When Jesus, in His conversation with the woman of Samaria, identifies Spirit with the Being of God {wvtvfj.a 6 Oebi, Jn 4''^), He at once proceeds to fore- shadow the abiding result, as well as the condition of man's approach to Him. The arena, so to speak, upon which the activity of the Divine Spirit displays His manifold and world-wide char- acter, is the human spirit. If we are to offer to God a spiritual (iv wvivixan) worship, and appre- hend clearly the methods by which He quickens human life, the first and last requisite is that we shall be in the Spirit (Jn 4^^ ; cf. Ro S'^'-, Eph 2^8 etc.). It is not enough, though it is perfectly true, to say that ' the spirit in man responds to the VOL. II.— 43
Spirit of God' (Westcott, Gospel of St. John, on t^^). The spirit in man becomes tiie spirit of man (rip TTvetjfjLaTi ijfJLQv, Ro 8'"), and acting, as it does, in harmony witli the Spirit of God, is guided into all the truth (cf. tlie sequence rb wvev/jia ttjs dXrjdeiai . . . eis rrjv d\r}dei.av irdaav, Jn 16'^). Henceforth man's spiritual home is within the region of that absolute truth which the Person and the work of Jesus were destined to disclose and make real.
Just as we are led to believe in and hope for this co-operative activity of the Holy Spirit, so the Evangelists are insistent in the belief that the spirits of evil are ever watchful to make their home within us. In words of solemn warning Jesus implies that our need of spiritual guidance is so profound that we stand in constant danger of harbouring these active enemies (note eh rbv oUbu fjLov, Lk IP'*), and that the only Avay of succes.sfully guarding against their presence is to admit the Holy Spirit as the supreme and only Guest (cf. Plummer, 'St. Luke,' in ICC, on 11-'). So close is the analogy between these conceptions that St. Mark does not hesitate to denote the presence and the relation of the evil spirits to the possessed by using the same preposition {iv) which he employs when speaking of the guiding influence of the Holy Ghost (Mk P^ S^^ 5^ ; cf. 1236, j^^ 2-^). The diseases which these spirits were supposed to con- vey to their victims were often spoken of as belonging to them inherently (Mk 9"* ^ etc. See art. Demon).
We shall not be surprised, after these considera- tions, to learn that when men have the same ends in view, pursue them by similar methods of work, and betray the same general characteristics in their mental and spiritual outlook, they are said to liave the same spirit. John the Baptist and Elijah, though separated by centuries of time, were be- lieved to be so far identified that the former lived and acted ' in spirit and in power ' {^v irvevpLan Kal 8vvdfi€i, Lk V"), I.e. under the shadow and guidance of the latter (cf. Jesus' method of interpreting the popular belief in the pre-Messianic return of Elijah, Mt IV*). At the same time, the historian is care- ful to note that the Baptist's childhood was marked by a gradual development and strengthening in spirit side by side with his bodily growth (Lk P"). See, further, artt. Flesh, Holy Spirit, Soul.
Literature. — In addition to the Lexx. and Dictionary artt. and the Lit. at Soul, see Laidlaw, Sible Docl. of Man, esp. 131 ff. ; Weiss, Bihl. Theol. of NT, § 27 ; W. H. Hodge, ' Bibl. Usage of Soul and Spirit ' in Pres. Ref. Bav. viii. (1897), 251 ; F. E. Brightman, ' Soul, Body, Spirit ' in JThSt ii. (1900) 273 ; W. H. Schoemaker, 'Use of Pneuma in NT' in JBL xxiii.
(1904) 13. J. R. Willis.
SPIRITUALITY. — See Character of Christ in vol. i. p. 286 f . , and art. Spirit.
SPIRITUALIZING OF THE PARABLES.— 'The
legs of the lame,' says a Hebrew proverb, 'hang loose; so is a parable in the mouth of fools' (Pr 26^) ; but it is possible to err in the opposite direc- tion by pressing a parable too far, and, if the ex- pression may be allowed, riding it to death. Such was the manner of the ancient interpreters, and it has been imitated by not a few in modern times. The error lies in forgetting that a parable is designed to teach one broad lesson, and insisting on discovering some significance in every detail. A glaring instance is Theophilus of Antioch's ex- position, quoted approvingly by St. Jerome,* of the parable of the Steward (Lk 16'"'^), which in- culcates simply tlie duty of being as shrewd in spiritual matters as men are wont to be in worldly att'airs. The rich man, according to Theophilus, is Almiglity God ; the steward, St. Paul ; the debtor who owed 100 baths of oil, the Gentiles, 'qui * ad Algas. Qucest. vi.
674
SPITTING, SPITTLE
STAR
magna indigebant niisericordia Dei ' ; the debtor who owed 100 cors of wheat, the Jewish people, ' wliich had been nourished by the wheat of God's commandments.' Euthymius Zigabenus, whose interpretation of 'the fatted calf (Lk 15'^^) as ' the holy body of Christ' is saved from being blas- phemous only by the good monk's simple piety, makes out that the ricli man is God (rbv (j>i\di>- dpwirov Kai dvevderj deov) ; the Steward, every possessor of riciies, such being ' not loi'ds but stewards ' ; the steward's dismissal, death. Some modern in- terpreters have gone quite as far in extravagance. Schleiermacher makes the rich man represent the Komans, the steward the tax-gatherers, the debtors the Jewish people. According to Olshausen, the rich man is dpx^v tou (coV/xok, while the steward is the man who applies earthly riches to spiritual uses.