4. St. Luke tells us that Jesus returned from the Jordan 'in the power of the Spirit' into Galilee (4"), and St. Peter in Ac (10=«') tells how God anointed Him (in the Baptism) ' with holy spirit and power ' ; and it is under these conditions that the Evangelists conceive His whole ministry to be fulfilled. If they do not mention the Spirit at every step, it is because they think of Him as in full possession of it continually. It probably agrees, e.g., with the Evangelist's own idea, to say that the passage in Mk. which immediately succeeds the Temptations illustrates first by Jesu.s' power over men (l^^-^), next by His power or authority in teaching (1""-), and, finally, by His power over demons (l^"-), what is involved in His possession of the Spirit. A Divine power accom- panied all His words and deeds, and made them effective for God and for His kingdom. The allu- sion in V^ to His rising early and going away to a desert place to pray suggests that. Divine as this power was, it wrought in, and in accordance with the laws of, a human nature which was capable of spiritual exhaustion, and had to recruit its strength \vith God. We do not find till we come to 3-' ('they said. He is beside himself,' iiiaTmi) any further indication of how His work in the Spirit afiected Jesus. It is clear from this impatient word, in which the same charge is brought against the Lord as was afterwards brought against Paul (see
HOLY SPIKIT
HOLY SPIEIT
2 Co 5'^, where i^iar-qiKv is ojjposed to aoiippovodixev), that the tension of His spirit seemed at times abnormal : He was ' rapt ' or ' carried away ' by His earnestness, and became for tlie time uncon- scious of bodily needs or indifierent to them (cf. the fast in the wilderness, and Jn 4^"''-). Pos- sibly even the charge brouglit against Him by the scribes, tliat He cast out devils by Beelzebub, in other words, tliat He was jiossessecl Himself by a demon, — a cliarge mentioned in this connexion by Mk.,— appealed for sup]Mirt U< tliis tension or rap- ture. If the character of -Icmis' tcailiiiig and heal- ing had been that of emotionless plucidity, it would not have been even plausible to say iat.fj.dvioi' e'x" Ka.1 fiaberai (Jn 8*- ^'- 10"" : these passages from the Fourth Gospel are guaranteed by their agreement with Mk 32"-). There is no trace in the Gospel of any want of self-control,— no such fren/y :i> is ascribed to the Spirit in 1 S 19-*'-, or in tie- .Ir^ i i|i tion of the glossolalists in 1 Co 14, — but ile ic i^ a superhuman intensity implied whicli was felt throughout the life in word and deed.
5. The main interest of the passage Mk 3^-^* lies in the word of Jesus Himself about the Holy Spirit : ' Verily I say unto you. All things shall be forgiven to the sons of men, the sins and the blas- phemies, all that they have blasphemed : but whoso shall have blasphemed the Holy Spirit hath never forgiveness, but is guilty of eternal sin : because they said, He hath an unclean spirit' (V.28I-). It is hardly doubtful that this is the true form of this much discussed saying of Jesus. Tlie Holy Spirit is not here set in any contrast with Jesus, as though to blaspheme Jesus were a venial fault, but to blaspheme tne Spirit an unpardonable one ; on the contrary, the Holy Spirit is blasphemed when malignant hearts harden themselves to say of Jesus, ' He has an unclean sjjirit.' The Divine power which works through Jesus with such in- tensity, healing all who are under the tyranny of the devil, is in point of fact God's supreme and final appeal to men. It is such an exercise of power as is possible only for one who has already vanquished Satan, and is engaged in liberating his captives (Mk 3"). No person \vith any sense for God in him can help being attracted by it to begin with. But if the other manifestations of this power should happen to provoke resentment, — if its ethical demands (as in the teaching of Jesus) should threaten seriously the rejiutation or the self- complacency of the insincere, — it is fearfully pos- sible that they may set tbeiiisehes .m.-iinst it, and so resist the Holy Spirit. Surlr ir^isliuice, unce begun, may go to any Icii-ih, imu id the length of defiantly misinterpret 111- ilic liii' of .lesus, and affirming it to be from l>eiie;il ii, nci I'lnm aliuve. This is the sin against lle^ Holy S|,iiii. In piin- ciple, it is the everyday sin of liii.lini; l.;ul nnp|i\.'-, for good actions; carried to its nnii.-udoniil.li- height, it is the sin of confronting the Divine holy power which ^vrought so irresistibly and so intensely in Jesus, and saying anything — the maddest, most wanton, most malignant thing — rather than acknowledge it for what it is. The people who said, ' He has Beelzebul' (3-^), ' He has an unclean spirit' (v.'"), were not giving expression to their first, but to their last thoughts of Christ. This was the depth which malignity in them had reached. The Holy Spirit receives' here a certain interpretation from being contrasted v.ith an ' un- clean ' spirit. ' Unclean ' is a religious rather than an ethical word ; the imclean spirit is one which has not and cannot have relations with God : it can only be excluded from His presence, as it excludes those who are possessed by it. The Holy Spirit is specifically God's ; it brings Hin: in His