Holy Spirit. Fresco from Bistrita Monastery, Romania. Photo: fotoload.ru
I. Such then is the account of the Son, and in this manner He has escaped those who would stone Him, passing through the midst of them. For the Word is not stoned, but casts stones when He pleases; and uses a sling against wild beasts—that is, words—approaching the Mount in an unholy way. But, they go on, what have you to say about the Holy Ghost? From whence are you bringing in upon us this strange God, of Whom Scripture is silent? And even they who keep within bounds as to the Son speak thus. And just as we find in the case of roads and rivers, that they split off from one another and join again, so it happens also in this case, through the superabundance of impiety, that people who differ in all other respects have here some points of agreement, so that you never can tell for certain either where they are of one mind, or where they are in conflict.
II. Now the subject of the Holy Spirit presents a special difficulty, not only because when these men have become weary in their disputations concerning the Son, they struggle with greater heat against the Spirit (for it seems to be absolutely necessary for them to have some object on which to give expression to their impiety, or life would appear to them no longer worth living), but further because we ourselves also, being worn out by the multitude of their questions, are in something of the same condition with men who have lost their appetite; who having taken a dislike to some particular kind of food, shrink from all food; so we in like manner have an aversion from all discussions. Yet may the Spirit grant it to us, and then the discourse will proceed, and God will be glorified. Well then, we will leave to others who have worked upon this subject for us as well as for themselves, as we have worked upon it for them, the task of examining carefully and distinguishing in how many senses the word Spirit or the word Holy is used and understood in Holy Scripture, with the evidence suitable to such an enquiry; and of showing how besides these the combination of the two words—I mean, Holy Spirit—is used in a peculiar sense; but we will apply ourselves to the remainder of the subject.
III. They then who are angry with us on the ground that we are bringing in a strange or interpolated God, viz.:—the Holy Ghost, and who fight so very hard for the letter, should know that they are afraid where no fear is; and I would have them clearly understand that their love for the letter is but a cloak for their impiety, as shall be shown later on, when we refute their objections to the utmost of our power. But we have so much confidence in the Deity of the Spirit Whom we adore, that we will begin our teaching concerning His Godhead by fitting to Him the Names which belong to the Trinity, even though some persons may think us too bold. The Father was the True Light which lightens every man coming into the world. The Son was the True Light which lightens every man coming into the world. The Other Comforter was the True Light which lightens every man coming into the world. Was and Was and Was, but Was One Thing. Light thrice repeated; but One Light and One God. This was what David represented to himself long before when he said, In Your Light shall we see Light. And now we have both seen and proclaim concisely and simply the doctrine of God the Trinity, comprehending out of Light (the Father), Light (the Son), in Light (the Holy Ghost). He that rejects it, let him reject it; and he that does iniquity, let him do iniquity; we proclaim that which we have understood. We will get us up into a high mountain, and will shout, if we be not heard, below; we will exalt the Spirit; we will not be afraid; or if we are afraid, it shall be of keeping silence, not of proclaiming.
IV. If ever there was a time when the Father was not, then there was a time when the Son was not. If ever there was a time when the Son was not, then there was a time when the Spirit was not. If the One was from the beginning, then the Three were so too. If you throw down the One, I am bold to assert that you do not set up the other Two.
What benefit is there in a Godhead that is not perfect? How can there be a Godhead that is not perfect? If something lacks perfection, then it cannot be considered perfect. And if it does not have the Holy Spirit, then it is lacking something essential. How could something be perfect if it is missing the Holy Spirit? If holiness is separate from Him, then what is it? If it is the same, then it should have been present from the beginning. It would not make sense for God to be imperfect and without the Spirit at one point. If God is not eternal, then He is on the same level as humans, separated from the Godhead by time. If that is the case, how can He elevate us to Godhood?
Let’s discuss the Holy Spirit from an earlier point. Some deny His existence, while others have different conceptions of Him. Some consider Him an Activity, others a Creature, and some see Him as God. Some are uncertain out of reverence for Scripture. Those who believe in the Trinity have different interpretations of the three Persons, creating confusion.
We cannot debate with those who deny His existence or with those who do not respect the importance of the Holy Spirit. But for those who believe in Him, we need to understand His nature – whether He is an attribute of God or a separate entity. If He is an attribute, then He is temporary and limited in nature. If He is a separate entity, then He must either be a creation of God or God Himself. If He is God, then He cannot be a creation or anything less than divine.
The debate is open. Is the Holy Spirit Unbegotten or Begotten? If Begotten, is it by the Father or the Son? If the Father has two Sons, they are Brothers. They can be twins or have an age difference, but it would be absurd to suggest a Grandson God. If distinctions are necessary, they should be acknowledged without fear of names. Just because the Son is of God and Consubstantial, it doesn’t mean all earthly names should be transferred to the Godhead. Our God is not defined by gender based on names like Father or Spirit. The idea of God begetting the Son through marriage is akin to the Hermaphrodite god of certain other beliefs.
The concept of Begotten and Unbegotten is not the only division, as there is also that which Proceeds, introduced by our Savior Himself. The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father, not as a Creature or a Son, but as God between the Unbegotten and the Begotten. Trying to understand the mysteries of God’s nature is futile, as it is beyond our comprehension.
There is nothing lacking in the Spirit that prevents Him from being a Son; it is the difference in their mutual relations that determines their names. The distinctions of Father, Son, and Spirit maintain the unity and dignity of the Godhead. The Unity is not Sabellian, and the Trinity does not support harmful distinctions.
The Spirit is God and Consubstantial because He is God. If two beings, one a Son and one not a Son, both of the same Substance as the Source, are accepted, then there can be both a God and a God. No, if you agree that there is another God and another nature of God, I can present to you the same Trinity with the same name and facts. However, since God is One and the Supreme Nature is One, how can I show you the Likeness? Is it not shameful and foolish to try to understand the unchanging nature of God by looking at things below and from a fluctuating nature?
I will try to help you with your argument, even from that source. I could bring forward many examples from animal history, where likes beget likes and diverse things beget diverse things. There are creatures that undergo self-consumption and self-generation, as well as transformations from one species to another. There are also instances where part of a species may be generated while the other part is not, yet all are of the same substance.
Let me mention one fact from our own nature: Adam was a creature of God, Eve a fragment of the creature, and Seth the begotten of both. Although they were different persons, they were consubstantial. This shows that different persons can have the same substance. I do not attribute creation or fraction to the Godhead, but I contemplate these examples as objects of thought alone.
It is possible to worship and pray to the Spirit, as Scripture says God is a Spirit and we must worship Him in Spirit and in truth. The Spirit Himself makes intercession for us, and praying to the Spirit is like offering prayer to Himself. Adoring or praying to the Spirit is the same as adoring the Three, because of their equality of honor and Deity. Therefore, I am not afraid of the argument that all things were made by the Son, as the Holy Spirit is not just one of these things. Demonstrate that He was created, and then offer Him to the Son, and count Him among the creatures; but unless you can prove this, you will not gain anything for your impiety from this all-encompassing statement. If He was indeed created, it was surely through Christ; I would not argue against that. But if He was not created, how can He be considered part of the All or through Christ? So, refrain from dishonoring the Father by presenting a creature to Him in place of a Son, and from dishonoring the Son by opposing the Spirit. The Spirit is not the creator of a fellow servant but is glorified alongside One of equal honor. Do not separate any part of the Trinity from yourself, for if you reject any of the Three, you have rejected the whole. It is better to have a limited understanding of the Unity than to embrace complete impiety.
Our discussion has now reached its crucial point, and though I am saddened that an old problem, long settled by faith, is being revived, it is necessary to stand against these talkers and not let justice be ignored when we have the Word on our side and are defending the cause of the Spirit. Those who question how there can be Three Gods without there being Three Gods are either deeply ungodly or have taken a more moderate stance regarding the Son. My argument is against both, but especially the latter. To those who worship the Son, even if they have turned away from the Spirit, why do you call us Tritheists? Are you not Ditheists yourselves? If you reject worship of the Only Begotten, you align with our adversaries. If you do worship Him and are on the path to salvation, explain why you are accused of ditheism. If you can defend your ditheism, it will also refute our Tritheism. Thus, by using you as our accusers, we can win the day.
Our dispute with both parties is this: to us, there is One God, as the Godhead is One, and all that comes from Him is directed towards One, even though we believe in Three Persons. There is no hierarchy in God, no division of will or power. The Godhead is undivided in separate Persons, like three suns joined together. When we consider the Godhead, we see One; when we consider the Persons in whom the Godhead dwells, we see Three whom we worship.
Some may argue that the Greeks also believe in one Godhead, but have many gods. However, the unity in the common nature of humanity is only conceivable in thought, while individuals are vastly different from each other. We are compound and contrasting beings, constantly changing. The same may be said of Angels and other superior beings close to the Trinity. XVI. The Greek gods, worshipped as dæmons, are convicted by their own theologians of being subject to passion, faction, evil, and opposition to each other and their first causes. Our faith, unlike theirs, believes in unity and each Person possessing Unity with that which is united to it. If this is true, let us be grateful; if not, let us seek a better understanding.
XVII. Your argument against our belief in the Unity of God is based on counting things of one essence together. But we do not risk speaking of three gods because we assert they are not consubstantial. By denying the Godhead to avoid trouble, you have conceded victory to your opponents. I will not abandon my faith, even if it requires effort.
XVIII. Your argument that things of one essence are counted together is flawed, as every number expresses quantity, not the nature of things. I will use the word “Three” for three things, even if they differ in nature, and “One” for united units, regardless of their essence. Your insistence on the letter of the law contradicts your argument.
XIX. The names of things do not determine their essence or unity. It is more about laying down laws of names than asserting truth. I must assert that Peter, James, and John are not three or consubstantial, as I cannot say Three Peters, Three Jameses, or Three Johns. If common names are reserved, proper names should be as well. Otherwise, it is unfair. In John’s Catholic Epistle, he mentions the Spirit, Water, and Blood as Three that bear witness. This contradicts the idea of consubstantiality. The argument from connumeration breaks down when considering examples like crabs and dogs. Adding One and One together results in Two, which can then be resolved back to One and One. The order of names does not determine the nature of the elements. The argument of counting before and after is flawed. The use of God, Lord, and prepositions in Scripture does not indicate inequality of nature or dignity. Ignoring the silence of Scripture, many have acknowledged the doctrine of the Trinity throughout history. This is demonstrated by those who have delved into the inner meaning of the Scriptures. However, because Scripture does not explicitly refer to Him as God as often or as clearly as it does to the Father and the Son, you have taken this as an opportunity to blaspheme and engage in excessive verbosity and impiety. To address this, we will have a brief discussion on things, names, and their use in Holy Scripture.
Some things are spoken of even though they do not exist, while others that exist are not mentioned. Some things neither exist nor are mentioned, and some both exist and are mentioned. For example, God is described as sleeping, being awake, angry, walking, and having the Cherubim as His Throne. However, God does not actually sleep, experience anger, or have a physical body. These descriptions are figurative language based on human attributes. Similarly, terms like Unbegotten, Unoriginate, and Immortal are not explicitly stated in Scripture but are implied by certain passages.
It is important to not be overly focused on the literal words of Scripture and to instead consider the intended meaning behind them. By understanding the deeper meanings and implications of the text, we can combat false teachings and uphold true orthodoxy. Since you deny the clear and numerous titles of the Son, it is evident that even if you were to learn more titles, you would not be moved to reverence. Let me explain the reason for this secrecy. Throughout history, there have been two significant changes in mankind’s lives known as Testaments – the transition from idols to the Law, and from the Law to the Gospel. The Gospel teaches of a third transition from this Earth to an unshakable realm. These changes were gradual to persuade rather than force, as involuntary change is not lasting. God gently guides us, allowing for gradual shifts in habits. The Old Testament revealed the Father and hinted at the Son, while the New Testament revealed the Son and introduced the Spirit. The Spirit now dwells among us, providing a clearer demonstration of Himself. This gradual revelation allows for a deeper understanding of the Trinity. Just as the Spirit was gradually revealed to the Disciples, so too is the truth of God revealed over time. We see lights breaking upon us gradually, and it is best for us to maintain the order of Theology by not revealing things too quickly or keeping them hidden until the end. Revealing things too suddenly would be unscientific, while keeping them hidden would be atheistic. The former may startle outsiders, while the latter may alienate our own people. Our Savior withheld certain teachings from His disciples at that time, perhaps for reasons similar to those I have mentioned. He also promised that all things would be taught by the Spirit when He came to dwell among us. One of these teachings, I believe, was the Deity of the Spirit Himself, which would be revealed at a later, more appropriate time. This knowledge would be received more readily after our Savior’s resurrection, when it would no longer be met with incredulity.
I hold firmly to the belief in the worship of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, as one Godhead. Let us not stray from this belief, but worship the three Persons as One God, undivided in honor, glory, substance, and kingdom. Those who do not worship the Holy Spirit do not understand the significance of Baptism. The Spirit is to be worshipped as God, for He is an Object of adoration. From the Spirit comes our New Birth, our new creation, and a deeper understanding of the dignity of God.
The Deity of the Holy Spirit is clearly evident in Scripture, for those who are not ignorant or hostile to the Spirit. Throughout the life of Christ, the Spirit is present, bearing witness, leading, and accompanying Him. The Spirit is associated with great things and bears many titles that belong to God. It is important for the distinct properties of the Father and the Son to remain unique to them, to maintain order in the Godhead. The Spirit is referred to by many names in Scripture, each highlighting His divine attributes.
Source link