The word pneuma
occurs 385 times in the Greek Revised Text of the New
Testament, which have been translated in the KJV
sometimes as “Spirit” (or “spirit”) and sometimes as “Ghost” (or “ghost”). On
93 occasions it is used together with the Greek word hagion
(meaning “holy”) in various combinations. Out of these, 89 times it has been
translated as “Ghost” (i.e. Holy Ghost), and only
four times as Spirit (i.e. Holy Spirit). Out of the
remainder, 133 times it has been translated as “Spirit,” 153 times as “spirit,”
once as “spiritual,” once “spiritually,” twice “ghost,” once “life,” and once
“wind.” Thus the breakdown of the various renderings of the Greek word pneuma in the KJV is as follows:1
|
renderings |
times |
|
Ghost (Holy) |
89 |
|
Spirit (Holy) |
4 |
|
Spirit (of God, of truth, the, etc.) |
133 |
|
spirit (all kinds) |
153 |
|
spiritual |
1 |
|
spiritually |
1 |
|
ghost |
2 |
|
life |
1 |
|
wind |
1 |
|
Total |
385 |
This should dispel the notion entertained by some in the Church, that the expression “Holy Ghost” should properly be used of the “person” of the Holy Ghost, while the expression “Holy Spirit” should be applied to the “radiating influence” or “Spirit” which emanates from him. It is suggested therefore that the most fruitful way to carry out a systematic analysis of the doctrine of the Holy Ghost as it unfolds in the scriptures is to study the expressions according to how they are used in context. There are several different approaches that can be adopted for such a study. For example, consider the following three separate accounts of the gifts of the Spirit given in the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and the Doctrine and Covenants:
“Wherefore I give you to
understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God
calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by
the Holy Ghost.
“Now there are diversities of
gifts, but the same Spirit.
“And there are differences of
administrations, but the same Lord.
“And there are diversities of
operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
“But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.
“For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another, the word of knowledge
by the same Spirit;
• • •
“But all these worketh that one and
the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally
as he will.
• • •
“For by one Spirit
are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews
or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.” (1 Corinthians 12:3–8, 11, 13.)
“And again, I exhort you my
brethren that ye deny not the gifts of God, for they are many, and they come
from the same God. And there are different ways that these gifts are
administered; but it is the same God who worketh all in all. And they are given
by the manifestations of the Spirit of God unto men,
to profit them.
“For behold, to one is given by the
Spirit of God that he may teach the word of wisdom;
“And to another, that he may teach
the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
• • •
“And all these gifts come by the Spirit of Christ; and they come unto every man severally
according as he [Christ] will.” (Moroni 10:8–10, 17.)
“For all have not every gift given
unto them; for there are many gifts, and to every man is given a gift by the Spirit of God.
• • •
“To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and
that he was crucified for the sins of the world.
• • •
“And again, to some it is given by the
Holy Ghost to know the differences of administration, as
it will be pleasing unto the same Lord, according as the Lord will,
• • •
“And again, verily I say unto you,
to some is given by the Spirit of God the word of
wisdom.
• • •
“And all these gifts come from God,
for the benefit of the children of God.” (D&C 46:11, 13, 15, 17, 26.)
As we compare these three
different accounts, we note the following:
1. In these verses the expressions
“Holy Ghost,” “Spirit of God,” and “Spirit” are all made synonymous with the
“Spirit of Christ,” by which we can only understand that Spirit which emanates from him directly.
2. These gifts are given according
to the will and pleasure of the same Lord by whose Spirit
they come: “According as he will,” says Moroni; and “As it will be
pleasing unto the same Lord, according as the Lord will,”
says the D&C. A third “personage” is not involved
in this process at all.
3. These gifts are associated with
that Spirit which is bestowed upon baptized Church members by the laying on of
hands, that is to say, the gift of the Holy Ghost,
and not with that light which is generally given to all mankind.
4. This Spirit is described by
Paul as something by which we are all “baptized into one body,” and into which
we have all been made to “drink.”
From these passages it is
reasonable to conclude that the Spirit spoken of here must refer to that Spirit
which emanates from the Deity, and which is given to mankind without the
involvement of a third party or agent. Now consider the following example:
“Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I
say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter
into the kingdom of God.
“That which is born of the flesh is
flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
“Marvel not that I said unto thee,
Ye must be born again.
“The wind bloweth where it
listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it
cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.” (John
3:5–8.)
This scripture has been
interpreted in the Church as referring to the two basic ordinances of the
gospel: the baptism by water, and the gift of the Holy Ghost (i.e. the third member of the Godhead) by the laying of
hands. But compare it now with the following:
“And behold, whosoever believeth
on my words, them will I visit with the manifestation
of my Spirit; and they shall be born of me, even of water and of the Spirit.” (D&C 5:16.)
“And thus he [Adam] was baptized
[with water]; and the Spirit of God descended upon
him, and thus he was born of the Spirit, and became
quickened in the inner man.
“And he heard a voice out of
heaven, saying, Thou art baptized with fire and with the
Holy Ghost. This is the record of the Father and the
Son, from henceforth and forever.” (Moses
6:65–66.)
These scriptures imply
that the “birth of the Spirit” (or the gift of the Holy Ghost) refers
to that Spirit which emanates from Jesus Christ himself, and that is bestowed
without the involvement of a third party or agent of any kind whatever. This
doctrine is implied and taught, implicitly and explicitly, in a great many
scriptures:
“I indeed baptize you with water
unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I
am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the
Holy Ghost, and with fire.” (Matthew 3:11.)
“I indeed have baptized you with
water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.” (Mark 1:8.)
“John answered, saying unto them
all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the
latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he
shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire.” (Luke 3:16.)
“In the last day, that great day of
the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.
“He that believeth on me, as the
scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of
living water.
“(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for
the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus
was not yet glorified.)” (John 7:37–39.)
These scriptures are intended to
convey the idea that the “baptism of fire and Holy Ghost” was something which
was to be performed by Jesus Christ himself, and not
by a “third personage.” It involved the Spirit which was to emanate directly from the person of Jesus Christ himself, without
the involvement of a third agent or intermediary. It was given to the disciples
of Christ during his ministry as a promise which was
to be fulfilled after his resurrection; hence it is
often referred to as the Holy Spirit of Promise, and
we see from the sacred record that the promise was indeed fulfilled soon after
Lord’s resurrection:
“And when he had said this, he breathed on them [a symbolic gesture, signifying the Spirit
which should emanate from him], and saith unto them, Receive
ye the Holy Ghost.” (John 20:22.)
“And, being assembled together with
them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for
the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have
heard of me.
“For John truly baptized with
water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days
hence.
• • •
“But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye
shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in
Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” (Acts 1:4–5, 8.)
“And when the day of Pentecost
was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
“And suddenly there
came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the
house where they were sitting.
“And there appeared unto them
cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
“And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the
Spirit gave them utterance.
• • •
“But Peter, standing up with the
eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye
that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
“For these are not drunken, as ye
suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
“But this is that which was spoken
by the prophet Joel;
“And it shall come to pass in the
last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit
upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young
men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
“And on my servants and on my
handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit;
and they shall prophesy:
• • •
“This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all
are witnesses.
“Therefore being by the right
hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise
of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye
now see and hear.” (Acts 2:1–4, 14–18, 32–33.)
The Nephite disciples of Christ
also received the same promise:
“And ye shall offer for a
sacrifice unto me a broken heart and a contrite spirit. And whoso cometh unto
me with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, him will I
baptize with fire and with the Holy Ghost, even as the Lamanites,
because of their faith in me at the time of their conversion, were baptized
with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and they knew it not.” (3 Nephi 9:20.)
“… and after that ye are baptized
with water, behold, I will baptize you with fire and with
the Holy Ghost; …
“Yea, blessed are they who shall
believe in your words, and come down into the depths of humility and be
baptized, for they shall be visited with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and
shall receive a remission of their sins.” (3 Nephi 12:1–2.)
And the Nephite record shows how
this promise was soon fulfilled upon the Nephites, as it had been upon the
Jews:
“And they did pray for that which
they most desired; and they desired that the Holy Ghost
should be given unto them.
• • •
“And it came to pass when they
were all baptized and had come up out of the water, the Holy
Ghost did fall upon them, and they were filled with the
Holy Ghost and with fire.” (3 Nephi
19:9, 13.)
“Father, I thank thee that thou
hast given the Holy Ghost unto these whom I have
chosen; and it is because of their belief in me that I have chosen them out of
the world.
“Father, I pray thee that thou wilt
give the Holy Ghost unto all them that shall believe
in their words.
“Father, thou hast given them the
Holy Ghost because they believe in me; and thou seest
that they believe in me because thou hearest them, and they pray unto me; and
they pray unto me because I am with them.” (3 Nephi 19:20–22.)
“Now when the multitude had all
eaten and drunk, behold, they were filled with the Spirit;
and they did cry out with one voice, and gave glory to Jesus, whom they both
saw and heard.” (3 Nephi 20:9.)
“Now this is the commandment:
Repent, all ye ends of the earth, and come unto me, and be baptized in my name,
that ye may be sanctified by the reception of the Holy
Ghost, that ye may stand spotless before me at the last day.” (3 Nephi 27:20.)
In these verses, and also in the
following, the Holy Ghost is represented as being given by the Father rather
than by Jesus Christ:
“Verily, verily I say unto you,
that this is my doctrine, and I bear record of it from the Father; and whoso
believeth in me believeth in the Father also; and unto him will the Father bear
record of me, for he will visit him with fire and
with the Holy Ghost.
“And thus will the Father bear
record of me, and the Holy Ghost will bear record unto him of the Father and
me; for the Father, and I, and the Holy Ghost are one.” (3 Nephi 11:35–36.)
The explanation is given in the
following verses:
“And the Holy Ghost beareth
record of the Father and me; and the Father giveth the Holy Ghost unto the children
of men because of me.” (3 Nephi 28:11.)
“And after that ye were blessed,
then fulfilleth the Father the covenant which he made with Abraham, saying, In
thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed—unto the pouring out of the Holy Ghost through me upon the Gentiles, which blessing upon the
Gentiles shall make them mighty above all, unto the scattering of my people, O
house of Israel.” (3 Nephi 20:27.)
From these scriptures we learn,
firstly, that the Holy Ghost is given to us through the merits of the Savior,
by virtue of his atoning sacrifice; and secondly, that it is also disseminated
by him, who in turn receives it from the Father. Thus whether it is given to
us by the Father or the Son, in either case it comes through his merits. Thus the
Savior becomes the true “intermediary” between God and man, as Paul also says:
“For there is one God, and one
mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
“Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.” (1 Timothy 2:5–6.)
“Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.” (1 Timothy 2:5–6.)
Hence we also find that the Holy
Ghost is often represented in the scriptures as something that is given to us, poured out upon us, dwells in us, fills us, abides in us, falls upon us, and
with which we are baptized or anointed,
of which the following are a few examples:
“What? know ye not that your body
is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you,
which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?” (1 Corinthians 6:19.)
“And because ye are sons, God
hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.” (Galatians 4:6.)
“And it came to pass that they
journeyed many days in the wilderness, and they fasted much and prayed much
that the Lord would grant unto them a portion of his
Spirit to go with them, and abide
with them, that they might be an instrument in the hands of God to bring, …” (Alma
17:9.)
“And behold, the Holy Spirit of
God did come down from heaven, and did enter into their
hearts, and they were filled as if with fire, and they could speak forth
marvelous words.” (Helaman 5:45.)
“Yea, behold, I
will tell you in your mind and in your heart, by the Holy
Ghost which shall come upon you, and which shall dwell
in your heart.” (D&C
8:2.)
“Verily, verily I say unto you, I will impart unto you of my Spirit,
which shall enlighten your mind, which shall fill your soul with joy;
“And then shall ye know, or by
this shall you know, all things whatsoever you desire of me, which are
pertaining unto things of righteousness, in faith believing in me that you
shall receive.” (D&C 11:13–14.)
“And in that day the Holy Ghost fell upon Adam, which beareth record
of the Father and the Son, …” (Moses 5:9.)
“And thus he [Adam] was baptized;
and the Spirit of God descended upon him, and thus he
was born of the Spirit, and became quickened in the inner man.
“And he heard a voice out of
heaven, saying, Thou art baptized with fire and with
the Holy Ghost. This is the record of the Father and
the Son, from henceforth and forever.” (Moses 6:65–66.)
“… No sooner had I baptized
Oliver Cowdery than the Holy Ghost fell upon him, and
he stood up and prophesied many things which should shortly come to pass.… We
were filled with the Holy Ghost, and rejoiced in the
God of our salvation.” (JS-H 1:73.)
Note that it is always the Holy Ghost itself that is depicted as possessing these
characteristics and attributes, and not something that supposedly “radiates”
from him: it is the Holy Ghost itself that is “shed
forth,” “poured out,” “proceeds,” “falls on,” or “fills” people. Men are
baptized with the Holy Ghost, and not with something
that “radiates” from him; they are filled with the
Holy Ghost, and not with something that “emanates” from him. The difficulty
arises when we sometimes find that this Spirit is personified
in the scriptures. It is depicted as though it were an independent
agent, as if it had a personality and will of its
own. The correct interpretation of these passages, however, becomes
clear to us when we compare them with other similar passages which clarify
them. Consider the following examples:
“Wherefore I say unto you, All
manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy
against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto
men.
“And whosoever speaketh a word
against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against
the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, …” (Matthew 12:31–32.)
In these verses the Holy Spirit is
personified, and is depicted as someone against whom it is possible to commit
blasphemy. But now compare it with the following:
“For behold, if ye deny the Holy Ghost when it once has had place in you, and ye know that ye deny it,
behold, this is a sin which is unpardonable; …” (Alma 39:6.)
Another example:
“But when they shall lead you,
and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do
ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye:
for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost.”
(Mark 13:11.)
Here the Holy Ghost is again
personified. He is depicted as someone who is able to speak on our behalf. But
now compare with the following:
“But when they deliver you up, take
no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same
hour what ye shall speak.
“For it is not ye that speak, but
the Spirit of your Father which speaketh
in you.” (Matthew 10:19–20.) [Also compare with D&C
124:97 quoted below.]
Another example:
“But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom
the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all
things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” (John 14:26.)
Here again the Comforter is
personified, and the personal pronouns “he” and “whom” is used to refer
to it. But now compare with the following:
“… let him be humble before me,
and be without guile, and he shall receive of my Spirit,
even the Comforter, which
shall manifest unto him the truth of all things, and shall
give him in the very hour what he shall say.” (D&C 124:97.)
“Therefore it is given to abide in you; the record of heaven;
the Comforter; the peaceable things of immortal glory; the truth
of all things; that which quickeneth all things,
which maketh alive all things; that which knoweth all things, and hath all power
according to wisdom, mercy, truth, justice and judgment.” (Moses 6:61.)
Another example:
“As they ministered to the Lord,
and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas
and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.
• • •
“So they, being sent forth by the
Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia; and from thence
they sailed to Cyprus.” (Acts 13:2, 4.)
This is as explicit an expression
of the personified Spirit as could be given. He is depicted as someone who
“speaks,” who “calls,” who “assigns,” who uses the personal pronouns “me” and
“I,” and who “sends.” But now compare with the following, where the same characteristics
are attributed to that Spirit which proceeds from the Deity:
“Ammon said unto him, I am a man,
and man in the beginning was created after the image of God; and I am called by his Holy Spirit to
teach these things unto this people, …
“And a portion
of that Spirit dwelleth in me, which giveth me
knowledge, and also power according to my faith and desires which are in God.” (Alma 18:34–35.)
By far the most revealing
expression of the personified Spirit, however, has been left for us by the
prophet Nephi, which merits a repetition here:
“For it came to pass, after I had
desired to know the things that my father had seen, and believing that the Lord
was able to make them known unto me, as I sat pondering in mine heart I was
caught away in the Spirit of the Lord, yea, into an
exceedingly high mountain, which I never had before seen, and upon which I never
had before set my foot.
“And the Spirit
said unto me, Behold, what desirest thou?
“And I said, I desire to behold the
things which my father saw.
• • •
“… for I spake unto him as a man
speaketh; for I beheld that he was in the form of a man; yet
nevertheless, I knew that it was the Spirit of the Lord; and he spake unto me as
a man speaketh with another.” (1 Nephi 11:1–3, 11.)
The Prophet Joseph Smith therefore
understood the doctrine of the Spirit correctly, and also teaches it correctly
in these words:
“And he [Christ] being the Only
Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth … possessing the same mind with the Father, which mind is the
Holy Spirit that beareth record of the Father
and the Son … [he] being filled with the fulness of the mind
of the Father; or in other words, the Spirit of the
Father; which Spirit is shed forth upon all those who
believe on his name and keep his commandments … Through the love of the Father,
the mediation of Jesus Christ, and the gift of the Holy
Spirit [which is his mind], they are to be heirs of God and joint heirs
with Jesus Christ.” (Lectures on Faith, lecture V.)
“Do the Father and the Son possess
the same mind? They do …
“What is this mind?
[It is] the Holy Spirit …
“Do the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit constitute the Godhead? They do …
“Do the believers in Christ
Jesus, through the gift of the Spirit, become one
with the Father and the Son, as the Father and the Son are one? They do …” (Lectures on Faith, catechism to lecture V.)
The following scriptures are of
particular interest to us, because they refer to the reception of the Spirit by
the Savior himself:
“And Jesus, when he was baptized,
went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto
him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a
dove, and lighting upon him.” (Matthew 3:16.)
“That it might be fulfilled which
was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying,
“Behold my servant, whom I have
chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased:
I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall show
judgement to the Gentiles.” (Matthew 12:17–18.)
“And the Holy
Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came
from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.” (Luke 3:22.)
“And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by
the Spirit into the wilderness.” (Luke 4:1.)
“And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee: and there went out
a fame of him through all the region round about.” (Luke 4:14.)
“And there was delivered unto him
the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the
place where it was written,
“The Spirit of
the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed
me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted,
to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to
set at liberty them that are bruised.” (Luke 4:17–18.)
“How God anointed
Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power:
who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil;
for God was with him.” (Acts 10:38.)
“For he [Jesus] whom God hath
sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.” (John 3:34.)
And the Spirit which Jesus
received, we must also receive:
“And also, the voice of the Son
came unto me, saying, He that is baptized in my name, to him will the Father
give the Holy Ghost like unto me; wherefore follow me, and do the things which
ye have seen me do.
“… yea, by following your Lord and
your Savior down into the water, according to his word, behold, then shall ye
receive the Holy Ghost; yea, then cometh the baptism of fire and of the Holy
Ghost; …
• • •
“… For the gate by which ye
should enter is repentance and baptism by water; and then cometh a remission of
your sins by fire and by the Holy Ghost.” (2 Nephi 31:12–13, 17.)
“And this is my gospel—repentance and baptism by water; and then cometh the baptism of fire and the
Holy Ghost, even the Comforter, which showeth all things, and teacheth the
peaceable things of the kingdom.” (D&C 39:6.)
“And I will lay my hand upon you
by the hand of my servant Sidney Rigdon, and you shall receive my Spirit, the Holy Ghost, even
the Comforter, which shall teach you the peaceable
things of the kingdom.” (D&C 36:2.)
One good way to study the subject
is to examine it from a purely internal or linguistic point of view. Consider
for example the expressions, “Spirit of God” and “Spirit of the Lord,” which
occur frequently in the scriptures. The word “of” in these expressions suggest
a possessive attribute. It implies that the “Spirit”
thus referred to must in some sense or other belong
to God, or be a part of his attributes or nature. Syntactically these
expressions are not any different from other similar expressions such as “love
of God,” “word of God,” “commandment of God,” “power of God,” “kingdom of God.”
However according the doctrine of the Holy Ghost often taught in the Church, we are expected to place
two entirely different interpretations on these expressions, depending on how
they are used in context. Sometimes we are expected to believe that they refer
to that Spirit which emanates from the Deity, and which is indeed a part of
him and “belongs” to him; but at other times2 we are expected to believe that they refer to that
other “personage” in the Godhead who must have a totally independent existence,
who cannot possibly “belong” to God or be a part of his attributes or nature—and of whose existence we have no knowledge. Is it not more reasonable to
conclude that these expressions always refer to that
Spirit which emanates from the Deity, and never to any “personage” of the kind
that is generally understood in the Church? How does it make good sense to give to somebody a personage as a
gift, who has his own agency, who is divine in any
case, and who dwells in heaven anyhow; and then to declare that this “personage” is given to every Church member who receives him
to become his own personal constant companion? Or
consider the following example:
“And, behold, there was a man in
Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting
for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon
him.
“And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he
had seen the Lord’s Christ.
“And he came by
the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child
Jesus, to do for him after the custom of the law,” (Luke 2:25–27.)
This scripture makes three
references to the Holy Ghost: first it says that the Holy Ghost “was upon him;”
then it says that the Holy Ghost “revealed” to him something; and finally it
says that he was led by the Spirit to go to the temple. In the first instance,
when it says that the Holy Ghost “was upon him,” it implies that the Holy Ghost
rested upon him, or abode in him, or dwelt in him—in other words, it was his constant companion.3 In the second instance, when it says
that the Holy Ghost “revealed” to him something, the Holy Ghost is personified. He is depicted as an independent agent who
can act as a revelator. Now there are
two possible ways of interpreting this scripture: one way, which might be
favored by Latter-day Saints, would be to assume that in
the second instance it refers to the person of the
Holy Ghost, while in the first instance it refers to the “power” or “agency” by
which that personage operates. The other interpretation is that
what the writer of these simple lines meant by the Holy Ghost in the second
instance, is nothing different from what he means by it in the first instance. I think that the latter is the more reasonable assumption.
Still another good way to study
the subject is to examine the scriptural references in the broader context in
which they occur. For example if we examine the doctrine of the Holy Ghost as
it is taught in the first and second chapters of the book of Acts, it becomes
more significant than if we studied the verses in isolation. It will prove a useful
exercise for the student of the gospel to go through the scriptures, or with
the help of a concordance to extract all the scriptural references to the
divine Spirit, and make a special study of them. There are many ways that such
a study can be carried out, and a sizeable treatise could be written on it. The
only conclusion that can be drawn from this preliminary investigation is that,
no matter how one looks at it, no trace is found in
the scriptures, ancient or modern, of any third “personage” in the Godhead of
the kind that is generally understood by Latter-day Saints. The expressions “Holy
Spirit,” “Holy Ghost,” “Comforter,” “Spirit of God,” “Spirit of the Lord,”
“Spirit of truth,” “the Spirit” etc. are always used
in the scriptures to refer to that Spirit which emanates directly from God, or
from Jesus Christ; and which is bestowed upon mankind without the involvement
of a third agent or intermediary. It is never used to refer to anything else.
Whether such a being as a
“personage of Spirit,” of the kind that is generally understood in the Church, also exists in the Godhead or not is a debatable issue. The
above reasoning does not rule out the possibility of his existence. The only
thing that can be said with certainty about it is that, if such a being does exist,
firstly the scriptures make no mention of him. Secondly, his true identity,
office, calling, and his means of carrying it out is likely to be very
different from what Latter-day Saints generally think it to be. And
thirdly, we can only know the truth of these things by means of a new revelation. Old revelations simply do not help us with
that. The failure to recognize these facts has led to some confusion and
misunderstanding in the Church about the doctrine of the Holy Ghost. The
following examples are only a small selection of what could be given. Consider
first the following exegesis concerning the Holy Ghost from the official Bible
Dictionary published by the Church:
“The Holy Ghost is manifested to
men on the earth both as the power of the Holy Ghost
as well as the gift of the Holy Ghost. The power can come upon one before baptism, and is the
convincing witness that the gospel is true.… The gift
can come only after proper and authorised baptism, and is conferred by the
laying on of hands, …
“For some reason not fully
explained in the scriptures, the Holy Ghost did not operate in the fulness
among the Jews during the years of Jesus’ mortal sojourn (Jn. 7:39; 16:7).
Statements to the effect that the Holy Ghost did not come until after Jesus was
resurrected must necessarily refer to that particular dispensation only, for it
is abundantly clear that the Holy Ghost was operative in earlier dispensations.
Further, it has reference only to the gift of the
Holy Ghost not being present, since the power of the
Holy Ghost was operative during the ministry of John the Baptist and Jesus; …”
This exegesis contains a number of
mistakes. Firstly, such a distinction between having the “Holy Ghost,” having
the “power of the Holy Ghost,” and having the “gift of the Holy Ghost” cannot
be made on scriptural grounds. The scriptures do not permit such distinctions
to be made. And secondly, the scriptures do explain
the reason why the Holy Ghost was not given until after the Lord’s
resurrection. Let us examine each in turn.
Firstly, the scriptures do not
make any distinction between having the Holy Ghost,
and having the power of the Holy Ghost. In the
scriptures, whenever it is stated that someone has the “power of the Holy
Ghost,” or works by the “power of the Holy Ghost,” or speaks by the “power of
the Holy Ghost,” or performs a miracle by the “power of the Holy Ghost,” it
always means that that person has the Holy Ghost in him which enables him to do
those things. It is never intended to convey the idea that the “Holy Ghost” and
his “power” are two different things, and that it is possible to have the one
without the other. It is no more possible to have the “power” of the Holy Ghost
without having the Holy Ghost, than it would be possible to have the “power” of
the priesthood without having the priesthood, or to send a satellite into orbit
by the “power” of a rocket but without an actual rocket. The scriptures often
teach that it is God himself who works by the “power
of the Holy Ghost,” with exactly the same meaning. God works by the “power of
the Holy Ghost” because the Holy Ghost is his power.
It is the “power of God who sitteth upon his throne” (D&C
88:13).
Similarly, such a distinction
between having the Holy Ghost, and having the “gift” of the Holy Ghost cannot
be made, not on scriptural grounds. In the scriptures, by the “gift of the Holy
Ghost” is always meant the Holy Ghost itself as a gift.
If the matter is viewed broadly within the context of the whole of the
scriptures, it can be seen that the reception of the Holy Ghost is always regarded as a gift, regardless of the terms,
conditions, or circumstances under which it is bestowed. Whether it is bestowed
by the laying on of hands or in some other way, it is always regarded as a gift. Consider the following example:
“While Peter yet spake these words,
the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
“And they of the circumcision
which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the
Gentiles also was poured out the gift
of the Holy Ghost.” (Acts 10:44–45.)
In this scripture the Holy Ghost
which Cornelius received prior to his baptism is regarded as a gift. It is true that had Cornelius then failed to comply
with all the requirements of the gospel, the Holy Ghost which he had received
prior to his baptism would have departed from him, and would not have remained
with him, as Joseph Smith has pointed out in his Teachings
(p. 199). Nevertheless, the Holy Ghost which he had received prior to his
baptism was regarded as a gift. Now consider the
following:
“If ye then, being evil, know how
to give good gifts unto your children: how much more
shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?” (Luke
11:13.)
In this verse the laying on of
hands is not made a prerequisite for receiving the “gift” of the Holy Ghost. It
is God who gives the Holy Ghost to mankind, and as such it is always regarded
as a gift. Now consider the following, where the same
doctrine is taught and amplified:
“And it came to pass, after I
Nephi having heard all the words of my father concerning the things which he
saw in a vision, and also the things which he spake by the power
of the Holy Ghost, which power he received by
faith on the Son of God—and the Son of God was the Messiah who should come—I
Nephi was desirous also that I might see, and hear, and know of these things by
the power of the Holy Ghost, which is the gift of God unto all those who diligently seek him, as well
in times of old as in the time that he should manifest himself unto the
children of men.” (1 Nephi 10:17.)
In this verse, the “power of the
Holy Ghost” is made synonymous with the “gift of the Holy Ghost.” They are in
fact the same. Now consider the following, and note that this revelation was
given before the Melchizedek Priesthood was restored:
“Yea, behold, I will tell you in
your mind and in your heart, by the Holy Ghost which
shall come upon you, and which shall dwell in your heart.
“Now behold, this is the spirit of
revelation; behold, this is the Spirit by which Moses brought the children of
Israel through the Red Sea on dry ground.
“Therefore this is thy gift. Apply unto it, and blessed art thou, for it shall
deliver you out of the hands of your enemies, …” (D&C
8:2–4.)
Thus any distinction made between
the “Holy Ghost,” the “power of the Holy Ghost,” and the “gift of the Holy
Ghost” is arbitrary and untenable. The distinctions between them are purely
rhetorical: one mode of expression is more suitable in a given context than
another; but ultimately they all mean the same thing. When we use the
expression “gift of the Holy Ghost,” we emphasize the fact that the Holy Ghost
is given to us as a free gift from God. We cannot obtain it in some other way,
through our own ingenuity, wisdom, or strength. We cannot purchase it with
money for example, as Simon the sorcerer tried to do (Acts 8:18–20). Similarly,
when we use the expression “power of the Holy Ghost,” we lay emphasis on the
fact that the Holy Ghost is the source of power to those who receive it. He is
the source of physical as well as spiritual power, and all the scriptures bear
testimony to that (e.g. Judges 14:5–6; Acts 1:8; Romans 15:19). In the same way, all the other
expressions used for the divine Spirit are intended to emphasize some
particular characteristic or attribute of it. They are never intended to refer
to intrinsically different objects. The differences between them are
rhetorical.4
Next we come to the question of
why the Holy Ghost was not given until after the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The scripture which explains this doctrine is as follows:
“In the last day, that great day of
the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto
me, and drink;
“He that believeth on me, as the
scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of
living water.
“(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for
the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus
was not yet glorified.)” (John 7:37–39.)
From this scripture we learn,
firstly, that that which was “not yet given” (i.e.
the Holy Ghost) was to flow out of Christ’s belly
(meaning to emanate from his person); and therefore it cannot be referring to
any “personage” of the kind that is commonly understood in the Church.
Secondly, we discover that this Spirit was to flow
from him after that Jesus was glorified. In other
words, it was to be a quality, a property, a characteristic, or an attribute of
the Savior in his glorified and resurrected state;
which explains why it “was not yet given,” because that Jesus was
“not yet glorified.” The difficulties arise out of trying to distinguish
between two separate entities, whereas the scriptures do not make such a
distinction. In the scriptures the term Holy Ghost, and its various synonyms,
are always used to refer to that Spirit which
emanates from the person Jesus Christ. It is never used to refer to anything
else. If that which was “not yet given” (i.e. the
Holy Ghost) was to flow out of Christ’s belly
(meaning to emanate from his person), then evidently it cannot be referring to
any kind of “personage” such as it is generally understood in the Church.
“Personages” do not “flow”—not even Spirit personages! The following are some additional
examples of the kind of difficulties that arise when we fail to take these matters into consideration:
“The term Holy Ghost, and its
synonyms, Spirit of God, Spirit of the Lord, or simply, Spirit, Comforter, and
Spirit of truth, occur in the scriptures with plainly different meanings,
referring in some cases to the person of the Holy
Ghost, and in other instances to the power or authority of this great Personage, or the agency through
which he ministers. The context of such passages show which of the
significations applies.” (James E. Talmage, quoted in Discourses
on the Holy Ghost. p. 12.)
This widely accepted
interpretation of the doctrine of the Holy Ghost is purely speculative. It has
no scriptural basis. It may appear to be plausible, but James E. Talmage would
not have been able to adduce any scriptural evidence to support it. Talmage
then continues his narrative as follows:
“Much of the confusion existing
in human conceptions concerning the Holy Ghost arises from the common failure
to segregate between his person and powers. Plainly, such expressions as being
filled with the Holy Ghost, and his falling upon persons, has reference to the
powers and influences that emanate from God [i.e. God
the Holy Ghost] … for the Holy Ghost in this way may operate simultaneously upon
many persons even though they may be widely separated, whereas the actual
person of the Holy Ghost cannot be in more than one place at the same time.” (Ibid. p. 13.)
The overall message one gets from
studying the scriptures does not sustain this interpretation. Most of the
confusion existing in the Church about the Holy Ghost stem precisely from
making such a “segregation,” whereas the scriptures do not make such a
segregation. Consider the following example:
“Now when the apostles which were
at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto
them Peter and John:
“Who, when they were come down,
prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:
“(For as yet he
was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized
in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
“Then laid they their hands on
them, and they received the Holy Ghost.” (Acts
8:14–17.)
In these verses, the act of
“falling” is unquestionably attributed to a person.
It is the person of the Holy Ghost itself that is
portrayed as not having “fallen” upon them. It leaves no room for uncertainty
or speculation. We are not justified in reading into the scriptures something
that is not there, and which evidently is not intended to be there. There is
nothing in the scriptures which suggests any kind of “segregation” between the
“person” of the Holy Ghost and his supposed “powers.” This is not an isolated
example. It follows a regular and consistent pattern throughout the scriptures.
“As a Spirit Personage the Holy
Ghost has size and dimension. He does not fill the immensity of space, and
cannot be everywhere present in person at the same time. He is also called the
Holy Spirit, the Spirit of God, the Spirit of the Lord, the Spirit of truth,
and Comforter. As President Joseph F. Smith says: ‘He does not have to dwell
with one constantly.’ This man here, and another one there, and a man over in
England, are confirmed members of the Church. The question arises: ‘How can the
Holy Ghost be with them all at the same time?’ He does not have to be. But the
power of the Holy Ghost is such that it can be manifested in every place at the
same moment of time.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Ibid. pp.
22–3.)
This interpretation is not
sustainable on scriptural grounds. According to the scriptural definition, the
Holy Ghost does have to dwell with one constantly—if
he wants to be a constant companion that is. The scriptures teach that the Holy Ghost itself is given to everyone who receives him to
become his constant companion, not something that supposedly “radiates” from
him. When baptized Church members are confirmed, they are told to receive the Holy Ghost, not some influence that emanates from him.
It is the Holy Ghost itself that is to become their
constant companion, provided that they remain worthy of it. Joseph Fielding
Smith then continues:
“The Holy Ghost should not be
confused with the Spirit which fills the immensity of space and is everywhere
present. This other Spirit is impersonal and has no size, nor dimension; it
proceeds from the presence of the Father and the Son, and is in all things. We
should speak of the Holy Ghost as a personage as ‘he,’ and this other Spirit as ‘it,’ although when we speak of the power or gift of the Holy Ghost we may
properly say ‘it.’” (Ibid. p. 28.)
The problem with this interpretation
is that the scriptures often do use the word “it” to
refer to the Holy Ghost (and “he” to refer to that Spirit which emanates from
God!) and several examples of them have already appeared in this study. The
scriptures are our definitive standard on doctrine. We cannot predetermine what
the scriptures should or should not say. We can only accept what they actually
do say, and obtain our doctrine from them.
“The inspiration which was
promised to all flesh by the Lord through the prophecy of Joel, is not the
promise of the Holy Ghost, but the promise of the guidance of the light of
Christ, or the Spirit of truth, which is given to every man who comes into the
world …” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Ibid. p. 29.)
“The light of Christ is the Spirit
which is being poured out upon all flesh in the last days, according to Joel’s
promise. (Joel 2:28–29; JS 2:41.)
“The light of Christ is the
agency or power used by the Holy Ghost in administering his affairs and in
sending forth his gifts.” (Bruce R. McConkie, Ibid. p.
56.)
These interpretations are
evidently incorrect. In the New Testament, the prophecy of Joel is identified
with the outpouring of the Holy Ghost on the day of the
Pentecost, which was promised to the disciples by the Savior after his
resurrection, and which was accompanied by the gifts of tongues, prophecy, and
revelation (Acts Ch. 1–2). Furthermore, the prophet Joel himself
associates this outpouring of the Spirit with the spirit of
prophecy and revelation. “They shall prophesy,”
he declares. John the Revelator teaches that “the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy” (Revelation 19:10). If this Spirit has
already been poured out on all nations, then all nations should have the spirit
of prophecy, and all should have the testimony of Jesus. The spirit of prophecy
is normally associated with the gift of the Holy Ghost bestowed on baptized
Church members by the laying on of hands. It is not associated with that light
that is given generally to all mankind.
“Three separate and distinct
meanings of the title, Spirit of the Lord, are found in the revelations: 1. It
has reference to the spirit body of Christ our Lord, the body which he had from
the time of his birth as the First-born of the Father until he was born of Mary
in mortality; 2. It is used to mean the Spirit of Jesus Christ, or light of
truth, or light of Christ—the Spirit which is impersonal and fills the
immensity of space … and 3. It is also a synonym for the Holy Ghost, the Spirit
entity or personage of Spirit who is a member of the Godhead.” (Bruce R.
McConkie, Ibid. p. 55.)
Of these three interpretations,
the first is unquestionably incorrect. The expression “Spirit of the Lord” is never used in the scriptures to refer to the “spirit body of
Jesus Christ,” not even once. There is no
justification whatsoever for reaching such a conclusion. I would consider
definition 3 also to be faulty, in so far as his understanding of the doctrine
of the Holy Ghost appears to be faulty. Only definition 2 is correct. Bruce R. McConkie then
continues as follows:
“But when we read of the account
of the appearance of the ‘Spirit of the Lord’ to Nephi (1 Ne. 11), we are left
to our own interpretative powers to determine whether the messenger is the
Spirit Christ [i.e. spirit body of Christ], or the
Holy Ghost. Presumptively it is the spirit Christ ministering to Nephi much as
he did to the Brother of Jared …” (Ibid. p. 55.)
This interpretation is again most
certainly incorrect. The correct interpretation of this scripture has been
given by James E. Talmage:
“That the Spirit of the Lord [i.e. the Spirit which emanates from him] is capable of
manifesting himself in the form and figure of man, is indicated by the
wonderful interview between the Spirit and Nephi, in which he revealed himself
to the prophet, questioned him concerning his desires and belief, instructed
him in the things of God, speaking face to face with the man. ‘I spake to him,’ says Nephi, ‘as a man speaketh; for I beheld that he was in the form of a man; yet nevertheless, I knew that it was the Spirit of the Lord;
and he spake unto me as a man speaketh with another.’” (Ibid.,
p. 13. Emphasis added.)
In the continuation Bruce R.
McConkie then adds a new dimension to the discussion which merits a more serious
consideration (emphasis added):
“The Holy Ghost is the third member of the Godhead. He
is a personage of Spirit … Because he is a Spirit personage, he
has … power to
perform essential and unique functions for man.” (Ibid. p. 59.)
Here Bruce R. McConkie has
recognized an important principle not mentioned by others: he has correctly
understood that the Holy Ghost, by virtue of being a “spirit,” is able to
perform certain “essential and unique functions” for man which he would not be
able to perform if he had a physical body. Unfortunately he does not attempt to
discuss what those “essential and unique functions” are. The scriptures are not
very explicit about that. There is one scripture, however, which comes to our
rescue:
“… the Holy Ghost has not a body
of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it
not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us.” (D&C
130:22. Emphasis added.)
This scripture explains why the
Holy Ghost needs to be a “spirit;” or what he can do as a “spirit,” which he
would not be able to do if he had a physical body: it enables him to dwell in us. This leads us to the next question: Why should
the Holy Ghost want to “dwell in us?” What is the purpose of him doing that?
And note that the word “dwell” literally means to “live,” “reside,” “abide.” A
man’s “dwelling place” for example is his house. When the Holy Ghost “dwells in
us,” that means that he takes his abode in us, he makes us his home. There is
only one answer to this question: the Holy Ghost needs to
dwell in us in order to become our constant
companion, and impart to us his powers and gifts. The Holy Ghost can
only do that by dwelling in
us. He cannot do it in any other way. This in turn leads us to the third
and final question: How is it possible for the Holy Ghost as a distinct,
singular, individual “personage” to enter into, reside in, abide in, “dwell”
in, and become a constant companion to every Church member at the same time? We
can only answer this question by radically altering our view of what the Holy
Ghost is. If we regard the Holy Ghost as a distinct, singular individual who can
only be in one place at the same time, then of course he cannot do that. But
the Holy Ghost that the scriptures talk about is not that kind of being. The Holy Ghost of the scriptures is never any other thing
than that Spirit which proceeds from Jesus Christ, and which is also able to
assume the human form (in more than one place at the same time) as he did to
Nephi, and as such he becomes a constant companion to
every Church member who receives him.
To conclude this discussion, the
following quotation is given from Parley P. Pratt, as it highlights a
particularly important source of doctrinal error in the Church:
“This substance [i.e. the Holy Spirit], like all others, is one of the
elements of material or physical existence, and therefore subject to the necessary
laws which govern all matter, as before mentioned. Like the other elements, its
whole is composed of individual particles. Like them, each particle occupies
space, possesses the power of motion, requires time to move from one part of
space to another, and can in nowise occupy two spaces at once. In all these
respects it differs nothing from all other matter … This is the light which in
some measure illuminates all men. It is in its less refined particles, the
physical light which reflects from the sun, moon, and stars, and other
substances …” (Ibid. pp. 75–6.)
The whole of this reasoning I
consider to be fallacious and incorrect. The main mistake that he makes is that
he tries to understand spiritual things by comparing it (indeed identifying it)
with natural things. There is nothing that is calculated more surely to lead
men into error in doctrine, or in spiritual things, than the belief that
spiritual things and natural things are essentially the same, that they possess
the same natures or attributes, are composed of the same substances, are
governed by the same laws, can be comprehended upon the same principles, and
that spiritual things are simply a more refined or rarefied version of natural
things. Nothing could be further from the truth; nor could anything lead men
into greater error in doctrine than such an erroneous supposition. Most of the doctrinal mistakes that have been made by Latter-day Saints in the past
can be traced to this source. Spiritual things and natural things are independent
of one another, and cannot be comprehended upon the same principles. They are
governed by laws, but it is not the
same laws. They are made of substance, but it
is not the same substance. They are created in the image and likeness of one another (D&C 77:2), but there the similarity
between them ends. To understand them correctly spiritual things must be
compared with spiritual, and natural things with natural; the two metaphors
cannot be mixed.
In section 29 of the Doctrine and Covenants the Lord has made a clear distinction between spiritual and temporal, or natural things in these words:
“Wherefore, verily I say unto you that all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal; neither any man, nor the children of men; neither Adam, your father, whom I created.” (D&C 29:34.)
If spiritual and natural things are essentially the same, and even identical, as Parley P. Pratt suggests; then the distinction between them that the Lord has made in D&C 29:34 becomes untenable, and impossible to maintain. Paul teaches differently:
“But as it is written, Eye hath not
seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things
which God hath prepared for them that love him.
“But God hath revealed them unto us
by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of
God.
“For what man knoweth the things of
a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God
knoweth no man, but [by] the Spirit of God.
“Now we have received, not the
spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the
things that are freely given to us of God.
“Which things also we speak, not in
the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth;
comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
“But the natural man receiveth not
the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can
he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
“But he that is spiritual judgeth
all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
“For who hath known the mind of
the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ [which is
his Spirit].” (1 Corrinthians 2:9–16.)
The conclusion we reach from this
brief analysis is that a genuine doctrinal problem concerning the Holy Ghost
does exist in the theology of Latter-day Saints which has not yet been
adequately resolved or acknowledged. Recognizing that a difficulty exists is
the first step to solving it. Having identified more precisely the nature of
the doctrinal issues relating to the Holy Ghost, it will be possible to provide
a more satisfactory resolution to it by revelation than have been attempted
hitherto.
─────────
Notes
1 This study is based on the
Greek Revised Text of the New Testament, and therefore does not accurately
portray the occurrence of these words in the KJV; but
it is close enough for our purpose. Source: E. W. Bullinger, Word Studies on the Holy Spirit.
2 See entry under Holy Ghost in the Bible Dictionary published by the Church for examples.
3 How he came to
receive that companionship of the Spirit is not relevant to our present
discussion; but it is worth pointing out that this scripture is
another good example of how it is possible to have the “gift” of the Holy Ghost
without necessarily receiving the laying on of hands.
4 It is also possible for the Holy Ghost to bear witness to someone to the truth of something, without their having received the gift of the Holy Ghost as a constant companion. Scripture teaches that when the gospel is preached by the power of the Holy Ghost, by those sent directly from God, the Holy Ghost then bears witness to the hearts of those who hear that the words spoken are true, and originate from God (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:8; Romans 10:17; 1 Corinthians 14:24–25; 1 Thessalonians 1:5; 2 Nephi 33:1; Doctrine and Covenants 100:7–8).
