Tag Archives: Holy Spirit

The Spirit of God (I)

But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. 10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. 11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God (I Corinthians 2:9-11).

It is reasonable to deduce that there are things about God we shall never know. It is a reasonable deduction because God is infinite in all His attributes, as we have seen, and we are mere finite creations. A finite mind can never grasp all the possibilities and nuances of infinite divinity. “The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law” (Deuteronomy 29:29). The only things we can know for certain are those things the Spirit of God explicitly reveals and those things that can be reasonably deduced from the things the Spirit of God has revealed. Extreme care must be taken that we stay within the limits of what a finite mind may know about the nature of the infinite God.

As we have seen, the Holy Spirit is the third Person of the Godhead. He is co-equal in every way with the First and Second Persons of the Godhead. He is God, yet He is not the Father and He is not the Son. It would be an error of the greatest magnitude to think of the Holy Spirit as merely God’s power or energy, dependent upon the Father for its existence. In fact, it would be wrong to think of the Holy Spirit as an “it” at all. The Holy Spirit, as we have seen, has Person status, and He has always existed because God has always existed and He is God. The Holy Spirit has divine omnipotent power (Rom. 15:13) and since He is God there is nothing He cannot do (Luke 1:37).

In a previous article, I tried to offer an analogy of the triune nature of God by comparing it with our own tripartite human nature. As I pointed out then, the analogy is faulty because there is no true analogy for the triune Godhead. But the analogy can be used for contrast, which is also helpful. For the triune nature of God is quite different than the tripartite nature of man. Let’s observe the following.

• God is three divine Persons while man is one mortal person.
• God is three divine Persons Who are co-equal and co-eternal. Man is one mortal person with three parts, body, soul and spirit (I Thess. 5:3) which, while they are all three essential for personhood and intended to go together, seem to have a hierarchical relationship.
• The three Persons of the Godhead are each fully and equally God, while the parts of the body are not fully persons without each other.
• The three Persons of the Godhead are uncreated and self-existing while the body and its three parts are created.
• In God, each Person is fully and equally God, and their unity is perfect and indivisible. In man, the parts are not persons, and their unity is contingent and vulnerable to disruption (as in death).

We can see then that the relationship of the Spirit of God to God is quite different than that of the spirit of man to man. Man’s spirit alone is not fully man; The Holy Spirit in Himself is fully God.

Everything that can be said of God can be said of the Holy Spirit. Indeed, the Holy Spirit is called God (Acts 5:3,4). He is identified as Jehovah ( Exod. 17:7, with Heb. 3:7-9; Num. 12:6, with II Pet. 1:21) and as the Most High Jehovah (Psalms 78:17, 21; cf. Acts 7:51) He is eternal (Heb. 9:14) and the Creator of man (Job 33:4). In creation He garnished the Heavens (Job. 26:13). He is omniscient in knowledge (I Cor. 2:10), omnipresent (Psalm 139:7), He is omnipotent in power (Luke 1:35; Rom.), and He is the source of miraculous power (Matt. 12:28, with Luke 11:20; Acts 19:11, with Rom. 15:19). He is co-equal with the Father and the Son (Matt. 28:19; II Cor. 13:14). Jesus was raised from the dead by the Spirit (I Pet. 3:18; Rom. 1:4) and the new birth comes under the work of the Spirit of God (John 3:3-5).

While the Nature and work of the Holy Spirit of God is addressed in multiple passages throughout scripture, He is probably misunderstood by more people in and out of the church than either the Father or the Son. The Holy Spirit is usually considered mysterious, perhaps because of His spiritual nature. And while that nature is unobservable to the human vision (cf. John 3:8), it is knowable and understandable by the things that are revealed in scripture (I Cor. 2:10) to the mind’s eye. The Spirit of God is a “revealer” not a “concealer.” The Holy Spirit brings order, not chaos. We will address more about the Holy Spirit of God in the next few entries.

Eric L. Padgett

These Three Are One (Part 1)

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one (I John 5:7).1

As we have seen, there is but one God. And yet, the Bible clearly teaches here and in the totality of its revelation that there are three Persons in the Godhead, or, in one God. The common word for this is the Trinity. Though that word is not explicitly found in scripture, the idea is there from the first verses to the last chapter of the Bible. While Moses (and Adam and Abraham and all other saints mentioned in scripture) may not have understood the triune nature of God, he speaks to it often, as do other Old Testament authors. In this installment, we will focus on one particular passage and then broaden our scope to cover more of the Old Testament landscape.

The very first verse of the Bible teaches so much. One very interesting aspect of this verse is that the word translated God, elohim, is plural. It literally means “gods.” This is the word translated most often in scripture as “God.” It is true that Hebrew sometimes uses the plural of some words to intensify the meaning. But it’s not the word elohim alone that is significant. It’s the connection of the plural noun “elohim” to the singular verb “created” (bara) that makes it so unique. In Biblical Hebrew, standard grammar demands that a singular noun govern a singular verb and a plural noun govern a plural verb.2 Moses was an educated man (Acts 7:22) and would not have made such a simple mistake as to confuse number grammatically. The text could literally be translated, “In the beginning, the gods He created…” To be grammatically correct, the text should read either “God He created” or “gods they created.”

Grammatically, there are no parallels in Hebrew to this construction which is consistently used in the Old Testament. There are instances of collective, plural nouns receiving the action of a masculine, singular verb (i.e., mayim and shamayim, Gen. 1:1, 7), but this is very different from the use in the elohim passages. And it wasn’t only Moses. Nearly every Old Testament book uses elohim and very often it is connected to a singular verb (i.e., II Chron. 26:7). The use of a singular verb with the plural elohim in scripture is not a mistake, it is intentional and suggests the idea of the Trinity. Furthermore, it is a testament to the inspiration of the scriptures that Hebrew authors and other persons in scriptures across the centuries and from various backgrounds utilized the same grammatical peculiarity in referring to deity. This, in itself, is astonishing.

A further support of this view is that Genesis1:26 contains the statement, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Genesis 1:26). This grammatical structure indicates a plurality of Persons. Some say God was using the majestic “we.” But God does not use the majestic “we” in other important passages, (ie., Ex. 20 “Thou shalt have no other gods before Me…”). Others say He was speaking to the angels. But angels are created beings and were not of the same nature as God. We are not made in the image of angels (Psalm 8:5;Heb. 2:7-9). It is better to take this as referring to the three Divine Persons of the Godhead. So from the very first verse of the Bible, and from the first chapter elsewhere, we are given a glimpse of the triune nature of God.

It is a glimpse. A foreshadowing of a truth more fully revealed in the New Testament. This is not unusual. Various prophecies, types and metaphors arising from the various tabernacle services and utensils and other forms of Old Testament worship revealed in parts the coming redemptive work of Messiah. These things were not fully understood until the Holy Spirit revealed them clearly in the New Testament. As Paul explained, “Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit” (Ephesians 3:5). And so it is with the triune nature of God. What was hinted at and suggested in the Old Testament regarding the nature of God, is now more fully revealed in the New Tesament.

Accordingly, we have also in connection with Genesis 1:1 the New Testament commentary on this passage in John 1:1-3. John says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.” John clearly intends to comment and elaborate upon the Genesis text. While John’s purpose may have been to combat certain false doctrines regarding Jesus’ nature, he nevertheless corroborates the view that Genesis 1:1 is meant to encompass the triune nature of the Godhead.

John’s statement is just as unique as the Genesis passage. John states the Word was both with God and was God. Now, in our world and reality it is not possible to both be with and be the same thing. I am myself. I am not with myself, not in any sense about which we normally speak (unless we speak in euphemistic way, i.e., we might say someone is beside himself). But both of these things were true of the Word Who became flesh (John 1:18). He was with God and He was God. This explains how God could say, “Let us make man in our image and after our likeness…” (Gen. 1:26). God the Father was speaking to at least the Second Person of the Godhead, the Logos or Word. John emphasizes this once again in his first general epistle ( I John 1:1-3).

Even standing on its own, it seems to me to be clear that the use of the plural elohim with a singular masculine verb in Genesis 1:1 (and throughout the Old Testament) is speaking to, at the very least, a plurality of the singular God and, in its fullest revelation, the triune nature of the Godhead. We have not even touched upon the fact that Spirit of God is explicitly mentioned in the Text as a separate quantity (Gen. 1:3). More will be said about the Spirit in future installments. And more will be said about other Old Testament passages that add to the doctrine of the triune Nature of God.

Endnotes

  1. I know this verse is controversial with many. However, I hold it to be sacred scripture. You may find part of my reason for holding it thus here (https://mtvchurchofchrist.org/wp/?p=594). Just because many do not find it authoritative, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be used in defense of the truth it states. I will not let other Christian’s skepticism of this verse dictate my use of it any more than I would let modernists skeptics doubts of other passages limit my use of them. I have found that many merely follow what they have been told rather than do their own research and come to their own conclusions, unfortunately.
  2. ”A good command of Hebrew also requires proficiency in using grammatical gender and number correctly, as nouns, verbs, and adjectives are all gendered and must agree in terms of number.” from https://www.hebrewpod101.com/blog/2021/03/18/hebrew-grammar-overview/#2; A Concise Hebrew Grammar Guide

Eric L. Padgett

Some Thoughts on the Holy Spirit

Can you imagine being in the first century on the day of Pentecost?  You probably have either seen or heard of Jesus of Nazareth, a man who performed great miracles–healing the sick, giving sight to the blind, even raising the dead.  You have either seen or know of His followers, the apostles, who have performed similar fantastic feats.  Then, on the day of Pentecost, these same apostles begin speaking in languages they had not learned and everyone there is able to be spoken to in their own native tongue.  These apostles stand up and preach that what everyone there is seeing is in fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy that the Spirit would be poured out (a metaphorical expression signifying the obvious influence of the Holy Spirit on others), resulting in prophecy, etc.  In what sense, then would you take it, when Peter says that you, too, will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit?  Would you or any other person think, given these circumstances, that Peter meant a non-miraculous, literal, personal indwelling?  I cannot see it.
 
The Spirit came in the first century to reveal the word and then confirm it (John 14:26; 16:13; Mark 16:15-18; John 20:30,31; Heb. 2:1-4).  That word, being inspired by the Spirit (II Tim. 3:6,17; II Pet. 1:19-21), is sufficient to guide us in all things pertaining to life and godliness (II Pet. 1:2-4).  We do not now need the Holy Spirit to guide us, except as He does it through His perfect Revelation (Eph. 6:17; Rom. 12:1,2; James 1:22-25).
 
Except for the apostles receiving the baptism of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5-8), the Holy Spirit was given through the laying on of hands of an apostle in the first century (Acts 8:16-18).  This is the context that must govern how we understand the Holy Spirit passages. 
 
Given the proclivity of spiritual gifts in the Corinthian church, where “every one” had a psalm and “every one” had a doctrine, a tongue, a revelation, and an interpretation (I Cor. 14:26), can you imagine that a brother in Corinth would think first of all about a non-miraculous, personal, literal indwelling when Paul said “your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, which ye have of God” I Cor. 6:19)?  Would they not think of the power the Holy Spirit had given them?  I think so. My own, personal view is that the Holy Spirit has never literally or personally indwelt anyone.  The expression that the Holy Spirit is “in” the Christian is to be taken in the same sense that we are said to be in Christ (e.g., Rom. 8:9).
 
In Acts 5, the context is clearly miraculous.  Ananias and Saphira were miraculously struck down by God for their lie and great fear came upon as many as heard these things because of it (Acts 5:1-11).   “By the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people” (Acts 5:12) insomuch that the “people magnified them” (5:13) and “they brought forth the sick into the streets, and laid them on beds and couches, that at the least the shadow of Peter passing by might overshadow some of them” (Acts 5:15).    Hearing of these miraculous events, multitudes “out of the cities round about unto Jerusalem” brought “sick folks, and them which were vexed with unclean spirits: and they were healed every one” (Acts 5:16).  The apostles, being thrown into prison for working these things and preaching in the name of Jesus, were miraculously set free.  It is in answer to these persecutors the apostles say that we ought to obey God rather than men and “and we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him” (Acts 5:32).  I find it difficult to fathom that, as a proof that the Holy Spirit was a witness to Jesus being the resurrected Christ (Acts 5:30,31), the apostles would offer up a non-miraculous, personal, literal indwelling of the Holy Spirit when they could so easily point to all the miraculous activity the Holy Spirit had engaged in right before their eyes.  Would this non-miraculous, literal indwelling be more proof than all the profound miracles He had performed for them?  I cannot see it.  That is why I think Acts 5:32 points to the miraculous.
 
I could go on, but my view is simply that the Holy Spirit was given to reveal the Truth and confirm it.  That word is still true today and just as powerful now as then.  The Holy Spirit has never indwelt any human being literally, for then they would become God in the flesh, God incarnate, just as Christ was.  The character of all three persons of the Godhead indwell me as long as I follow their teaching, revealed by the Holy Spirit Himself to God’s ambassadors to men.
 
The references to the Holy Spirit being in a person are figures of speech, just as when Jesus said “drink the cup.”  We do not drink the literal cup, we drink it’s contents.  When the apostles were told that they would be baptized in the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5) Jesus clarified what that meant when He said the apostles would “receive power” after that the Holy Ghost came upon them (Acts 1:8).  The Holy Spirit never literally indwelt anyone but He did give people power.
 
Today, the Holy Spirit does not give these gifts or powers (I Cor. 13:8-13), but we still have His word which is powerful (Rom. 1:16,17).  When we apply these teachings to our lives we are transformed because we now can know ourselves just as God knows us by looking into that mirror of God’s word (I Cor. 13:12). 
 
Eric L. Padgett