Pneuma is Neuter?

[RICHinCHRIST]

This question is for those with some knowledge of Greek. I am currently working through Bill Mounce's "Basics of Biblical Greek" course. I was surprised to find that the word "pneuma", translated spirit, Spirit, wind, or inner life is a neuter word. What I mean is that it is not a masculine or feminine word, but rather neither. Isn't the Spirit of God the Third Person of the Trinity? Why is the word not switched to a masculine form when it is used of the Spirit of God? Wouldn't that make it more obvious when it is specifically speaking of God's Spirit, as opposed to the natural wind, or man's spirit?

This verse has always convinced me of the Spirit's personal nature:



Now the word "He" is an inference from the use of the word "ekeinos". It can also translate "she" or "it" dependent upon the context. How do we know to translate this as "He" unless we have a predisposition to the nature of the Holy Spirit? the word pneuma is neuter so it seems that "IT" might have been the grammarically correct translation in this case.

[steve]

I am no Greek scholar, but, as I understand languages that have masculine, feminine and neuter nouns, the following observations may be relevant to your inquiries:

1. The gender of the word does not always tell you anything about the gender of the object described. For example, the German word Mädchen means "girl," but is a neuter noun.

2. Words do not change their genders for different applications. For example, pneuma, being a neuter word, would not be expected to be changed into a masculine word when describing the spirit of a man, nor into a feminine word when referring to the spirit of a woman. If the noun is of a certain gender, that is always its gender.

3. To know whether to translate the relative pronoun to pneuma as "he," "she," or "it" would seem to require that we know something about the nature and gender of the pneuma in question from other parts of scripture.

If others who are more expert at Greek than I am need to correct me about this, feel free to do so.

[Paidion]

As a person who has studied Greek for years, I offer my opinion. However, I'm sure Apollos will find fault with it as usual, and point out that I've had only two years of formal Greek, as opposed to his many years of formal study, and that I rely on Strongs, etc., etc., etc.

Notwithstanding, I affirm that Steve is correct in pointing out that the fact that "the gender of a word does not always tell you anything about the gender of the object described." However, in Greek the gender of an adjective agrees with the gender of the noun it modifies or to which it refers. (See Basics of Biblical Greek p. 102,103) In the verse in question, here are the first Greek words and a word for word translation (as far as possible), followed by my personal translation:

οταν--- δε ελθη------ εκεινος-- το- πνευμα-- της αληθειας--- οδηγησει-- υμας-- εις --την-- αληθειαν-- πασαν

When- now- comes- that one- the- spirit--- of the reality--- will lead---- you--- into--the- reality------ all

Now when the spirit of reality comes, that one will lead you into all reality.

Use "truth" instead of "reality" if you wish. There's no significant difference except that "truth" seems more limited to what people say rather that what actually IS.

The crucial point here concerns the adjective "εκεινος". It is masculine, and it seems to refer to "πνευμα" (which is neuter). So why isn't the neuter form "εκεινο" used in order to agree with the neuter "πνευμα"?

I suggest the reason is that in this case the writer considers "πνευμα", as he is using it, to be personal. Therefore, he uses a masculine adjective.

[RICHinCHRIST]

Thanks for the comments Steve and Paidion. That helps! I am still only in the 7th chapter of Mounce's book so I'm still in the very early stages of understanding the language.

[Paidion]

I'm glad you're studying Koine Greek, Rich. As you progress in the language, I'm sure you will gain a better comprehension of some of the texts which seem self-contradictory or at least ambiguous.

[Paidion]

Rich, having said what I said, there's another understanding which I should make known. Some people say that "εκεινος" does not modify "πνευμα" at all, but modifies "παρακλητος " (paraclete, encourager) from way back in verse 7. "παρακλητος" is a masculine noun, and this is the reason "εκεινος", which refers to it, must be masculine. It is thought that John has been speaking of the encourager all along, and that in verse 13, John uses the phrase "the spirit of reality" in apposition to "that one" (the paraclete). This explanation of the masculine "εκεινος" seems plausible, and is possibly the correct one. If so , the case in hand is no exception to the rule that an adjective must be of the same gender as the noun it modifies.

[Apollos]

This question is for those with some knowledge of Greek. I am currently working through Bill Mounce's "Basics of Biblical Greek" course. I was surprised to find that the word "pneuma", translated spirit, Spirit, wind, or inner life is a neuter word. What I mean is that it is not a masculine or feminine word, but rather neither. Isn't the Spirit of God the Third Person of the Trinity? Why is the word not switched to a masculine form when it is used of the Spirit of God? Wouldn't that make it more obvious when it is specifically speaking of God's Spirit, as opposed to the natural wind, or man's spirit?

This verse has always convinced me of the Spirit's personal nature:



Now the word "He" is an inference from the use of the word "ekeinos". It can also translate "she" or "it" dependent upon the context. How do we know to translate this as "He" unless we have a predisposition to the nature of the Holy Spirit? the word pneuma is neuter so it seems that "IT" might have been the grammarically correct translation in this case.

Wallace does with John 16 and argues that the passage can't be used either to prove or disprove the personality of the Spirit:

http://search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0oG7h4h ... Spirit.doc

[Apollos]

As a person who has studied Greek for years, I offer my opinion. However, I'm sure Apollos will find fault with it as usual, and point out that I've had only two years of formal Greek, as opposed to his many years of formal study, and that I rely on Strongs, etc., etc., etc.

If I truly find fault - i.e. if you are making erroneous claims - isn't that a good thing?

[Paidion]

Thanks Apollos, for that article by Wallace. He also says that the antecedent of "εκεινος" is, in fact, "παρακλητος ", as I mentioned in my last post.
What I did not know was that there were so many instances of adjectives NOT agreeing in gender with their antecedents. Thanks again.