The holy spirit in the old testament

We often hear the OT speak about the Holy Spirit, even though the term "The Holy Spirit" is not frequent - this name of the Spirit of God only occur twice (Ps 51:12; Is 63:10). Far more frequent is the designation "Spirit of God" (RUACH ELOHIM, 15x) or "Spirit of the Lord" (RUACH JHVH, 30x). In addition we find the term "the Spirit" without any qualifying designation quite often. At times it is not always easy to distinguish whether the word signifies the Spirit of God in specific or it simply means "wind" in general. The Hebrew use of the term RUACH is quite similar to the Greek PNEUMA. In those cases the understanding of the word is dependent on the context and the exegesis of the context. In this short paper it will be far to spacious to go into a discussion of these loci, and we will confine ourselves to those verses where the phrase indisputably refers to the Spirit of God. We still will have more than enough to occupy the given amount of time.

One feature that makes the OT teaching about the Spirit of God remarkable, is the fact that this is an exclusively biblical notion. As far as I am aware of, there has not been found any parallel to the OT's notion about the Spirit of God in any of the ancient Near Eastern religious archives and their mythical world. This is most important to have in mind facing the religious historical school (from Wellhausen on) and its understanding of this subject in the OT. This school postulates without basis in any empirical findings that "the OT religion" has developed from primitive animism via polydemonism and -theism before reaching its final stage, which is monotheisme. In such a context Paul Voltz' assertion (in: Der Geist Gottes, 1930) concerning the Spirit of God is typical: "The spirit originally was an independent demon or spiritual being that little by little was incorporated into "das Gottesbild Israels". Likewise I. P. Wood states (in: The Spirit of God in Biblical Litt., NY 1904) that "the idea (about the Holy Spirit) gradually came in under the influence from polytheism in the neighboring people". Methodologically this has led to pressing a certain development scheme onto the biblical texts, doing violence to the text on the basis of this philosophical and theological interest. Following this scheme OT studies often are conducted "historically", a phrase that does little but conceal the fact that the development scheme (that is fetched from Hegel) is made the structuring element of how one views and interprets OT history and theology. The problem is that this implies a consequent neglecting of the OT as revelation history and holy writ.

As distinct from this I assume that

- God is one. He is unchangeably the same in the New as well as in the Old Testament, and not subjugated any law of development, and that

- Holy Scripture therefore is one, meaning that the Old and the New Testament is a unity in revelation history that mutually condition each other in promise and fulfillment, in preparation and realization.

This implies that we here will work thematically with the biblical texts, not in accordance with some sort of presumed chronological development.

The two main points that I here stress, may b concentrated in a thesis that I think is the basic condition for understanding the OT properly: A Christian church shall not have any other relationship to the OT than our Lord and his apostles.

The Spirit in creation

The first time we hear of the Spirit in the OT, is in the creation story (Gen 1:2 - RUACH; 2:7 -N^eSHAMA). Later on in revelation history we find most noteworthy references to these two verses, references that interpret and clarify their meaning (Ps 33:6; 104:30f - RUACH; Hiob 27:3; 33:4; 34:14 - RUACH and NeSHAMA). What is particularly striking is that in Genesis 1 the Spirit appears as mediator in creation together with the word of God. The Spirit and the word works jointly, a fact that is strongly emphasized in Ps 33:6 and through the phrasing "the breath of his mouth". Another important point in the text in Ps 104, is what is said about creatio continua. The Spirit of God not only was active in the beginning, but also in the constant creation of new life both through creating and preserving it.

In the creation account we also face a question of greatest importance to how we understand God's presence, the question about the transcendence of God. In the surrounding world of OT Israel the cosmogonies also were theogonies. This entailed that there was no sharp distinction between creator and creation. The gods and the world were both of the same essence, the gods in consequence being immanent. In principle this gives the basis both for pantheism and polytheism. The creation story of the Bible does not give us any theogony, but on the contrary maintains an absolute distinction between the Creator and the universe. In Genesis 1 this is emphasized by the fact that it is creation that bears the adjective designation "beginning", the Creator not. In this way the creation narrative both avoids divinizing the created universe as well as secularizing God. God remains God, in essence totally different from his creation, and the created beings never can be exalted to the level of the Creator. It is in this context that we have to understand the teaching about the Spirit in Gen 1 - 2. The Spirit and the word is the bridge between the transcendent God and the immanent creation. The Spirit is in essence different from the created universe, but at the same time active in creation.

When Holy Scripture stresses this essential difference, it uses two important terms: The created beings are "flesh" (BASAR - Gen 6:3; Is 31:3), God on his side is "spirit" (RUACH). "Flesh" and "spirit" are labels pinpointing the difference between immanence and transcendence, creation and Creator. When this difference is being stressed in the biblical texts, "flesh" is used to portray man as weak and feeble, perishable and helpless. Man is without any of the qualities which distinguish God as Creator and therefore almighty (Ps 100:3). The creative powers are reserved exclusively to God, and this is an important notion within the term "spirit" (Sech 4:6), and which underlies the use of the word BARA in Gen 1:1.

It has been argued in some literature of the religio-historical brand that the term "spirit of God" is a kind of anthropomorphism in the same way as Scripture also speaks about "the hand of God" or "the face of God". However this is contrary to the texts where we find the Spirit appearing both as identical with God and at the same time as having his own individuality.

When the OT turns to the future and predicts the eschatological time of salvation, the Spirit of God reappears as creator: He is the re-creator (Is 32:15-18; 44:3; Ezech 36:2f; 37:14). Similar to what is said about the beginning, the Spirit's work is emphasizing that it is exclusively God's work.

The Spirit and the prophets

In the historical books of the OT we frequently hear of the Spirit of God in connection with the prophets ( Balaam: Num 24:2; Moses: Num 11:25-29; Neh 9:30; David: 2Sam 23:1f; Eliah and Elisha: 1King 18:12; 2King 2:9:16; Mika: 1King 22:24; Jehaziel: 2Chron 20:14; Sechariah: 2Chron 24:20).

A common expression is that "the spirit of God came/fell upon NN" (HAJTAH ALAW RUACH JHVH - 2Chron 20:14), but we also can hear that "the spirit of God clothed -" (2Chron 24:20; cf. Eph 4:24). This results in the prophetic inspiration, he can prophesize. Here the OT uses a special term, NABA, and various forms diverted from this verb: NEUM - word of God, prophesy; NABI - prophet; JITNABE (hitpael) - to prophesy. There is a clear connection between the Spirit of God and prophesying. The main point in binding prophecy to the Spirit is to state with clarity what is the source of the prophet's message, and the prerequisite that man can speak words that are God's words. This is why a prophet under the influence of the Spirit has the authority to say "Thus saith the Lord" (KOH AMAR JHVH). Under the influence of the Spirit the prophet cannot give his own opinion or words. On the contrary, this is the hallmark of the false prophets, who "speak visions of their own minds" (Jer 23:16; cf. 5:13; Ezech 13:3). Because these find the source of revelation in their own hearts, they are what Luther calls "Schwarmgeister". When Jeremiah settles the account with the false prophets, we find a clear and fundamental distinction between man's words and God's. And as was the case in the creation narrative and its theology, there is a close connection between the Spirit and the word of God.

Within much of the religio-historical (and -psychologiacally) oriented theology it has been common to translate the verb JITNABE (hitpael of NABA) with "extatic uttering". Also here one was led by the assumption that OT religion had borrowed all its basic features from neighboring religions just to gradually refine them. It was supposed that the kind of ecstasy found in primitive religion, had its counterpart in the biblical prophets. A biblical account of neighboring religion is given in 1Kings 18:29, where we hear about the prophets of Ba'al on Mt. Carmel, and JITNABE in several translations is rendered "frantic prophesying" (NIV, NO30; KJ has "prophesied"). In the same way the term is translated in several verses in the account of Saul, ((1Sam 18:10 "The day after an evil spirit from God came over Saul, and he was in a rage in his house, -"; 1Sam 19:22ff: "prophetic ecstasy". RSV: "prophetic frenzy"; DK31: " ecstasy"). The correct translation rather would be "act as a prophet". In primitive thinking ecstasy with its belonging loss of consciousness is deemed characteristic of "divine" inspiration or influence. The Norwegian OT professor I. P. Seierstad has in his dissertation (in: "Die offenbarungserlebnisse der Profeten Amos, Jesaja und Jeremia. Eine Untersuchung der erlebnis-vorgänge unter besonderer Berücksichtigung ihrer religiös-sittlichen Art und Auswirkung", 2. ed. Oslo 1965) investigated the word NABA and the revelational experiences of the prophets, and concludes that the prophetic inspiration implies the opposite of ecstasy and loss of consciousness. The prophets are deeply aware of what they experience, which is evident from their personal communication. We hear of two communicating subjects/personalities. The Lord in his revelation does not overrule or suppress man, but goes into a mutual personal relationship (cf. Is 5:9; 22:14; Jer . 1:7. 9).

It has been a problem in OT research why the frequent references to the Spirit in the historical books is replaced with relatively few in the prophetic literature Spirit (Is 48:16; Ezech: 11:5.24; 43:5; Micha: 3:8; Hoshea: 9:7; Sechariah: 7:12). A common explanation has been that they wanted to keep a certain distance to the ecstatic NABIs, who had been discredited through their savage behavior (cf. king Saul). This discredit was supported through referring to 2Kings 9:11 ("- Why did this madman come to you?" - "You know the man and the sort of things he says," Jehu replied"), and Hosh 9:7 ("The days of visitation are come, the days of recompence are come; Israel shall know [it]: the prophet [is] a fool, the spiritual man [is] mad, for the multitude of thine iniquity, and the great hatred", KJ). Accordingly one has constructed a contrast between the spirit and the word by the prophets. However the two verses referred to here, need not imply this kind of skepticism. It rather is more natural and in accordance with the texts to understand these derogatory designations in accordance with the spirit of the times that manifested itself in the Northern Kingdom from the time of king Ahab, when the hostility towards the word of God and its messengers became increasingly outspoken (cf. 1Kings 22:8). This enmity only grew in intensity during the spiritual and moral decay in the Southern Kingdom, as we can see it in the life of Isiah (ch. 30:9ff), and particularly Jeremiah. When the NIV renders Hos 9 thus "- the prophet is considered a fool, the spiritual man maniac", it correctly understands both the situation and the position of the prophet. A more likely explanation to the relatively sparse references to the Spirit in the prophetic literature, is that all the stress is put on the word of God, a fact that both underlines the objectivity in their message, and the continuity with the Pentateuch.

How then was the Spirit of God received? In the OT we see these ways

- through the laying on of hands (Num 27:20ff; Deut 24:9; 34:9 - like an ordination)

- through anointing (1Sam 16:13; Is 61:1 - this act having a sacramental character)

- through prayer (2Kings 2:9ff; Ps 51:12)

The narrative in Num 11 is especially peculiar. Moses is in need of assistants in his work, and the Lord appoints seventy elders. "The LORD came down in the cloud and spoke with him, and he took of the Spirit that was on him (Moses) and put the Spirit on the seventy elders. When the Spirit rested on them, they prophesied, -" (v. 25). Again: The communication of the Spirit leads to prophesy. The fact that the elders receive a share of the Spirit that dwelt on Moses, is emphasizing that the all have the same spirit, and therefore unity and continuity.

At the end of this section Moses is expressing a wish/prayer: "- I wish that all the LORD'S people were prophets and that the LORD would put his Spirit on them [all]!" This prayer we retrieve in prophetic form in Joel 3:3-5, and it is being fulfilled in New Testament times. We hereby reach another important trait in our theme: The promise of the Spirit is an integral part of the eschatological preaching of the OT:

The spirit and the Messiah

This promise has its center in the message about the Messiah. It is important to notice that what is taught about the Spirit in his relationship to the prophets and their calling, is continued in the promise of the Messiah. What particularly shall distinguish the Messiah, is his fullness of the Spirit. We find this feature primarily in Isaiah (11:2ff; 42:1; 59:20; 61:1). In this connection it may be of interest to remind about the rabbinical notion about the Forerunner, Elijah (cf. Mal 4:5), whose calling was to anoint the Messiah (as Samuel anointed David, 1Sam 16:13; cf. 1Kings 19:15f). This expectation was fulfilled through Christ's baptism in Jordan (Math 3:13ff; Acts 10:37b-38a), where we read that the Spirit came "down from heaven like a dove and rested on him" (John 1:32f). It also is a rabbinic rule concerning the Messiah (which I think is valid) that "as the first redeemer (Moses), so shall the last redeemer (the Messiah) be". Now Scripture clearly states that Moses was under the direction of the Spirit of God (Num 11), and that the Spirit was at work during the Exodus and the wanderings in the wilderness (Neh 9:20. 30; Ps 106:32; Is 63:10. 14). In the same way the Spirit will be active in the final redemption both through the Lord's servant, and in his people in those days:

According to what Isaiah relates, when God equips his Servant with an extraordinary gift of the Spirit, this is due to his particular calling. Hearing of (in 11:2f) his special wisdom, might and fear of the Lord, makes him the opposite of Israel: God's people has fallen, and through her fall come under the judgment of the Lord. The servant of the Lord is "righteous" and "gives righteousness" and thus delivers from the judgment. The indwelling Spirit effectuates the work of the Messiah through his words. This is a striking fact in Is 42:3f "Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him and he will bring justice to the nations. - - A bruised reed he will not break, and a smoldering wick he will not snuff out. In faithfulness he will bring forth justice; he will not falter or be discouraged till he establishes justice on earth. In his law the islands will put their hope.") and 61:1 ("The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me, because the LORD has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners, to proclaim the year of the LORD'S favor -"). Again there is a clear connection between the Spirit and the word, a connection which is put forward also in 59:20 ("As for me, this is my covenant with them," says the LORD. "My Spirit, who is on you, and my words that I have put in your mouth will not depart from your mouth, -").

OT eschatology is connected to the promises about the Messiah, and in these predictions we also find abundant predictions regarding the fullness of the Spirit which his people shall have their share in. Of special importance here are Is 4:4; 59:20f; Joel 3:1-3 (2:28f); Sech 12:10, and the verses in Ezechiel (36:26f; 37:14) where redemption and conversion "in the last days" is promised. There is not time to make an extensive investigation of these texts, I just want to direct your attention to the close connection that we find between the pouring out of the Spirit and the presence of the Messiah.

At last: I can not refrain from relating an interesting rabbinic exegesis of Exodus 19 -20 which sheds some light on the relationship between the old and the new covenant. In 19:16 we read: "On the morning of the third day there was thunder and lightning, with a thick cloud over the mountain, and a very loud trumpet blast. Everyone in the camp trembled". The Hebrew word that in all translations is rendered "thunder" (QOL) literally means "voice" or "tongue". Then in 20:18 we read "When the people saw the thunder and lightning and heard the trumpet and saw the mountain in smoke, they trembled with fear -". Here the Hebrew word QOL is in the plural. The rabbis now asked: "Why is there a plural form in the last verse, and a singular in the first?" And they had the answer ready: Because when the Lord revealed his holy Law, he did not confine himself to Israel. He also revealed "The 10 words" to all the nations under the heavens, and in their respective tongue. This is why we have the singular in ch. 19 and the plural in ch. 20: The Lord first spoke to Israel and asked whether they would obey his commandments, and all the people answered with one voice: "Everything the LORD has said we will do", (Ex 24:3). He then went to the gentiles with the same question in their tongues, but they denied obedience.

The rabbis also noticed a peculiarity in 20:18: It reads "-the people saw the thunder (voices) - -". How can this be possible? they asked. A voice is heard, not seen! But again they had the answer ready at hand: Referring to Ps 29:7: "The voice of the LORD divideth the flames of fire", they asserted that the voice of the Lord revealed itself as tongues of fire that cleaved and sat upon each and every one of the people.

The parallel between Acts 2 and this exegesis should be evident, both regarding the many tongues and the flames of fire. The point here is that at the time of our Lord and his apostles, Pentecost ("Feast of the Weeks") was celebrated not only as a "Thanksgiving" for the year's harvest, but - more important - in commemoration of the giving of the Ten Commandments on Mt. Sinai. Therefor the passages in Ex. 19-20 were read in the Synagogue during this Holiday, a custom that prevailed for 300-400 years in the ancient church. This gives a new depth towards understanding that on the day of Pentecost the New covenant takes effect: "- (He) also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life", (2Cor 3:6).

Soli Deo Gloria!