The
reason for this has been partly because those who have asked the doctrinal
questions have not been able to clearly identify and isolate in their own minds
the precise nature of the doctrinal issues associated with the Holy Ghost,
which confronts us in the scriptures and in the teachings of the Church, so
that they have not been able to formulate their questions in such a way as to
elicit the right answers. The kinds of questions which have been asked have
been of the order of, “What is the difference between the Holy Spirit and the
Holy Ghost?” or, “Was the Holy Ghost given on the day of the Pentecost or
before the day of the Pentecost?”1 These unimaginative questions
neither recognize nor address themselves to the underlying doctrinal problems
of the Holy Ghost in the theology of Latter-day Saints, and consequently they are not able to elicit the right
answer to them. But on the other hand, those who have attempted to answer the
questions have also not always been able to recognize and identify the precise
nature of the doctrinal issues involved, with the result that they have also
not been able to address their replies to the solution of them. Before asking
any doctrinal questions on the Holy Ghost therefore, or attempting to answer
them, it is important that we get a clear idea of what the nature of those
doctrinal issues are, and then to aim the questions, or answers, to the
solution of them. This will be explained below.
It is
generally accepted in the Church that there are two distinct and separate
entities involved in this controversy: one is an unembodied “personage of
spirit,” that is to say, a being of the same class or order of beings such as
we were in the preexistence, or as Jesus was when he showed himself to the
brother of Jared for example (Ether 3:16); and the other is a “radiating
influence” which emanates or “proceeds” from the presence of God and “fills the
immensity of space,” as described in D&C 88:7–13; by means of which God
exercises his power and dominion in the universe.2 For the
purpose of this discussion, and in order to avoid confusion, the first entity
will be referred to here as the PERSONAGE OF SPIRIT (in small caps), and the
second entity will be referred to as the DIVINE PROCESSION.3 It is also
generally agreed, by all those who have attempted to speak authoritatively on
the subject, that the expressions Holy Spirit, Holy Ghost, Comforter, Spirit of
God, Spirit of the Lord, Spirit of truth, the Spirit etc. are used
interchangeably in the scriptures to refer to either of these two different
entities. Thus far there appears to be general agreement.4 The first
obvious doctrinal question that arises therefore is, Why is it that these two different entities,
which have nothing in common with one another, are called by the same names,
which causes all the confusion about them? The answer that is commonly given in the Church to this question is that the PERSONAGE OF SPIRIT, he being a member of the Godhead, operates by means of the same DIVINE PROCESSION, and therefore both he as well as the influence which emanates from him are called by the same names. This explanation, however, is evidently incorrect. The scriptures make it clear that it is the Spirit which emanates
directly from the person of Jesus Christ that is variously called the Holy Spirit, Holy Ghost, Comforter, the Spirit etc., and not from any supposed PERSONAGE OF SPIRIT. Consider the following examples:
“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)
“And
thou shalt be ordained under his hand to expound all scriptures, and to exhort
the church, according as it shall be given thee by my Spirit.
“For
he shall lay his hands upon thee, and thou shalt receive the Holy Ghost,
…” (D&C 25:7–8)
“Let
him be humble before me, and be without guile, and he shall receive my
Spirit, even the Comforter, which shall manifest unto him the truth of all things, and shall give unto him in the very hour what he shall say.” (D&C 124:97)
“God
shall give you knowledge by his Holy Spirit, yea, by the unspeakable
gift of the Holy Ghost, that has not been revealed since the world was until now.” (D&C 121:26)
“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 [Jesus] 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)
“In that
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
[i.e.
from his person] shall flow [i.e. emanate] rivers of living waters.
“(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)
“Then
said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as the Father hath sent me, even
so send I you.
“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 20:21–22)
“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 has shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.” (Acts 2:32–33)
“But
according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and the
renewing of the Holy Ghost;
“Which
he shed on us abundantly through Jesus
Christ our Saviour.” (Titus 3:5–6)
“And I
give unto you this promise that inasmuch as ye do this, the Holy Ghost
shall be shed forth in bearing record unto all things whatsoever ye shall say.” (D&C 100:8)
“That by
keeping his commandments they might be washed and cleansed from all their sins,
and receive the Holy Spirit by the laying on of the hands of him who is ordained and sealed unto this power;
“And
who overcome by faith, and are sealed by the Holy Spirit
of promise, which the Father sheds forth [through Christ] upon all those who are just and true.” (D&C 76:52–53)
“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 fullness of the mind
of the of the Father; or, in other words, the Spirit
of the Father; which Spirit is shed forth upon all who believe on his name and keep his commandments …” (Lectures on Faith, lecture V)
Thus we
have here identified at least one doctrinal question about the Holy
Ghost in the theology of Latter-day Saints which needs to be answered, and which has not been answered hitherto.
But the
real doctrinal difficulty of the Holy Ghost in the theology of Latter-day Saints goes deeper than that, and is more
complex. The real difficulty is that as we search the scriptures, we discover
that the expressions Holy Spirit, Holy Ghost, Comforter, the Spirit etc. are always used to refer
to that Spirit which emanates from the Deity, or to the DIVINE PROCESSION, and
never to any specific PERSONAGE OF SPIRIT such as it is commonly understood in
the Church—so much so that it is possible to question his very existence. I do not believe it is possible to quote one verse from the scriptures, ancient or modern, which could be said to definitely refer to the PERSONAGE OF SPIRIT, as distinct from the DIVINE PROCESSION which emanates from the Deity. Here are some typical examples:
“But
when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the
Spirit of truth which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
“And
ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.” (John 15:26–27)
“Nevertheless,
I tell you the truth; it is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not
away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him
unto you.” (John 16:7)
These
verses would appear at first sight to be referring to a distinct “personage,”
because the Savior uses the personal pronouns “he,” “him,” and “whom” to refer
to him; and also because he says, “I will send him,” which implies that the
Lord regards him as someone distinct from himself. But also notice, firstly,
that it says that he proceedeth
from the Father (the word “proceed” is used in D&C 88:12 to refer to the emanation of the divine Spirit). Secondly, and more importantly, notice how Joseph Smith interprets this same scripture:
“What
is this mind [of God]? [It is] the Holy Spirit: ‘But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me.’” (Lectures on
Faith, catechism to lecture V)
Thus
Joseph Smith identifies this “Comforter” with the mind of God, which is the same as his Spirit
which is “shed
forth” upon the believers,5 and not with any distinct “personage.” Now one may well ask, If that be the case, why does the Lord use the personal pronouns “he” and “him” to refer to it; and why does he say, “I will send him,” which implies that he is talking about someone distinct from himself? There are several passages in modern scripture which give the answer to that question. The first is the following:
“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 my heart I was caught away in the Spirit of
the Lord, yea into an exceeding 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.
“And the
Spirit said unto me, Believest thou that thy father saw the tree of which he hath spoken?
“And I
said, Yea, thou knowest that I believe all the words of my father.
• • •
“And it
came to pass that the Spirit said unto me, Look! And I looked, and beheld a tree; and it was like unto the tree which my father had seen; …
“And it
came to pass after I had seen the tree, I said unto the Spirit,
I behold that thou hast shown unto me the tree which is precious above all.
“And he
said unto me, What desirest thou?
“And I said unto him, To know the
interpretation thereof—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 11:1–5, 8–12)
From
this scripture we learn that this Spirit which emanates from God appears to Nephi in the
human form. It assumes the human form. Therefore Nephi also uses the personal pronouns “he” and “him” to refer to it. The second scripture is the following:
“Man was also in
the beginning with God. Intelligence, or light of truth, was not
created or made, nether indeed can be.” (D&C 93:29)
(In
this verse the expression “light of truth” is synonymous with “light of Christ”
etc., or the Spirit which emanates from him. See D&C 88:6–7). This
scripture teaches us that this Spirit, which Joseph Smith identifies with the
“mind” of God, actually has an independent existence. Other scriptures which bear on our discussion are Moses 6:61 and D&C 88:12–13; which inform us that this Spirit is also both omniscient
and omnipotent:
it “knoweth all things,” and it also has “all power according to wisdom, mercy, truth, justice and judgement.” From these scriptures we learn the following attributes of this divine Spirit which emanates or “proceeds” from God; or the DIVINE PROCESSION, as I have chosen to refer to it in this discussion:
- It has an independent existence (not created or made).
- It is omniscient (knoweth all things).
- It is omnipotent (hath all power).
- It assumes the human form.
Consequently
we ought not to be surprised if we find that the Lord also:
- Speaks of it as though it were a person.
- Speaks of it as someone distinct from himself.
The
following is another interesting example:
“The
Father has a body of flesh and bones, as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but
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.
“A man
may receive the Holy Ghost, and it may descend upon him, and not tarry with him.” (D&C 130:22–23)
Anyone
reading these verses would be inclined to think at first sight that Joseph
Smith is speaking of some distinct “personage,” and not of some kind of
“radiation,” especially since he contrasts him with the other two members of
the Godhead who are distinct “personages” of flesh and bones. However, it is
evident that this scripture also refers to that same Spirit which emanates from
the Deity, or the DIVINE PROCESSION, and not to any distinct, singular,
individual “personage” of the kind that is generally understood in the Church. In other words, what
Joseph Smith refers to here as a “personage of Spirit” is not to be identified
with the PERSONAGE OF SPIRIT as I have defined it in this discussion.
Notice
that Joseph says that this Spirit shall “dwell” in us. He also says that it may
descend upon a man, “but not tarry with him”—which implies that it may also
descend upon a man, and
tarry with him. Now this “indwelling” of the Spirit, and “tarrying” of the Spirit, is intended to be a permanent one, not a temporary one. By the “gift of the Holy Ghost” in the scriptures is meant precisely this, that the Holy Ghost (as a personage) is given to everyone who receives him to become his constant
companion. He is not to depart! When baptized Church members are confirmed, they are told to receive “the Holy Ghost,” not the “Spirit of the Holy Ghost,” or the “radiating influence
of the Holy Ghost.” He is not only to “descend on them,” but “tarry with them,” and “dwell
in them;” which means to stay with them permanently. He may depart for reasons of unworthiness; otherwise he is to abide forever. In fact the tenor of Joseph Smith’s statement implies that the “indwelling” of the Holy Ghost is essential in order that it may discharge its prime function of being our constant companion. The implication is that the Holy Ghost must be a “personage of Spirit” in order
that he may “dwell in us;” implying that unless he could “dwell” in us he could not perform its proper function, which is to always be with us, continually guide, direct, inspire, comfort, and warn us, and to lead us into all truth; otherwise what would be the objective of him “dwelling in us?” The “indwelling” of the Spirit is intended to fulfill a specific purpose, which is to become our constant companion. That is the whole idea of it. That is what the “gift if the Holy Ghost” is all about. The word “dwell” literally means to “live,” “reside,” “abide”. It refers to a permanent indwelling of the Spirit in the believer. Notice how other scriptures teach this doctrine:
“But ye
are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if it so be that the Spirit of God dwell
in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
“And if
Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
“But
if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell
in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit which dwelleth in you.” (Romans 8:9–11)
“Know ye
not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth
in you?
“If
any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God
is holy, which temples are ye.” (1 Corinthians 3:16)
“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)
“In
whom ye also are builded for an habitation of God through the Spirit.” (Ephesians 2:22)
“That
good thing which was committed unto thee keep by the Holy Ghost which
dwelleth in us.” (2 Timothy 1:14)
“And
he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit
which he hath given us.” (l John 3:24)
“Hereby
we know that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.” (1 John 4:13)
“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)
“And
behold, you [the Twelve] are they who are ordained of me to ordain priests and
teachers; to declare my gospel according to the power of the Holy Ghost which
is in you, and according to the callings and gifts of God unto men.” (D&C 18:32)
“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 marvellous words.” (Helaman 5:45)
“And
it came to pass that Enoch journeyed in the land among the people; and as he
journeyed, the Spirit of God descended out of heaven, and abode upon him.” (Moses 6:26)
When
Joseph Smith says, “Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us,” he is alluding to the above passages of scripture. He means a permanent indwelling of the Spirit in the individual. The idea that the Holy Ghost temporarily visits people at the time of confirmation, and afterwards departs, and from then on he operates in them by means of his divine Spirit, is incorrect, and has no scriptural basis. The “gift of the Holy Ghost” means that the Holy Ghost itself as a personage is given to everyone who receives him to be his constant companion; and this can only be possible if it refers to that Spirit which emanates from the Deity, 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. It cannot refer to that other PERSONAGE OF SPIRIT (assuming that he exists), because he being a distinct, singular, individual “personage,” cannot become a constant companion to every Church member at the same time. This is the correct interpretation of D&C 130:22–23. Notice also that in verse 23 Joseph Smith uses the impersonal pronoun “it” to refer to the Holy Ghost, which further supports this interpretation.
These
two examples should be sufficient to demonstrate that the terms Holy Spirit,
Holy Ghost, Comforter, Spirit of God, Spirit of truth, the Spirit etc. in the
scriptures are always used to refer to that Spirit which emanates from the
Deity, or to the DIVINE PROCESSION, and never to the PERSONAGE OF SPIRIT such
as it is commonly understood in the Church.
It is
of course possible to make a more convincing case for this than space permits
here. It is possible to go through the scriptures, and quote from every
reference to the Holy Spirit, Holy Ghost, Comforter, the Spirit etc.; and by
classifying and cataloguing them judiciously, and cross-referencing them with
other scriptures; or by examining them more carefully in their context; to
demonstrate that this is what the scriptures always mean.6 It is also possible
to quote from numerous authorities in the Church who have expressed differing,
and sometimes conflicting opinions on the subject, and to show what were the
causes of their misunderstandings. All the misunderstandings in the Church
about the doctrine of the Holy Ghost invariably stem from attempting to
distinguish between two separate entities, whereas the scriptures do not make
such a distinction. The truth is that in the scriptures, the expressions Holy
Spirit, Holy Ghost, Comforter, the Spirit etc. are always, invariably, and
consistently used to refer to that Spirit which emanates from the Deity, or to
the DIVINE PROCESSION; and never to any distinct, singular, individual
“personage” of the kind that is generally understood in the Church. This is the
real doctrinal puzzle of the Holy Ghost in the theology of Latter-day Saints. In order to formulate the doctrinal
questions more intelligently, all of this needs to be taken into account,
and the questions be framed in such a way as to elicit the right answers. I
would break it down into a series of three questions as follows:
QUESTION 1. Does such a
being as the PERSONAGE OF SPIRIT exist at all in the Godhead (as distinct from
the DIVINE PROCESSION which emanates from the Deity, and which is also able to
assume the human form and act like one); and if he exists, how do you prove it?
In
order to prove that such a being exists, either an irrefutable scriptural
evidence must be given to support it, or some other statement must be produced
which would be equally authoritative and binding. A scriptural proof I am
convinced would not be possible. The alternative would be for the First
Presidency to produce a new revelation, or to make a solemn declaration to the
same effect, that such a being does indeed exist—with a theological explanation that would
clarify the scriptural ambiguities on the subject. I do not believe that would
be possible without a new revelation.
QUESTION 2. If such a being
exists (i.e. if the answer to the first question is positive), why is it that
these two different entities (i.e. the PERSONAGE OF SPIRIT and the DIVINE PROCESSION) are called by the same names, which causes all the confusion about
them?
The
answer that is commonly given in the Church to this question—that the PERSONAGE OF SPIRIT operates by means of the same DIVINE PROCESSION—is evidently
incorrect. The correct answer would have to be something different.
QUESTION 3. If such a being
exists, why is it that the scriptures are completely silent about him?
The
scriptures already give us considerable information about the other two members
of the Godhead. We know most about the Son, enough that some have ventured to
write books about him. We also have a fair bit of knowledge given to us about
the person of the Father, thanks to modern revelation. We even have a fair bit
of knowledge given to us about this Spirit which emanates from the Deity, or
the DIVINE PROCESSION—again thanks to modem revelation. But about this
mysterious PERSONAGE OF SPIRIT (if he exists at all) we know nothing. The
scriptures tell us nothing. Why so? Why is he so conspicuous by his absence?
Why has he never been seen?
Why is it that Joseph Smith saw two personages in the Sacred Grove, and not three? Why is it that when Moses was taken up to the high mountain, and conversed with God, there were two personages and not three? Why is it that when Enoch was translated, and communed with God, he spoke with two personages and not three? Why is it that when God appeared to Adam in the Garden of Eden, there were two personages and not three? And why is it that when God created the world in six days, and made man out of the dust of the ground, he spoke and said to his Only
Begotten Son, “Let us make man in our image” (Moses 2:26), but the third “personage” is absent? Adam did indeed receive the Holy Ghost after he was baptized—the first man ever to do so. But what kind of Holy Ghost did he receive? This is the kind of Holy Ghost that Adam received:
“Therefore
it [Holy Ghost] 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 has all power according to wisdom, mercy, truth, justice and judgment.” (Moses 6:61)
To
which we might further add:
“Which
truth shineth. This is the light of Christ.… which light proceedeth from the presence of God to fill the immensity of space—the light which is in
all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the
law by which all things are governed, even the power
of God who sitteth upon his throne, …” (D&C 88:7, 12–13)
This is
the only
kind of Holy Ghost that the scriptures ever talk about. There is no other. If another kind of Holy Ghost exists besides this one, why don’t the scriptures ever tell us anything about him?
At this
point it is worth taking a look at the other side of the argument, and to see
what answers it is possible to give to these questions on the basis of existing
information. It is possible to give some kind of an answer to those questions
without further revelation; but those answers would be tentative, uncertain,
and inconclusive. They are mentioned here in order to complete the discussion.
In
answer to the first question: “Does such a being as the PERSONAGE OF SPIRIT exist at all in the
Godhead; and if so how do you prove it?” my answer would have to be, if I were to rely on the scriptures alone, that such a being does not exist; because there are no scriptural grounds for believing that he does; and in the absence of that we are not authorized to believe that he exists. The only indication we have that such a being might exist comes from outside of the scriptures. Among these the foremost are those which come from the Prophet Joseph Smith. There are a number of quotations survived from him, or attributed to him, in which he categorically asserts that the Godhead consists of three distinct and separate Gods; and the most reasonable interpretation to put on these is that the third member of the Godhead must be a distinct “personage” like the other two, rather than something that “radiates” from them:
“I
have always declared God to be a distinct personage, Jesus Christ a separate
and distinct personage from God the Father, and that the Holy Ghost was a
distinct personage and a Spirit: and these three constitute three distinct
personages and three Gods.” (Teachings, p. 370)
“Everlasting
covenant was made between three personages before the organization of this
earth, … these personages, according to Abraham’s record, are called God the
first, the Creator; God the second, the Redeemer; and God the third, the
Witness or Testator.” (Ibid.,
p. 190)
These
quotations, however, fall short of fulfilling the requirement of a “proof” that
such a being exists, for the following reasons: Firstly they come from outside
the standard works, and therefore do not carry sufficient authority. We should
expect that a doctrine as fundamental as this should be comfortably
demonstrable by clear evidence from canonized scripture, without having to rely
entirely on evidence from outside it. Secondly, Joseph Smith’s teachings are
still capable of a different interpretation. It is still not too unreasonable
to assume that when he refers to the third member of the Godhead as a God, that he is still referring to this DIVINE PROCESSION which emanates from the Deity, rather than to any specific “personage.” This is because as we have seen, this Spirit not only has an independent existence, but is also omniscient, omnipotent, and assumes the human form. That gives it all the attributes of divinity. It was “not created or made, neither indeed can be” (D&C 93:29). Hence it is not too far-fetched to assume that when Joseph Smith refers to the third member of the Godhead as a God, that he is still referring to this Spirit, rather than to some specific “personage.” This interpretation is further strengthened by D&C 130:22–23 discussed earlier, in which he contrasts this Spirit with the other two “personages of flesh and bone” as together constituting the Godhead.7 A third reason why these quotations do not constitute a sufficient “proof” that such a being exists is that the difficulties involved necessitate a credible theological explanation, which these sources do not provide.
The
answer to the second question: “Why is it that these two different entities are called by the same
names?” depends on the answer to the first question. If the answer to the first question is negative, the second question does not arise, so that our answer to it would have to be tentative and hypothetical. Assuming, however, that such a being does exist, the most reasonable explanation I can think of as to why the two may be called by the same names is that one is a symbolic representation or manifestation of the other. The scriptures teach that in the person of Jesus Christ “dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily” (Colossians 2:9). There is a mystery in this scripture which cannot be fully discussed here;8 as Paul also says:
And
without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in
the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles,
believed on in the world, received up into glory. (1 Timothy 3:16)
Suffice
it to say that it would not be unreasonable therefore to think that the Spirit
which proceeds from him is a symbolic representation or manifestation of the
third member of the Godhead as it dwells in him.
As
regards the third question: “If such a being as the PERSONAGE OF SPIRIT exists, why are the
scriptures silent about him?” I confess that I have no answer to this question. It is a mystery to which an answer does not exist at the present time. A new revelation is required to provide the answer to that question.
Here
are the questions once again, summarized and condensed, the answers to which I
believe will once for all resolve the doctrinal difficulty of the Holy Ghost in the theology of Latter-day Saints:
- Does such a being as the PERSONAGE OF SPIRIT exist at all in the Godhead, and if so how do you prove it?
- If such a being exists, why are these two different entities called by the same names, which causes all the confusion about them?
- If such a being exists, why are the scriptures silent about him?
Conclusion
To sum
up our discussion, and bring the matter into sharper focus, consider the
following quotation from an official Church publication:
“The
Holy Ghost is a member of the Godhead. He has a body of spirit. His body of
spirit is in the form and likeness of man. He can be only in one place at the same
time, but his influence can be in every place at the same time.” (Gospel Principles,
1986, p. 34)
This in
simple language sets forth what may rightly be described as the Church’s
“official” or “approved” doctrine of the Holy Ghost. Thus the Church recognizes
two distinct entities: one is a “personage of Spirit” who by definition can only be in one place
at the same time (and who is conferred on baptized Church members by the laying on of hands at confirmation); while the other is a “radiating influence” which emanates from him, or from the Deity, by means of which God exercises his power and dominion in the universe. The problem arises out of the fact that the
scriptures do not make such a distinction. In the scriptures, such a being as a “personage of Spirit” who can be only in one place at the same
time is completely non-existent. He is nowhere to be found throughout the entire length and breadth of the volume of the scriptures, ancient or modern. Throughout the scriptures the expressions Holy Spirit, Holy Ghost, Comforter, the Spirit etc. are always, invariably, and consistently used to refer to that Spirit which proceeds from the Deity—specifically from the person of Jesus Christ. They are never used to refer to anything else. Thus there exists a profound contradiction, a fundamentally illogical and irreconcilable dichotomy, between the doctrine of the Holy Ghost as taught in the scriptures and as it is taught by the Church which has not yet been adequately resolved.
─────────
Notes
1 See James R. Clark, Messages of the First Presidency
[Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 6 vols., 1965–75], 4:32–34; 5:3–4.
2 It is the first entity that is generally understood to
be conferred by the laying on of hands at the time of confirmation.
3 The choice of the word “procession” here is an apt one
because, as we shall see presently, the word “proceed” is favored in the scriptures
when referring to the emanation of this divine Spirit; and also because the word
“procession” is used in theology as a technical term to refer to the “emanation
of the Holy Spirit” (Concise Oxford Dictionary).
4 See N. B. Lundwall, Discourses on the Holy Ghost
[Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, n.d., c. 1940], pp. 12, 22, 23, 28, 52, 53.
5 For the complete text see Appendix II.
6 See Appendix I.
7 There are one or two quotations attributed to Joseph
Smith in which he is reported to have said that the Holy Ghost is a “personage
of spirit” who is awaiting to be born on earth and acquire a physical body. If
that is true, it would leave no room for doubt that Joseph Smith believed in
the existence of a true “personage.” At the same time, however, it is worth
noting that there are other passages in his Teachings which support the line of reasoning suggested here. Consider the following:
“There are two Comforters spoken of. The first is the
Holy Ghost, the same as was given on the day of the Pentecost, and that all the
Saints receive after faith, repentance, and baptism. This first Comforter, or
Holy Ghost, has no
other effect than pure intelligence.” (p. 149.)
If the effect of this Comforter, or Holy Ghost, is
just “pure intelligence,” then that is a strange way of describing a true
“personage.” If the Holy Ghost is indeed a true “personage” (that is to say, of
the kind that is commonly understood in the Church), then his influence should
be more than just “pure intelligence.” Pure intelligence, however, is a true description
of that Spirit which emanates from the Deity, or the DIVINE PROCESSION, which
has been variously described in the scriptures as “light,” as “truth,” as
“intelligence,” as the “mind” of God, and as the “power” of God.
8 See the fifth article in this series, “A Reappraisal
of the Doctrine of the Godhead Based on the Lectures on Faith.”
