Chapter 3: Understanding the Holy Spirit
Trying to determine what the Holy Spirit is has been a challenging quest for many for a long time. The most common explanation of the Godhead—the Trinitarian view—teaches that the Holy Spirit is a coequal person with God the Father and the Son, but is this teaching found in the Bible?
Although sorting out what the Bible says about the Holy Spirit is more complicated than learning about God the Father and the Word, a clear explanation is available if we will carefully consider the Scriptures without bias toward a particular interpretation. As we have seen thus far, the humanly devised explanations of God the Father and the Son contradict the biblical teaching that the Godhead consists of two distinct spiritual beings (1 Corinthians 8:6).
Because the Trinity is the most popular explanation of God, in this chapter we are going to consider a brief history of how and why the Trinity doctrine was devised. First, we will see how the Bible explains the Holy Spirit, then learn about the Trinity, and then conclude with clear explanations of passages about the Holy Spirit that are often misunderstood.
As we begin our quest to understand the Holy Spirit, a brief observation is insightful. We have already seen that the Bible refers to both the Father and the Son as God (John 1:1, 18; 20:28; Romans 9:5; Philippians 2:6; Colossians 2:9; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:8; 2 Peter 1:1). But the Bible never refers to the Holy Spirit as God. This simple fact should alert us that the Holy Spirit is likely something different than a third being in the Godhead.
So what is the Holy Spirit? Let’s see how the Bible describes it.
God’s Spirit at creation
At the creation of the heavens and earth, Scripture tells us that “the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters” (Genesis 1:2). The Spirit of God was thus present at the preparation of the earth for mankind, but God is the being who said, “Let there be light” and is the being who did the work (verses 3, 31).
Although we later learn that Christ is the One through whom God did the creating (Colossians 1:16; Ephesians 3:9), what is significant for us to focus on here is that God—not the Holy Spirit—is credited with creating and fashioning the earth. Why is Genesis written this way if the Holy Spirit is a third person in the Godhead? Was the Holy Spirit just watching what God was doing?
In considering the Old Testament, Jewish scholars have defined the Holy Spirit as the power of God—not as a member of the Godhead. This explanation is accurate, for the Bible repeatedly presents the Spirit of God as the power of God, the force by which He accomplishes things.
By means of His Spirit, God can be everywhere at once (Psalm 139:7-10). It is thus the operational presence and influence of God.
A Spirit of power
This definition of the Holy Spirit as the power of God is confirmed in a number of scriptures. The prophet Micah said God’s Spirit was the impetus he received from God to fulfill his ministry: “But truly I am full of power by the Spirit of the LORD ” (Micah 3:8).
Through the power of the Holy Spirit, God the Father conceived the Word in Mary as the man Jesus Christ (Luke 1:31-32, 35). If God were a trinity, we would expect Jesus to be called the Son of the Holy Spirit—the power that came upon Mary to cause her to conceive (Matthew 1:18). But Jesus was never called the Son of the Holy Spirit.
Jesus likewise taught that the Holy Spirit is the power of God. Speaking to His disciples of the Holy Spirit they would soon receive, Jesus said, “Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high” (Luke 24:49).
During the last few days before His ascension to heaven, Jesus reminded His disciples of this promise, saying, “You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth” (Acts 1:8). The Holy Spirit would empower Jesus’ disciples to carry out the commission He had given them.
Christ’s disciples understood the Holy Spirit to be the power of God. Peter wrote that the Spirit of God moved the prophets to speak God’s messages (2 Peter 1:21). Paul said he did mighty signs and wonders “by the power of the Spirit of God” (Romans 15:18-19). Paul further described the Holy Spirit as a spirit “of power and of love and of a sound mind” (2 Timothy 1:7).
When people repent of their sins and are baptized, they can have hands laid on them to receive the Holy Spirit—the power of God to help them to live in accordance with God’s instructions (Acts 2:38; 19:6).
How New Testament Christians understood the Holy Spirit
The way the writers of the New Testament spoke of the Holy Spirit is quite insightful. In this portion of the Bible, the Holy Spirit is referred to in many ways indicating it is not a person.
The Holy Spirit is called a gift (1 Timothy 4:14; Acts 10:45). It can be quenched (1 Thessalonians 5:19). It can be poured out (Acts 2:17, 33), and we are baptized with it (Matthew 3:11). It can renew us (Titus 3:5) and needs to be stirred up within us (2 Timothy 1:6).
Instead of being presented as a person, the Holy Spirit is described as wind (Acts 2:2), fire (verse 3), water (John 4:14; 7:37-39), oil (Psalm 45:7), a dove (Matthew 3:16) and an “earnest” (down payment or guarantee) on eternal life (2 Corinthians 1:22; 5:5; Ephesians 1:13-14, KJV). It is also significant to note that Jesus always prayed to the Father and not to the Holy Spirit (Matthew 6:9; 11:25-27).
Paul, the most prolific writer of the New Testament, never speaks of the Trinity. In all of his books, his standard greeting (with only slight variations) to the churches is, “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” He never mentions the Holy Spirit in all his greetings (see Romans 1:7; 1 Corinthians 1:3; 2 Corinthians 1:2; Galatians 1:3; Ephesians 1:2; Philippians 1:2; Colossians 1:2; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 2 Thessalonians 1:1-2; 1 Timothy 1:2; 2 Timothy 1:2; Titus 1:4; Philemon 1:3). What disrespect this would be if the Holy Spirit were indeed a being in the Godhead!Like other people of God in the Bible, Paul also understood the Holy Spirit to be the power of God that can encourage us, uplift us and inspire us. Speaking of his ministry to the church at Rome, Paul wrote: “For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ has not accomplished through me, in word and deed, to make the Gentiles obedient—in mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God, so that from Jerusalem and round about to Illyricum I have fully preached the gospel of Christ” (Romans 15:18-19).
In Revelation 21 we read of new heavens and new earth wherein “the tabernacle of God is with men” (verse 3) as is Christ, the Lamb of God (verse 22). The Holy Spirit is not mentioned here—another indication that the Holy Spirit is not a separate being in the Godhead.
For additional insight on how first-century Christians understood the Holy Spirit, see our online articles “What Is the Holy Spirit?” and “What Did the Apostles Believe About God?”
A short history of the Trinity
Historians know that the Trinity was never a perspective of the Jews or Christians of the first century. As one Trinitarian candidly acknowledges, “The Jews never regarded the spirit as a person; nor is there any solid evidence that any Old Testament writer held this view … The Holy Spirit is usually presented in the Synoptics [the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke] and in Acts as a divine force or power” (Edmund Fortman, The Triune God, 1972, pp. 6, 15).
Numerous sources confirm that the Trinity was a concept devised by theologians rather than a teaching of the Bible. “The Old Testament clearly does not envisage God’s spirit as a person … God’s spirit is simply God’s power. If it is sometimes represented as being distinct from God, it is because the breath of Yahweh acts exteriorly … The majority of New Testament texts reveal God’s spirit as something, not someone; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God” (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 14, pp. 574-575).
Gregory of Nazianzus acknowledged in the fourth century: “Of our thoughtful men, some regard the Holy Spirit as an operation, some as a creature and some as God; while others are at a loss to decide, seeing that the Scripture determines nothing on the subject” (Oratio 38: De Spiritu Sancto). Easton’s Bible Dictionary states that the word Trinity is “not found in Scripture” (“Trinity”).
So we are faced with a decision. We have to choose between accepting what God tells us about Himself in His inspired Word—the Bible—and accepting a humanly devised explanation of the Holy Spirit. As we consider our choice of explanations, we need to remember that Jesus declared that God’s Word is truth (John 17:17). Doesn’t it make sense that Jesus knew what was true and that the Bible is a better source for truth regarding the Godhead than the ideas of men?
As for how the Trinity came to be an integral part of Christianity, the New Bible Dictionary notes: “The word Trinity is not found in the Bible, and though used by Tertullian in the last decade of the 2nd century, it did not find a place formally in the theology of the church till the 4th century” (1982, “Trinity”). Several hundred years after the Bible was completed, religious leaders began developing and teaching that God is a Trinity.
Echoing this history, The Oxford Companion to the Bible explains: “Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian doctrine, it is striking that the term does not appear in the New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead found in later creedal formulations cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon” (Bruce Metzger and Michael Coogan, editors, 1993, p. 782).
So why did church leaders develop a new, nonbiblical explanation of the Godhead?
The effort to define who God was began due to a major controversy that had erupted among those professing to be followers of Christ. “In about 320 a fierce theological passion had seized the churches of Egypt, Syria and Asia Minor … The controversy had been kindled by Arius … He had issued a challenge which his bishop, Alexander, found impossible to ignore but even more difficult to rebut: how could Jesus Christ have been God in the same way as God the Father? Arius was not denying the divinity of Christ … but he argued that it was blasphemous to think that he was divine by nature” (Karen Armstrong, A History of God, 1993, p. 107).
Arius was an intelligent man and an accomplished debater, but he mistakenly believed that Jesus was a created being. The Roman Church selected a man named Athanasius, who was Alexander’s assistant, to counter this faulty teaching that was spreading throughout the churches.
Summarizing the argument, Karen Armstrong writes: “Either Christ, the Word, belonged to the divine realm (which was now the domain of God alone) or he belonged to the fragile created order” (p. 108). Arius placed Him in the created order, but Athanasius placed Him in the divine realm.
The Trinity was a philosophical concept developed to defeat the argument of Arius. What we have to recognize is that it had no basis in Scripture. The Trinity was simply the humanly devised construct that the Roman church used to counter the heretical teaching that Christ was a created being and thus on a lesser plane than God the Father. Trinitarians claim that a few passages in the Bible do indicate that God is a trinity; we will carefully examine these scriptures a little later to see whether this contention is legitimate.
The Arian controversy raged for a number of years. In response, the proposed doctrine of the Trinity “gradually developed over several centuries and through many controversies … The Council of Nicaea in 325 stated the crucial formula for that doctrine in its confession that the Son is ‘of the same substance [homoousios] as the Father’ even though it said very little about the Holy Spirit. Over the next half century, Athanasius defended and refined the Nicene formula, and, by the end of the 4th century … the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since” (Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Trinity”).
Earlier religious leaders accepted the biblical teaching that the Father and Son formed the Godhead. In the second century, bishop Irenaeus stated: “There is none other called God by the Scriptures except the Father of all, and the Son, and those who possess the adoption” (Against Heresies, Book 4, preface; compare Book 3, chapter 6).
In time biblical teaching would be discarded in favor of a model identifying the Holy Spirit as a third member of the Godhead. The historical record shows that the doctrine of the Trinity wasn’t completed until centuries after the Bible had been written and Christ’s original apostles had died. Unfortunately, this false concept of God has done much to suppress the biblical teaching of the Godhead.
For additional information on the development of the Trinity, see our online article “The Trinity: What Is It?”
Commonly misunderstood scriptures
Advocates of today’s more common explanations of God claim to take their beliefs from the Bible and cite a number of scriptures to supposedly prove their explanations. But as we are going to see, these so-called proofs really aren’t proofs at all.
What about Matthew 28:19?
Prior to returning to heaven, Jesus charged His disciples: “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” Some have assumed that this passage proves that the Holy Spirit is a person.
The word in (from the phrase “baptizing them in the name”) is the Greek word eis. It is defined as “into, to, towards, for, and among” (Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament). Entering God’s family via baptism involves entering into or moving into an association with the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
This verse is not addressing the nature of God or whether the Holy Spirit is a person. Acts 2:38 shows that we receive the Holy Spirit when we repent of our sins and are baptized. The process includes a minister laying his hands upon the person who is baptized (Acts 19:6) and then the person receiving the Holy Spirit from God (Acts 8:14-17).
McClintock and Strong in Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature note that Matthew 28:19 “proves only that there are the three subjects named … but it does not prove, by itself, that all the three belong necessarily to the divine nature, and possess equal divine honor … This text, taken by itself, would not prove decisively either the personality of the three subjects mentioned, or their equality or divinity” (1987, Vol. X, p. 552).
There are several scriptures similar to Matthew 28:19 that are commonly cited in an attempt to prove the Trinity, but when these scriptures are examined carefully, it becomes clear that they are simply referencing the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and are not proving anything about the nature of God.
Examples include Matthew 3:16-17; Galatians 4:6; Romans 15:30; Ephesians 2:18; 1 Peter 1:2; 3:18. Again, simply referring to three things does not mean all three things are exactly the same and equal or that these three things are a trinity.
For additional information on this passage, see our online article “Does Matthew 28:19 Prove the Trinity?”
What about 1 John 5:7-8?
The King James Version of the Bible renders these verses: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” Strangely, the words in italics are not included in the generally accepted New Testament manuscripts.
Many Bible commentaries, including The New Bible Commentary, state that the inserted words in the King James and New King James Versions of the Bible are spurious. The New Revised Standard Version correctly renders these verses: “There are three that testify, the Spirit and the water and the blood, and these three agree.” Here John personifies these three elements as providing testimony that Jesus was the Son of God. (For additional explanation of personification, see the section at the end of this chapter, “Why do some scriptures personify the Holy Spirit?”)
Dr. Neil Lightfoot says that the textual evidence is against 1 John 5:7 as translated by the King James and New King James Versions of the Bible. “Of all the Greek manuscripts, only two contain it [the addition]. These two manuscripts are of very late dates, one from the fourteenth or fifteenth century and the other from the sixteenth century. Two other manuscripts have this verse written in the margin. All four manuscripts show that this verse was apparently translated from a late form of the Latin Vulgate” (How We Got the Bible, 2003, pp. 100-101).
Albert Barnes in his Notes on the Bible concurs that the addition is spurious and states that this passage “is never quoted by the Greek fathers in their controversies on the doctrine of the Trinity—a passage which would be so much in point, and which could not have failed to be quoted if it were genuine.”
As for what this passage means, John was offering proof that Jesus was the Son of God (1 John 5:1, 5). The “water” was likely a reference to Christ’s baptism and the Spirit coming upon Him (Matthew 3:13-17).
As for the reference to “blood,” we realize that Christ’s shed blood pays the penalty for our sins (Matthew 26:28). And John’s mentioning the “Spirit” reminds His readers of the power of God that Jesus came to announce and which is in those who are baptized (Acts 2:38).
We should also note that if we were to conclude that this passage proves that the Holy Spirit is a person, to be consistent, we would have to conclude that the water and blood are also persons. This, of course, is inaccurate. The passage in 1 John 5:7-8 does not prove that the Holy Spirit is a person.
Does Acts 5 prove that the Holy Spirit is a third member of the Godhead?
In this chapter Peter told Ananias that he and his wife, Sapphira, had lied to the Holy Spirit (verse 3) and then said, “You have not lied to men but to God” (verse 4). Does this prove that the Holy Spirit and God are interchangeable—the same?
What is clear is that this husband and wife lied both to the Holy Spirit and to God. But this does not prove that the Holy Spirit is a separate being. Again, the Holy Spirit is the power of God. The reason Peter told them that they had lied to God is because to lie to an individual who has God’s Holy Spirit residing within him and is acting on behalf of God is to lie to God. Here Peter was an agent or representative of God. To lie to Peter was to lie to God.
Does blasphemy against the Holy Spirit prove that it is a person?
Matthew 12:31-32 records Jesus saying, “Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.”
Some have mistakenly assumed that these words of Christ prove that the Holy Spirit is a person. The reality is that this situation is similar to the one in Acts 5.
The context is an occasion when the Jewish leaders had accused Jesus of casting out demons by Satan himself (Matthew 12:22-24). Jesus explained the illogic of such an explanation, saying, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand?” (verse 26). The more logical explanation was that Jesus was casting out the “demons by the Spirit of God” (verse 28).
So why did Jesus say people could be forgiven for speaking against Him, “the Son of Man,” but not the Holy Spirit?
The distinction seems to be that Jesus acknowledged that people might have a hard time understanding that He was God in the flesh and that this was something that people could in time come to see and repent of. But speaking against the power of God—which was obvious to all via the casting out of a demon—was a direct insult to God. It was something that would not be forgiven because it was done with full understanding.
Commenting on speaking against the Holy Spirit in Matthew 12:32, Albert Barnes explains: “There is no evidence that it refers to the third person of the Trinity; and the meaning of the whole passage may be: ‘He that speaks against me as a man of Nazareth—that speaks contemptuously of my humble birth, etc., may be pardoned; but he that reproaches my divine nature, charging me with being in league with Satan, and blaspheming the power of God manifestly displayed “by me” can never obtain forgiveness’” (Notes on the Bible).
For additional information on blasphemy against the Spirit, see our online article “What Is the Unpardonable Sin?”
Why is the Holy Spirit sometimes called “He,” “Him” and “Himself” in the New Testament?
Some have mistakenly suggested that because the Greek language uses masculine pronouns for some words associated with the Holy Spirit, this should be maintained in the translation of the text into English.
Greek, similar to other languages, designates nouns, both animate and inanimate, as masculine, feminine or neuter. The gender can be unrelated to personal male or female identity. For example, in German the word for table—tisch—is a masculine noun; the word for cup—tasse—is a feminine noun; and the word for child—kind—is neuter. In English, however, a table would not be referred to as “he,” a cup would not be identified as “she,” and a child would not usually be called “it.”
In Greek one word commonly used to designate the Holy Spirit is indeed masculine. The Greek word parakletos is a masculine noun, translated as “Helper,” “Comforter” and “Advocate” in John 14-16. Because this word is masculine, Greek uses masculine pronouns equivalent to “he” and “him” in English.
This is grammatically correct when using Greek, but not necessarily correct when using English. If the “Helper” is indeed a male person, then using a masculine pronoun in English would be correct. But if the “Helper” is not a person, then it would not be grammatically correct to use a masculine pronoun when translating the Greek to English.
There is another Greek word—pneuma—that is also used to designate the Holy Spirit, and this word is neuter. In Greek this word calls for the use of neuter designations equivalent to “it,” “itself” and “which” in English. The King James Version correctly uses neuter designations for this word in John 1:32; Romans 8:16, 26; and 1 Peter 1:11 saying, “it [the Spirit] abode upon him,” “the Spirit itself” and “when it [the Spirit] testified.”
Broadening this perspective regarding grammar, the Hebrew word ruach, which is translated “spirit,” “breath” and “wind” in the Old Testament, is feminine. We thus note that the Hebrew and Greek nouns that are used to indicate spirit in the Bible are masculine, feminine and neuter. These grammatical genders have nothing to do with actually being male or female or with whether the Holy Spirit is a person.
So really it is a matter of doctrinal interpretation. Most translators have used masculine and personal pronouns for the Holy Spirit in modern English translations because they believe the Holy Spirit is a person. A good example of this is found in the New King James Version, where the neuter noun pneuma in John 1:32 is referred to as “He” while the older King James Version reads, “I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it [not ‘he’] abode upon him.”
Similarly, the translations of pneuma in the King James Version in Romans 8:16, 26 and 1 Peter 1:11 are “itself,” “which” and “it.” More recent versions of the Bible have wrongly used the masculine pronoun “He” and the personal pronoun “who” for the neuter noun pneuma.
In short, the use of personal pronouns for the Holy Spirit in the New Testament is not based on linguistic accuracy but rather on translator misperception. While the gender of Greek words is a factor that can lead to confusion in translation, in reality it is a nonissue.
The translators of the New Testament did not stumble over the grammar involved. The real reason for their use of “He,” “Him” and “Himself” for the Holy Spirit was their acceptance of the nonbiblical doctrine of the Trinity. These instances of mistaken translation do not contradict the many clear scriptures that show that the Holy Spirit is the power of God instead of a person.
Why do some scriptures personify the Holy Spirit?
Several passages in the Bible personify the Holy Spirit—that is, they describe the Holy Spirit as though it were a person. These biblical references speak of the Holy Spirit telling Church leaders to send Paul and Barnabas on a missionary journey (Acts 13:1-4), forbidding Paul and Timothy to go into Bithynia (Acts 16:7), potentially being grieved (Ephesians 4:30), leading faithful Christians (Romans 8:14), speaking about conditions in the end time (1 Timothy 4:1) and testifying that Jesus was the Son of God (1 John 5:7-8). Do these passages prove that the Holy Spirit is a distinct being, similar to the Father and Son?
In these passages the Bible is using a style of writing called personification or anthropomorphism to describe inanimate objects. Other examples in the Bible of nonliving objects being given lifelike abilities include Abel’s blood crying out to God from the ground (Genesis 4:10), the mountains and hills singing (Isaiah 49:13; 55:12) and wisdom speaking (Proverbs 1:20; 8:1) and having children (Luke 7:35).
In these instances, we understand that blood, mountains and wisdom aren’t living beings. These inanimate objects are simply personified to add interest or emphasis to the subject being addressed.
Since the Holy Spirit is the power of God (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:8)—a force through which God accomplishes His will and works with His people—personification of this power was a fitting style of writing for New Testament writers to employ. But the use of this literary style does not contradict the many scriptures describing the Holy Spirit as the power of God, nor does it prove that the Holy Spirit is a person.