Colin, This is what others are saying about the Spirit: http://themeofthebible.com/articles/David%20Clayton/The%20Holy%20Spirit%20Of%20God.html

I took this from a page on the themeofthebible.com website.

Yes, Tom, that looks alright on first reading, and I know I agree with the webmaster over there.

Dr Glenn!! Thank you, thank you, thank you for your Bible study on entering the trinity thread, and for joining this 'Holy Spirit' thread. All those texts are very helpful.

MM, no doubt the Holy Spirit is a person of the Godhead, but what sort of person is it as a personality? Not like the Father or the Son are persons, that much we can say.

The Bible and SOP teach the trinity doctrine which we now teach?? How, as the Son is no longer begotten at all, except he is in Scripture, etc. Our previous teaching of the Godhead involved three persons as revealed in the Bible. There is a difference: hence this discussion.

Thomas, you sought clarification:

quote:

---

If I understand your position correctly, that the Spirit isnt a person at all but an it, an apersonal "artificial intelligence of God and Jesus", and that the prof of this is His/its lack of a humanly recoginseable body.

---

No.... Both the power of God in the universe - sustaining creation, especially grace sustaining this world, and God's presence in the lives of his people. So, isn't the Spirit of God both facilitating God's personal presence in our lives, and manifesting the grace & power of God for & in us, etc.

The Bible only mentions the Spirit as the Spirit of God representing Father and Son to their intelligent creatures in God's personal absence, powerful to make God's presence real in our lives with God's power for us. Early Adventism went no further.

Tom:

quote:

---

Here's where the rubber meets the road I think. Is the Holy Spirit someone that can think and act indepently of God the Father or Christ the Son? When the Godhead meets in conference, how many are present? Two or three? The ideas of how many are expressed? Two or three?

---

What did Jesus say the Spirit of truth would do? Since Jesus himself is Biblical truth - as this very week's lesson brings out in Jn 14:6, the Spirit of that truth testifies of Jesus' truth, and not of himself. Thus The Spirit speaks for God and Jesus, not of himself. It doesn't thus act independently of the Father or his Son.

Jesus spoke of being one with his Father but didn't include being one with his Spirit. Rather, by the Spirit the Father and his Son are one in character and purpose, while they are one in nature by sharing true divinity, though divinity has the divine Spirit, of course, as far as is revealed. Counsels of the Godhead list two beings, in the Bible and the SOP. The Spirit implements the counsels of God, but doesn't discuss those counsels since he is God's presence for believers and not God himself in person.

Overall certainly we are virtually dealing with the incomprehensible when dealing with God, but I'm trying only to be as clear about Biblical revelation as possible without going beyond it.

Does that help, everyone?

Colin, do you believe there is enough inspired evidence to believe that the Holy Spirit is as much a person as God is a person?

The Holy Spirit is a distinct person of the Godhead. I think we are straying into semantics over what is meant by "person". Though the Spirit may not have the same substance as the Father and Son, yet, HE can certainly have a distinct mind and thought process from theirs.

One cannot read the Bible without seeing that there is order of function in all things. Though the Spirit might not act indipendently from the Father and the Son in fulfilling His role in the plan of salvation, He certainly has an individual mind whereby He comes into aggreement with the plans worked out by the Father and the Son.

The fact that the Spirit is not mentioned in the councils of Heaven does not mean He did not participate in them, either. You have to look at things from the context of the Great Controversy. The rebellion did not involve enmity agains the 3rd person of the Godhead, but the 2nd. Yet, Sister White does mention that all Three were moved with compassion for the human race and that all Three gave themselves for its redemption. Why did she not say "both the Father and the Son" were moved with compassion instead? If the Holy Spirit is not a distinct being of the Godhead, then IT has no compassion nor ability to give ITSELF for anything.

Good point Dave.

/Thomas

Sorry, Dave and Thomas, but you're both failing to spot the point about "person".

Dave, your post has effective contradictions because of the theological terms you used, like here

quote:

---

The Holy Spirit is a distinct person of the Godhead. I think we are straying into semantics over what is meant by "person". Though the Spirit may not have the same substance as the Father and Son,

---

. Yes, a distinct person of the Godhead, but no, the Spirit - for the very reason of being a distinct person of the Godhead - has the same substance as the other persons, when "substance" refers to having divine nature, as all three do have. I'm not seeking to touch on same or similar substance debate, or other like issues: just show that you appear accidentally to have removed the Spirit's divine identity .

The conroversy is very much rather about what sort of person the spirit is. Never is it called a being, but person or personality or Spirit: "being" means a regular physique, and Adventist literature before the Great War emphasised merely the personal Spirit of God proceeding from the Father or Son without a body. Your closing comment

quote:

---

If the Holy Spirit is not a distinct being of the Godhead, then IT has no compassion nor ability to give ITSELF for anything.

---

unwittingly used "being" for "person": the Spirit isn't a being but a person.

In her comments on the heavenly counsels of God, Sister White clearly restricts it to 2 beings. The Spirit's participation would be mentally facilitating the agreement between God and Jesus and empowering its implementation as God's power where he is not physically present, while bringing God's presence to his intelligent creation.

The Spirit is an irregular sort of person, helping to implementing God's will when God's on his throne or otherwise 'tied down' in one spot. That's the extent of Biblical revelation, and not the speculation of any number of trinitarian formulations available today.

Colin, you mention the Holy Spirit not testifying of Himself, but rather of Christ. This implies He has a self of which He can testify.

If the Holy Spirit is simply Christ manifest as a spirit, then He would be saying in essence, "I will not testify of Myself, but will testify of Me." I know this is a strange sounding sentence, but hopefully the point I'm making is coming through OK.

When the Spirit of Prophecy says that the Holy Spirit is as much a person as God the Father is, or Jesus Christ, that seems to argue against the position you are suggesting, if I am understanding it correctly. "Person" by its very meaning implies individuality and the ability to act independently. One cannot speak of the "three persons" of the Godhead if there are only two. If when the Godhead meets in counsel there are only two minds present, then there are only two inviduals present as well, and hence only two persons of the Godhead.

One thing I agree with you about is that we are dealing with things above our heads. I share your desire not to go beyond what the Spirit of Prophecy or the Bible states, nor of being too dogmatic about things beyond our understanding. However, I'm having difficulty with some of the points you are making.

Yes, I should avoid sounding dogmatic, as I may appear to be. Still, this description of the Holy Spirit isn't some much above our heads: just a person while not a usual person. That's not complicated, is it? Just 'not a usual person'. [Officially though we don't make the short sentence of the Spirit's person a little longer to get this point out.... ]

I appreciate you're trying to work that out, from what you wrote: a person, but not a person...? That's the question that doesn't go away, as that M C Wilcox excerpt noted. Inspiration is reasonably clear on the Holy Spirit being God's Spirit, even God's omnipresent, invisible agency: this Spirit's personality ain't normal: he's Christ's presence among us, his brethern, without Christ actually being here. It should be safe to call that divine magic. It's just not a conventional person since it proceeds from a physical person. Not ethereal, since that's earthly and natural, but the divine Spirit of and from God.

The Holy Spirit's testimony is about the truth of God in Christ. The Spirit of Christ speaks of Christ, as God's agency to us: The Spirit has no truth of its own to impart; he merely is God's presence, will, witness and power among us, facilitating our experience with God and our witness of God's truth. God's actions are the Father's will carried out by the Son through the agency of their Spirit. Perfect, active agreement, but all are divine for sharing the Father's divinity, not merely on the basis of that agreement - as we officially teach today.

Sorry, that was longer than I anticipated. God's personal agency isn't the same sort of person as God is. Is that simple enough?