The question is sometimes asked, “If God is Spirit, why do we refer to him in masculine terms?” Theology buffs are perhaps even more specific and ask, “Since the Greek term for Spirit—pneuma—is a gender neutral term, why do we not refer to the Holy Spirit with the seemingly more inclusive ‘it’ or ‘ze’?” From a purely linguistic perspective, the question is a good one. In discussing most ideas, however—particularly theological concepts—much more than mere linguistics needs to be considered in order to arrive at meaning.
This first of a three-part posting will attempt to shed some light on this good question. We will begin by looking at a significant passage of Scripture in which Jesus Christ discusses the role of the Holy Spirit.
In John 14:26, Jesus says, “But the Helper (parakletos), the Holy Spirit (pneuma to hagion), whom the Father will send in my name, he (ekeinos, “that one”; cf. houtos, “this one” in John 1:5; Acts 4:10; 1 John 5:6) will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.” Jesus continues in John 16:13–15, “When the Spirit of truth (to pneuma tes aletheias) comes, he (ekeinos) will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak (ou lalesei) on his own (heautou) authority, but whatever he hears (akousei) he will speak (lalesei), and he will declare (anangelei) to you the things that are to come. 14He (ekeinos) will glorify me, for he will take (lempsetai) what is mine and [he will] declare it (anangelei) to you. 15All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take (lambanei) what is mine and [he will] declare it (anangelei) to you” (John 16:13–15). When John uses the word ekeinos (“that one”) in these instances, he is referring to the third person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit. In several other places in his writings, John uses the same pronoun in indisputable reference to the unambiguously masculine Jesus Christ (for example, John 7:11; 1 John 2:6; 3.3, 5, 7, 16; 4:17). While pronoun usage in distinct instances does not mandate identical meaning in each instance, the point is that John is employing the term in these instances of persons, not objects.
Next time, we will unpack the importance of making this necessary distinction between persons and objects.
