The Holy Spirit: Person or Power?

[look2jesus]

I think, in a lot of churches, ones spiritual maturity would be the last thing they (i.e., the churches) would be concerned about...it's ones salvaltion that would be questioned and scrutinized. So I agree with your sentiments, though I think it is wise not to embrace everyone who calls him or herself a christian too hastily without, at least, some judgment being applied by the christian...of course that doesn't mean that we should ever be unloving to anyone.

Probably the biggest draw I feel toward Steve's ministry, and, by extension, this forum (because in the main I see the same spirit here) is due to the ability to share and discuss and argue over things of the Christian faith without fear of condemnation or ridicule and that sort of thing. I wish it were the same throughout the church. The main problem with denominations, as I see it, is not the different views that they hold, but rather, the lack of love for, and grace extended to, and acceptance of, believers who happen to hold different views or question certain views that are being espoused. Any doctrine or question should be open to discussion and even vigourously argued about, without either party stepping outside the bounds of christian charity but, alas, such is not the case in too many circles.

I find it unfortunate that with some of the people that I love the most, I'm not able to discuss a difference of opinion without them getting angry or upset. So, in effect, whole doctrines have to be taken off of the table because I don't feel I'm acting in love if I bring up a topic that I know will make someone angry or upset. Maybe I'm wired differently than a lot of people but I love to engage someone and have someone engage me. If I make a statement, I think I ought to be able to defend why I believe as I do and, conversely, I ought to have the right to question someone else's opinion or belief without the discussion turning nasty, especially among fellow believers.

But back to this whole thing about the Holy Spirit. One of my concerns (if I can call it that, because I'm not really that concerned about it) is that it reminds me of a friend of mine, who's a brother, that believes there is only one God...a Jesus Only guy, I guess. I maybe hinted at this before but reading the link that was posted in the beginning of this thread reminded me of the way my friend would argue to try and prove to me that Jesus was really the Father and that the Holy Spirirt was the Father also...but the main thing that sort of bugged me was that, with him (and Steve addressed this too, I think, regarding the initial link that was posted) it seemed to be his main agenda (as well as the leadership's in the church he attended). And don't misunderstand, I'm not getting that sense from you at all. But whenever I'm attending any fellowship that makes too much of secondary issues, or where a particular doctrine that they hold to is the main focus of what they teach or who they are, I just get uncomfortable and I feel my spirit being quenched. I wish that we all, myself included, would focus more of our attention on doing the one thing Jesus commanded us to do, that should be obvious to every christian no matter the denomination, and that is to love one another. If we christians could just make that our starting point, there's no telling what great things the church could accomplish for her king.

But, thanks again Darin. Sorry for getting a little off topic there. : )

[Singalphile]

My thinking is similar to darinhouston's in this thread.

Some thoughts (some of which were already mentioned in this thread):

1. I affirm that the Spirit is God and is not an impersonal power. (Likewise, the Son is God and the Father is God.)

2. I suppose that I have a spirit and I would refer to my spirit as me, but my spirit is not a different "person" than me. Likewise, I'm not sure the Holy Spirit should be thought of as a different person from the Father and/or Son. Maybe.

3. Assuming that "the Holy Spirit" is the same as the Spirit in the Old Testament, I'm not aware of any Jewish statement of the Spirit as a second "person" of God. Why should we? Progressive revelation?

4. The references to the Spirit of Christ and the Spirit of God are interesting. (Paidion, and others, has his well-known view related to this point, which I think is possible.)

5. There is a biblical emphasis on the Father and Son, which is a little odd if the Spirit is really exactly the same sort of co-equal but distinct "person".

6. If God saw fit to keep His "three-in-oneness" unknown for so long, then why couldn't it be the case that He is actually four-in-one or five or six, etc.? Progressive revelation, right? For that reason, I only refer to the Father, Son, and Spirit as Scripture does, without speaking (presumptuously, imo) of God as if that is the kind of being that He is.

So I'm not sure if I qualify as a trinitarian. It's not a big deal for me.

I appreciate look2jesus's last post. I try to only use biblical language. If others understand those words of Scripture differently than I do, that's fine. Many preachers and Bible study leaders use extra-biblical language - e.g., "our triune God" - so very freely. That's the sort of behavior that causes sects (aka, heresies), which I think hurts the body of Christ. When individuals - often the more thoughtful and theology-minded - are driven out because they have the wrong opinion, they often will meet up with others who have odd opinions, and then you end up with Mormons and JWs and the like. (Of course, sometimes it's the person with the minority view who is divisive.) That's a real shame, I think.

It's an important topic for me. If I could help do only one thing with the tons of freedom, health, resources, and time that I have been blessed with (while it lasts, which might not be long), I would especially love it if I could help unite the church and rid us of all the hairesis, i.e., sects/divisivenss. It's such a waste.

Edit: If I could, which I probably can't, I'd like to widely disseminate a full treatment of the preceding few sentences. I'd call it, "Heresy: It's Not What You Think." If anyone likes that title and idea, run with it, please!

[Homer]

Singalphile,

You seem to wisely adhere to "we speak where the bible speaks, and are silent where the bible is silent". This is commendable. I think it is also important to speak of biblical things in the way the scriptures speak of them (not a fan of "The Message" ). Neglect of this has caused many of the divisions in the church. When we read the scriptures we form our idea of what the word, or words mean. Then we tell someone else our version, they form their idea from our words and then are another possible step from the original. An example of this is the mischief caused by adding the word "alone" to "we are saved by faith". Then books are written to explain what is meant by the "proof text".

You wrote:

There is a biblical emphasis on the Father and Son, which is a little odd if the Spirit is really exactly the same sort of co-equal but distinct "person".

Interestingly, one seminary professor, author of a number of books, says the theme of the book of Acts is the coming of the Holy Spirit.

[Paidion]

Have you ever noticed that almost all prayer in the New Testament is addressed to the Father alone?
There is one (and only one) instance of a prayer addressed to Jesus:
Stephen, while being stoned, cried out, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." (Acts 7:59).

But how many prayers found in the New Testament were addressed to the Spirit? Exactly zero.

I think the reason is that the Spirit is the extension of the Persons of the Father and of the Son, and though personal, is not "a third person of the godhead." It seems that in some special way the Father and the Son dwell in Heaven. But Jesus said:

Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him." (John 14:21)


How does the Father and the Son manifest Themselves to those who love Jesus and keep His commandments when they dwell in Heaven? As I see it, They do it by extending their Persons into their minds and hearts. That extension of their Persons is the Spirit of God, or the Holy Spirit.

So in my understanding, the Holy Spirit is neither "a Person" nor "a Power" but the very Persons of the Father and the Son in extension.

[darinhouston]

Paidion, I think that’s along the right lines. I’m not sure we have warrant to clarify much but I think there’s possibly a subtle difference that could be true. It’s possible that the Spirit is the Father’s way of expressing himself and having relationship (or His very essence) and that it’s not so much that it is that they both share the same Spirit but that Jesus’ Spirit is the same as His Father’s either in that the Father gave it to Him (a part of being His Son) or that His Spirit indwelt Jesus and fully united with Jesus’ own in a way that perhaps we can do in measure and/or fully unite with in our Resurrection. As Jesus’ body was the temple of the Holy Spirit and we are His body on earth, there may be warrant to this. Of course this whole line is largely conjecture. It’s an interesting mystery to meditate on, and to consider as we read Scripture. I do wish this is where the Church had left the Trinity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[darinhouston]

I have been thinking along these lines for a while. What do you think about this? Any other recommendations for writing or lectures on Spirit Christology as compared with Logos Christology?

http://cdn.theologicalstudies.net/53/53.2/53.2.3.pdf