JW’s how can “In the spirit” speak about living people but mean Christ was a spirit?

It's really important how one little word can change the meaning of a Bible verse, and if we want to check whether the JWs are being consistent with regard to being "in the Spirit / spirit", then all we have to do is check out their Greek Interlinear of the Christian Greek Scriptures.

Have a look at 1 Peter 4:6 in the JW Bible. It says, "...live as to the spirit". This is entirely correct, for the Greek word is the one for "to spirit".

But just a few verses earlier, in 1 Peter 3:18, something strange happens. The Greek text has exactly the same word for "to spirit", yet the JWs now translate this as "in the spirit". This makes their verse read, "...he [Christ] being put to death in the flesh but being made alive IN the spirit."

This is to support the JW view that Jesus was raised as a spirit creature because they reject the bodily resurrection of Christ. Other translations show that it was the Holy Spirit who resurrected Christ, not that Christ was raised as a spirit! But the JWs will not have that; they must try to make their Bible support their denial of Christ's bodily resurrection.

All I will say is that the Greek phrase consistently rendered 'to the spirit" by the JWs, suddenly gets an inconsistent translation in 1 Peter 3:18. And it's because they are desperately trying to muster up some kind of biblical support for an unbiblical teaching. However, when we just use their own KIT and compare the Greek in 3:18 with 4:6, their cover is blown right out of the water. No way can 1 Peter 3:18 be twisted to imply that the now-living person of Christ is a spirit devoid of the body He died with! Thanks for listing all those other veres.

Tons of fine books written on this. Residing within the Spirit is residing within the Spirit's manner. Learn on in Galatians. The Spirit's way: love, joy. Peace, longsuffering, patience, goodness, gentleness, self manipulate. You didn't conclude the verse : " are living via the Spirit and you are going to not fulfill the evil wants of the flesh that are ......................"

You haven't explained the difference between the human spirit and the Holy Spirit [which is Christ].

Greetings,

Your question requires us to have a great ignorance of Greek grammar, syntax and how context relates to the proper sense of phrases. Only a beginner thinks that just finding examples of the same word or phrase means that they are being used with the same sense.

So first, it is ludicrous to try and claim that the same exact words carry the same sense while ignoring metaphorical, symbolic, and poetic uses.

You have even more of a problem since you seem to be ignorant of the *many* various senses for the word “spirit.”

So, your question is fatally flawed because it relies on these logical and exegetical fallacies.

Now, I don’t have room to go through all your cited verses. But since they ALL make the same fatal mistake I will cover a few of representative ones.

Your biggest mistake is that you ignore the contextual sense of the word “spirit.” Whereas 1Pet. is clearly refering to Christ’s EXISTENCE, contrasting flesh on earth with his *resurrected* spirit state, ALL of your claimed parallel verses are universally accepted as using the word "spirit" to denote a human's mental attitude or the Holy Spirit.

Just the slightest research would have shown you that there appears to be absolutely no biblical commentary or Greek scholar who would agree with you that your cited verses have anything to do with spirit or flesh bodies. EVERY reference work I checked agreed that the word "spirit" was being used of the dominant "mental" or "moral" tendencies and not bodies. This one fact shows that your verses are irrelevant since they cannot be used as evidence for bodies of any sort, spirit or flesh.

Therefore, your logic in using these verses as somehow parallel to 1Peter is fatally flawed and does not support your desired interpretation of 1Pt.

For example at John 11:33 the verse is not addressing Christ's *body* at all and there is no contrast or parallel between "flesh" and "spirit."

Barnes' Notes: "The word spirit is used in a great variety of significations in the Scriptures...The word spirit is often used to denote the temper, disposition; thus we say, a man of a generous spirit, or of a revengeful spirit, etc. "

Then Acts 18:25 is again clearly using the word “spirit” in relation to the man’s disposition as you can see by the various translations of “in the spirit”: NRSV: "spoke with burning enthusiasm." NIV: "he spoke with great fervor."

Barnes' Notes: "Being zealous and ardent."

Gill's Expositor: "he might be inspired with zeal by the Spirit of God: or "in his own spirit,"...his soul was inflamed with zeal"

Notice how scholars understand Act 19:21:

Barnes' Notes: "Purposed in the spirit. Resolved in his mind."

RWP: "Purposed in the spirit (eyeto en tw pneumati). Second aorist middle indicative for mental action."

Now, Rom 8:9 does contrast “in the flesh” with “in the Spirit.” But, it is not speaking of the resurrection and so does not pertain to their "bodies." The context makes it clear that it is using "flesh" and "spirit" as euphemisms."

And this verse actually agrees with the grammar of 1Pet. This cannot be construed to mean "in the flesh” and “by the spirit" as your view requires. You cannot translate "in the spirit" and "in the flesh" differently. It is speaking of their "mental" or "spiritual" life verses the sinful flesh.

Gill's Expositor: "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, &c. That is, ye are not carnal, but spiritual men; or ye are not in a state of unregeneracy, but in a state of grace."

When we follow the rules of exegesis, including grammar and context it is easy to see that 1Pt. 3:8 clearly states that Jesus was raised as a spirit and not with his fleshly body.

The claim that the words "in the spirit'" does not mean that he was "raised as a spirit" is completely incorrect. The Greek grammar is very clear and completely contradicts this statement.

Even in English we can plainly see that the phrases "in the flesh" and "in the spirit." are parallels. These two corresponding phrases state the result: Christ was "flesh" and he now is "spirit. Anyone who denies this clear and irrefutable statement must ignore the grammar and syntax. If we forced this phrase to mean "by the spirit" rather than "as a spirit" we would also have to accept the meaning "Christ was put to death by the flesh." This obviously would be ridiculous. And so is any denial that this verse explicitly states that Christ was raised as a *spirit* creature.

Confirming this is all the explicit statements in the Bible that Jesus was raised as a spirit. For example:

1Cor.15:45: "Jesus Christ became a life-giving spirit." The context is also explicit that those resurrected to heaven have spirit bodies not fleshly).

Paul also says that Christ will be "the exact representation of God's very being" (Heb. 1:3). God is a Spirit and has never been flesh!

Yours,

BAR-ANERGES

You're always TRYING but never SUCCEEDING.