Which Bible Should You Use?

Holy Spirit = Holy Ghost
Holy Ghost = Holy Spirit

In the Greek and Hebrew there’s no distinction whatsoever. Ruach in Hebrew, Pneuma in Greek. It is only in the peculiar funniness that is the English tongue where we run into a semantic difference.

Let’s look at a German translation of Isaiah 11:2 to help us out here.

auf welchem wird ruhen der Geist des HERRN, der Geist der Weisheit und des Verstandes, der Geist des Rates und der Stärke, der Geist der Erkenntnis und der Furcht des HERRN.

See there, German Geist? That’s the German cognate with English “ghost”, and it is being used to translate the Hebrew ruach.

Let’ look at how the Vulgate translates Isaiah 11:2

Et requiescet super eum spiritus Domini: spiritus sapientiae et intellectus, spiritus consilii et fortitudinis, spiritus scientiae et pietatis;

See here that same Hebrew word, ruach, is translated into Latin spiritus.

So let’s look at various English translations,

John Wycliffe’s 14th century translation was made using the Vulgate, and so Isaiah 11:2 in the Wycliffe Bible looks like this:

And the Spirit of the Lord schal reste on hym, the spirit of wisdom and of vndurstondyng, the spirit of counsel and of strengthe, the spirit of kunnyng and of pitee;

We see this also in later English translations such as the Coverdale:

The sprete of the LORDE shal light vpon it: the sprete of wysdome, and vnderstondinge: the sprete of councel, and strength: ye sprete of knowlege, and of the feare of God:

The first 1611 publishing of the KJV

And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest vpon him, the spirit of wisedome and vnderstanding, the spirit of counsell and might, the spirit of knowledge, and of the feare of the Lord:

All of this is post-Norman English, Wycliffe is Middle English, the English that emerged following the Norman Conquest, distinct from pre-Norman Old English (aka Anglo-Saxon), and later Early Modern English (Coverdale, the KJV, etc). Where the influence of Latin via Norman French is very much in full effect in English; and so English translations are using the Latin-based “spirit”, rather than the Germanic-based “ghost”.

When we look at other Germanic language Bibles, such as the German language Luther Bible I quoted earlier, we see geist, “ghost”. This runs true if we look at other Germanic language Bible translations,

Here’s Isaiah 11:2 in a Dutch translation:

De Geest van de Heer zal op Hem zijn. Hij zal vol zijn van de Geest van wijsheid, de Geest van verstand, de Geest van raad, de Geest van sterkte, de Geest van kennis van God en de Geest van ontzag voor God.

Again we see geest, “ghost”.

And we see this also in Flemish translations such as here:

En op Hem zal de Geest des HEEREN rusten, de Geest der wijsheid en des verstands, de Geest des raads en der sterkte, de Geest der kennis en der vreze des HEEREN.

And the language most closely related to English, Frisian, we see

De geest van de HEER zal op hem rusten: een geest van wijsheid en inzicht, een geest van kracht en verstandig beleid, een geest van kennis en ontzag voor de HEER.

Spirit/spiritus, ghost/geest/geist/gast. All are translating the same Hebrew word: ruach.

So Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit really is just a semantic case because of the peculiar funniness of English and the history of the English language. The meaning is identical: the Holy Spirit/Ghost is the Third Person of the Holy Trinity.

So we can confess in the Creed that “We believe in the Holy Ghost” (a more traditional translation) or that “We believe in the Holy Spirit” (a more modern translation) and it means exactly the same thing. The Latin of the Apostles’ Creed* says “Credo in Spiritum Sanctum”. So again, “Holy Ghost” or “Holy Spirit” is just semantics, the meaning is 100% identical.

*And if we look at the Greek of the Nicene Creed, we’ll see Pneuma; and again English translations either say “Holy Spirit” or “Holy Ghost” largely based on when the translation is made, older translations use “Holy Ghost” more modern ones use “Holy Spirit”. This is a common trend in English translations of Scripture, Christian prayers, the Creeds, and Christian texts of all sorts generally.

1 Like

Well said brother.

J.

The Bible is a book, a collection of ancient writings that are believed to be divinely inspired, meaning that God directed or clearly influenced the authors. (It is important to realize that NONE of the original writings exist.) A second point is that a group of people decided which ancient writings were inspired by God and which were not. A third point is that most of us do not have sufficient knowledge to read the contents in their original languages, so we must rely on others to translate those writings into our language, keeping in mind that decisions must be made regarding word meanings, verb tenses, idioms, etc. In other words, our modern translations are NOT the source writings; they are interpretations.

There are some who consider that a single translation is THE word of God, which of course it isn’t, so everyone must decide which translation best conveys what the God-inspired authors intended to convey.

I own a LOT of Bibles and, considering that I am fully retired, have the opportunity to read the Bible extensively every day. I consider this time to be feeding my reborn spirit, which God so graciously gave me on March 19, 1977. Although I have the choice of which translation to read, my preference is the Christian Standard Bible. It most clearly conveys to me what I feel God wants me to understand → and to make a part of me ← I also read the NIV, the NET, “A New New Testament”, the Geneva Bible, and a few others. Each one is unique and each conveys what God wants me to absorb into my mind and spirit.

In summary, there is no single “Word of God”. The closest that we come to that impossible entity is copies of the earliest sources, each of which differs from others in sometimes significant ways. For those of us who cannot read the original languages, we must rely on translations. The end result is that, despite all the difficulties, God can still communicate to us what He wants us to understand about Him, HIs Son, His Spirit, and our place in the Body of His Son (the church).

1 Like

Unfortunately, this is the wrong tool to use re the Dead Sea Scrolls–Wiki can be helpful here.

And this–

Johann.

Hi I shared the puritan board earlier. It had some great research..And happily what I found by one who the Holy Spirit brought it too, Stands.

So I was Excited to see it proven.
And add a little more depth to the knowledge I already received years ago in my own quest.

Very excited. But check the puritan board out if you have read the previous discussion with Johann and I-if not you may not know where I was coming from.

From their board a quick note: holy pneuma" is always translated ‘Holy Ghost’

“pneuma of …” is always translated 'Spirit of …"
By Adam Olive
https://puritanboard.com/threads/what-is-the-significant-difference-between-the-nt-translation-holy-ghost-vs-holy-spirit.93141/

There are other Logians that have brought up the significance of: before the resurrection and after…

But out of all my research done on the internet before this I only found 2…that made it make sense before this. But one It was brought to by the Holy Spirit…

If I recall correctly, Part of the revelation was -Holy Spirit- Spirit of the Father, And Holyghost Spirit of the son. And it had to do with b4 the resurrection and after the resurrection. So while you may be right in ways it doesn’t negate what I brought out in earlier conversations. I appreciate the expertise to the adherence to language though!

So yep I like the king James…

the and thou

Jesus Christ vs. CHRIST JESUS

KINGDOM OF HEAVEN VS KINGDOM OF God

Eternalife vs. Life eternal

And Holy Ghost vs. HOLY Spirit..

And I belive they all might have in common before the resurrection and after the resurrection.. not that their Greek word and such is not the same…but a message that the author wanted to get across that h may help us to understand the meaning of passages.

Galatians 2:16 in kjv helped me to want to probe into the difference in the phrases : the Faith of Jesus, & faith in Jesus.
NT Wright has a video on it on youtube…and I am sure many orhers do as well. As a matter of fact I order a book I must seek and find on the subject.

Hi, Help me out here:

*Restore to me the joy of your salvation, and uphold me with a willing spirit," *

This passage says restore the Joy of God’s Salvation.

So if salvation means deliverence..It may read Restore me the Joy of your Deliverence.

So in order to be restored with that Joy doesn’t He first need to be delivered from his sins?

Can you share anymore scriptures to make your claim and elaborate in the context? :folded_hands:

Hi @Corlove13

Let’s look at the verse in its fuller context and examine what is really being asked, both theologically and linguistically.

Psalm 51:12 (Hebrew numbering) or Psalm 51:14 (LXX) reads:
“Restore to me the joy of your salvation, and uphold me with a willing spirit.”

The Hebrew is
הָשִׁ֣יבָה לִּ֣י שְׂשֹׂ֣ון יִשְׁעֶ֑ךָ וְר֥וּחַ נְדִיבָ֥ה תִסְמְכֵֽנִי׃
Hāshîḇâ lī śəśôn yišʿekā, wə-rûaḥ nəḏîḇâ tiśməḵēnî
“Cause to return to me the joy of your salvation, and with a willing spirit sustain me.”

This is a plea from David after the sin with Bathsheba and Uriah, and it is grounded in the fact that he knows he once tasted the joy of God’s deliverance, but because of his sin, that joy has been eclipsed.

You are correct to note that yeshua (יֵשׁוּעָה) in Hebrew refers to salvation or deliverance. It is not just a vague spiritual term—it means to be rescued, delivered from danger or guilt. So David is asking for the joy that came with being rescued, forgiven, and brought near to God to be restored.

To answer your question directly: Yes, he must first be delivered in order for the joy of that deliverance to be restored. However, in Psalm 51, David is not asking for a first-time salvation. He already knows God. He is not an outsider to the covenant. Rather, he is asking to be cleansed, forgiven, and restored to intimate fellowship with God, which sin had disrupted.

He says earlier in verse 10:
“Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me.”
That word create is בָּרָא (bara)—the same word used in Genesis 1:1. It shows David knows that this restoration is something only God can do, not something he can manufacture himself.

Cross-references that support and expand this include:

Isaiah 12:2–3
“Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and will not be afraid; for the Lord God is my strength and my song, and he has become my salvation. With joy you will draw water from the wells of salvation.”
Here again, joy and salvation are tied together. The one who is delivered responds with joy because he now has peace with God.

Isaiah 61:10
“I will greatly rejoice in the Lord; my soul shall exult in my God, for he has clothed me with the garments of salvation.”
There is no joy without first being clothed—delivered, covered by the mercy and righteousness of God.

Luke 1:47
“My spirit rejoices in God my Savior.”
Mary rejoices not in her emotions, but in the reality of God’s saving act.

Romans 5:11
“More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.”
Paul confirms that joy is the fruit of reconciliation—deliverance from wrath.

1 Peter 1:8–9
“Though you do not now see him, you believe in him and rejoice with joy that is inexpressible and filled with glory, obtaining the outcome of your faith, the salvation of your souls.”
Again, the sequence is clear. Belief, deliverance, and then joy.

So yes, joy cannot be restored unless one has been first delivered, and if that joy has been dimmed by sin, the path back is repentance, cleansing, and a renewed heart. David is not asking to be saved again, but to be restored in the joy that flows from the salvation he knows is God’s alone.

If you would like I can also show how the early Jewish and Christian interpreters understood this verse.

Just holler.

Johann.

1 Like

First, Thank you for your time :blush:

However I just don’t see the scriptures proving your claim:
But maybe im just confused. So when you said Justification is

“A completed act at the moment of true …”

You are saying it’s a one time deal, that once you are justified you can’t be justified again correct???

I said justification is a one time Aorist, sanctification progressive and there are three tenses used re our salvation @Corlove13

Johann.

Peace to all,

True, The All Bibles are a reference book and also the inspiried word of God. Is there a one book reference book that can be all we need for salvation, faithfully, logically? To me, faithfully by believing, we are saved and again to me, logically more than one book is needed, as in the case of Brain Surgery for The Self, therefore the Bible is two books in One, to me.

Peace always,
Stephen

Who better than Utley?

NT HOLINESS / SANCTIFICATION

The NT asserts that when sinners turn to Jesus in repentance and faith (cf. Mark 1:15; Acts 3:16,19; 20:21), they are instantaneously justified and sanctified. This is their new position in Christ. His righteousness has been imputed to them (cf. Gen. 15:6; Romans 4). They are declared right and holy (a forensic act of God).

But the NT also urges believers on to holiness or sanctification. It is both

a theological position in the finished work of Jesus Christ
a call to be Christlike in attitude and actions in daily life. As salvation is a free gift and a cost-everything lifestyle, so too, is sanctification (i.e., Eastern Literature [biblical paradoxes]).
SPECIAL TOPIC: EASTERN LITERATURE (biblical paradoxes)

Initial Justification and Sanctification A Progressive Sanctification, Christlikeness
Acts 26:18
Romans 15:16
1 Corinthians 1:2-3,30; 6:11
2 Thessalonians 2:13
Hebrews 2:11; 10:10,14; 13:12
1 Peter 1:2 Romans 6:19
2 Corinthians 7:1
Ephesians 1:4; 2:10
1 Thessalonians 3:13; 4:3-4,7; 5:2
1 Timothy 2:15
2 Timothy 2:21
1 Peter 1:15-16
Hebrews 12:14
The goal of salvation is not heaven when we die but Christlikeness now (cf. Rom. 8:28-29; 2 Cor. 3:18; 7:1; Gal. 4:19; Eph. 1:4; 4:13; 1 Thess. 3:13; 4:3; 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:13; Titus 2:14; 1 Pet. 1:15), so that those who see our witness may be drawn to Jesus and go to heaven with us! Sanctification, like justification, is

a gift and a choice
an INDICATIVE and an IMPERATIVE
a trophy and a race

Shalom.

Johann.

net.bible.org classic brings up net.bible.org

https://classic.net.bible.org/bible.php

I enjoy explaining to my students that English is a “shotgun wedding” of two incompatible linguistic families. Gifted writers can pit these antagonistic components against one another to increase the energy level of their prose or poetry.

Peace to all,

To me the Bible allows and trusts and verifies teachings of the Church, The One God and The Body of Christ in all mankind becoming again in all One God in being.

To me there are two justifications flesh nature from the spirit Baptism once and for all from the spirit through the soul for the flesh nature to become from death to life from the Immaculate Immortal Flesh through The New Eve.

  1. initial salvation ‒ justification (saved from the penalty of sin)
  2. progressive salvation ‒ sanctification (saved from the power of sin)
  3. final salvation ‒ glorification (saved from the presence of sin)

And to me, From Sacrifice through Penance from the spirit for the spirit every Sunday for Holy Spirit Incorruption in Jesus, the New Adam becoming again glorified and incorruptibly transfigured in all One Holy Spirit One God in being.

Pewace always,
Stephen

It can be helpful to understand the distinction between objective and subjective justification. Objective justification is once and for all (Romans 5:18). But unless I, myself, am justified I do not enjoy the benefits; that is subjective justification. Through faith alone, by grace alone, we are freely justified–declared righteous, imputed the alien righteousness of Jesus. It’s not so much a moment, as a present fact. It’s not that I was, at some point in my past, justified; it’s that I am right now in this moment justified because God declares me just and imputes the righteousness of Christ to me through faith. Justification is past-continuing, when we first believed, and are now believing. So when we continue to hear the Gospel and God works and strengthens our faith, there is justification–God is declaring us just on Christ’s account as we hear and believe the Good News.

The whole Christian life of faith is a life of justification; justification being the singular monergistic work of God. Sanctification on the other hand, that’s an ongoing process of being conformed to the image and likeness of Christ. We cooperate with God in our sanctification; but our justification is singularly the work of God who puts us in Christ, imputes the righteousness of Christ to us, and this is through faith alone. That is what the rallying cry of the Reformation was all about five hundred years ago: Justification through faith alone.