lord.

The Holy Spirit, living and indwelling us means we are a new people in the Messiah, a chosen nation, a royal priesthood (1 Peter 2:9), taking us and making us a kingdom of priests (Revelation 1:6), for He is King, and High Priest forever, in the style of Melchizedek (Hebrews 7:17). We are His, we are priests of His priesthood, we are called to be kings under His Kingdom–not in the ways of sinful kings of this fallen age; but rather in the way He is King, and how we were called to be in the beginning–bearing the image of God and “have dominion” over creation, through ministry. Dominion, not domination. Our calling is to reign with Christ, and indeed we are (even now) seated with Christ in heavenly places (Ephesians 2:6), heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ (Romans 8:17), for the Holy Spirit dwelling in us Himself means we cry out to God the Father with “Abba!” for Christ’s Father is our Father by adoption, by the indwelling of the Spirit.

The pouring out of the Spirit required that Christ be glorified–for the Messiah was to come, suffer and die, rise on the third day, and take His throne–and He did, when He ascended, for He is seated at the right hand of Majesty–and because of this, the Spirit has come, and He lives in us. Bearing faith into our hearts, sanctifying us, drawing us, keeping us, and making us everything God declares us to be, and is working to make us be, so that in the end we are obedient, holy, witness-bearing, and ultimately with the Lord as He sets all things to rights and makes everything new. World without end.

I’ll share some of my ideas as well…
Regarding the distinction between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit, the scripture employs these terms synonymously, without any ontoloigcal or functional diffrentiation. Both translate to the Greek Pneuma Hagion, denoting the Third Person of the Trinity, co-equal, co-eternal and consubstantial with the Father and the Son. In KJV, i guess, that “Holy Ghost” predominates in narrative portions while Holy Spirit is used more in didactic epistles, which I feel, is a stylistic variance in Elizabethan English, because, I read once, that a linguist scholar sard, that “ghost” in 1611 connoted 'spirit’ or ‘breath’ not a spectral apparition, and modern translations uniformly render it as Holy Spirit for clarity…
Our Lord’s post-resurrection breathing upon the disciples, “And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost”, it consitutes a sacramental sign and pledge of the Spirit;s impartation, preparatory to their apostolic vocation. Calvin, writes that this is an outward emblem of Christ’s sovereign authority to bestow the Spirit, equipping the disciples for ecclesiastical governance and the remission of sins. “He breathed on them. Not one of the sons of men is qualified for discharding so difficult an office, and, therefore, Christ prepares the Apostles for it by the grace of His Spirit…Receive ye the Holy Spirit. Though He continues to be the only Shepherd of His Church, He must necessarily display the power of His Spirit in the ministers whose agency He employs; and this also He testified by the outward symbol, when He breathed on the Apostles”
Now, this is no exhaustive effusion but an anticipatory event, distinct from the plenary outpouring at Pentecost, where the Spirit descended with power from on High, as Christ had enjoined, “Tarry ue in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on High”. The former symbolizes the Sprit’s procession from the Son, affirming Christ’s deity while the latter fulfills the promise post-ascension…
The necessity of Christ’s departure for the Spirit’s advent, is what is called as the economic order of the Trinity in redemption As Mediator, Christ ascends to intercede, dispatching the Spirit as the vicar of His presence among the elect. This comforter, is none other than the Holy Spirit, sent by the Father at the Son’s behest, Calvin depicts it beautifully, that in John 14:16, “Here He calls the Spirit the gift of the Father, but a gift which He will obtain by Hus prayers…He calls the Spirit another comforter, on account fo the difference between the blessings which we obtain from both. The peculiar office of Christ was, to appease the wrath of God by atoning for the sins of the world…and the peculiar office of the Spirit is, to make us partakers not only of Christ Himself, but of all His blessings”.
When Christ avers, “I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you”, He denotes not a corporeal return but His spiritual advent through the Comforter. Calvin clarifies that “I will not have you orphans…When He says, I will come to you, He shows in what manner He dwells in His people…It is, by the power of His Spirit; and hence it is evident that the grace of the Spirit is a striking proof of his Divinity.” This culimates in the profound mutuality, that “At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father and ye in me, and I in you” (John 14:20), manifesting the covenantal indwellling whereby the elect partake of the divine life.

@PeterC
Avoid going for blasphemous anthropomorphism…
First, the unity and distinction within the Godhead must be maintained without compromise.

In the unity of the Godhead there be three Persons, of one substance, power, and eternity: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost.”

This is not a functional unity of three beings cooperating under one banner, nor a modal unity of one Person appearing in three forms like oneness pentecostals, but it is an ontological unity, one indivisible divine essence subsisting in three distinct, co-equal, co-eternal Persons. The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit, the Spirit is not the Father, yet each is fully and completely God, and there is only One God…
So the analogy to human composition is a bit faulty, because it undermines the simplicity of God, because man is composite, God is simple, man is finite but God is infinite…
Next is about the economy of salvation, that it is the ordered outworking of God’s eternal decree in time, does not imply a division of labor among separate agents, but the harmonious, inseparable operaiton of the one Triune God…
The Father elects a people in Christ, appoint the Son as Mediator, and sends Him into the World
The Son, as the eternal Word, voluntarily assumes human nature, obeys the law, suffers in the place of sinners and rises victorious, securing redemption
The Holy Spirit applies this redemption, regenerating the elect, uniting them to Christ by faith, sanctifiying them, and preserving them unto glory.
This is what we call as perichoretic unity, that each Person, fully active in every divine work, accoridng to His Personal properties, As Augustine taught, opera Trinitatis ad extra sunt indivisa, that the external works of the Trinity are undivided…
When Christ says, “I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you” and “We wil come to Him and make our home with Him”, He is not identifying Himself as the Holy Spirit, nor suggesting that the Spirit is merly Jesus in Spirit form, but The Lord explicitly promises another comfortor, a distinct person, not a different mode of the same Person. The Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, bears witness to Christ and glorifies Christ. He is not Christ’s alter ego; He is the third person of Trinity, refer to John 14:16, John 15:26, John 16:14 and John 14:18.
I would like to end with this quote…

“Christ does not speak of a visible presence, but of a spiritual one… He comes to us by His Spirit, and the Father with Him.”

(Note: If the Holy Spirit is just the “spirit form” of Jesus, how could a spirit have a physical body? Jesus, after His resurrection, appeared to Thomas and said, “Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side” (John 20:27). Thomas touched the wounds, Jesus had a real, physical body. He ate fish (Luke 24:42–43), ascended in that body (Acts 1:9), and the angels said, “This same Jesus… shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go” (Acts 1:11). So if Jesus came back as the Holy Spirit, He would have descended as a spirit, but the Spirit came at Pentecost as wind and fire, without flesh (Acts 2:2–4). That contradicts Scripture. Something is wrong here. It’s either modalism (one Person switching forms) or tritheism (three separate gods).)

1 Corinthians 15:42, Bible.com, which uses the metaphor of a seed to describe the resurrection body. It means that a mortal body, which is subject to decay and death (corruption), is transformed into an immortal, spiritual body that will last forever. This transformation is likened to a seed that is buried in the ground (sown in corruption) and grows into a new, transformed plant (raised in incorruption). AI

In that passage, @Corlove13, you will notice that Jesus talks about the Father, himself, and the “Spirit of truth,” who is the same as the Holy Spirit and Holy Ghost (who the KJV describes with the older language of “Ghost”). The three Persons work together as our ONE God to bless and guide us believers.

I haven’t read it…but Im sure they are the same…but different

In KJV, i guess, that “Holy Ghost” predominates in narrative portions while Holy Spirit is used more in didactic epistles, which I feel, is a stylistic variance in Elizabethan English, because, I read once, that a linguist scholar say, that “ghost” in 1611 connoted 'spirit’ or ‘breath’ not a spectral apparition, and modern translations uniformly render it as Holy Spirit for clarity…

I had to go back and read all my responses here. I’m not sure who you are quoting, but it is not me. God Bless.

Peter

I quoted John Calvin, sorry for not mentioning it…:cry: