Wednesday, 19 December 2018

The Holy Spirit as feminine: Early Christian testimonies and their interpretation

Johannes van Oort

Received: 22 Oct. 2015; Accepted: 02 Feb. 2016; Published: 19 Aug. 2016

Copyright: © 2016. The Author(s). Licensee: AOSIS.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

The earliest Christians – all of whom were Jews – spoke of the Holy Spirit as a feminine figure. The present article discusses the main proof texts, ranging from the ‘Gospel according to the Hebrews’ to a number of testimonies from the second century. The ancient tradition was, in particular, kept alive in East and West Syria, up to and including the fourth century Makarios and/or Symeon, who even influenced ‘modern’ Protestants such as John Wesley and the Moravian leader Count von Zinzendorf. It is concluded that, in the image of the Holy Spirit as woman and mother, one may attain a better appreciation of the fullness of the Divine.

Introduction

In two previous articles, I discussed the place and role of both the doctrine and the experience of the Holy Spirit in the Early Church (Van Oort 2011; 2012). An important aspect remained, however: namely the fact that many early Christian authors – in particular those belonging to so-called ‘Jewish Christianity’¹ – spoke of the Holy Spirit as Mother.

How did this come to pass? And which consequences may be derived from this phenomenon for present-day discourse on the Holy Spirit?

An essential background to the occurrence of the Holy Spirit as Mother is, of course, the fact that the Hebrew word for Spirit, ruach, is in nearly all cases feminine. The first Christians, all of whom were Jews, took this over. Also in Aramaic the word for Spirit, rucha, is feminine. All this, however, does not fully account for the early Jewish Christian practice. A close reading of the relevant texts will reveal more.

Jewish Christian sources

Origen and the ‘Gospel according to the Hebrews’

The first prooftext, which already brings in medias res, is from the Greek church father Origen (c. 185–254). In his Commentary on the Gospel of John, he says:

If anyone should lend credence to the Gospel according to the Hebrews, where the Saviour Himself says, ‘My Mother (mētēr), the Holy Spirit, took me just now by one of my hairs and carried me off to the great Mount Tabor’, he will have to face the difficulty of explaining how the Holy Spirit can be the Mother (mētēr) of Christ when She was herself brought into existence through the Word. But neither the passage nor this difficulty is hard to explain. For if he who does the will of the Father in heaven [Mt. 12:50] is Christ’s brother and sister and mother (mētēr), and if the name of brother of Christ may be applied, not only to the race of men, but to beings of diviner rank than they, then there is nothing absurd in the Holy Spirit’s being His Mother (mētēr); everyone being His mother who does the will of the Father in heaven. (Origen, Commentary on the Gospel of John 2, 12 – Preuschen 1903:67)

Origen, who in all probability dictated these lines when he was in Palestinian Caesarea, refers to a ‘Gospel according to the Hebrews’. Until today there is much discussion about the origin and contents of this Gospel (e.g. Frey 2012:593–606; Luomanen 2012:1–2, 235–243), but all specialists agree that it was of Jewish Christian provenance. Apart from several other things, we learn from this quote that, sometime in the beginning of the second century CE, the Jewish Christians of this Gospel spoke of the Holy Spirit as Mother (mētēr).

The same is evident in another quote from Origen:

… but if one accepts (the following): ‘My Mother (mētēr), the Holy Spirit, took me just now and carried me off to the great Mount Tabor,’ one could see who is his Mother (mētēr). (Origen, Homilies on Jeremiah 15, 4 – Klostermann 1901:128)

From both quotes we may also learn that Origen himself accepted the concept of the Holy Spirit as Mother.

Jerome and the ‘Gospel according to the Hebrews’

The church father Jerome (c. 342–420), who spent many years in Bethlehem, makes mention of several passages from the Gospel of the Hebrews, too. In his Commentary on Micah, he says:

… and he should believe in the Gospel, which has been edited according to the Hebrews, which we have translated recently, in which it is said of the person of the Saviour: ‘My Mother (mater), the Holy Spirit, took me just now by one of my hairs ….’ (Jerome, Commentary on Micah 2, 7, 6 – Adriaen 1969:513)

The essence of the same quote from the Gospel of the Hebrews is found in Jerome’s Commentary on Ezekiel:

… and this relates to the Holy Spirit, who is mentioned with a female name (nomine feminino) among the Hebrews. For also in the Gospel which is of the Hebrews and is read by the Nazaraeans, the Saviour is introduced saying: ‘Just now, my Mother (mater), the Holy Spirit, took me up …’ (Jerome, Commentary on Ezekiel 4, 16, 13 – Glorie 1964:178).

In his Commentary on Isaiah, Jerome states:

And also this: (in the text) ‘like the eyes of a maid look to the hand of her mistress’ [Ps. 123:2], the maid is the soul and the mistress (dominam) is the Holy Spirit. For also in that Gospel written according to the Hebrews, which the Nazaraeans read, the Lord says: ’Just now, my Mother (mater), the Holy Spirit, took me.’ Nobody should be offended by this, for among the Hebrews the Spirit is said to be of the feminine gender (genere feminino), although in our language it is called to be of masculine gender and in the Greek language neuter. (Jerome, Commentary on Isaiah 11, 40, 9 – Adriaen 1963:459)

While Jerome was well acquainted with the old Jewish Christian tradition of the femininity of the Holy Spirit, which in his time was still alive among the ‘Nazaraeans’, who read the ‘Gospel according to the Hebrews’, he considered it to be a question of language only.

Epiphanius and Hippolytus on the prophet Elxai

For the Jewish Christians themselves, however, it was not merely a question of language. Apart from the Gospel according to the Hebrews, this is testified by a number of testimonies regarding the prophet Elxai. This Jewish Christian prophet—in the various sources also named as Elchasai, Alchasaios, Elkesai and Elxaios—is said to have received the revelation written about in the Book of Elchasai in Mesopotamia in the year 116–117.

The church father Epiphanius (c. 315–430), for many years bishop of Salamis and the metropolitan of Cyprus, transmits this revelation as follows:

Next he describes Christ as a kind of power and also gives His dimensions (…)And the Holy Spirit is (said to be) like Christ, too, but She is a female being (thēleian) (…). (Epiphanius, Panarion 19, 4, 1–2 – Holl I, 1915:219)

Later on in his book, Epiphanius reports essentially the same:

And he [i.e., Elxai] supposed also that the Holy Spirit stands over against Him (i.e., Christ) in the shape of a female being (en eidei thēleian) (…). (Epiphanius, Panarion 30, 17, 6 – Holl I, 1915:375)

Earlier the learned Hippolytus (c. 170–c. 236), a Christian presbyter at Rome, had transmitted the same tradition on Elchasai:

There should also be a female (thēleian) with Him (i.e., with Christ as an angel) (…) The male is the Son of God and the female (thēleian) is called the Holy Spirit. (Hippolytus, Refutatio 9, 13, 3 – Wendland 1916:251)

The Pseudo-Clementines

A next testimony to the Holy Spirit’s femininity may be derived from the so-called Pseudo-Clementines. The Pseudo-Clementines is a work circulated under the name of Clement of Rome (fl. c. 96), which came down to us in two fourth-century forms: the Greek Homilies and the Latin Recognitions. Both forms contain very old Jewish Christian source material. The Jewish Christian concept of the Spirit as a feminine Being is, by implication, preserved in one of the Homilies:

And Peter answered: ‘One is He who said to His Wisdom, ‘Let us make a man’ [Gen. 1:26]. His Wisdom (sophia), with Her (Greek: hei, 3rd p. sing. feminine) He Himself always rejoiced [Prov. 8:30] just as (hōsper) with His own Spirit (pneumati).’ (Ps.-Clementines, Hom. 16, 12, 1 – Rehm 1969:223)

The text identifies Wisdom with the Holy Spirit. This equation of Wisdom (chokma, sophia) and Holy Spirit (ruach, pneuma) has old parallels in Jewish and Jewish Christian traditions. Already in the Jewish book Wisdom of Solomon, preserved in Greek as part of the Septuagint and being in high esteem among most early Christian writers, one finds this equation; for instance, in Wisdom 9, 17 it runs:

Who has learned thy (i.e., God’s) counsel, unless thou hast given wisdom (sophian) and sent thy holy Spirit (pneuma) from on high? (Wisdom of Solomon 9, 17 [Revised Standard Version])

Wisdom is equated with the Holy Spirit and both are considered to be feminine.² Hence one understands how in early Christian tradition Christ is so often considered to be the child of mother Sophia or the Holy Spirit.³ In essence, both traditions express the same concept. The oldest patristic testimonies to this concept are the texts from Origen and Jerome quoted above.

In interpreting all these testimonies, one should bear in mind that ancient Jewish Christianity did not express itself in Greek discursive terminology, but in Semitic metaphorical language. Or, stated otherwise: the Jewish Christians expressed themselves in images, not in logical concepts. Accordingly, one may also understand that the Christian concept of Trinity is not merely due to Greek philosophical thinking, but has genuine and extremely old sources in Jewish Christian writings.⁴ One may reread the statements of Hippolytus and Epiphanius on Elxai’s vision of God with his Son and the female Spirit as quoted above.

Theophilus and Irenaeus

The influence of the archaic Jewish Christian tradition on Spirit and Sophia is even found in Greek Christian authors such as Theophilus of Antioch (fl. later 2nd c.) and Irenaeus of Lyon (c. 130–c. 200). In his writing Against Autolycus, the Greek bishop and apologist Theophilus wrote for instance:

God made everything through His Logos and Sophia, for ‘by His Logos the heavens were made firm and by His Spirit all their power.’ [Ps.32:6] (…)

Similarly the three days prior to the luminaries [cf. Gn. 1] are types of the Triad (triados), of God and His Word and His Wisdom (Theophilus, Ad Autol. 1, 7; 2, 15 – Grant 1970:10; 52).

In Greek speaking bishop Irenaeus’ work Against Heresies, which is mainly transmitted in Latin, it runs inter alia:

… the Son and the Holy Spirit (Spiritus), the Word and the Wisdom (Sapientia) (…)

For with Him were always present the Word and the Wisdom (Sapientia), the Son and the Spirit (Spiritus)

Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 4, 7, 4; 20, 1. (Rousseau 1965:464; 626)

The Pastor of Hermas

The Shepherd of Hermas is a rather enigmatic and, in all probability, composed document which originated in Rome between the end of the first and the middle of the second century. Its final form consists of five ‘Visions’, twelve ‘Mandates’ and ten ‘Similitudes’. In the second and third centuries, it was accepted as Scripture by several ecclesiastical authors and even Didymus the Blind, a contemporary of Athanasius in the fourth century, included it in his canon of Scripture. It is also found in the highly important biblical manuscript Codex Sinaiticus, dating from the same time.⁵ In many of its utterances, the Shepherd reveals its Jewish Christian provenance.

One of these Jewish Christian features is the concept of the Holy Spirit as feminine. Although the Shepherd of Hermas (now generally classified as one of the ‘Apostolic Fathers’) uses the word ‘spirit’ in a variety of ways, in several cases ‘spirit’ appears to mean ‘Holy Spirit’. One of these cases is SimilitudeIX (Körtner & Leutzsch 1998:300 ff.), where the Holy Spirit is presented in the image of twelve virgins (parthenoi). The plural should not lead us astray here.⁶ Elsewhere in the Shepherd the Holy Spirit—in her equivalent the Church—is described as being pre-existent and also as an old women (gunē presbutis) (Vis. I, 2, 2; cf. e.g. II, 4, 1 ff.: presbutera in Körtner & Leutzsch 1998:158).⁷

Melito of Sardis

Some decades later, and in another part of the Roman Empire, Melito of Sardis († c. 190) composed his homily On the Passover. It became famous after its discovery and publication by Campbell Bonner in 1940. In its newest editions one finds some fragments added, the seventeenth of which reads as follows:

Hymn the Father, you holy ones;
sing to your Mother (tēi mētri), virgins.
We hymn, we exalt (them) exceedingly, we holy ones.
You have been exalted to be brides and bridegrooms,
for you have found your bridegroom, Christ.
Drink for wine, brides and bridegrooms … (Melito, Frg. 17 – Hall 1979:84–85)

It does not seem to be beyond doubt that the fragment, which follows On the Passover in a Bodmer Papyrus Codex, really stems from Melito. In any case it is a liturgical dialogue, if not part from Melito’s sermon, then perhaps of a baptismal liturgy. In its main theme and imagery, On the Passover is close to Jewish Christian thinking in general and Jewish Paschal tradition in particular. In the just quoted fragment, the Mother is without a doubt the Holy Spirit.

Sources from East and West Syria

As we have just seen with Theophilus, Irenaeus, the Pastor Hermae and (perhaps) Melito, the concept of the Spirit as feminine is sometimes found as an archaic reminiscence of Jewish Christianity in later Greek writers. However, in several Christian writings stemming from Syria, which mainly had Syriac (a branch of Aramaic) as their original language, this speaking of the Holy Spirit as feminine really abounds.

The Gospel of Thomas

Apart from some Greek scraps, the Gospel of Thomas has been mainly transmitted in a Coptic translation found in the second codex of the ‘gnostic’ library which, in December 1945, was discovered near Nag Hammadi in Upper Egypt.⁸ Many researchers maintain that the Gospel of Thomas—in any case in its original form(s)—was not ‘gnostic’ at all, nor even tincted with typical ‘gnostic’ ideas, but a fine example of primitive Jewish and Syrian Christianity. One of its logia reads as follows:

(Jesus said:) Whoever does not hate his father and his mother in My way will not be able to be a (disciple) to me. And whoever does (not) love (his father) and his mother in My way will not be able to be a (disciple) to me, for My mother (tamaay) (…) but (My) true (Mother) gave me the Life. (Gospel of Thomas, logion 101 – Guillaumont a.o. 1998:50; Nagel 2014:152)

Here, the true Mother is the Holy Spirit.

The Acts of Thomas

The Acts of Thomas recount the missionary activities of the apostle Judas Thomas. It is generally agreed that the composite work, which has survived in several Syriac and Greek manuscripts, was written in Syriac sometime before the middle of the third century. It contains many archaic elements pointing to early Jewish Christian tradition in Syria.

One of these archaic Jewish Christian elements is the concept of the Holy Spirit as feminine. It is clearly found in the following texts transmitted in Greek:

And the apostle arose and sealed them (…): Come, compassionate Mother (mētēr); (…) Come, Mother (mētēr) of the seven houses (…); Come, Holy Spirit (pneuma) and cleanse their loins and their heart, and seal them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit (pneumatos). (Acta Thomae 27 – Lipsius-Bonnet 1903 [repr. 1972]:142–143)

… we praise and glorify You (Christ), and Your invisible Father, and Your Holy Spirit (pneuma), (and) the Mother (mētera) of all creation. (Acta Thomae 39 – Lipsius-Bonnet 1903 [repr. 1972]:157)

Come, secret Mother (mētēr); Come, You who (fem.) are manifest in your deeds; You who (fem.) gives joy and rest to those who are united to You (fem.). (Acta Thomae 50 – Lipsius-Bonnet 1903 [repr. 1972]:166)

One may also compare Acta Thomae 7 (the Syriac text speaks of the glorification of ‘the Father, the Lord of all’ and ‘the Spirit, His Wisdom’) (cf. Klijn 2003:29), whereas the Greek text has: ‘The Father of truth and the Mother of Wisdom’) and Acta Thomae 133 (‘We name over you [i.e. the ‘bread of life’ in the eucharist] the name of the Mother [= the Holy Spirit]).

Gospels in Old Syriac, the Odes of Solomon, the Didascalia and the Apostolic Constitutions

A number of other writings from the Syrian world may be briefly dealt with under one heading. The first is the Old Syriac Version of the Gospels, which reaches back to the second century and transmits Jn 14:26 as follows:

… but that (Syr.: hi = she) Spirit, the Paraclete that my Father will send to you in my name, She (Syr. hi) shall teach you everything, She (hi) shall remind you of all what I say. (Evangelium da-Mepharrese – tr. Burkitt 1904:510–511)

In all probability, the Odes of Solomon are a (Jewish) Christian work which is almost certainly written in Syria or Palestine in the course of the same second century. In Ode 36, 3 it runs:

The Spirit of the Lord rested upon me,
and She lifted me up to the height (…)
She brought me forth before the face of the Lord (…)
For according to the greatness of the Most High,
so She made me (…) (Odes of Solomon 36, 3a – tr. Lattke 2009:492)

The Didascalia Apostolorum (‘Teaching of the Apostles’) is an ancient ‘Church Order’ which seems to have been composed in Syria in the earlier half of the third century. In the Syriac text of chapter 11 it runs:

This (i.e., the bishop) is your chief and your leader, and he is your mighty king. He rules in the place of the Almighty: but let him be honoured by you as God (…). But the deacon stands in the place of Christ, and do you love him. And the deaconess shall be honoured by you in the place of the Holy Spirit (…). (Didascalia apostolorum 9 –tr. Connolly 1929:86–88)

Virtually the same is stated in the Apostolic Constitutions, a collection of ecclesiastical commandments dating from the latter half of the fourth century and almost certainly of Syrian provenance:

Let also the deaconess (diakonis) be honoured by you in the place of the Holy Spirit (eis typon tou hagiou pneumatos) (…) (Apostolic Constitutions II, 26, 6 – Funk 1905:296)

Aphrahat and Ephrem

Clear resonances of this kind of representation are present in Aphrahat. As a rule he is said to be the first of the (orthodox) Syriac church fathers and also ‘the Persian sage’. We mainly know him from his so-called ‘Demonstrations’, a work dating from about 340. In the eighteenth Demonstration it runs with reference to Genesis 2:24:

Who is it that leaves father and mother to take a wife? The meaning is this. As long as a man has not taken a wife he loves and reveres God his Father and the Holy Spirit his Mother, and he has no other love. (Aphrahat, Dem. 18 – Parisot 1980:840; tr. Murray 1975:143)

One may add to this quote a passage from Demonstration VI, where Aphrahat speaks of the role of the Spirit in baptism:

From baptism we receive the Spirit of Christ, and in the same hour that the priests invoke the Spirit, She opens the heavens and descends, and hovers over the waters [cf. Gen. 1:2], and those who are baptized put Her on. (Aphrahat, Dem. 6 – Parisot 1980:292–293; tr. Murray 1975:143)

Although Ephrem Syrus (c. 306–373), who wrote most of his extant works in Edessa, conjugates the Syriac word rucha as feminine, one finds only one or two passages⁹ in his œuvre which highlight her femininity. In one of these it runs:

It is not said of Eve that she was Adam’s sister or his daughter, but that she came from him; likewise it is not to be said that the Spirit is a daughter or sister, but that (She) is from God and consubstantial with Him. (Ephrem, Commentary on the Concordant Gospel or Diatessaron 19, 15 – Leloir 1953:277; tr. Murray 1975:318)

Makarios/Symeon

Finally, an extremely rich and influential source is constituted by the homilies of Symeon of Mesopotamia. For centuries, these homilies were transmitted under the name of Makarios (Macarius), an Egyptian monk who lived c. 300–390 and was a staunch supporter of Athanasius. Modern research, however, established that their real author is no other than a certain contemporary Symeon, who lived in Mesopotamia, in the vicinity of the upper Euphrates. The homilies of this Symeon mainly survive in Greek in four collections. The second collection, consisting of fifty ‘spiritual’ homilies, became the most popular, but the other three are important as well.¹⁰

Here I quote only some of the most conspicuous examples, derived from a number of editions of the various collections. In the most influential Fifty Homilies, we read:

And from his (sc. Adam’s) time until the last Adam, the Lord, man did not see the true heavenly Father and the good and kind Mother (mētera), the grace of the Spirit (pneumatos) (…). (Makarios/Symeon, Hom. 28, 4 – Dörries, Klostermann & Kroeger 1964:232–233)

Elsewhere it runs of the Holy Spirit:

She (autē) is the kind and heavenly Mother (mēter) (…) (Makarios/Symeon, Hom. 27, 4 – Klostermann 1961:155)

Repeatedly it is stressed by Makarios that there is no human birth without a mother, and therefore no spiritual birth without the Holy Spirit (e.g. Hom. 8, 1; Klostermann 1961:37). As the mother (mēter) of young birds cares for them, so the Holy Spirit provides food for God’s children (Hom. 16, 2; Klostermann 1961:79–81). At another occasion, Makarios speaks of ‘the grace of the Spirit, the Mother (mēter) of the holy’ (Hom. 27, 1; Klostermann 1961:151).

Over the centuries, the writings of Makarios and/or Symeon have exerted an enormous influence, both in the East and in the West, not only in Syriac Christianity and other Eastern Orthodox circles, but also among Protestants. It is interesting to note that, among many others (see e.g. Benz 1963; Van de Bank 1977), both the very influential John Wesley¹¹ and the also very influential Nikolaus Ludwig Graf von Zinzendorf were deeply influenced by Makarios. Although in the case of the first one I was not able to find any stress on the femininity of the Holy Spirit, in Zinzendorf there is indeed. In his first address in Pennsylvania, for instance, he said that ‘the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is our true Father, and the Spirit of Jesus Christ is our true Mother’.¹²

Conclusions

Here I may conclude. It is not my aim to further look for influences of early Christian testimonies in this respect, nor did I even intend to be complete in my overview of early Christian texts.¹³ I only tried to make clear a certain current, which had its initials in early Jewish Christianity and also exerted its influence on other (‘orthodox’) Christian writers. It seems to have been the same Jewish and/or Jewish Christian influences which, moreover, can be found in many ‘gnostic’ texts, but I deliberately excluded these texts from my exposition.¹⁴ Here I just note that sometimes genuine Christian traditions and concepts, which became forgotten in mainstream Christendom, were kept alive in ‘heretical’ Christian circles.

It would be completely wrong to state that the image of the Holy Spirit as a woman and mother is simply caused by the fact that the Hebrew, Aramaic and Syriac words for ‘spirit’ are (nearly) always feminine. Of course this was an important factor, but there were other significant factors as well, such as the link between the figures of the Holy Spirit and Wisdom or between Holy Spirit and the Jewish feminine concept of the Divine Presence or Shekinah.¹⁵ Moreover, it should be remarked that, still, we are dealing with metaphorical language. Religious language is inherently metaphorical, that is, bound to images and similes. By its very nature it cannot define God’s essence. All ancients were aware of the fact that this essence of the Divine remains a holy mystery and is by nature ineffable.

Nevertheless, the very first Christians, all of whom were Jews by birth, used to speak of the Holy Spirit as feminine. These Jewish Christians (or, perhaps better: Christian Jews) adhered to Genesis 1:27 where it is said that God created male and female after his image. If this text is really taken for true, then something female is inherent to God. Apart from the image of a Mother, Syrian and other Jewish Christians stressed the ‘hovering’ (rahhef) of the Spirit as stated, for instance, in Genesis 1:2 and Deuteronomy 32:11.¹⁶ Besides, they attributed to the Spirit the motherly features which Jewish prophetic writings like Isaiah (49:15–15; 66:13) find in God. One may also bring to mind that, according to Matthew, Jesus compared himself to a mother bird (Mt. 23:37). Moreover, when believers are born anew from the Spirit (e.g. Jn 3), they are ‘children of the Spirit’, who is their ‘Mother’.¹⁷

An expression such as ‘children of the Spirit’ is typical to Makarios.¹⁸ It explicitly refers to the motherly function of the Holy Spirit. There appears to be a tender aspect in God (see e.g. Is 66:13) which can only be expressed in the simile of the Mother. This does not mean that in this way we have ‘defined’ God; it just means that in this way we attain a better appreciation of the fullness of the Divine.

Acknowledgements

Competing interests

The author declares that he has no financial or personal relationships which may have inappropriately influenced him in writing this article.

References

Acta Thomae, 1903 [repr. 1972], ‘27’, in R.A. Lipsius & M. Bonnet (eds.), Acta Apostolorum Apocrypha, II, 2, pp. 142–143, Hinrichs, Leipzig, (repr. Hildesheim, Olms).

Acta Thomae, 1903 [repr. 1972], ‘39’, in R.A. Lipsius & M. Bonnet, (eds.), Acta Apostolorum Apocrypha, II, 2, p. 157, Hinrichs, Leipzig, (repr. Hildesheim, Olms).

Acta Thomae, 1903 [repr. 1972], ‘50’, in R.A. Lipsius & M. Bonnet (eds.), Acta Apostolorum Apocrypha, II, 2, p. 166, Hinrichs, Leipzig, (repr. Hildesheim, Olms).

Acta Thomae, 2003, ‘7’, in A.F.J. Klijn, (ed.), The Acts of Thomas: Introduction, text, and commentary, p. 29, 2nd rev. edn., Leiden-Boston, Brill.

Aphrahat, 1980, ‘Demonstration 6’, in J. Parisot (ed.), Aphraatis sapientis Persae Demonstrationes, Patrologia Syriaca, I, 1, p. 143, Firmin-Didot, Paris, (repr. Turnhout: Brepols 1980).

Aphrahat, 1980, ‘Demonstration 18’, in J. Parisot (ed.), Aphraatis sapientis Persae Demonstrationes, Patrologia Syriaca, I, 1, p. 143, Firmin-Didot, Paris, (repr. Turnhout: Brepols 1980).

Barker, M., 1992, The Great Angel: A study of Israel’s second god, SPCK, London.

Chorbishop, S.J.B., 2014, Early Syriac theology with special reference to the Maronite tradition, rev. ed., The Catholic University of America Press, Washington, DC.

Benz, E., 1963, Die protestantische Thebais: Zur Nachwirkung Makarios des Ägypters im Protestantismus des 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts in Europa und Amerika, Akademie der Wissenschaften Mainz, Wiesbaden.

Beyreuther, E. & Meyer, G. (eds.), 1963, Nikolaus Ludwig von Zinzendorf, Hauptschriften, vol. 2, Reden in und von Amerika, Olms, Hildesheim.

Bousset, W. & Gressmann, H., 1966, Die Religion des Judentums im späthellenistischen Zeitalter, Mohr, Tübingen.

Didascalia Apostolorum, 1929, ‘9’, in R.H. Connolly (ed.), Didascalia apostolorum: The Syriac Version translated and accompanied by the Verona Latin Fragments, pp. 86–88, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Didascalia et Constitutiones Apostolorum, 1905, ‘II, 26, 6’, in F.X. Funk (ed.), Didascalia et Constitutiones Apostolorum, p. 296, I, F. Schoeningh, Paderborn.

Drobner, H.R., 2007, The Fathers of the Church: A comprehensive introduction, Hendrickson, Peabody.

Evangelium da-Mepharrese, 1904, Evangelium da-Mepharrese: the Curetonian Version of the four gospels, with the readings of the Sinai palimpsest and the early Syriac patristic evidence edited, collected and arranged by F.C. Burkitt, pp. 510–511, University Press, Cambridge.

Ephrem Syrus, 1953, ‘Commentary on the concordant gospel or Diatessaron 19, 15’, in L. Leloir (ed.), S. Éphrem, Commentaire de l’Évangile concordant, version arménienne, p. 277, Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 137, Peeters, Leuven.

Epiphanius, 1915, ‘Panarion 19, 4, 1–2’, in K. Holl (ed.), Epiphanius I, Ancoratus. Panarion (haereses 1–33), p. 219, Hinrichs, Leipzig.

Epiphanius, 1915, ‘Panarion 30, 17, 6’, in K. Holl (ed.), Epiphanius I, Ancoratus. Panarion (haereses 1–33), p. 375, Hinrichs, Leipzig.

Frey, H., 2012, ‘Die Fragmente des Hebräerevangeliums’, in Chr. Markschies & J. Schröter (eds.), Antike christliche Apokryphen in deutscher Übersetzung, vol. 1, pp. 593–606, Evangelien und Verwandtes, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen.

Hieronymus, 1963, ‘Commentary on Isaiah’, in M. Adriaen (ed.), Hieronymi Commentariorum in Esaiam, p. 459, Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina 73, Brepols, Turnhout.

Hieronymus, 1964, ‘Commentary on Ezekiel’, in F. Glorie (ed.), Hieronymi Commentariorum in Ezechielem libri XIV, p. 178, Brepols, Turnhout. (Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina 75)

Hieronymus, 1969, ‘Commentary on Micah’, in M. Adriaen (ed.), Hieronymi Commentarii in prophetas minores, p. 513, Brepols, Turnhout. (Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina 76)

Hippolytus, 1916, ‘Refutatio 9, 13, 3’, in P. Wendland (ed.), Hippolytus’ Werke, 3. Band, Hippolytus, Refutatio omnium haeresium, p. 251, Hinrichs, Leipzig.

Hirsch, S., 1926, Die Vorstellung von einem weiblichen Pneuma Hagion im Neuen Testament und in der ältesten christlichen Literatur, ein Beitrag zur Lehre vom heiligen Geist, Emil Ebering, Berlin.

Irenaeus Lugdunensis, 1965, ‘Adversus Haereses 4, 7, 4’, in A. Rousseau (ed.), Irénée de Lyon, Contre les hérésies, Livre IV. Édition critique (…) sous la direction de Adelin Rousseau (…). Tome II: Texte et traduction, Les Éditions du Cerf, Paris, p. 464.

Irenaeus Lugdunensis, 1965, ‘Adversus Haereses 20, 1’, in A. Rousseau (ed.), Irénée de Lyon, Contre les hérésies, Livre IV. Édition critique (…) sous la direction de Adelin Rousseau (…). Tome II: Texte et traduction, Les Éditions du Cerf, Paris, p. 626.

Klijn, A.F.J., 2003, The Acts of Thomas: Introduction, text, and commentary, 2nd rev. edn., Leiden-Boston, Brill.

Kretschmar, G., 1956, Studien zur frühchristlichen Trinitätstheologie, Mohr, Tübingen.

Luomanen, P., 2012, Recovering Jewish-Christian sects and gospels, Brill, Leiden-Boston.

Makarios/Symeon, 1961, ‘Hom. 8,1’, in E. Klostermann & H. Berthold (eds.), Neue Homilien des Makarius/Symeon, p. 37, Akademie-Verlag, Berlin.

Makarios/Symeon, 1961, ‘Hom. 16,2’, in E. Klostermann & H. Berthold (eds.), Neue Homilien des Makarius/Symeon, pp. 79–81, Akademie-Verlag, Berlin.

Makarios/Symeon, 1961, ‘Hom. 27,1’, in E. Klostermann & H. Berthold (eds.), Neue Homilien des Makarius/Symeon, p. 151, Akademie-Verlag, Berlin.

Makarios/Symeon, 1961, ‘Hom. 27,4’, in E. Klostermann & H. Berthold (eds.), Neue Homilien des Makarius/Symeon, p. 155, Akademie-Verlag, Berlin.

Makarios/Symeon, 1964, ‘Hom. 16,8’, in H. Dörries, E. Klostermann & M. Kroeger (eds.), Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios, p. 163, Akademie-Verlag, Berlin.

Makarios/Symeon, 1964, ‘Hom. 28,4’, in H. Dörries, E. Klostermann & M. Kroeger (eds.), Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios, pp. 232–233, Akademie-Verlag, Berlin.

Makarios/Symeon, 1964, ‘Hom. 30,2’, in H. Dörries, E. Klostermann & M. Kroeger (eds.), Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios, p. 241, Akademie-Verlag, Berlin.

Melito of Sardis, 1979, ‘Frg. 17’, in S.G. Hall (ed.), Melito of Sardis, On Pascha and Fragments, pp. 84–85, Texts and translations by Stuart George Hall, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Murray, R., 1975, Symbols of church and kingdom. A study in early Syriac tradition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Odae Solomonis, 2009, ’36, 3a’, in M. Lattke (ed.), Odes of Solomon, A Commentary by Michael Lattke, transl. M. Ehrhardt, H.W. Attridge (ed.), Fortress Press, Minneapolis, p. 492.

Origenes, 1901, ‘Homilies on Jeremiah’, in E. Klostermann (ed.), Origenes Werke, 3. Band, Jeremiahomilien, Klageliedkommentar, Erklärung der Samuel- und Königsbücher, p. 128, Hinrichs, Leipzig.

Origenes, 1903, ‘Commentary on the Gospel of John’, in E. Preuschen (ed.), Origenes Werke, 4. Band, Der Johanneskommentar, p. 67, Hinrichs, Leipzig.

Osiek, C., 1999, Shepherd of Hermas, Fortress, Minneapolis.

Outler, A.C. (ed.), 1964 (paperback ed. 1980), John Wesley, Oxford University Press, New York.

Pastor Hermae, 1998, ‘Similitudes’, in U.H.J. Körtner & M. Leutzsch (eds.), Papiasfragmente: Hirt des Hermas, pp. 242–359, Eingeleitet, herausgegeben, übertragen und erläutert von Ulrich H.J. Körtner und Martin Leutzsch, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt.

Pastor Hermae, 1998, ‘Visions’, in U.H.J. Körtner & M. Leutzsch, (eds.), Papiasfragmente: Hirt des Hermas, p. 146–191f, Eingeleitet, herausgegeben, übertragen und erläutert von Ulrich H.J. Körtner und Martin Leutzsch, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt.

Pseudo-Clementines, 1969, ‘Hom. 16, 12, 1’, in B. Rehm (ed.), Die Pseudoklementinen, I, Homilien, p. 223, Zum Druck besorgt von Johannes Irmscher. Zweite, verbesserte Auflage besorgt von Franz Paschke, Akademie Verlag, Berlin.

Quispel, G., 2008, ‘The Holy Spirit as Woman in Apocalypse 12’, in J. van Oort (ed.), Gnostica, Judaica, Catholica: Collected essays of Gilles Quispel, Brill, Leiden-Boston.

Robinson, J.M., 2014, The Nag Hammadi story, vol. 1–2, Brill, Leiden-Boston.

Schüssler Fiorenza, E., 1983, In memory of her: A feminist theological reconstruction of Christian origins, SCM Press, London.

Seeberg, R., 1922, Dogmengeschichte, vol. 1, Deichert, Leipzig & Erlangen.

Seeberg, R., 1924, Christliche Dogmatik, vol. 1, Deichert, Leipzig & Erlangen.

Schäfer, P., 2002 (paperback 2004), Mirror of his beauty: Feminine images of God from the Bible to the early Kabbalah, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Theophilus Antiochenus, 1970, ‘Ad Autolycum 1, 7’, in R. M. Grant (ed.), Theophilus of Antioch, ad Autolycum, p. 10, Text and translation by Robert M. Grant, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Theophilus Antiochenus, 1970, ‘Ad Autolycum 2, 15’, in R. M. Grant (ed.), Theophilus of Antioch, ad Autolycum, p. 52, Text and translation by Robert M. Grant, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Thomae Evangelium, 1998, ‘Logion 101’, in The Gospel according to Thomas, Coptic Text established and translated by A. Guillaumont, H. -Ch. Puech, G. Quispel, W. Till and †Yassah ‘Abd al Masīh, Brill, Leiden-Boston-Köln.

Thomae Evangelium, 2014, ‘Logion 101’, in P. Nagel (ed.), Codex apocryphus gnosticus Novi Testamenti, p. 152, Band 1, Mohr, Tübingen.

Van de Bank, J.H., 1977, Macarius en zijn invloed in de Nederlanden, Rodopi, Amsterdam.

Van Oort, J., 2011, ‘The Holy Spirit and the early church: Doctrine & confession’, HTS Theologiese Studies 67(3), Art. #1120, 8 pages. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/hts.v67i3.1120

Van Oort, J., 2012, ‘The Holy Spirit and the early church: The experience of the spirit’, HTS Teologiese Studies 68(1), #Art. 1154, 7 pages. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/hts.v68i1.1154

Footnotes

1. The term ‘Jewish Christianity’ is used here to denote those ancient form(s) of Christianity which directly stemmed from Jews and retained typical features of their faith and ways of thinking.

2. For this and related Jewish texts, see e.g. Bousset and Gressmann (1966:346, 397).

3. One of the first who saw this was Schüssler Fiorenza (1983:132–135); one may compare, for instance, Barker: 1992:48–69 [= Ch. Four: ‘The Evidence of Wisdom’]). Sometimes, however, their reasoning and rather quick conclusions should be taken with caution.

4. Kretschmar (1956:99) considers the scheme of Elxai’s vision to be ‘die älteste Form der “Trinitätslehre”’ (‘the oldest form of the “doctrine of the Trinity”’).

5. Unfortunately the end of Codex א did not survive.

6. With reference to Seeberg (1924:371, 1922:140), his promovenda Selma Hirsch wrote in her dissertation (1926:41), ‘Der Geist wird hier pluralisch, als eine Mehrheit von Geistern gedacht, ”was aber ebensowenig wie אלהים oder קדזשים usw. auf eine Vielheit von Wesen zu deuten, sondern nur auf die Mannigfaltigkeit der in einem Wesen zusammengefaßten Kräfte hinweist“.’

7. More on the Shepherd’s pneumatology in concise form in e.g., Osiek (1999:31–34).

8. See e.g. Robinson (2014). Here and elsewhere I speak of ‘gnostic’ (between parentheses) to indicate that, in modern research, the term has become problematic.

9. Cf. Murray (1975:318–319, 144 n. 2): ‘… two passages in the Diatessaron commentary suggest that he was familiar with the tradition’. With reference to Murray (1975:313–319), Chorbishop Seely Joseph Beggiani (2014:81), reduces this to one.

10. Further particulars on the diverse (and overlapping) collections conveniently in, for instance Drobner (2007:370–372).

11. See e.g. Outler (1964 [paperback ed. 1980]: 9 where Outler also mentions his particular interest in Ephrem Syrus). Cf. e.g. a quote from Wesley himself (‘A plain account of genuine Christianity’) on p. 195. More on Wesley’s study of Makarios and the translation of his works in Benz (1963:118–127, n. 14).

12. Beyreuther & Meyer (1963:38): ‘… da der Vater unsers Herrn Jesu Christi unser wahrhaftiger Vater/ und der Geist Jesu Christi unsere wahrhaftige Mutter ist (…)’. A little further on it runs (38): ‘… daß es nicht anders sein kann, als daß sein (= Christ’s) Vater auch unser Vater und seine Mutter auch unsere Mutter sein muß’ and near the end (45): ‘… so spricht man von seinem und unserm Vater/ von dem Geist, der seine und unser aller wahrhafftige Mutter ist …’

13. An important testimony seems to be Apoc. 12; see e.g. Quispel (2008:749–752).

14. I only mention here Nag Hammadi writings such as the Apocryphon of John (e.g. 10, 17–18: ‘… the Holy Spirit, who is called the Mother of the living’) and the Gospel of Philip (e.g. 55 and 59), and testimonies such as Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. I, 30, 1–2 (the Sethians called the Spirit the First Woman: Primam Feminam) and Epiphanius, Panarion 21, 2, 3 (Simon Magus called Helena the Holy Spirit).

15. I do not enter the difficult question of whether or not Shekinah may be considered as (nearly) identical with God’s Spirit. See e.g. Schäfer (2002 [paperback 2004]). It is interesting to read on e.g. pp. 86–91 his argument that the Shekinah (which in his view is not identical to the Spirit) is the female aspect of God.

16. See e.g. Murray (1975:22, 144 and 313, among others).

17. Cf. Murray (1975: e.g. 312ff.).

18. See e.g. his Fifty Homilies, e.g. Hom. 16, 8 (Dörries 1964:163) and 30, 2 (Dörries 1964:241). As a matter of fact, he more often speaks of ‘Children of God’.

https://hts.org.za/index.php/hts/article/view/3225/7763

Friday, 14 December 2018

Know Thyself and the Devil Romans 7:18-21

Know Thyself and the Devil

Self Knowledge and the Devil

Romans 7:18-21

Romans 7:18-21 New King James Version (NKJV)

18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find. 19 For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice. 20 Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.

21 I find then a law, that evil is present with me, the one who wills to do good.

In the Gospel of Thomas Jesus tells us that finding the Kingdom is done by a person who "knows himself will discover this"

Gospel of Thomas Saying (3) Jesus said, "[If] those who lead you [say to you, 'See], the kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky [will precede you. If they say that] it is under the earth, then the fish of the sea [will enter it, preceding] you. And, the [kingdom of God] is inside of you, [and it is outside of you. Whoever] knows [himself] will discover this. [And when you] come to know yourselves, [you will realize that] you are [sons] of the [living] father. [But if you] will [not] know yourselves, [you dwell] in [poverty] and it is you who are that poverty."

Knowing yourself is part of self examination when We examine ourselves we come to an understanding that our natural self is unclean or full of sin it is referred to as sinful flesh our natural self is our real adversary or Satan. Satan or the Devil is our Ego or the natural propensities of the flesh, that is "that physical principle of the animal nature, which is the cause of all its diseases, death, and resolution into dust. It is that in the flesh "which has the power of death;" (Hebrews 2:14) and it is called sin, because the development, or fixation, of this evil in the flesh, was the result of transgression." (Elpis Israel)

The Devil is limitation of mind. The Devil in flesh is the rationalist or uncomprised intellectual who sees the universe as a blind mechanical force, acting in an arbitrary fashion imposing upon mankind an infinite variety of hardships and dis- eases. The Devil is that agency within us which sows seeds of fear and confusion and declares in no uncertain terms that – this is how life is! The Devil is a speaker of lies. (Man Know Thyself: Hermetic Qabalistic Keys to the Bible)

Ecclesiastes 10:2 A wise man’s heart is at his right hand, but a fool’s heart at his left I have suggested on :1 and :3 that Solomon has himself in view, dissecting his own spiritual collapse as he does in the preceding verses of Ecc. 9. So I suggest this too is him stating that he was not really the true "wise man" but the fool, because wisdom had been "far from me" (Ecc. 7:23). Here he puts it another way, in saying that a truly wise man has his heart at his right hand, under his control, with his wisdom in his heart.

Whereas Solomon sees himself as the fool whose heart was not under his control, spiritual mindedness and psychological self discipline had not been practiced by him at all. And despite realizing that, he still doesn't repent. The Old Testament frequently speaks of man as having two "sides" to his character; one that wished to serve God, and the other which was rebellious. Ecc. 10:2 shows how that the spiritual man is not only aware of this, but he consciously acts to control these two sides: "A wise man's heart is at his right hand; but a fool's heart at his left".

This kind of self-knowledge is sadly lacking in most human beings, and Solomon is admitting it had been lacking in himself. Proverbs 7,8 likewise has the picture of two women, personifying the flesh and spirit (Prov. 7:12 cp. 8:2,3). Against this Old Testament background, there developed a strong Jewish tradition that the right hand side of a man was his spiritual side, and the left hand side was the equivalent of the New Testament 'devil'. The Lord Jesus referred to this understanding when He warned: "Let not your left hand know what your right hand does" (Mt. 6:3)- implying that the good deeds of the spiritual man would be misused by the 'devil', e.g. in using them as grounds for spiritual pride.

“The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left” (Ecc. 10:2 NIV) has been understood as referring not so much to right and wrong, good and evil, as to the highest good and lesser good (cp. how the left hand can stand for simply lesser blessing rather than outright evil, e.g. Gen. 48:13-20). The fool inclines to lower commitment. The wise will always incline to the maximum, wholehearted level. And Solomon realizes that this is how he has been.

Paul laments: "In me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing...for the good that I would I do not...if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me" (Rom.7:18-21). Now he does not blame his sinning on an external being called the devil. He located his own evil nature as the real source of sin: "It is not I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then a law (within me), that, when I would do good, evil is present with (i.e. within) me". So he says that the opposition to being spiritual comes from something that he calls "sin dwelling in me". Every thoughtful, spiritually minded person will come to the same kind of self-knowledge. It should be noted that even a supreme Christian like Paul did not experience a change of nature after conversion, nor was he placed in a position whereby he did not and could not sin. The modern 'evangelical' movement claims that they are in such a position, and thereby place Paul well within the ranks of the 'unsaved' because of his statement here in Rom.7:15-21. These verses have proved a major difficulty for their claims. David, another undoubtedly righteous man,likewise commented upon the constant sinfulness of his very nature: "I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me" (Ps.51:5).

Realizing who ‘the Devil’ really is inspires us to more concretely fight against him.

For we are our own worst enemy our own devil and an enemy against God. If we follow the thinking of the flesh, (). So to “know yourself” is to know that it is our own evil heart that is the devil. ()

Our ego catapults self-interest to the forefront of our attention. Daily readings, Bible study and prayer suppress the power of the ego. Over a period of time the reflective mind, remembering the pain of past ego-driven mistakes, will grow in wisdom. But ego never disappears. It can only be suppressed and its power limited by the constant reintroduction of spiritual thinking.

The doctrine of the fallen angel devil tells us that we are not truly to blame. The evil in the world comes from outside us and in reality it is God who is to blame, since He can’t control His own angels. We are told God either doesn’t have the power or the will to stop this fallen angel, and therefore we suffer. This doctrine elevates the flesh and degrades the spirit.

If we wish to partake of God’s nature, we have to recognize the uncleanness of our own nature and reject it.

We must come to know our true self. Our true self is not the person of this world, but the one who was born of God. We are spiritually maturing and growing in knowledge of who we are. We may not be clearly seeing our true self (who is Christ) right now, but we will once we come to fully know and be our True self. We are God’s image that must become perfect like our heavenly Father this is our purpose to reflect the identity, character and glory and become the image of Christ, who is the true image of God. We can only do this in Christ where our true self (life) will be kept hidden in Christ Col 3:3, 4.

So in this light real poverty is when we do not know our true self in Christ. The use of the term 'poverty' is meant for life outside of true knowledge This is spiritual poverty where our minds are lost in deception and our hearts feel homeless because we have not returned to our Father’s house 1Cor 3:16 6:19 Eph 2:20-22 1Pet 2:5. Finally, Jesus says, “you are that poverty” Paul says that nothing good could come from him Rom 7:18 He said that “Paul” had died and Christ now lived in and through him Gal 2:20. Paul knew that his true life was found when he had the spirit of Christ, which is the mind of Christ and not the natural or worldly Paul.

Paul rebuked Corinth for their inability to know whether they had the christ-consciousness developed within them: "Know ye not...that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?" (1Cor. 3:16). We must reckon ourselves dead to sin (Rom. 6:11). The Greek for "reckon" is that translated "impute" or "count", and which often appears in the surrounding chapters in Romans, speaking of how God "counts" us to be perfect. We must reckon ourselves as God reckons us.

the christ-consciousness is first born at baptism, but it is quite possible for it to lie dormant or even die unless it is nurtured. Almost all of us have discovered the presence of our real spiritual man some time after baptism. The spiritual self is begotten by the word, leading to the birth at baptism (2Cor 5:17; James 1:18; 1Pet. 1:23); yet it is the word which makes the " man of God" perfect or mature (2Tim. 3:16,17). Note that the " man of God" here probably refers to our inner spiritual self, rather than just being an description for the believer. In this case, 1Tim. 6:11 records Paul speaking to Timothy's spiritual man: " Thou, O man of God, flee these things". "Man of God" was a term used to describe the Old Testament prophets; it is as if Paul is addressing himself to the word-developed man within Timothy. We must likewise relate to the spiritual man within our brethren.

Moreover, this is how we become “sons of the living Father” (compare Thomas 49-50), which is to become like Jesus himself our example. We must have the same faith as Jesus as well as the same self-control just as Jesus needed it to be saved, so do we Heb 5:7, 8 also in the gospel of John it is Jesus who empowered true believers, so #Ec 5:19, 6:2. He gave them the privilege, the liberty, the dignity, which refers to the legitimate entitlement to the position of being called and becoming the sons of God. Israel was once the son and the first-born, #Ex 4:22: but now the adoption of sons to God was open and free to all nations whatever. By believing, undeserving sinners can become full members of God's family.

Wednesday, 12 December 2018

The Doctrine of Emanation

The doctrine of emanation

“All the emanations from the Father, therefore, are Pleromas, and all his emanations have their roots in the one who caused them all to grow from himself.” The Gospel of Truth, The Nag Hammadi Library

There are two emanations the first emanation is to about the self-realization of the Uncreated Eternal Spirit the second emanation is the manifestation of creation both the spiritual universe and the physical universe

This study will deal with the the second emanation the creation of the the physical universe

GOD AND HIS SPIRIT IN RELATION TO THE UNIVERSE

What is the meaning of the word spirit‭? ‬To what language does the word belong‭? ‬It is a Latin word,‭ ‬as,‭ “‬spiritus,‭” ‬a blowing,‭ ‬from‭ ‬spiro,‭ “‬to breathe,‭ ‬breathe out,‭ ‬exhale.‭” ‬Hence‭ ‬Spirit is that also which is exhaled.‭ ‬In the Greek,‭ ‬the word which answers to‭ ‬spirit is‭ ‬pneuma,‭ ‬which signifies the same as‭ ‬spiro.‭ ‬In the Hebrew it is‭ ‬ruach.‭ ‬But these words,‭ ‬while they tell us that they stand for something radiated or exhaled,‭ ‬do not tell us what the essence or substance of the exhalation,‭ ‬or radiation,‭ ‬is.‭ ‬It may be air in motion,‭ ‬or wind,‭ ‬breath,‭ ‬electricity,‭ ‬or some other agent.‭ ‬What it is the word represents,‭ ‬depends upon something more than etymology can supply.‭ ‬The words ‬ruach,‭ ‬pneuma,‭ ‬spiritus and‭ ‬spirit do not signify the same thing in all places where they occur‭; ‬still,‭ ‬whatever the thing is,‭ ‬the radical idea is a motion outwards‭ ‬from,‭ ‬into.

The first place in the Bible where the word occurs is in‭ ‬Gen.‭ i. ‬2.‭ ‬Here it is‭ ‬ruach Elohim,‭ ‬a principle going out of,‭ ‬or from,‭ ‬the Mighty Ones.‭ ‬What could this be‭? ‬It may be known by its effects.‭ “‬It brooded upon the face of the waters,‭”—‬of the waters which in the primeval state of the earth,‭ ‬covered its entire surface.‭ ‬This brooding principle covered the surface and penetrated its substance in all its atoms,‭ ‬so that it was only necessary for the word of command to go forth from the Mighty,‭ ‬and whatever might be commanded would be done.

‬Everything was made by this brooding principle as the executive of divine Wisdom.‭ “‬By His spirit he hath garnished the heavens‭;” “‬He sendeth forth his spirit‭; ‬they are created,‭” ‬even all the things detailed by Moses.‭ ‬Hence,‭ ‬Job says,‭ “‬the‭ ‬ruach of‭ ‬Ail hath made me,‭ ‬and the‭ ‬Nishmah of SHADDAI hath given me life.‭ ‬The Spirit is,‭ ‬therefore,‭ ‬formative.‭ ‬It is creative power.‭ ‬It made the light‭; ‬it divided the vapours from the waters by an expanse‭; ‬gathered the waters together in the place of seas‭; ‬formed the vegetable world‭; ‬established the astronomy of the heavens‭; ‬developed the animal kingdom‭; ‬and executed the whole so satisfactorily that the work was pronounced‭ “‬very good.‭”

When we contemplate‭ ‬spirit through these results,‭ ‬we behold an Almighty power which is predicated of AIL—the‭ ‬spirit of Ail.‭ ‬But what is AIL‭? ‬Etymologically,‭ ‬it is‭ ‬strength,‭ ‬might,‭ ‬power.‭ ‬Hence the‭ ‬Spirit of AIL is a powerful emanation,‭ ‬or‭ ‬breathing forth of power.‭ ‬ALMIGHTY POWER is the fountain and origin of the universe,‭ “‬out of whom are all things‭” ‬says Paul‭ (‬1‭ ‬Cor.‭ viii. ‬6‭)‬.‭ ‬He also tells us that the fountain of Omnipotence is a glorious and torrid centre‭; ‬a centre that cannot be approached by man,‭ ‬and the dwelling place of an invisible,‭ ‬intelligent,‭ ‬and deathless being‭ (‬1‭ ‬Tim.‭ vi. ‬16‭)‬.‭

This is AIL—all-wise,‭ ‬all-powerful,‭ ‬all-seeing,‭ ‬and all-knowing.‭ ‬There is only one such in the wide-extended universe.‭ ‬He is life and incorruptibility,‭ ‬and never was anything else.‭ ‬Here is a wonderful being,‭ ‬corporeal intelligence that hath always existed,‭ ‬and out of whom,‭ ‬as‭ “‬THE FATHER,‭” ‬all things have been produced.‭ ‬But of what does his substance consist‭? ‬What his nature‭? ‬What is he‭?

‭ “‬HE IS SPIRIT.‭”

These are the words of Jesus,‭ ‬who knew what he affirmed.‭ ‬AIL is spirit,‭ ‬and there is a spirit of AIL—the fountain and the stream are both spirit,‭ ‬and hold a like relation that radiant caloric does to iron glowing with a white heat.‭ ‬But what is the glowing substance of Deity‭? ‬That which shall be manifested in the saints when they become spirit,‭ ‬for they shall be like him who is in the bosom of the Father.‭ “‬Deity is spirit,‭” ‬and to convey our conception to the reader of this substance,‭ ‬we would style it‭ ‬corporeal electricity.‭

We behold the lightning’s flash‭; ‬we see its almighty effect upon rocks and trees,‭ ‬and we perceive its universality‭; ‬still of its‭ ‬essence,‭ ‬we are ignorant.‭ ‬Our words and definitions leave this untouched.‭ ‬But whatever the essence may be,‭ ‬that corporeal essence is God,‭ ‬and the same incorporeal and radiant essence is the spirit of God.‭

Electricity or lightning is a Bible symbol for spirit.‭ ‬Ezekiel,‭ ‬son of man,‭ ‬priest and prophet,‭ ‬had‭ ‬visions of Elohim,‭ ‬who are,‭ ‬when manifested,‭ ‬spirit,‭ ‬being all of them post-resurrectionally begotten,‭ ‬and born out of spirit,‭ ‬and consequently consubstantial with the Father,‭ ‬who is spirit.‭ ‬In these visions of spirit,‭ ‬then,‭ ‬Ezekiel saw the living ones or Elohim come forth out of the midst of fire and brightness.‭ ‬His description in chap.‭ i. ‬4,‭ ‬is symbolical of‭ ‬1‭ ‬Tim.‭ vi. ‬16.‭ ‬What we call electricity,‭ ‬for want of a better word,‭ ‬in glowing combustion,‭ ‬he terms‭ “‬fire and brightness.‭”

‬In beholding the electrically-generated beings born of the Ezekiel fire,‭ ‬he says‭ “‬Whither the spirit was to go,‭ ‬they went,‭” ‬because they will be spirit,‭ ‬so that wherever they may be,‭ ‬there,‭ ‬necessarily,‭ ‬corporeal-spirit will be.‭ ‬And,‭ ‬as for the likeness of the living creatures,‭ ‬says he,‭ “‬their appearance was like burning coals of fire,‭ ‬and like the appearance of lamps‭; ‬it went up and down among the living creatures‭; ‬and the fire was bright,‭ ‬and out of the fire went forth lightning‭” ‬or flaming electricity.‭ “‬And the living creatures ran and returned as the appearance of a flash of lightning.‭”

In scriptural discourse, "electricity" is termed spirit, because it is radiated, or sent forth, from the substance of Almighty Power, after the tropical analogy of blowing, breathing, or exhaling. This idea is illustrated by the iron excited to white heat, or the magnet. These are solid substances, but within a certain radius, they are enveloped in an atmosphere of light and heat, or of magnetism. This atmosphere may represent the radiant power, or spirit, of the Deity; and the glowing iron and magnet, the radiating power, or substance, called DEITY.

Here, then, is spirit free, radiant, or uncombined ; and spirit in substance, corporeal, bodily existence. The latter is the original condition of spirit. It was not originally free or diffused through space, and at some particular epoch condensed, reduced to a bodily form, and individualized.

To affirm this, would be to affirm the existence of abstract intelligent power antecedent to the Hypostasis, or substance, the exact representation of which Jesus Anointed is declared now to be. No, the Substantial Father has always been substance, and has had no incorporeal predecessor in wisdom and power.

His nature is the substratum, or basis, of all conceivable existences, animate or inanimate, in all the universe ; for they are all created out of his spirit, and that spirit radiates out of his substance. It is always subordinate to His will; and accomplishes that only whereunto it is sent. Hence, it does not act independently of the radiating power. Nothing, therefore, happens by chance in the operation of the spirit.

The wisdom that ordains is in the Father; and the wisdom that executes is in the power radiating from him. This is illustrated by the fact (and we have verified the fact by experiment) that a man may simply will actions to be performed by another at a distance ; and his will, though unexpressed in words or gesture, will be done. If any action result, it will not be contrary to the will, nor can it be. It is impossible, likewise, for the spirit of the Deity to execute contrary to the will of the Deity. Hence, " THE SON," or Spirit- Emanation from the Father-Spirit-Substance, " can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do," or will; " for whatsoever he doeth," or wills," "these also doeth," or executeth, "the Son likewise"—John v. 19.

The distinction made by "philosophers" between "matter" and "spirit" is artificial, and does not obtain in scripture.The Father is matter, or substance, but he is spirit also; for that matter of which he consists, and which constitutes his nature, is spirit. This being the fact, matter is eternal. But this by no means implies that the forms of matter arc eternal likewise; for that would be to affirm that the Creator was not antecedent to his works. The dispute, then,, upon the question whether spirit existed before matter, or matter before spirit, is a vain controversy; and indicative of the ignoranee of the "philosophers" on both sides.

The one had no precedence of the other, being essentially the same. Hence matter is not essentially evil, or coiTupt and mortal; nor is it incapable of thought. The Divine Power is matter, but, though he creates evil, he is not evil, nor corruptible and mortal. There is,therefore, no force nor reason in the argument that a thing is immortal because it is immaterial, or not matter. Whatever exists is matter. Electricity is as much matter as a block of marble, the only difference is, that it is matter in a different form. Hence the immaterial is the non-existent, or nothing. To say, then, that a thing is immortal because it is immaterial, is to ailirm that it is immortal because it is nothing, or does not exist; which is the demonstration of the wisest thinking of the flesh—" the wisdom of the world " condemned as folly, working death in all that are deceived by it.

There is no part of the boundless universe where the spirit of the Divine Power is not. It pervades the atoms of all bodies and is everywhere. Hence the inquiry of Christ in prophecy, " Whither shall I go from thy spirit ? Or whither shall I flee from thy presence ? If I ascend into heaven thou art there; if I make my bed in the grave, behold thou art there. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; even there shall thine hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me. If I shall say surely the darkness shall cover me, even the night shall be light about me. Yea, the darkness hideth not from thec; but the night shineth as the day; the darkness and the light are both alike to thee."—Ps. exxxix. 7-14.

This proves what we have said, and teaches that, in a general sense, allcreatures are in the presence of the Creator; that they arc so in being contiguous to his spirit: for, as fish live, and move, and have their being in the waters, so all animals and men " live, and move, and have their being " in spirit of God. Upon this natural principle it is that Paul declared to the heathen philosophers that God is "not far from every one of us"; and that Jesus said," a sparrow shall not \ fall on the ground without the Father." Hence, in the natural or physical sense, all creatures have the spirit, and cannot live without it; so that as Job says, " If He gather to himself his spirit and his breath, all flesh shall perish together, and man shall turn again unto dust"—xxxiv. 14. Spirit develops the organism of all creatures, and preserves it from disorganization.

It is what pathologists term the vis medicatrix natwras; and physiologists, " the vital principle." When the spirit and breath of the Creator are withdrawn from a man or a sparrow, there remain no healing power and vitality in their several bodies; and the immediate tendency in them is to corruption and dust. Hence, all creatures in the air, earth, and seas, are spirit-farms. The types or patterns, after which they were created were all in the mind of Deity before they were created; and when they were formed, the formation was out of spirit-matter and by spirit according to pattern. Every creature is therefore a spirit in this sense; but not necessarily immortal because a spirit. The immortality of a spirit depends upon the constitution of the matter or substance of the peculiar form. A spirit form of a flesh and blood organization is essentially mortal and corruptible; for death and corruption are peculiar to that material constitution. The " spirits in prison " Peter speaks of, were flesh and blood organizations turned again into dust, consequent upon the Deity gathering to himself his spirit and breath. ·

His free spirit withdrawn, and the cohesive affinity of their substance departed, and its gaseous elements entered into new combinations, destructive of the forms, termed man, cattle, fowl, and so forth. Hence the Deity is styled by Moses in Numb, xxvii. 16, " YAHWEII, Elohim of the spirits of all flesh " : that is, the spirit self-styled HE SIIALL BE, is the powers of all flesh-emanations of hi9 power. The spirit-power of the lion is the power of Jehovah; and so of all other creatures. Hence the facility with wThich he can open and shut their fierce and voracious mouths, as in the case of Daniel and his persecutors. This universal diffusion of spirit places all created things in telegraphic communication with the will of the Deity. What he wills needs not batteries and wires for transmission. He has but to will and it is instantaneously responded to according to his purpose, though the locality where obedience is required be distant from his throne a hundred millions of miles. Take these two points, the throne of the Universe, and the earth we inhabit, as the two extremities of the line—the Deity at the one end, and we at the other. The intermediate space is filled with his " free spirit," radiant from his substance, and incarnately organic in all his creatures.

What we call "time" is unnecessary for the transmission of ideas. The Deity is not a being of time. He has not to move from where he is to be where he would be; for he is everywhere by spirit, and fills all. Hence his will at the throne is his will at the same instant on earth; for his intelligence and wisdom are as universal as his power and only require his will to be exercised for their manifestation in every part of his wide domain.

Now, in studying the subject of spirit we must consider it severally in its relations to things physical and natural; andto things intellectual and moral, or spiritual in a special sense. As we have seen, all mankind and animals generally are the subject of the operation of the spirit; but it is only a certain class of mankind that is operated upon in the special sense by which individuals are brought iilto harmony with the moral attributes of Deity.

The ideas and thoughts of the Deity are as much spirit as this physical power.His thoughts are moral power breathed forth in his words, and that is spirit, even as the lightning breathed forth, or radiant, from his substance is spirit. His thoughts breathed forth or revealed in any way he may determine constitute uthe truth1*, and therefore the truth is spirit. Hence, the Lord Jesus said,u My words arc spirit"; and the apostle John says, " The spirit is the truth." To produce physical results, such as raising the dead, curing the sick, speaking with tongues, speaking by inspiration, and so forth, material power or spirit is required; but when purely moml results are the things desired, the truth is the spirit that operates upon the heart.

Notes

hypostasis

(Colossians 1:15) He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;

Heb 1:3 3 who being the brightness of the glory, and the impress of His subsistence (5287 ὑπόστασις hypostasis hoop-os’-tasis), bearing up also the all things by the saying of his might — through himself having made a cleansing of our sins, sat down at the right hand of the greatness in the highest,

5287 ὑπόστασις hypostasis hoop-os’-tasis

hypostasis

an underlying reality (pleroma) or substance, as opposed to attributes or to that which lacks substance (kenoma)

So the Deity has a substance this substance is spirit

Electricity

Deity is spirit that is corporeal energy or electricity or dark matter (Exodus 20:21) (Deuteronomy 4:11) (1Kings 8:12) (Psalms 18:11) (Psalms 97:2) (1 Corinthians 4:5) (Job 22:11-14)

from these texts above it appears that God resides in thick darkness and in heaven, so heaven arguably must equate to thick darkness.

dark matter and/or energy in our universe may actually be described as the abode of spiritual creation in the scriptures, i.e. the place where God and his spiritual sons actually live and from where they can observe and interact with us