God is a Spirit猫态，更好的理解應(yīng)該是God is Spirit。
必須說明兆解，無論是小要理問答馆铁，還是信條，或者大要理問答锅睛，都是God is a Spirit埠巨，因?yàn)闊o論是信條，還是要理問答现拒，這里都是直接引用的KJV的翻譯：God is a Spirit（Jn.4:24辣垒，KJV）。然而印蔬，這個翻譯卻是錯誤的勋桶。
Daniel Wallace在他的《希臘文語法進(jìn)深》一書中（這本書目前幾乎是所有北美的福音派神學(xué)院，包括改革宗神學(xué)院侥猬，學(xué)習(xí)進(jìn)深希臘文的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)教材）例驹，他在270頁如此說：
In John 4:24 Jesus says to the woman at the well, πνε?μα ? θε??. The anarthrous PN comes before the subject and there is no verb. Here, πνε?μα is qualitative– stressing the nature or essence of God (the KJV incorrectly renders this, “God is a spirit”).
簡單翻譯一下：在約4:24，耶穌在水井旁對婦人說退唠，πνε?μα（靈） ? θε??（神）鹃锈。這里沒有帶定冠詞的謂語性主格出現(xiàn)在主語之前，并且沒有動詞連接铜邮。這里仪召，πνε?μα（靈）強(qiáng)調(diào)的是本性上的寨蹋，強(qiáng)調(diào)神的本性或本質(zhì)（KJV錯誤的翻譯為：神是個靈）松蒜。
需要說明一下，這里涉及到過去對希臘文語法的一種錯誤認(rèn)識已旧，即認(rèn)為當(dāng)沒有帶定冠詞的謂語性主格出現(xiàn)時秸苗，一般會認(rèn)為應(yīng)當(dāng)加上一個不定冠詞來說明，KJV就是這樣理解的运褪。但這種理解是有問題的惊楼。后來隨著對希臘文語法的理解更加深入，基本已經(jīng)糾正了過來秸讹。比較后期的權(quán)威譯本檀咙，如ESV，NIV璃诀，NASB等弧可，都將這句經(jīng)文翻譯為“God is Spirit”，比較著名的約翰福音注釋（如D.A.Carson劣欢，J.Ramsey Michaels等）也是如此來理解的棕诵。
實(shí)際上裁良，自19世紀(jì)以后，長老會的神學(xué)家們也都是如此來解釋要理問答的這個第四問答校套。比如价脾，十九世紀(jì)后期蘇格蘭長老會的著名牧師Alexander Whyte在其著名的《小要理問答注釋》中，如此解釋這一問題：
God is a Spirit, or better, both in grammar and theology,"God is Spirit." "God is pure Spirit, perhaps better not a Spirit,' since it is His essence, not His personality, which is here spokenof" (Alford). Compare the two other definitions found in I John" God is light," and "God is love" with which this present definition must, in Westcott's words, he "compared and combined."
（翻譯如下：神是個靈笛匙，或者從語法上或神學(xué)上侨把，更好的是“神是靈”∶盟铮“神是單純的靈座硕，也許更好的，不是一個靈涕蜂，因?yàn)檫@里所談及的是祂的本質(zhì)华匾，而不是祂的位格』叮”(Alford）比較其他兩個在約翰一書中的定義蜘拉，“神是光”，和“神是愛”有鹿，用Westcott（一位著名的希臘文專家）的話說旭旭，當(dāng)前的定義必須與以上相比較和結(jié)合。）
另一位更早一點(diǎn)的美國長老會牧師FrancisR. Beattie在其著名的《威斯敏斯特準(zhǔn)則注釋》（這本書直到今天仍然是一本經(jīng)典）中如此說：
?In regard to the nature of God, the Standards further assert the spirituality of the divine essence. God is Spirit. This is, perhaps, the chief description of the nature of God which the Scriptures, and the Standards also, contain.
（考慮到神的本性葱跋，準(zhǔn)則進(jìn)一步斷言神圣本質(zhì)的屬靈性持寄。神是靈。這也許是圣經(jīng)娱俺，包括準(zhǔn)則稍味，所教導(dǎo)的神的本性的最首要的描述。）
從神學(xué)上來說荠卷，神是靈模庐，或神的屬靈性，是神的本質(zhì)屬性油宜，而非指向其位格掂碱。就神的本質(zhì)屬性而言，所有的屬性都應(yīng)當(dāng)是“無限慎冤、永恒疼燥、不變”的，不可以有任何的有限性蚁堤，以至于可以用任何數(shù)字來劃分醉者。所以，神是靈，在神學(xué)上湃交，比“神是個靈”更正確熟空。“神是靈”所強(qiáng)調(diào)的搞莺，是神的本性息罗。
實(shí)際上，雖然過去的長老會神學(xué)家們才沧，因?yàn)樽g本的限制（只能使用KJV）和對希臘文語法的錯誤認(rèn)識迈喉，仍然堅持說“神是個靈”，但在他們的注釋中温圆，都不約而同的將其理解為神的本質(zhì)屬性挨摸，而非神的位格。某種意義上岁歉，他們從錯誤的譯文得运，卻在教導(dǎo)正確的教義」疲可以參看以下個早期的要理問答注釋：
比如熔掺，清教徒Thomas Boston如此解釋這一問題：
Now, a spirit is an` immaterial substance, Luke 24:39; and seeing whatever God is, he is infinitely perfect in it, he is a most pure spirit. Hence we may infer,
1. That God has no body nor bodily parts. Object. How then are eyes, ears, hands, face, and the like, attributed in scripture to God ?Answ. They are attributed to him not properly, but figuratively; they are spoken of him after the manner of men, in condescension to our weakness; but we are to understand them after a sort becoming the Divine Majesty. We are to consider what such bodily parts serve us for, as our eyes for discerning and knowing, our arms for strength, our hands for action, &c. and we are to conceive these things to be in God infinitely, which these parts serve for in us. Thus, when eyes and ears are ascribed to God they signify his omniscience;his hands denote his power, and his face the manifestation of his love and favour.
2. That God is invisible, and cannot be seen with the eyes of the body, no not in heaven; for the glorified body is still a body, and God a spirit, which is no object of the eyes, more than sound, taste, smell,&c. 1 Tim. 1:17.
3. That God is the most suitable good to the nature of our souls, which are spirits; and can communicate himself, and apply those things to them, which only can render them happy, as he is the God and Father of our spirits.
4. That it is sinful and dishonorable to God, either to make images or pictures of him without us, or to have any image of him in our minds, which our unruly imagination is apt to frame to itself, especially in prayer. For God is the object of our understanding, not of our imagination. God expressly prohibited Israel to frame any similitude or resemblance of him, and tells them, that they had not the least pretence for so doing, in as much as they'saw no similitude of him, when he spake to them in Horeb,' Deut. 4:12, 15, 16.And says the prophet, To whom will ye liken God ? or what likeness will ye compare unto him ? ' Isa. 40:18. We cannot form an imaginary idea, of our own souls or spirits, which are absolutely invisible to us, and far less of him who is the invisible God, whom no man hath seen or can see. Therefore to frame a picture or an idea of what is invisible, is highly absurd and impracticable:nay, it is gross idolatry, prohibited in the second commandment.
5. That externals in worship are of little value with God,who is a spirit, and requires the heart. They who would be accepted of God must worship him in spirit and in truth, that is, from an apprehension and saving knowledge of what he is in Christ to poor sinners. And this saving knowledge of God in Christ is attainable in this life: for it is the matter of the divine promise, 'I will give them an heart to know me, that I am the Lord,' Jer. 24:7.'it is written in the prophets, They shall be all taught of God, John 6:45. And therefore it should be most earnestly and assiduously sought after by us, as,unless we attain to it, me must perish for ever.
That we may know what sort of a spirit God is, we must consider his attributes, which we gather from his word and works, and that two ways:
1. By denying of, and removing from God, in our minds, all imperfection which is in the creatures, Acts 17:29. And thus we come to the knowledge of his incommunicable attributes, so called because there is no shadow or vestige of them in the creatures, such as infinity, eternity, changeableness.
2. By attributing unto him, by way, of eminency, whatever is excellent in the creatures, seeing he is the fountain of all perfection in them, Psal. 94:9. And thus we have his communicable attributes, whereof there are some vestiges and small scantlings in the creature, as being, wisdom,power, &c. amongst which his spirituality is to be reckoned.
另一位清教徒John Flavel在他的要理問答注釋中如此說：
Q. 2. How many ways are there by which men may know and describe the nature of God?
A. There are two ways of knowing God in this Life. First, Byway of affirmation; affirming that of God by way of eminence, which is excellent in the Creature; as when we affirm him to be Wise, Good, Merciful,etc. Secondly, By way of Negation, when we remove from God in our Conceptions all that is imperfect in the Creature: so we say God is immense, Infinite,Immutable; and in this sense we also call him a Spirit, (i.e.) He is not a gross corporeal Substance.
Q. 3. How many sorts of Spirits are there; And of which sort is God?
A. There be two sorts of Spirits, created and finite; as Angels, and the Souls of Men are. Secondly, Uncreated, and Infinite; and such a Spirit God only is, infinitely above all other Spirits.
Q. 4. If God be a Spirit, in what sense are we to understand all those Scriptures, which speak of the Eyes of the Lord, the Ears and Hand of God?
A. We are to understand them as Expressions of God, in condescension to the weakness of our understandings; even as the Glory of Heaven is expressed to us in Scripture by a City, and the Royal Feast. These shadows are useful to us whilst we are in the Body; but we shall know him in Heaven after a more perfect manner.
Q. 5. What may be inferred from the Spiritual Nature of God?
A. Hence learn, that it is both sinful and dangerous to frame an Image or Picture of God. Who can make an Image of his Soul? which is yet not so perfect a Spirit as God is? And as it is sinful to attempt it, so it is impossible to do it; Deuteronomy 4:15-16. Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of Similitude on the day that the Lord spake to you in Horeb out of the midst of the Fire; lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven Image, the similitude of any figure, etc.
另一位著名的要理問答注釋家James Fisher如此解釋：
Q. 12. Why is he said to be a Spirit?
?A. Because he is necessarily and essentially a living intelligent substance; incorruptible, incorporeal, without flesh, or bones, or bodily parts, Luke 24:39.
馬太亨利在他的要理問答注釋中如此說：
1. Is God a Spirit? Yes: for Christ himself has said, God is a Spirit, John 4:24. Is he a pure Spirit? Yes: for God is light, and with him is no darkness at all, 1 John 1:5. Has he a body as we have? No: Hast thou eyes of flesh? or seest thou as a man seeth? Job 10:4. Can he be seen with bodily eyes? No. For he is one whom no man hath seen, or can see, 1 Tim. 6:16. Are not the angels spirits? Yes: He maketh his angels spirits, Ps. 104:4. Are not the souls of men spirits? Yes: for he formeth the spirit of man within him, Zech.12:1. But is God a Spirit like unto them??????????? No:for he is the Father of spirits, Heb. 12:9.
