O
oldernotwiser
Guest
And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spake by the prophets[5].
The Holy Spirit is a separate and distinct member of the Trinity but any attempt to describe that relationship (other than in terms of function) is doomed to failure. Those efforts are in effect attempts to capture God within the limits of human language. God cannot be defined in terms that are themselves limited by the finite realities of time and space. God exists outside of those boundaries. II Tim. 1:9 speaks of “…..This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time.” To suggest that we can describe a being that exists outside of both time and physical space gives hubris a new and more sweeping meaning.
Scriptural descriptions of the Holy Spirit focus for the most part on activity or function. It is from this that we interpolate personhood, divinity, and relationship to the other members of the Trinity. There are verses which strongly support these characteristics or qualities of the Holy Spirit, but it is the total scriptural witness that must be considered in describing His[6] nature.
While there is no specific passage that describes the Holy Spirit as a separate co-equal part of the Godhead, the overall scriptural witness leads clearly to that conclusion. The descriptions of the Spirit of God in the Old Testament are framed in the language of a people surrounded by polytheism. Under those conditions it was not possible to describe the Spirit of God in the same terms as those used after the Incarnation revealed so much more of the nature of God. To have done so would (in the minds of the pre-Incarnation community) have seemed to describe a second and lesser God. The Old Testament vision was one of a transient “Spirit of The Lord” that came upon individuals. When Isaiah wrote that “The Spirit of the Sovereign Lord is upon me,” it was heard as a reference to the power and presence of God, and certainly not as a separate being. In the New Testament we see the distinct nature of the Spirit described. In Matt. 10:20 the Spirit of God is described as entering into, and speaking through the believer in times of persecution. This is still not a clear statement of the individuality of the Holy Spirit, but taken with other passages such as John 15:26 “When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, He will testify about me.” Mark 3:29, references to blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, and in the Trinitarian baptismal formula of Matt.29: 19, we have the picture of the Godhead that was finally enunciated in the Nicene Creed.
While I accept this I am not entirely happy with it. While on the one hand I understand that it was to a great extent reactive: on the other hand I am unhappy to be locked into a theological structure based on a response to heresies that are now almost two thousand years old, and described in the language of an even more distant intellectual system. Having stated my dissatisfaction I will now, in a limited space, attempt to sum up my own definition of the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit is that part of the Triune God who dwells within the believer. It is this indwelling nature of the Holy Spirit that makes definition so difficult. The Holy Spirit is more easily experienced than defined. The more responsive we are to the voice of the Spirit, the more clearly we understand His nature. This is the problem that we face when we attempt definitions based on scriptural proofs. In Jn. 3:8, Jesus explains this: “The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.” The writers of the New Testament understood the nature of the Holy Spirit in such a deeply personal way that they saw the futility of attempting to articulate His nature. The only adequate definition must be shown in terms of a life lived in response to His voice. It is the Holy Spirit that speaks to convict us of sin, calls us to a life of discipleship, and empowers us so that we may successfully live that life.
The nearest I can come to a clear definition of the Holy Spirit is in the story of the early Mennonite, Dirk Willems. It was the Holy Spirit who spoke to Willems when an Anabaptist hunter pursuing him fell through the ice of a frozen river. He reminded Willems that in spite of his fear he was commanded to love his enemies. Then it was the Holy Spirit who gave Willems the courage to turn and rescue the man, although it certainly meant that he would be arrested. Dirk Willems rescued the Anabaptist hunter and on May 19th 1569 was burnt at the stake. Today it is the Holy Spirit who speaks to us when we hear that story and asks: “Do you love your enemies as much as Dirk Willems did?”
The Holy Spirit is a separate and distinct member of the Trinity but any attempt to describe that relationship (other than in terms of function) is doomed to failure. Those efforts are in effect attempts to capture God within the limits of human language. God cannot be defined in terms that are themselves limited by the finite realities of time and space. God exists outside of those boundaries. II Tim. 1:9 speaks of “…..This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time.” To suggest that we can describe a being that exists outside of both time and physical space gives hubris a new and more sweeping meaning.
Scriptural descriptions of the Holy Spirit focus for the most part on activity or function. It is from this that we interpolate personhood, divinity, and relationship to the other members of the Trinity. There are verses which strongly support these characteristics or qualities of the Holy Spirit, but it is the total scriptural witness that must be considered in describing His[6] nature.
While there is no specific passage that describes the Holy Spirit as a separate co-equal part of the Godhead, the overall scriptural witness leads clearly to that conclusion. The descriptions of the Spirit of God in the Old Testament are framed in the language of a people surrounded by polytheism. Under those conditions it was not possible to describe the Spirit of God in the same terms as those used after the Incarnation revealed so much more of the nature of God. To have done so would (in the minds of the pre-Incarnation community) have seemed to describe a second and lesser God. The Old Testament vision was one of a transient “Spirit of The Lord” that came upon individuals. When Isaiah wrote that “The Spirit of the Sovereign Lord is upon me,” it was heard as a reference to the power and presence of God, and certainly not as a separate being. In the New Testament we see the distinct nature of the Spirit described. In Matt. 10:20 the Spirit of God is described as entering into, and speaking through the believer in times of persecution. This is still not a clear statement of the individuality of the Holy Spirit, but taken with other passages such as John 15:26 “When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, He will testify about me.” Mark 3:29, references to blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, and in the Trinitarian baptismal formula of Matt.29: 19, we have the picture of the Godhead that was finally enunciated in the Nicene Creed.
While I accept this I am not entirely happy with it. While on the one hand I understand that it was to a great extent reactive: on the other hand I am unhappy to be locked into a theological structure based on a response to heresies that are now almost two thousand years old, and described in the language of an even more distant intellectual system. Having stated my dissatisfaction I will now, in a limited space, attempt to sum up my own definition of the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit is that part of the Triune God who dwells within the believer. It is this indwelling nature of the Holy Spirit that makes definition so difficult. The Holy Spirit is more easily experienced than defined. The more responsive we are to the voice of the Spirit, the more clearly we understand His nature. This is the problem that we face when we attempt definitions based on scriptural proofs. In Jn. 3:8, Jesus explains this: “The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.” The writers of the New Testament understood the nature of the Holy Spirit in such a deeply personal way that they saw the futility of attempting to articulate His nature. The only adequate definition must be shown in terms of a life lived in response to His voice. It is the Holy Spirit that speaks to convict us of sin, calls us to a life of discipleship, and empowers us so that we may successfully live that life.
The nearest I can come to a clear definition of the Holy Spirit is in the story of the early Mennonite, Dirk Willems. It was the Holy Spirit who spoke to Willems when an Anabaptist hunter pursuing him fell through the ice of a frozen river. He reminded Willems that in spite of his fear he was commanded to love his enemies. Then it was the Holy Spirit who gave Willems the courage to turn and rescue the man, although it certainly meant that he would be arrested. Dirk Willems rescued the Anabaptist hunter and on May 19th 1569 was burnt at the stake. Today it is the Holy Spirit who speaks to us when we hear that story and asks: “Do you love your enemies as much as Dirk Willems did?”