I can argue theology with the best of 'em, Brownie. However hours of attempting to fall asleep in uni during theology drones/lectures kind of indoctrinated (yes, I know......) me againt a lot of the jargon some post as a defence of thier argument. Some apologetics is so high brow that it loses the essence of what the Gospel is, and who it concerns. As Alen has no doubt argued in umpteen threads here, the original Koine Greek was not as black and white as our modern languages (including contemporary Greek) are. The sense of the setting of the word and phrase are almost as important as the words themselves. I sometimes think we make a great mistake when we cherry pick specific verses in Scripture - because no such numbering existed at the time. Not only the original Koine Greek words, but the sense and context of their placing in the Gospel narrative, tend to show that Jesus was no man infused with God's Spirit for His time on earth (very Gnostic stuff, by the way ), but God Himself. The Gospel writers try to encapsulate this mind blowing concept in their work, writing to Jews mainly - Jews to whom the very idea was something they were brought up to abhor. Though we may consider some of the language beautiful, or inspiring, I have the feeling - just a feeling, mind you, that the writers were really struggling with vocabulary when they tried to put on paper what was something entirely new to their thought process. Though the Holy Spirit was within them, teaching and using them, they were, after all, only human.
