9/2/14

The Holy Spirit & Human Experience

The Holy Spirit is thought of as one person of the Trinity. The word person is used in recognition of the identity of an individual sentient being. With God though whom is the transcending omnipotent, omniscient being the differentiation from monism to pluralism is challenging to understand. One wonders what could differentiates or forms boundaries within the being of God such that differences could exist yet equally as well one might wonder how God could not have primary differentiation in order to achieve better intellect or capacity such as one finds in moving from monocular to binocular vision. The Holy Spirit is God, yet so are the Father and the Son.

It is a little difficult to describe the Holy Spirit without describing the Father and the Son for each cohere within God and comprise the essential nature of God as a triune being from whom all good things are made to exist (though one might have an opinion that all things always exist in some nook within the infinite spatio-temporal, non-spatio-atemporal- memory as reality -knowledge of God). The Holy Spirit is held to have always existed as have the Father and Son.

Obviously scientists would want find in that an interest in deconstructing a synthesis as they might find a synthesis in the history of human R.N.A. and mitochondrial D.N.A. or the evolution of a given government bureaucracy such as Homeland Security from prior bureaucracies. The trinity though is something more than what a Nobel Prize winning physicist wrote about phase changes generating new wholes that are greater than the sum of the parts in a book called ‘Reinventing Physics from the Bottom Up’. Existence and creation may be enabled because of the complexity possible with the Trinity.

Albert Einstein had a friend and fellow physicist (Paul Ehrenfrest) who discovered the principle that three dimensions of space and one of time seems to be the ideal configuration for the existence of atoms. With fewer dimensions of space atoms either could not exist as complex structures and with more dimensions the formation of atoms would be too difficult and simple motions would not be possible. Nuclear valence shells would be obstructed by complexity; electrons could not orbit a nucleus and so forth.

If atoms exist in three dimensions of space it is possible that they are made up of one or two dimensional strings at a very fundamental level. At a larger level membrane of space-time may collide to generate energy or membranes of spatial dimensions may intersect and move along creating an appearance of the passage of time for humans or other sentient beings existing within the intersecting ‘branes’.  In that context space ‘branes’ would have field energy that generates complexity after collisions. That complexity seem like a big bang and a Universe of particles could appear as detritus. That has been compared to a collision in a particle accelerator. This is all natural philosophy view by humanity within some existing realm willed by God to exist. Various fields and branes, if they exist, would be pluralistic creations will by God to exist. In the infinite power of God all things are possible including an infinite generation of spatial membranes.

The Holy Spirit as one of the trinity has a special role enabling communication with humanity and providing grace unto humanity though the world is itself complex and challenging to exist within. The Holy Spirit has more power than even gravity to transcend the criterion of mass, for gravity acts without differentiation upon all mass with only massless particles being uninfluenced by it, while the Holy Spirit can act specifically upon individuals as the will of God deems. The Trinity may be the way God interacts with all created things while for-himself He just is.

God exists in a heterodox fashion with things existing eternally one might guess as an essential attribute. The Holy Spirit is God as are the Father and Son, yet one might also regard the Holy Spirit from the perspective of existential relations of being-for-others. In that sense one finds the Holy Spirit to be  little different-a Person of Holiness and excellence drawing human beings toward the perfect and good, the true and righteous, to a directions leading to fulfillment of the purposes of God. Through revelation human beings learn of the Holy Spirit. It is only as created beings that humanity can regard the Holy Spirit. What or how the Holy Spirit is for-himself or more accurately what God is like for-himself human beings simply cannot know. The most close we can get to that is through Jesus Christ, as Jesus informed us in his special prayer of renormalization unto one-ness.

In order to provide a measure of comparison of what I have written here to the historical context of what has been written about the Holy Spirit I will provide a substantial quote from a Christian historian on the Holy Spirit. It is interesting to see how a writer’s knowledge-base affects his approaches for writing about a topic that has existed for writers as a topic for millennia. It occurs to me for example, that the problem of free will and determinism can be approached differently today with string and atomic theory cosmology than during the early Christian era, of course it wasn’t necessary to develop apologetics or replies to quantum physics or the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, General Relativity or quantum teleportation in the first century A.D. With all of that it is illuminating to consider that the Holy Spirit would seem to implicitly have an advantage in acting within and through deterministic sectors of space-time mass and/or energy configured as human life and human affairs. One also might wonder how God can effect deterministic space-time mass or energy once it is set in motion. Though brane theory can negate the need for local brane motion when the appearance of motion can arise through intersecting, traveling branes, some motion does seem to exist at at least one meta-level of brane existence or in a variegated field of branes. With the uncertainty principle perhaps arising because of the difference in space-mass-energy configurations on intersecting branes yet at any rate required for freedom-of-movement within an overall deterministic field, the Holy Spirit can act directly beyond and through any given configuration of branes, entangled mass energy, fields, strings or other atomic structure…helpful indeed for the fallen and lost human race.

Holy Spirit (page 503) and the Trinity (page 507) in volume 2 of Schaff’s History of the Christian Church; (in the public domain).

Quote-“The doctrine of the Holy Spirit was far less developed, and until the middle of the fourth century was never a subject of special controversy. So in the Apostles’ Creed, only one article is devoted to the third person of the holy Trinity, while the confession of the Son of God, in six or seven articles, forms the body of the symbol. Even the original Nicene Creed breaks off abruptly with the words: "And in the Holy Spirit;" the other clauses being later additions. Logical knowledge appears to be here still further removed than in Christology from the living substance of faith. This period was still in immediate contact with the fresh spiritual life of the apostolic, still witnessed the lingering operations of the extraordinary gifts, and experienced in full measure the regenerating, sanctifying, and comforting influences of the divine Spirit in life, suffering, and death; but, as to the theological definition of the nature and work of the Spirit, it remained in many respects confused and wavering down to the Nicene age.

Yet rationalistic historians go quite too far when, among other accusations, they
charge the early church with making the Holy Spirit identical with the Logos. To confound the functions, as in attributing the inspiration of the prophets, for example, now to the Holy Spirit, now to the Logos, is by no means to confound the persons. On the contrary, the thorough investigations of recent times show plainly that the ante-Nicene fathers, with the exception of the Monarchians and perhaps Lactantius, agreed in the two fundamental points, that the Holy Spirit, the sole agent in the application of redemption, is a supernatural divine being, and that he is an independent person; thus closely allied to the Father and the Son yet hypostatically different from them both. This was the practical conception, as demanded even by the formula of baptism. But instead of making the Holy Spirit strictly coordinate with the other divine persons, as the Nicene doctrine does, it commonly left him subordinate to the Father and the Son.

So in Justin, the pioneer of scientific discovery in Pneumatology as well as in Christology. He refutes the heathen charge of atheism with the explanation, that the Christians worship the Creator of the universe, in the second place the Son, in the third
the prophetic Spirit; placing the three divine hypostases in a descending gradation
as objects of worship. In another passage, quite similar, he interposes the host of good
angels between the Son and the Spirit, and thus favors the inference that he regarded the Holy Ghost himself as akin to the angels and therefore a created being. But aside from the obscurity and ambiguity of the words relating to the angelic host, the coordination of the Holy Ghost with the angels is utterly precluded by many other expressions of Justin, in which he exalts the Spirit far above the sphere of all created being, and challenges for the members of the divine trinity a worship forbidden to angels. The leading function of the Holy Spirit, with him, as with other apologists, is the inspiration of the Old Testament prophets. In general the Spirit conducted the Jewish theocracy, and qualified the theocratic officers. All his gifts concentrated themselves finally in Christ; and thence they pass to the faithful in the church. It is a striking fact, however, that Justin in only two passages refers the new moral life of the Christian to the Spirit, he commonly represents the Logos as its fountain. He lacks all insight into the distinction of the Old Testament Spirit and the New, and urges their identity in opposition to the Gnostics.

In Clement of Alexandria we find very little progress beyond this point. Yet he calls
the Holy Spirit the third member of the sacred triad, and requires thanksgiving to be addressed to him as to the Son and the Father.

Origen vacillates in his Pneumatology still more than in his Christology between
orthodox and heterodox views. He ascribes to the Holy Spirit eternal existence, exalts him, as he does the Son, far above all creatures and considers him the source of all charisms, especially as the principle of all the illumination and holiness of believers under the Old Covenant and the New. But he places the Spirit in essence, dignity, and efficiency below the Son, as far as he places the Son below the Father; and though he grants in one passage that the Bible nowhere calls the Holy Spirit a creature, yet, according to another somewhat obscure sentence, he himself inclines towards the view, which, however he does not avow that the Holy Spirit had a beginning (though, according to his system, not in time but from eternity), and is the first and most excellent of all the beings produced by the Logos.

In the same connection he adduces three opinions concerning the Holy Spirit; one regarding him as not having an origin; another, ascribing to him no separate personality; and a third, making him a being originated by the Logos. The first of these opinions he rejects because the Father alone is without origin (ἀγέννητος); the second he rejects because in Matt. 12:32 the Spirit is plainly distinguished from the Father and the Son; the third he takes for the true and scriptural view, because everything was made by the Logos. Indeed, according to Matt. 12:32, the Holy Spirit would seem to stand above the Son; but the sin against the Holy Ghost is more heinous than that against the Son of Man, only because he who has received the Holy Spirit stands higher than he who has merely the reason from the Logos.

Here again Irenaeus comes nearer than the Alexandrians to the dogma of the perfect
substantial identity of the Spirit with the Father and the Son; though his repeated figurative (but for this reason not so definite) designation of the Son and Spirit as the "hands" of the Father, by which he made all things, implies a certain subordination. He differs from most of the Fathers in referring the Wisdom of the book of Proverbs not to the Logos but to the Spirit; and hence must regard him as eternal. Yet he was far from conceiving the Spirit a mere power or attribute; he considered him an independent personality, like the Logos. "With God" says he, "are ever the Word and the Wisdom, the Son and the Spirit, through whom and in whom he freely made all things, to whom he said, ’Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.’ "But he speaks more of the operations than of the nature of the Holy Ghost. The Spirit predicted in the prophets the coming of Christ; has been near to man in all divine ordinances; communicates the knowledge of the Father and the Son; gives believers the consciousness of sonship; is fellowship with Christ, the pledge of imperishable life, and the ladder on which we ascend to God.

In the Montanistic system the Paraclete occupies a peculiarly important place. He
appears there as the principle of the highest stage of revelation, or of the church of the
consummation. Tertullian made the Holy Spirit the proper essence of the church, but subordinated him to the Son, as he did the Son to the Father, though elsewhere he asserts the "unitas substantiae." In his view the Spirit proceeds "a Patre per Filium," as the fruit from the root through the stem. The view of the Trinity presented by Sabellius contributed to the suppression of these subordinatian ideas.

§ 149. The Holy Trinity.
Comp. the works quoted in §144, especially Petravius, Bull, Baur, and Dorner.
Here now we have the elements of the dogma of the Trinity, that is, the doctrine of the
living, only true God, Father, Son, and Spirit, of whom, through whom, and to whom are
all things. This dogma has a peculiar, comprehensive, and definitive import in the Christian system, as a brief summary of all the truths and blessings of revealed religion. Hence the baptismal formula (Matt. 28:19), which forms the basis of all the ancient creeds, is trinitarian; as is the apostolic benediction also (2 Cor. 13:14). This doctrine meets us in the Scriptures, however, not so much in direct statements and single expressions, of which the two just mentioned are the clearest, as in great living facts; in the history of a threefold revelation of the living God in the creation and government, the reconciliation and redemption, and the sanctification and consummation of the world—a history continued in the experience of Christendom. In the article of the Trinity the Christian conception of God completely defines itself, in distinction alike from the abstract monotheism of the Jewish religion, and from the polytheism and dualism of the heathen. It has accordingly been looked upon in all ages as the sacred symbol and the fundamental doctrine of the Christian church, with the denial of which the divinity of Christ and the Holy Spirit, and the divine character of the work of redemption and sanctification, fall to the ground.

On this scriptural basis and the Christian consciousness of a threefold relation we
sustain to God as our Maker, Redeemer, and Sanctifier, the church dogma of the Trinity
arose; and it directly or indirectly ruled even the ante-Nicene theology though it did not
attain its fixed definition till in the Nicene age. It is primarily of a practical religious nature,
and speculative only in a secondary sense. It arose not from the field of metaphysics, but from that of experience and worship; and not as an abstract, isolated dogma, but in inseparable connection with the study of Christ and of the Holy Spirit; especially in connection with Christology, since all theology proceeds from "God in Christ reconciling the world unto himself." Under the condition of monotheism, this doctrine followed of necessity from the doctrine of the divinity of Christ and of the Holy Spirit. The unity of God was already immovably fixed by the Old Testament as a fundamental article of revealed religion in opposition to all forms of idolatry. But the New Testament and the Christian consciousness as firmly demanded faith in the divinity of the Son, who effected redemption, and of the Holy Spirit, who founded the church and dwells in believers; and these apparently contradictory interests could be reconciled only in the form of the Trinity; that is, by distinguishing in the one and indivisible essence of God three hypostases or persons; at the same time allowing for the insufficiency of all human conceptions and words to describe such an unfathomable mystery.

The Socinian and rationalistic opinion, that the church doctrine of the Trinity
sprang from Platonism and Neo-Platonism is therefore radically false. The
Indian Trimurti, altogether pantheistic in spirit, is still further from the Christian Trinity.
Only thus much is true, that the Hellenic philosophy operated from without, as a stimulating force, upon the form of the whole patristic theology, the doctrines of the Logos and the Trinity among the rest; and that the deeper minds of heathen antiquity showed a presentiment of a threefold distinction in the divine essence: but only a remote and vague presentiment which, like all the deeper instincts of the heathen mind, serves to strengthen the Christian truth. Far clearer and more fruitful suggestions presented themselves in the Old Testament, particularly in the doctrines of the Messiah, of the Spirit, of the Word, and of the Wisdom of God, and even in the system of symbolical numbers, which rests on the sacredness of the numbers three (God), four (the world), seven and twelve (the union of God and the world, hence the covenant numbers. But the mystery of the Trinity could be fully revealed only in the New Testament after the completion of the work of redemption and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The historical manifestation of the Trinity is the condition of the knowledge of the Trinity.”-endquote


No comments:

About Logic

A silly, grossly invalid syllogism. premise 1  All men are mortal premise 2  Janey Socrates is not a man Conclusion-  Janey Socrates is immo...