048. I. Personality Of The Spirit.

I. Personality Of The Spirit.

1. Determining Facts of Personality.—These facts were sufficiently given in our discussion of the divine personality. As in all instances the same facts are necessary to personality, and in all determinative of personality, a reference to the previous discussion may here suffice.

2. The Holy Spirit a Person.—The Scriptures are replete with references to the Spirit, the Spirit of God, the Spirit of Christ, and the Holy Spirit. This reference is in the first chapter of the Bible and in the last. But it is not necessary, nor would it be judicious or wise, to assume in every such instance a personal distinction of the Spirit in the sense of Trinitarianism. It suffices for the doctrine that there are sufficiently numerous texts which give the sense of this distinction, and which cannot be rationally interpreted without it. There are enough such; even many above the need. The clearer texts are in the New Testament, but there are many in the Old which, especially as read in the light of the New, give the same meaning. In the brooding of the Spirit upon the face of the waters, bringing cosmic forms out of the chaotic mass (Genesis 1:2); in the striving of the Spirit with men (Genesis 6:3); in his gift of wisdom to Bezaleel and Aholiab, and to other artisans of special skill (Exodus 31:2-6); in his illumination and guidance of Othniel, the son of Kenaz, in the leadership and government of Israel, securing to them the conquest of their enemies, and rest for forty years (Judges 3:9-11); in giving a pattern of the temple to David—a pattern which he gave to Solomon (1 Chronicles 28:11-12); in the gracious baptism of Christ, as foretold in prophecy and fulfilled in the Gospel (Isaiah 41:1-3; Luke 4:18-21),—in all these operations, as in many others like them, there are forms and qualities of agency which clearly signify the personality of the Spirit. The association of the Holy Spirit with the Father and the Son in the form of baptism gives the sense of his own personality (Matthew 28:19). The personality of neither the Father nor the Son can be questioned, so far as the meaning of these words is concerned. Any such denial respecting the Spirit is utterly arbitrary and groundless. If it be not so, then the Holy Spirit must signify some nameless impersonal energy of the Father. In this case, baptism would be in the name of the Father, and in the name of some indefinite form of his personal energy. So irrational a sense cannot be read into these words of Christ. The Father must here mean the plenitude of his Deity. Hence baptism in his name must be in the full sense of this plenitude. No impersonal somewhat can remain, in the name of which baptism may be solemnly performed, just as though it stood in the same infinite plenitude of divinity with the Father himself. In the form of apostolic benediction there is a like association of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (2 Corinthians 13:14). For like reasons we must here find the personality of the Spirit. This benediction is not a mere form of words, but an earnest prayer, an outbreathing of the soul in supplication for the richest spiritual blessings. These blessings can be conferred only through personal divine agency. This love of God the Father is the personal bestowment of the gifts of his love. This grace of Christ is the personal gift of the benefits of his redemptive work. Hence this communion of the Spirit must signify his personal agency in our spiritual life. The personality of the Spirit is as real as that of the Father and of the Son.

There are many words of Christ respecting the offices of the Spirit which can have no rational interpretation without the sense of his personality. The disciples were taught that, when arraigned before magistrates, they need not be anxious respecting their answer, for the Holy Spirit would teach them in the same hour what they should say, and in this manner answer for them (Mark 13:11). Again, Christ promised the mission of the Spirit as another Comforter, who should abide with the disciples, teach them in all things, reprove the world of sin, guide the disciples into all truth, and glorify the Son (John 14:16-17; John 14:26; John 15:26; John 16:8; John 16:13-14). These are strange forms of expression if the Spirit is not a person. Strictly personal terms are used, with pronouns just as usual in other instances of personal antecedents. The agency of the Spirit in the several forms of its expression is strictly personal—such as only a person can exercise. There can be no mere personification. The facts of this agency preclude it. The personality of the Spirit is given in these facts. The diverse gifts of the Spirit, as expressed by St. Paul, are conclusive of his personality. The Spirit gives wisdom, knowledge, faith, the power of healing and working miracles, of prophesying, discerning of spirits, speaking with divers tongues, and interpreting tongues (1 Corinthians 12:4-11). Here again is the use of strictly personal terms, and the expression of a strictly personal agency. These diverse gifts signify the diverse forms of this agency: “But all these worketh that one and the self-same Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.” Nowhere has St. Paul expressed himself in so strange a personification as this would be. The meaning of his words cannot admit such a mode. We must give them a strictly personal sense, and with that sense the personality of the Spirit.

We may group a few significant and decisive facts. The Holy Spirit suffers blasphemy (Luke 12:10); witnesses to our gracious adoption, and helps us in our prayers (Romans 8:16; Romans 8:26); is lied to, and resisted (Acts 5:3; Acts 7:51); is grieved (Ephesians 4:30); is despited (Hebrews 10:29); searches and knows all things (1 Corinthians 2:10-11); chooses ends and orders the means of their attainment (Acts 13:2-4). These facts are distinctive of personality, and thus prove the personality of the Holy Spirit. There is significance for the present question in the very common qualitative appellation. Holy Spirit, or Holy Ghost. This appellation occurs so frequently in the New Testament, and is so familiar, that references are quite needless. We find it also in the Psalms and in Isaiah (Psalms 51:11; Isaiah 63:10). If, instead of a personal title, we find with this appellation only a personification, we are brought back to some indefinite energy of God. Why should such an energy be thus specially qualified? Holiness is distinctively a personal quality. Deeds may be holy, but only as the deeds of a person in holy action. Even a subjective holiness can be such only as its tendencies are to holy personal action. Holy, as a qualitative term in the appellation of the Spirit, must signify the personality of the Spirit.

3. Procession of the Spirit.—With the distinction between generation in respect to the Son and procession in relation to the Spirit, each of which is a mystery for our thought, the treatment of the latter is much the same as that of the former. Procession respects purely the personality of the Spirit, and as the generation of the Son, is designated as eternal. Procession is not from an optional act of the Father, for this would place the origin of the Spirit in time, which is contradictory to his true and essential divinity. An optional act of the Father as original to the existence of the Spirit will answer for Arianism or Semi-Arianism, but will not answer for the true doctrine of the Trinity. It only remains to say that the procession of the Spirit is from a necessary and eternal activity of the Godhead. Like other truths of the Trinity, it is inexplicable for human thought. The procession of the Spirit from the Father is a definite truth of Scripture. This truth, while omitted in the Apostles’ Creed, was distinctly affirmed in the Nicene. So far there was no reason for disputation among those who accepted this Creed. All could agree in its affirmation that the Spirit proceedeth from the Father, as this is so definitely a truth of Scripture. It might still be questioned whether this gave the whole truth in the case. Such a question did arise. Soon after the Nicene Council it came to be hotly disputed whether the procession of the Spirit was from the Father only, or from the Father and the Son. The former view prevailed in the East; the latter in the West. A provincial Council, convened at Toledo, A. D. 589, and representing the Western view, added to the Nicene Creed the notable Filioque, so that the procession of the Spirit should be expressed as from the Father and the Son. The friends of this addition thought it a logical requirement of the true and essential divinity of the Son; that if the Son is όμοούσιος τώ πατρί—of one substance with the Father—The procession of the Spirit must be from the Son as from the Father. The question is thus carried into a sphere of speculation which seems too subtle for any very positive assertion of doctrine. However, this issue respecting the procession of the Spirit was a chief influence which led to the separation between the East and the West, or to the division of the Church into the Greek and the Roman. Evangelical Churches hold the Filioque. The procession of the Spirit from the Father is, as we have stated, explicitly scriptural: “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me” (John 15:26). The procession from the Son is not an explicit truth of Scripture; yet it is held to be derived from the Scriptures, but only in an inferential mode. This mode is legitimate; and a doctrine thus obtained may be as validly scriptural as if explicitly given. Many leading doctrines are so derived; notably, the doctrine of the Trinity, and the doctrine of the person of Christ. The only question is whether the grounds are at once thoroughly scriptural and conclusive of the inference. This is the vital question concerning the procession of the Spirit from the Son.

There are certain relationships between the Father and the Spirit which imply, and, for their full truth, require, the procession of the Spirit from the Father. But the same relations exist between the Son and the Spirit, which, therefore, prove the procession of the Spirit from the Son. For the proof of this procession, these facts of relationship must be presented. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of the Son, just as he is the Spirit of the Father (Romans 8:9; Galatians 4:6; 1 Peter 1:11). This fact of a common relationship seems clearly stated, without any qualification or reserve. If it be true, as maintained in this argument, that the Spirit is the Spirit of the Father on the specific ground of procession, and that this is the only ground of the relation, he must be the Spirit of the Son on the same ground. Therefore the procession of the Spirit is from the Son, as from the Father. This is one Scripture proof of the Filioque. Again, the mission of the Holy Spirit in the economy of redemption is from the Son, just as it is from the Father (John 14:16; John 14:26; John 16:7; Acts 2:33). Here also is a fact of common relationship, clearly expressed, and without any distinction. But the mission of the Spirit from the Father implies a subordination, the only ground of which is in his procession from the Father. Therefore his mission from the Son implies a subordination which must have its ground in a procession from the Son. This is the second argument. The two give, in substance, the more direct Scripture proof of the Filioque, or of the procession of the Spirit from the Son.