A couple days ago, I wrote a post on focus in continuous Noun Phrases, testing whether the claims that Devine and Stephen’s Discontinuous Syntax: Hyperbaton in Greek make are also valid for Koine Greek in general and the New Testament in particular. Thus far, their claims have proved true.
I decided to do a search looking at the orderings of πνεῦμα and ἅγιος the New Testament. Now this technically doesn’t answer the questions posed by the Better Bibles Blog about whether Holy Spirit should always be capitalized or not, but even still, the results were rather interesting.
These are the basic claims made by Devine and Stephens (for chapter one):
- Descriptive adjectives (i.e. predictable adjectives: green grass, tall tower, etc.) occur prenominally(= 1st attributive position) when unmarked.
- Restrictive adjectives (adjectives that restrict the referent: black cat; fat man, etc.) occur postnominally(=2nd attributive position) when unmarked.
- Marked restrictive adjectives either occur prenominally directly in front of the noun or even more marked in front of the preceding word creating a discontinuous Noun Phrase.
What does this mean for the Holy Spirit? Of the 84 occurrences πνεῦμα being modified by ἅγιος in the NT, 69 of them occurred with ἅγιος in the postnominal/2nd attributive position.
This suggests that the majority of occurrences of Holy Spirit are restrictive. The authors are using ἅγιος to refer to a specific Spirit – the Holy one. The implication for the discussion of whether to capitalize “holy spirit” would be to dig through those 69 occurrences.
But probably more interesting are the other 15 instances.
In 12 of the occurrences, ἅγιος appear prenominally/1st attributive. I only have time to examine one at length right now:
πορευθέντες οὖν μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, βαπτίζοντες αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
The first example at Matthew 28:19 is interesting. Contextually, there’s not reason to conclude that the adjective ἅγιος is both restrictive and focused. For one, if it is focused, typically there would be a contrast drawn between this holy spirit and another less than holy spirit or something similar. There is none. It cannot be restrictive and not focused because the adjective is prenominal. Thus, a descriptive understanding of it is best here.
The implication of this is that the Holy Spirit is a well known entity in the early Church by the time the Gospel of Matthew was written. Descriptive adjectives express known information that is relevant
So if ἅγιος is descriptive here, then the holiness of the spirit is something that everyone knows and recognizes. So then, the holiness of the Spirit is a well known trait and that its a trait that Matthew considers important in the context. The adjective’s importance makes sense in light of the other nouns in the clause: the Father and the Son.
Perhaps a trinitarian understanding of God was in the works at the time of, if not before Matthew was written. And if this particular saying of Jesus is authentic – and I think it is – we have a Trinity being described by Jesus.