GOD
GOD, CHILDRE2\ OF
21i
divine influence of which they were conscious in preacliing and teaching; ; the sjiecial and reiuarkahle ' gifts ' (xa/jiff^aTo) whicli distinguished in an emi- nent degree the (irst generations of Cliristians ; and, generally speaking, the felt communion of the human spirit \\itli tlie divine, were regarded by them as manifestations of the activity of the Holy Ghost. If we read the three chs. I Co 12-14 we see that St. Paul felt himself to be in the midst of sucli activity ; and tliere are many otber allusions to it. The Early Church appears to have dated the energies at work within it in a special sense from the lirst Pentecost after the Ascension. They called this an 'outpouring;' of the Holy Ghost, seeing in it a fullilment ot prophecy (Ac 2"-"^'», Tit 3%
IJut how was it that they came to speak of the work of the Holy Spirit as lie work of apersonl That they did so apiicars not only from such incidental passages as Ko S-", 1 Co 12", Eph 4*", but still more from the great Trinitarian te.\ts2 Co IS" and Mt 28'", in whicli the Huly Clhost is placed on precisely the same footing as the Son and the Father. We have seen that this tan have been no momentary freak of language, Li.t that it must have had a broad foundation in tlie consciousness of the apostolic Church. Between the lluid usage of contemporary Judaism and the lixed usage of the apostles and their successors there intervenes the teacliing of Jesus. And it seems impossible not to refer to this tlie impulse which determined the direction of Cliristian thought upon the sub- ject. The fragments of that teachin" which have been preserved for us in the Fourth Gospel (Jn 14i6ff. so J5M 16'-") seem to imply a j'et fuller con- text which has been lost ; but of tliemselves they are sulhcient to warrant the faith which the Church has evidentlj' held from the tirst, though as the centuries went on it was compelled to define it with increasing distinctness.
There are two classes of pas.'sages in NT relating to the Holy Ghost. On the one hand, there are those of which we have been speaking, where the Third Person (of later theologj-) is clearly distin- guished from the First and Second, and repre- sented as confronting them. And, on the oilier hand, there are passages in which the Third Person is as closely associated with the First and Second.
The Spirit is repeatedly spoken of as the ' Spirit of God.' And the relationship indicated by this phrase is explained in 1 Co 2''"- as analogous to that of the spirit in man. 'For the Spirit searcheth all thmgs, j-e.a, the deet) things of God. For who among men knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of the man which is in hira ? even so the things of God none knoweth, save the Spirit of God.' ISut He who is thus described as the ' Spirit of God ' is also described as the ' Spirit of Chnxt.' So notably in Ko 8'-"- ' Hut 3'e are not in the llesh but in the Spirit, if so bo that tlie Spirit of God dwelleth in vou. But if any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, lie is none of his. And if Christ is in you,' etc. Here ' Christ ' takes up the 'Spirit of Christ,' and that, a"ain, takes uj) the •Sjjirit of God' (delined a little later lus the 'Spirit of Him that raii*cd up Jesus from the dead ) in such a way as to show that, at least for the purpose of the writer, the three terms are convert- ible. Nor is this the only place in which we read of the 'Spirit of Christ' (cf. 1 P 1"), or ' of Jesus' (Ac 16' KV), or 'of Jesus Christ' (Ph V), or 'of [the] Son' (Gal 4"), or 'of the Lord' ( = Christ, 2 Co 3").
Again, we have to remember that the concep- tion of the incarnate Christ is reierred to the direct operation of the Holy Ghost (Lk I"), and that His endowment with the fulncRs of divine power for His ministry U also ihitid from the
descent of the Holy Ghost at His baptism. This ii the 'anointing with the Holy tihost' of Ac 10*' as the sequel to which He is ' full of the Holj- Spirit ' (Lk 4'), and acU through the Holy Spirit (Mt 12-«, Ac l'. He 9^*) ; He al.so communicated the Holy Spirit to the apostles (Jn 2iJ-).
There is thus another side to the mystery of the Triune God. Although in one sense Three, He is in another no less One. There is such a mutual interaction, such a fundamental unity, as prevents distinction from amounting to separation. The Three Persons are not three individuals. There are not three Gods, but One God.
This is the evident drift of the data which NT has handed down to us ; and it is to these data that the later theology has sought to do justice. They find their most complete and ripest inter- pretation in the balanced clauses of the (Juicumt/ue. Those clauses are, no doubt, relative to the line of thought which leads up to them. Compared to some aspects of the biblical teaching, they will appear secondary where this is primary. It is more important lor the great mass of Christians to have it brought home to them that God is love, that the proof of His love is the incarnation and death of His Son, and that He does impart of His own righteousness to men, than that {e.g.) the Son is ' not made nor created, but begotten.' But the signilicance of this latter proposition is that Christ is truly Son. And the <|uestion whether He is truly or only figuratively Son is a vital q^uestion, as vital now as it was in the days of Nic;ia or Chalcedon. The question was quite sure to be raised, and, being raised, it has to be answered. The phrasing of the answer may varj' with the