Source: The Trinity — Evidence and Issues, by Robert Morey, Chapter 18, pp.
See also this file on the Holy Spirit.
As we approach the subject of the Holy Spirit, the first question we must encounter is where do we begin? Obviously, we all approach the subject with certain a priori assumptions. The Unitarians begin with the assumption that the Spirit is an impersonal force or power and is neither a person nor God. In opposition to this, Trinitarians begin with the assumption that the Holy Spirit with the Father and the Son constitutes the Christian God. Clearly, the issue is not who has a priori assumptions, but whose assumptions are vindicated by good and sufficient reasons.
Since we should logically begin with what has already been previously established, historical precedent is very important. Since we have already demonstrated that the Old Testament and the early Jewish Literature both teach the personhood and deity of the Spirit, the Trinitarian is perfectly justified when he begins with that as his a priori assumption. He is merely following the historical precedent. For example, Josephus refers to the Holy Spirit as "the divine Spirit" (tou theiou pneumatos) in his Antiquities of the Jews. [Ftn: IV:6.3, 6.5; VI: 4.2, 8.2, 11.5; VIII: 15.4; X: 11.3.] The Spirit is clearly portrayed as a person and as God.
On the other hand, the Unitarians have no historical precedent for their denial of the personhood and deity of the Spirit. Thus, the burden of proof falls on them to show where the New Testament explicitly denies those doctrines. But they have yet to find a single passage in the New Testament where the personhood and deity of the Holy Spirit are explicitly denied.
Exegetical verification is the second step in vindicating an assumption. If the authors of the New Testament believed in the personhood and deity of the Holy Spirit, how would they express this in the language of their day? For example, wouldn't they use personal pronouns such as "He" to refer to the Spirit? We would expect them to do so.
Since the Trinitarian begins with the a priori assumption that the Holy Spirit is a Person, he expects to find in the New Testament that the Holy Spirit manifests the attributes of personhood, i.e., the Spirit will be described by the authors of the New Testament as doing and saying those things which only a person can do or say. And when we turn to the New Testament, this is exactly what we find.
The very same evidence that demonstrated the personhood of the Father and the Son likewise demonstrates the personhood of the Holy Spirit. For example, just as our communion with the Father and with the Son reveal their personhood, even so our communion with the Spirit reveals His personhood.
2 Corinthians 13:14 (NASB) The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.
Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἡ κοινωνία τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν.
An Gordon Fee points out, "In many ways, this benediction is the most profound theological moment in the Pauline corpus." According Heinrich Meyer, it clearly speaks of our "participation in the gracious efficacy of the Holy Spirit."
In 1 John 1:3, we have fellowship with the Father and with the Son. Now in 2 Cor 13:14, using the same exact words, we have fellowship with the Holy Spirit. Can words be any plainer?
κοινωνία μετὰ τοῦ πατρὸς — fellowship with the Father
κοινωνία μετὰ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ — fellowship with Jesus Christ
κοινωνία μετὰ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματο — fellowship with the Holy Spirit
In order to have fellowship with the Father and with the Son, requires that they are persons. The same holds true for fellowship with the Holy Spirit. In order to have communion with Him, He must be a person. A.W. Pink explains:
Let it be duly weighed that "communion" is a mutual thing, a giving and receiving. In our communion with the Father we receive from Him, and then return to Him love and obedience. From the Son we receive life and acknowledge it in our praises. From the Spirit we receive regeneration and sanctification, shall we render Him nothing in return?
This one verse is sufficient to overthrow the erroneous idea that the Holy Spirit is only an impersonal force or power. Lenski is absolutely correct when he states:
The personality of the Spirit is often denied by rationalism. Only a person can establish communion. The Holy Spirit is there named beside the other two persons.
The exegetical evidence for the personhood of the Spirit is overwhelming. The Holy Spirit "hears" (John 16:13), "searches all things" (1Co 2:10), "speaks" (Mark 13:11), "teaches" (John 15:26), "convicts of sin, righteousness, and unbelief" (John 16:8), "comforts" (John 16:7), "guides" (John 16:13), "glorifies Christ" (John 16:14), "reveals" (John 16:14), "forbids" (Acts 16:6-7), "intercedes" (Rom 8:26), "brings to remembrance" (John 14:26), "separates" and "sends" out people (Acts 13:1-4), "sets" elders over the church (Acts 20:28), etc.
These actions of the Spirit require intellect, emotion, and will. How can the Spirit choose and appoint leaders in the church with knowing, being pleased with, and choosing the right men (Acts 20:28; 13:1-4)?
The fact that the Holy Spirit speaks to people giving them detailed information cannot be so easily ignored. The detailed information given by the Spirit requires both intelligence and personhood on His part as well as the people to whom He speaks. For example, Mark 13:11 has in focus a court room situation in which the Holy Spirit will give the believer legal arguments for his defense:
Mark 13:11 (NASB) "When they arrest you and hand you over, do not worry beforehand about what you are to say, but say whatever is given you in that hour; for it is not you who speak, but it is the Holy Spirit."
The Holy Spirit will reveal to the persecuted believer what he needs to say in court! This means specific and detailed information. An impersonal force or power cannot do this. The Holy Spirit has to be a Person in order to give this kind of detailed legal information.
While Mark 13:11 sets for the principle, the book of Acts records the application. Peter's trial recorded in Acts 5:32 not only illustrates how the Holy Spirit helps persecuted believers, but also has a direct statement about the Spirit that proves His personhood.
Acts 5:32 (NASB) "And we are witnesses of these things; and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him."
Peter was on trial for his life and claimed that he and the other apostles saw the risen Christ with their own eyes and would swear to this fact in court as "witnesses" (μάρτυρες). Then he adds that the Holy Spirit was also a "witness" (μάρτυς) to the resurrection.
The word μάρτυς is often used in the New Testament in its legal or forensic sense (Mat 18:16; Luke 22:71, etc.). That it is used here is clear from verses Acts 5:17-18,27-40. It is inconceivable that the Holy Spirit would be called upon as a "witness" of the resurrection of Christ if He were not a person. William Biederwolf states:
How the idea of the Holy Spirit as a distinct personality could be more clearly set forth than is done in the Word of God is impossible for an unbiased mind to conceive.
The same holds true for all the other times the Holy Spirit spoke:
Acts 8:29 (NASB) Then the Spirit said to Philip, "Go up and join this chariot."
Acts 10:19-20 (NASB) While Peter was reflecting on the vision, the Spirit said to him, "Behold, three men are looking for you. 20 "But get up, go downstairs and accompany them without misgivings, for I have sent them Myself."
Acts 13:2 (NASB) While they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them."
Acts 21:11 (NASB) And coming to us, he took Paul's belt and bound his own feet and hands, and said, "This is what the Holy Spirit says: 'In this way the Jews at Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.'"
Galatians 4:6 (NASB) Because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, "Abba! Father!"
This kind of detailed speech requires an intelligent Speaker. Specific information, directions, and commands are spoken by the Spirit.
The Spirit is the one who decides which gift to give to believers:
1 Corinthians 12:11 (NASB) But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills.
πάντα δὲ ταῦτα ἐνεργεῖ τὸ ἓν καὶ τὸ αὐτὸ πνεῦμα διαιροῦν ἰδίᾳ ἑκάστῳ καθὼς βούλεται.
The word βούλεται "as He wills" is the present indicative of βούλομαι and must grammatically refer back to the Holy Spirit. The use of the present tense is significant. Rienecker and Rogers comment:
The present tense emphasizes the habitual or repeated action. He gives not according to the merit or wishes of men but according to his own will.
We have yet to see and impersonal force make such decisions. The Arian and Unitarian claim that the Holy Spirit speaks, but is not a Speaker, leads, but is not a Leader, witnesses, but is not a Witness, comforts, but is not a Comforter, intercedes, but is not an Intercessor, guides, but is not a Guide, etc., goes against all logic and reason. How can the Holy Spirit intercede in prayer on our behalf, if He is only an impersonal power or force (Rom 8:26)? How can He know our needs and pray for us unless He is a person? No wonder George Smeaton exclaims:
To deny that there is any allusion to a person in such references to the Spirit, betrays either deep-seated bias and prejudice, or lack of exegetical aptitude and capacity.
The use of personal pronouns in reference to the Spirit in such places as John 15:26; 16:7,13 cannot be ignored as irrelevant:
John 15:26 (NASB) "When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me,
John 16:7 (NASB) "But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you.
The personal pronouns "He," "who," and "Him" all refer to the Spirit. This cannot be denied. Only a person can do these things.
We must, also, point out that to exchange a personal Jesus for an impersonal power would hardly be to our "advantage." Jesus said that the Spirit would come to help and comfort us, and that this would be to our advantage. Octavius Winslow comments:
If a distinct personage is not spoken of in these passages, [then] language has lost its power to describe what a person really is, or to convey to us an intelligent idea of his existence. But our Lord was speaking of an exchange of persons. It was a Divine and intelligent person that was to depart, and it was a Divine and intelligent person that was to supercede Him in the church, abiding with it for ever.
While the pronoun is masculine, the word "spirit" is neuter because the word can refer to many different things (God, angels, demons, man, the age, etc.). Thus, we would naturally expect to find only the neuter used in reference to the Spirit. But the authors of Scripture went out of their way to use personal pronouns for the Spirit. This fact is significant. Prof. Gans explains:
The contrast between the masculine and neuter, according to the peculiar genius of the Greek language, gives a boldness to the conception of personality which is very striking. The neuter pronoun "it" would evidently be the proper word, instead of the masculine "He," "Who," "Him," if the Holy Ghost were a mere power, or attribute, or influence. "He" is the proper exponent of personality; and it its relation, here to the Holy Ghost—a relation constituted by Christ Himself—it is the clear outward verbal sign of this fact in Him.
But why were neuter pronouns used in a few places to refer to the Holy Spirit? Doesn't the use of the neuter mean that the Spirit is not a person? Not at all! We have already shown that both the Father and the Son are referred to at times by the neuter gender. But who uses that fact to deny their personhood? In the same way, just because the neuter is used of the Spirit does not deny His personhood either.
Another proof of the personality of the Holy Spirit is found in the fact that He can be "grieved" (Eph 4:30), made to "feel good" (Acts 15:28), "lied to" (Acts 5:3), "sinned" against (Mat 12:31), "resisted" (Acts 7:51), and "insulted" (Heb 10:29). It is impossible to attribute such language to an impersonal force or power.
Romans 15:30 becomes very important at this point:
Romans 15:30 (NASB) Now I urge you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God for me
Once again the Spirit is appealed to in conjunction with another person. Paul appeals to the Lord Jesus and to the Spirit as motivations for prayer. In his appeal, Paul refers to "the love of the Spirit" (τῆς ἀγάπης τοῦ πνεύματος).
Such language is not foreign to Paul. When he refers to the love of God the Father (Rom 5:5), he means His love to us, not our love to Him. The same is true when he speaks of the love of Christ (Eph 3:19). It is Christ's love for us, not our love to Him. The literary parallels are obvious.
| ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ | the love of God | His love for us. |
| ἀγάπην τοῦ Χριστοῦ | the love of Christ | His love for us. |
| τῆς ἀγάπης τοῦ πνεύματος | the love of the Spirit | His love for us. |
To argue that it cannot refer to the Spirit's love because the Spirit is not a person is to argue in a circle. If we take these words in their normal meaning, then this passage contains a reference to the love which the Spirit has for the saints. John Murray explains:
There is no good reason why it should not be taken as the love which the Spirit bears to believers. Besides, since "the love of the Spirit" is coordinated with "our Lord Jesus Christ" there is good, if not decisive, reason for the view that the love of the Spirit to us is intended... what could enforce Paul's request more than to be reminded of the Spirit's love? As God's love inspires and validates hope (Rom 5:5), so the Spirit's love should incite to prayer.
That "the love of the Spirit" motivates us to love one another does not negate the fact that He loves us. Neither does the fact that the Spirit pours out the love of the Father into our hears (Rom 5:5). Romans 15:30 refers to the love of the Holy Spirit that He manifests to us and in us as He guides us along the path of sanctification.
Not only is there a vast amount of positive exegetical evidence for the personhood of the Spirit, but the Bible explicitly denies that the Spirit is God's power in such places as Zechariah 4:6:
Zechariah 4:6 (NASB) Then he said to me, "This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel saying, 'Not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit,' says the LORD of hosts.
Yahweh Himself makes the clear distinction between His power and the Holy Spirit. It would be ludicrous to think that Yahweh said, "Not by power, but by power." The same problem is seen in Romans 15:13, "the power of the Holy Spirit." Are we to believe that Paul was saying "the power of the power?" It would be redundant to say, "with the Holy Spirit and with power" (Acts 10:38) if it meant, "with power and with power." This phraseology is not compatible with the reduction of the Spirit to a mere impersonal power or force.
After surveying all the evidence, the "Prince of Princeton," Dr. Charles Hodge, concludes:
He is introduced as a person so often, not merely in poetic or excited discourse, but in simple narrative, and in didactic instructions; and His personality is sustained by so many collateral proofs, that to explain the use of the personal pronouns in relation to Him on the principle of personification, is to do violence to all the rules of interpretation.
Did the authors of the New Testament reject the Old Testament doctrine of the deity of the Spirit? We do not find any indication in the New Testament that they did so. The burden of proof rests squarely upon those who deny the deity of the Spirit to show chapter and verse where the deity of the Spirit is denied in the New Testament.
What we do find in the New Testament is the same kind of evidence that demonstrated the deity of the Father and the Son.
The attempt to say that such evidence is valid when applied to the Father, but not valid when applied to the Spirit or the
Son, is the height of irrationality. Once an argument is deemed "valid," it is valid whenever and wherever it applies.
The authors of the New Testament did not hesitate to apply tot the Holy Spirit Old Testament passages which originally referred to God. Thus, the Holy Spirit is the God who is in focus in those passages. Several example will demonstrate this.
In Isaiah 6:8-10, Isaiah recorded the words of the "the Lord" (Heb. אדני "Adonai", LXX κυρίου "Lord") who was identified as "Yahweh of armies" (Heb. יהוה צבאות, LXX κύριος σαβαώθ) in verse 3. In Acts 28:25-27, Paul quotes Isaiah 6:8-10 and applies it to the words of the Holy Spirit:
Acts 28:25-27 (NASB) And when they did not agree with one another, they began leaving after Paul had spoken one parting word, "The Holy Spirit rightly spoke through Isaiah the prophet to your fathers, 26 saying, 'GO TO THIS PEOPLE AND SAY, "YOU WILL KEEP ON HEARING, BUT WILL NOT UNDERSTAND; AND YOU WILL KEEP ON SEEING, BUT WILL NOT PERCEIVE; 27 FOR THE HEART OF THIS PEOPLE HAS BECOME DULL, AND WITH THEIR EARS THEY SCARCELY HEAR, AND THEY HAVE CLOSED THEIR EYES; OTHERWISE THEY MIGHT SEE WITH THEIR EYES, AND HEAR WITH THEIR EARS, AND UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEART AND RETURN, AND I WOULD HEAL THEM."'
Before Paul quotes from Isaiah 6, he points out that it was the Holy Spirit Himself who spoke these words. Thus, the Holy Spirit is "the Lord Yahweh of Armies" who spoke the words found in Isaiah 6.
When the Jews rejected the gospel, they were not just rejecting Paul. No, they were rejecting the Holy Spirit. And to reject the Spirit is to reject Yahweh. R.J. Knowling, professor of New Testament Exegesis at King's College, London, explains:
The solemnity of the words is intensified by thus introducing the Holy Ghost, rather than merely the human agent, as Himself speaking; and not only so, but by thus intimating that they were resisting not man, but God, cf Acts 7:51.
Notice, also, that the Holy Spirit is the One who can "heal" rebel sinners by giving them repentance and faith. Who else but God can do this?
In his demonstration of the superiority of the new covenant over the old covenant, the author of Hebrews quotes from Jeremiah 31:31-34.
Hebrews 10:15-17 (NASB) And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying, 16 "THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM," He then says, 17 "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."
The personhood of the Spirit is established from the fact that He is called upon to give His testimony, as if He were in a court of law, and because it is the Holy Spirit who sets up the new covenant and forgives the sins of the people of God. How can an impersonal power do that? It can't.
The deity of the Holy Spirit is established from the fact that, when we go back to Jeremiah 31:31-34 to see who said the words attributed to the Spirit in the book of Hebrews, we find that it was Yahweh (Heb. יהוה, LXX κύριος) who spoke these words.
It is the Holy Spirit who, by His wondrous work of regeneration, implants the law into our hearts and forgives us of our sins and lawless deeds. It would be blasphemous to attribute such things to an impersonal force or power. Only God can regenerate the heart of man and forgive his sins.
Acts 5:9 (NASB) Then Peter said to her, "Why is it that you have agreed together to put the Spirit of the Lord to the test? ...
In the Old Testament we are warned, "You shall not tempt Yahweh your God" (Deu 6:16). When we act in an irreverent and immoral behavior, we tempt God to punish us on the spot. The Jews in the wilderness "tempted the Lord" and were destroyed for it:
1 Corinthians 10:8-10 (NASB) Nor let us act immorally, as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in one day. 9 Nor let us try the Lord, as some of them did, and were destroyed by the serpents. 10 Nor grumble, as some of them did, and were destroyed by the destroyer.
Jesus even warned the devil not to tempt the Lord (Mat 4:7). The Old Testament background of "tempting the Lord" gives us the key to interpreting Peter's words:
Acts 5:9 (NASB) Then Peter said to her, "Why is it that you have agreed together to put the Spirit of the Lord to the test? ...
To lie to the Holy Spirit is to tempt Him to punish you on the spot. Is this not what happened to Ananias and Sapphira? Were they not struck dead on the spot? Thus the Holy Spirit is identified with the Yahweh of Deu 6:16 who is not to be tempted.
In 2 Cor 3:17, the Holy Spirit is directly called "the Lord" (κύριος).
2 Corinthians 3:15-18 (NASB) But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart; 16 but whenever a person turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. 18 But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.
This passage has generated much discussion down through the centuries. The identity of "the Lord" (ὀ κύριος) and "the Spirit" (τὸ Πνεῦμα) has been a controversial issue because of their Trinitarian significance.
The passage is obviously an application of various Old Testament texts and phrases. Thus, the title "the Lord" (ὀ κύριος) must be interpreted in its Old Testament significance, i.e., Yahweh. This is clear from the fact that Paul is alluding to Exodus 34:34-35.
Exodus 34:34-35 (NASB) But whenever Moses went in before the LORD to speak with Him, he would take off the veil until he came out; and whenever he came out and spoke to the sons of Israel what he had been commanded, 35 the sons of Israel would see the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses' face shone. So Moses would replace the veil over his face until he went in to speak with Him.
In terms of the immediate context, Paul takes the story of the veil Moses used to hide his face and uses it as a metaphor to explain why the Jews rejected Jesus as the Messiah:
2 Corinthians 3:13-15 (NASB) and are not like Moses, who used to put a veil over his face so that the sons of Israel would not look intently at the end of what was fading away. 14 But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ. 15 But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart;
In verse 14, Paul states that the Jews were spiritually blind until the veil of unbelief is removed by the Messiah (ἐν Χριστῷ). But once, they "turn to the Lord" (ἐπιστρέψῃ πρὸς κύριον), the veil is removed:
2 Corinthians 3:16 (NASB) but whenever a person turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.
When someone "turned to the Lord" in the Old Testament, this meant that he placed his ultimate faith for salvation in Yahweh alone (Isa 45:22). The "Lord" to whom he turned was always YHWH.
| Text |
Hebrew |
Septuagint |
|---|---|---|
| Deu 30:10 | תשוב אל יהוה | ἐπιστραφῇς ἐπὶ Κύριον |
| Psa 22:27 | וישבו אל יהוה | ἐπιστραφήσονται πρὸς Κύριον |
Paul is clearly following the Septuagint when he writes ἐπιστρέψῃ πρὸς κύριον. Conversion takes place when a sinner turns to Yahweh.
Finally, that the title "the Lord" refers to Yahweh is also confirmed by Targum Jonathan. Numbers 7:89 is a parallel to Exodus 34:34. In both passages, it is Yahweh who speaks to Moses. A comparison of the Hebrew text, the Septuagint, and the Targum on Numbers 7:89 reveals that the "Yahweh" who was speaking to Moses was actually "the Spirit."
| The Hebrew text has Moses hearing: The Septuagint has Moses hearing: The Targum J1 has Moses hearing: |
"Him." (YHWH cf. 8:1) "the voice of the Lord." "the voice of the Spirit." |
The Targumist scholar Martin McNamara explains:
A comparison of the text and context of 2 Cor 3:17 with TJ1 to Exo 34 and the parallel passage of Num 7:89 appears to indicate that the Apostle is under the influence of the paraphrase in TJ1 when he affirms that "the Lord is the Spirit." In TJ1 Num 7:89 we read that in the Tent of Meeting Moses conversed with "the Spirit" which for Judaism was Yahweh as he revealed his will to his people. The "Lord" for Paul in 2 Cor 3:17 would then be the God of Israel of which the OT and Tg speak, rather than Christ.
Paul was familiar not only with the Hebrew text nad the Greek Septuagint, but also with the Aramaic Targums. In Targum J1, the Yahweh who speaks to Moses is the Spirit. This is why Paul states in 2 Cor 3:17, "the Lord is the Spirit."
Given the Old Testament significance of the word "Lord," we can translate the passage as follows:
But whenever a man turns to [Yahweh], the veil is taken away. Now [Yahweh] is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of [Yahweh] is, there is liberty. But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of [Yahweh], are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from [Yahweh], the Spirit. 2 Cor 3:16-18.
The vast majority of commentators agree that when Paul said, "Now the Lord is the Spirit," the word "Spirit" (τὸ Πνεῦμα) refers to the Holy Spirit. The Arian attempt to reduce the word "Spirit" to "spirit" and interpret it as a reference to the "spiritual nature" of Jesus is in such conflict with the context that no exegete holds to it today.
This remarkable passage not only demonstrates the personhood of the Spirit as He transforms us from glory to glory, but it is also clear that Paul took the Old Testament title "Yahweh" and applied it to the Spirit. Who is the "Yahweh" who spoke to Moses? The Spirit. Who is the "Yahweh" to whom we turn in conversion? The Spirit. As Francis Martin points out, it is clear that:
Paul is truly giving his own adapted exegesis of Exo 34:34 in 2 Cor 3:17-18 and that he is maintaining that knowledge of Christ is to be had by conversion to the Spirit.
Paul is carful not to give the impression that he is reducing Yahweh to the Spirit, as if the Spirit was the sum total of Yahweh. The Spirit is also described in verse 17 as "the Spirit of Yahweh." The word "of" is the genitive of origin meaning that the Spirit is sent from Yahweh. Thus, there are two Yahwehs mentioned in the text—the Spirit who is Yahweh and the Yahweh who sent the Spirit. This reflects the Old Testament concept of the multi-personal nature of Yahweh seen in such places as Genesis 19:24.
Since the Holy Spirit is identified with the divine name "Yahweh" (יהוה) and the divine title "Lord" (אדני) and "Yahweh of Armies" (יהוה צבאות), it is no surprise to find the authors of the New Testament applying the words "God" (θεὸς) and "Lord" (κύριος) to the Holy Spirit.
In Acts 5, we are told the sad story of how Ananias and his wife Sapphira were struck dead for lying:
Acts 5:1-11 (NASB) But a man named Ananias, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property, 2 and kept back some of the price for himself, with his wife's full knowledge, and bringing a portion of it, he laid it at the apostles' feet. 3 But Peter said, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back some of the price of the land? 4 "While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not under your control? Why is it that you have conceived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God." 5 And as he heard these words, Ananias fell down and breathed his last; and great fear came over all who heard of it. 6 The young men got up and covered him up, and after carrying him out, they buried him. 7 Now there elapsed an interval of about three hours, and his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8 And Peter responded to her, "Tell me whether you sold the land for such and such a price?" And she said, "Yes, that was the price." 9 Then Peter said to her, "Why is it that you have agreed together to put the Spirit of the Lord to the test? Behold, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out as well." 10 And immediately she fell at his feet and breathed her last, and the young men came in and found her dead, and they carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11 And great fear came over the whole church, and over all who heard of these things.
The personhood of the Spirit is established by the fact that it is impossible to "lie to" (v. 3) or "tempt" (v. 9) an impersonal force or power. Obviously, you can only lie to or tempt a person.
The deity of the Spirit is established by the fact that the syntax indicates that Peter was not saying that the couple lied to the Holy Spirit and to God, but that, when they lied to the Spirit, they were lying to Someone who is God. Thus, their lie was all the more horrible and deserving of instant death. The Spirit is here called "God" (θεὸς).
In 2 Thess 3:5 we read:
2 Thessalonians 3:5 (NASB) May the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God and into the steadfastness of Christ.
Ὁ δὲ κύριος κατευθύναι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας εἰς τὴν ἀγάπην τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ εἰς τὴν ὑπομονὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ.
There are clearly three persons in view:
Who then is the "Lord" who directs our hearts to the Father and to the Son? It does not take a rocket scientist to see that the Holy Spirit in His work of sanctification is here referred to as "Lord." The oter options do not make any sense.
Option #1. The "Lord" refers to the Father. Thus, Paul said, "May the Father direct your hears to the love of the Father." This interpretation does seem odd. If this is what Paul intended, then he would have written, "May the Father direct your hearts to His love."
Option #2. The "Lord" refers to Christ. Thus Paul said, "May Christ direct your hearts to the steadfastness of Christ." Once again this interpretation is quite odd and does not reflect Paul's style of writing.
If we interpret it strictly according to the grammar of the Greek text, we must agree with the Greek Fathers such as Basil the Great, Theodoret Theophylact, etc., that a third Person is in view, i.e., the Holy Spirit, here called "the Lord" (ὀ κύριος). The Rev. A.J. Mason, Canon of Canterbury, states in Ellicott's Commentary:
The Person of the Blessed Trinity to whom this guidance immediately belongs is the Holy Spirit. So far, the Greek expositors are right who agreed to consider this a proof of the Holy Ghost's divinity.
John Wesley noted in this commentary that "the Lord is the Spirit, whose proper work this is."
The majority of modern commentators reject this as a reference to the Spirit on the grounds that the Spirit is never called ὀ κύριος in the New Testament. Of course, this is the same reason they give as to why the Spirit is not called ὀ κύριος in 2 Cor 3:17. In both instances, their interpretation is based on circular reasoning. They both begin and conclude with the assertion that the Spirit is never called ὀ κύριος. The Wrede-Bousset thesis is once again behind the circular reasoning.
One final observation is that, if some name other than "Lord" was in the sentence, would anyone deny that a third person was in view? If the text read, "May Timothy direct your hearts to the love of God and the steadfastness of Christ," would anyone deny that "Timothy" referred to a third person? We think not.
Not only is the Spirit called both "God" and "Lord," but He is described with divine attributes. For example, how can all believers anywhere at any time have fellowship with Him, if He is not omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, and eternal (2 Cor 13:14)?
Hebrews 9:14 (NASB) how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
πόσῳ μᾶλλον τὸ αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὃς διὰ πνεύματος αἰωνίου ἑαυτὸν προσήνεγκεν ἄμωμον τῷ θεῷ, καθαριεῖ τὴν συνείδησιν ἡμῶν ἀπὸ νεκρῶν ἔργων εἰς τὸ λατρεύειν θεῷ ζῶντι.
Only God is eternal. This is so fundamental to biblical religion that no one denies that this is what the Bible teaches. In Hebrews 9:14, the Spirit is modified by the adjective "eternal" (αἰωνίου). The Trinitarian is not surprised by this. The Holy Spirit is as eternal as the Father and the Son.
Since Romans 16:26 uses the same word αἰωνίου to refer to the eternity of the Father, it is impossible to avoid the eternity of the Spirit in Hebrews 9:14.
The eternity of the Holy Spirit is underscored by the grammar of the Greek text in John 15:26:
John 15:26 (NASB) "When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me,
Ὅταν ἔλθῃ ὁ παράκλητος ὃν ἐγὼ πέμψω ὑμῖν παρὰ τοῦ πατρός, τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας ὃ παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκπορεύεται, ἐκεῖνος μαρτυρήσει περὶ ἐμοῦ·
This is one of the most significant passages on the Holy Spirit in the New Testament. That He is a Person is seen from John's use of the masculine ἐκεῖνος instead of neuter ἐκεῖνο. A.T. Robertson points out that here as well as in John 14:16:
John skips over πνεύμα (pneuma - "Spirit") and reverts to the gender of παράκλητος (parakletos - "helper").... It is more evident therefore in this passage that John is insisting on the personality of the Holy Spirit, when the grammatical gender so easily called ἐκεῖνο.
The word ἐκεῖνος is used for emphasis sake. When reading the verse out loud, emphasize the word "he will bear witness of Me."
That He is a separate Person from the Father is apparent from the use of the preposition παρὰ (para - "from") in reference to His relationship to the Father. The preposition παρὰ when used in conjunction with such verbs as "sending," indicates that two separate person are in view.. The Sender and the One sent.
The word παρὰ identifies the starting point of departure as along side of and separate from the Sender. It is used in verses 26 and 27 to speak of Christ's being sent "from," i.e., "from along side" of the Father. A.T. Robertson comments:
Here παρὰ calls attention to the fact that one is beside the place or person whence he starts.
If the Spirit were only a part of the Father, then "it" would have come "out from the Father" (ὃ ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς). But this is never said concerning the Spirit. He is always pictured as along side of the Father. Yeager translates ὃ παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς:
... who is proceeding from a place by the Father's side.
The Greek verbs "proceeds" is ἐκπορεύεται which is the third person singular present indicative of ἐκπορεύομαι. Lenski comments:
This tense, however, is what the grammarians properly call a timeless present; it intends to express an act that lies above and beyond all conception of time.
The implications are staggering. Lenski explains:
Just as behind the incarnation and the mission of Jesus we have his eternal generation by the Father, so here behind the sending and mission of the Spirit we have the Spirit's eternal procession of the Father.
Jesus gave three separate phrases. First, He said that He was going to send the Holy Spirit. This was fulfilled at Pentecost. Naturally, the verb "will send" (πέμψω) is in the future tense. Then He identifies the Holy Spirit as "the Spirit of truth." Finally, He further identifies the Holy Spirit as the One who has, is, and always shall be eternally proceeding from along side of the Father. William Hendriksen comments:
... this present tense has been called timeless present. The inter-Trinitarian relationship which is indicated here—the procession of the Spirit—is eternal, that is, it transcends time.
The French commentator, Frederick Godet, agrees:
The change of tense indicates the difference of idea: whom I will send and who proceeds from. He whom Jesus will send (historically, at a given moment) is a divine being, who emanates (essentially, eternally) from the Father. An impartial exegesis cannot, as it seems to me, deny this sense.... They are the reflections of the Trinitarian relations. As the incarnation of the Son rests upon His eternal generation, so the mission of the Holy Spirit is related to His eternal procession...
Some modern commentator deny there is any reference to the eternal procession of the Spirit from the Father in this passage. Once again, they urge us to ignore the grammar of the Greek text. Lenski's reply to them is appropriate:
The blame cast upon the ancient fathers for here finding the eternal procession of the Spirit from the Father is unjustified. Those fathers were right, and these newer men might well learn from them.
After a great deal of thought and research on this passage, we came to the same conclusion as Smeaton:
Such has been the belief of the Church from the first as set forth in all the creeds. It must be AS ESSENTIAL TO THE PERFECTION OF THE DIVINE NATURE that the Father have a Son, and there should be a Spirit proceeding from both. The phrase: who proceedeth from the Father, in the present tense, (ἐκπορεύεται), intimates an immanent, internal, ever-during act according to the unchangeable essence of Deity.
1 Corinthians 2:10 (NASB) For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.
ἡμῖν |δὲ| ἀπεκάλυψεν ὁ θεὸς διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος· τὸ γὰρ πνεῦμα πάντα ἐραυνᾷ, καὶ τὰ βάθη τοῦ θεοῦ.
This passage has been described as the clearest evidence for the omniscience of the Holy Spirit. Two phrases stand out in the Greek text as indicating true deity:
1. "the Spirit searches all things": τὸ πνεῦμα πάντα ἐραυνᾷ
The verb ἐραυνᾷ is in the timeless or gnomic present tense which indicates an eternal attribute of the Spirit. His knowledge is all embracing at all times. Rogers and Rienecker explain:
The present tense indicates that which is always true, the gnomic present.
Findlay notes the significance of this point of grammar:
The phrase describes an Intelligence everywhere active, everywhere penetrating.
The verb does not indicate that the Spirit has to go out and explore everything. It proclaims that He always knows all things at all times:
Dean Kling: "... it denotes the result of that exploring, i.e., a complete and thorough knowledge.
Canon Shore: "the word 'searcheth' here does not convey the idea of inquiry for the purpose of acquiring knowledge, but rather complete and accurate knowledge itself."
Just as the Father "searches the hearts" (ἐραυνῶν τὰς καρδίας, Rom 8:27) and the Son "searches the minds and hearts" (ἐραυνῶν νεφροὺς καὶ καρδίας, Rev 2:23), even so the Spirit "searches all things" (πάντα ἐραυνᾷ, 1 Cor 2:10). The Spirit is as omniscient as the Father and the Son.
The syntax of the verse has much to tell us. First, notice that πάντα does not have a definite article before it. Thus, it refers to "ALL" in an absolute sense.
Second, notice that πάντα is not in its normal word order after the verb. Instead, it is placed before the verb. This means that Paul doubly emphasized that the Spirit searches "ALL" in an absolute sense. Lenski comments:
The tense is the timeless present. In one timeless act the Spirit sounds the absolute depths of"all things," πάντα (not merely τἁ πάντα, all that God created and that now exists) in heaven and in earth, millions of them being beyond the human mind.
2. "Even the depths of God": καὶ τὰ βάθη τοῦ θεοῦ
In order to emphasize that, when he said that the Spirit searches "ALL," he really meant "ALL" in an absolute sense, Paul now adds that this includes the infinite depths of God's very being, essence, attributes, plans, and works!
The word βάθη (depths) was originally a nautical term denoting the unfathomable depths of the ocean (Luke 5:4). In opposition to the Gnostics who claimed that they knew the βάθη "depths" of all things, Paul here says that the Spirit alone knows ALL. Dean Kling comments:
βάθη τοῦ θεοῦ: inmost recesses of God, the otherwise unexplorable depths where His thoughts and volitions have free play, the hidden mystery of His personality which correspond to those mysteries of His kingdom and of all His works and ways which the Spirit reveals. The image is drawn from the sea, whose depths are supposed to be unfathomable and bottomless (Psa 36:7; 92:6; Job 11:8).
As Godet points out, "The deep things of God designate God's essence, then His attributes, volitions, and plans." Grosheide correctly concludes:
God's omniscience is here especially predicated of the Spirit. He searches the deep things of God: nothing is excluded from His searching.
What must be in order for what is to be what it is? While the Trinitarian expects to find passages such as this, the Arian does not. Indeed, what Arian would write such exalted language about the Spirit? Only a Trinitarian could or would write such things concerning the Spirit. The great Charles Hodge states:
This passage proves at once the personality and the divinity of the Holy Ghost. His personality, because intelligent activity is ascribed to him: he searches; his divinity, because omniscience is ascribed to him: he knows all that God knows.
One last evidence for the deity of the Spirit is found in Matthew 12:31-32:
Matthew 12:31-32 (NASB) "Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. 32 "Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.
It is inconceivable to deny either the personhood or the deity of the Spirit in the light of this passage. The kind of blasphemy referred to in this text clearly requires both the personhood and deity of the One blasphemed. The inherent ontological equality of the Three is also self evident.
The deity of the Spirit is seen from the fact that, if someone blasphemes the Father or the Son, he can be forgiven. But, if he blasphemes the Holy Spirit, it can never be forgiven. It is inconceivable that an impersonal force or power could be so exalted above the Father and the Son.
The Arian claim that the Spirit is merely an attribute of the Father or an exercise of His power cannot stand before this passage. A clear distinction is made in this passage between the Father and the Spirit. If the Spirit were only a part of the Father, to blaspheme the Father would be to blaspheme the Spirit. But this is not the case. Whoever blasphemes the Father can be forgiven, but not those who blaspheme the Spirit. They must be separate persons.
The Modalist claim that the Spirit is Jesus also falls to the ground before this passage. If the Three were the same person, then to blaspheme the one is to blaspheme the other. But, clearly to blaspheme Jesus or the Father is not the same as to blaspheme the Spirit. They must be separate persons, otherwise the passage makes no sense whatsoever.
It is the Holy Spirit who applies to us what Christ accomplished according to the plan of the Father. We are chosen by the Father, purchased by the Son, and sealed by the Spirit.
He is the Author of our regeneration (John 3:5) and our Guide throughout life (John 16:13). He is the One who sanctifies us (2 Thess 2:13) and comforts us when distressed (John 16:7). His fellowship quickens and revives us when weary (2 Cor 13:14). He glorifies Christ (John 16:14) and seals us for eternity (Eph 1:13). He convicts us of sin and brings us to repentance (John 16:8-11). He gives us assurance of salvation (Rom 8:16). He develops faith, hope, love, patience, and all the other "fruit of the Spirit" in our lives (Gal 5:22-23). He prays for us when we do not know what to pray for (Rom 8:26). To do all these things He has to be omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, etc. In other words, He has to be GOD.
Throughout the New Testament, the Holy Spirit is described as the divine Author of Scripture. The Word of God is, thus, the Word of the Spirit. For example, we read in Acts 1:16:
Acts 1:16 (NASB) "Brethren, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit foretold by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus.
David understood that what he said did not come from him. It came from the Holy Spirit:
2 Samuel 23:2 (NASB) "The Spirit of the LORD spoke by me, And His word was on my tongue.
Peter traced the Scriptures back to the divine Source:
2 Peter 1:20-21 (NASB) But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, 21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.
The words which Paul used when writing his epistles came from the Holy Spirit:
1 Corinthians 2:12-13 (NASB) Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, 13 which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.
The Holy Spirit's role in the inspiration of the Bible is clear evidence of His personhood and His deity.
No true worship is possible without the direct assistance of the Holy Spirit. Since "those that are in the flesh cannot please God" (Rom 8:8), we need the assistance of the Spirit in every act of worship.
In Philippians 3:3 we learn that we must "worship in the Spirit." In 1 Cor 12:15-16, we sing, pray, and bless God "with the Spirit." All true prayer is done "in the Spirit," by His power and guidance (Eph 6:18; Jude 1:20). We have access to the Father through the Son by the Spirit according to Ephesians 2:18. Thus, the Holy Spirit is invalved in every act of worship.
As to the direct worship of the Holy Spirit, 2 Cor 13:14 is more than sufficient to bear the weight of the doctrine. Whatever "fellowship" means when applied to the Father and to the Son also means the same when applied to the Holy Spirit. We "commune" or have "fellowship" with the Father and Son by our prayers and praise. The same is true of our fellowship with the Holy Spirit.
It is, thus, no surprise to see the Holy Spirit invoked along with that of the Father and the Son in the act of baptism. We must remember that baptism is as much an act of worship as the Lord's Supper. As the baptizer, the baptized, and the congregation worship God by observing this holy act of obedience, they are fulfilling the command of the Head of the Church who said:
Matthew 28:19 (NASB) "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit
Smeaton comments:
The doctrine of the Spirit was accepted from the earliest age as an elementary truth in connection with the baptismal formula by young and old, by learned and unlearned. This formula was a rudimentary truth to every baptized man: for there never was a time when a Christian disciple did not confess the Deity and saving work of all three Persons of the Godhead.
Finally, many commentators have seen, in Matthew 9:38, a prayer to the Holy Spirit:
Matthew 9:38 (NASB) "Therefore beseech the Lord of the harvest to send out workers into His harvest."
Who is the "Lord of the Harvest?" The One who sends forth missionaries and pastors to reap the fields that are white unto harvest. When we turn to the book of Acts, it is the Holy Spirit who sent forth Barnabas and Paul on their missionary tour (Acts 13:1-4). It is the Holy Spirit who appoints elders to rule over the local church (Acts 20:28). A.W. Pink concludes that the Holy Spirit is the "Lord of the Harvest" because:
It is the Holy Spirit who now appoints the laborers, equips them, assigns their work and blesses their efforts.
The Bible begins with the Holy Spirit superintending the molding of the old Creation (Gen 1:2). He is subsequently seen at work throughout redemptive history as the One predicting and preparing the way for the coming of the Messiah. His presence and gifts empowered the apostles as they established and extended the Christian Church. The Bible then ends with the Spirit calling us to come to the New Creation (Rev 22:17). In all these ways His personhood and deity shine forth with light indistinguishable and full of glory.